Bible Camp, where you learn about God, Jesus and....sex?

Recommended Videos

escapist_wolfand

New member
Oct 19, 2009
117
0
0
In Louisiana 28-year-old Heather Daughdrill was arrested recently on the charge of having sex with a 13-year-old boy from the months of June to October. The investigation that followed revealed that Daughdrill would pick up the kid from school (after the school day was out) without his parent's knowledge, and take him somewhere to engage in before-mentioned sexual activity.
Heather met the boy, whose name has not been released, at a religious retreat while acting as a teacher and an aide. It seems that not only did they participate in physical contact, but "explicit text messages" were discovered having been sent between the two.
She is currently being held on 17 charges including: sexual batter, carnal knowledge of a juvenile, kidnapping, indecent behavior with a juvenile and contributing to delinquency.

This article was found on the huffingtonpost website (link below). After I read it I scrolled down to the comments, out of sheer curiosity. The normal stuff were there at first, then a discussion came up that piqued my interest.
The users in the comments, the majority of them at least, said that she hurt this kid, while the others were saying that there wasn't much that was wrong. (I'm not going to add my own personal thoughts on this, however I will let you all know that I am on the side of those who say that she hurt this child, maybe not physically but mentally. Anyway back to what I was saying.)
One of the comments was one that caught my eye and is honestly something that I've noticed myself

"It amazes me that when it is a women sexually abuse a child and as long as that child is male, people are less outraged. An adult sexually abusing a minor should be all treated the same regardless of their sex."
True, and yet there were still those here who were arguing against that, claiming that there was a difference between rape and what this woman did:
"This woman didn't force that boy to do anything and he wanted her. Kept texting her and running out the door each afternoon into her arms."
Again, this user has a sound argument.
So where does the difference lie.
"Those men have to physically 'enter' these young boys, or girls. This boy didn't suffer any physical intrusion so to speak."

Even though he didn't "suffer any physical intrusion" it doesn't change the fact that in the eyes of the law it's still rape. But that post is also something that sticks itself out to me.

So here's where I'll put in just a little bit of my personal thoughts.
What this woman did is wrong. Just plain wrong. I'm sure that there are some of those people who are in their mid 20's or heck even 30's who see someone who they know they shouldn't be thinking about, or that they know they shouldn't want to touch, yet have those fantasies regardless, just as I'm sure this woman did. However what makes it wrong is acting upon said fantasies.
Think about it like this:
You work a basic 9 to 5, sit in a cubicle with tons of other people in similar suits or dresses with phones ringing the sound of keyboards being typed upon and people constantly talking. Your boss is a jerk and you honestly hate the place.
i know that there are some of you who would be sitting and working, on autopilot by this point, and fantasize about something happening to the building, like a fire or a bomb or something. Maybe not even something horrific, maybe not even something that gets people hurt. But my point is that you would fantasize about something. And let's just say, for the sake of argument, that it's something that you yourself could pull off.
Fantasizing is alright, dreaming about something you hate going up in flames (for school children I know for a fact that at least once in their lives they wish that the school would just catch fire overnight so they could sleep in) is perfectly normal. However acting upon said fantasy is were it becomes wrong.
And that's where I stand with this woman. She had her fantasies, and-although they would easily be frowned upon by pretty much everybody-she was wrong in acting upon them.

So, in the comments below, tell me and discuss and debate.
What are your thoughts about this?


Article and comments thread were read at www.huffingtonpost.com, Link to article itself below.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/07/heather-daughdrill-bible-camp-sex-scandal_n_1133851.html
 

Lieju

New member
Jan 4, 2009
3,044
0
0
escapist_wolfand said:
"It amazes me that when it is a women sexually abuse a child and as long as that child is male, people are less outraged. An adult sexually abusing a minor should be all treated the same regardless of their sex."
True, and yet there were still those here who were arguing against that, claiming that there was a difference between rape and what this woman did:
"This woman didn't force that boy to do anything and he wanted her. Kept texting her and running out the door each afternoon into her arms."
Again, this user has a sound argument.
So where does the difference lie.
"Those men have to physically 'enter' these young boys, or girls. This boy didn't suffer any physical intrusion so to speak."

Even though he didn't "suffer any physical intrusion" it doesn't change the fact that in the eyes of the law it's still rape. But that post is also something that sticks itself out to me.
It's all part of the BS assumption that men cannot be sexually victims, and that women cannot be sexual predators. And that men will always enjoy sex, no matter how it's forced upon them (by a woman, anyway) I agree that it should be treated the same, no matter the sex of the people involved.

Also, the 'physical intrusion' line is BS that kinda horrifies me.
And that s/he doesn't consider it possible for there being any other kind of physical intrusion than ones involving penises.

The woman in question misused her position of authority.
And involved herself with a boy she had influence over.

And, well, about how the society treats this kind of stuff, it used to be quite common for a 28 year-old and older men to marry 13-year old girls (and it still is in some parts of the world) and totally socially acceptable and even preferable, as women weren't considered to ever grow up the same way men did and become equal partners.