Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (April 29, 1997)
▼ EDITORIAL EDITOR-IN-CHIEF: Steven Asbury MANAGING EDITOR: Thom Schoenbom NIGHT EDITOR: Thom Schoenbom EDITORIAL EDITORS: Ashley Bach & Brian Diamond editorials, letters, commentary and perspective NEWSROOM: (541)346-5511 DISPLAY ADVERTISING: (541)346-3712 BUSINESS OFFICE: (541)346-5512 CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING: (541)346-4343 Oversimplified statutory rape laws need revising ■ OUR OPINION: Current statutory sex laws Jail to deal with the complex nature of most sexual relationships ■ 'v ecently, in Wisconsin, 18 ] 3 year-old Kevin Gillson got I ^ his 15-year-old girlfriend X- Xpregnant. Gillson was pre pared to drop out of school, find a job and marry his girlfriend to support her. His reward for his noble inten tions: The possibility of probation and 40 years of jail time. The problem Gillson faces is that he engaged in sex with a minor. Al though his girlfriend said the sex was consentual, in the eyes of the state, she is too young io consent to have sex. Even if he doesn't spend a day in jail, his record will show that he is a convicted sex offender, in the same class with rapists and molesters. Had his girlfriend been one year older, he would have been in the clear. Statutory rape laws state that it is illegal for anyone to engage in sex with a minor. Exactly who is consid ered a minor varies from state to state, usually between 16 and 18 years of age. While it’s hard to argue with the law’s intent, its actual exe cution raises some serious problems. The idea of a statutory rape law makes sense. The main goal is to pre vent situations where 50-year-old men are out at the local high school preying on young, unsuspecting fe males. Unfortunately, that’s not al ways how the law ends up working. The basic problem is the black and white nature of statutory rape laws. Every case is different, but with statutory rape, all that matters is age. An 18-year-old can go to jail for sleeping with his 17-year-old girl friend, but it is perfectly legal for a 50-year-old to be sleeping with a 20 year-old. Sexual relations are too complicat ed to be based on age alone. If the in tent of statutory rape laws is to pre vent manipulation, that should be reflected in the law itself. The prob lem is primarily one of coercion, not age. If it can be shown that an 18-year old man used his age and experience to manipulate a younger girl into en gaging in sexual activities, then that should be classified rightly as statu tory rape. If a 22-year-old and a 17 year-old are deeply in love, while it may be a little disturbing to some people, they should not be persecut ed solely because of the age differ ence. Another way to improve the effec tiveness of statutory rape laws would be to change how they are enforced. In the case of Gillson, he was arrested simply because the police found out about the couple. No complaints were filed by either of the families in volved. If the parents of a child want to al low her to see an older person (and as legal guardians of a minor they have a legal right to make that decision as hard as it may be to enforce), that is their prerogative. If all the parties in volved with the relationship are okay with it, then the police should not get involved. Only if a complaint is filed by ei ther the family or the couple should what is basically a personal matter become a legal concern. Those in volved with the relationship can bet ter determine if it is abusive than a third party guided only by a set of ar bitrary age requirements. Statutory rape is not an easy issue. On the one hand, it is important to protect young people who may or may not be ready to make mature de cisions about sexual activity. On the other hand, just because someone is older than his or her partner doesn’t mean that person will be any more manipulative than two people who are the same age. While this tension cannot be com pletely resolved, it can be improved. By making statutory rape laws con sider both age and intent and by pressing charges only when one of the parties involved files charges, the murky waters of statutory rape can be made considerably clearer — and fairer. This editorial represents the opinion of the Emerald editorial board. r TM6 ATtOR^EV G>£MePA^5 OFPKE HA5 LOOKED /ntq t The cmAHG^S A6A>*fr fMerA^y^MU A^jp DeC'OeQ mot to i/srVE5T<6^ Pufrntffl «** pp*0$ecuTE,.. lie Irani Board 1 £R_. DO HfiMt fMAT AUTMOP'Ty, Ml RENO? y In the April 28 “Overheard” sec tion on page 2, singer Jewel was misquoted. The quote (from the May 15 Rolling Stone) should have read as fol lows: “I’m just a person who is honestly living my life and ask ing, ‘How do you be spiritual and live in the world without going to a monastery?” The Emerald re grets the error. LETTERS Relative ignorance In response to Trevor Miller’s letter (April 21, ODE), I do not enjoy being labeled as "ig norant” by someone I do not even know. As a member of SETA. Miller’s attack on the education I received through this group shows only his own ignorance. To clarify Miller’s confusion, the “H” in HIV stands for “human,” as HIV infects hu mans. Rhesus monkeys, such as the ones held captive on campus, contract SIV (“S” is for simian), and if Miller knows the index case, he should share that knowledge with the rest of us. Animal research does not, as Miller cor rectly states, lead directly to cures simply because the wrong species are studied. Un derrated alternatives like epidemiology, clinical investigations and human tissue tests have led to advanced knowledge of smoking/lung cancer correlation, epilepsy and Alzheimer’s, keeping human research directly relevant to humans. SETA is committed to the 2,700 students who signed a petition demanding to know more about the tightly guarded animal re search conducted at our University. SETA offers extensive information on a large num ber of diverse topics, which we would be happy to educate Miller on so that he may at least recognize his own ignorance when judging our student group as “ignorant’ and “non-educational. ” Maureen Lynch Anthropology/Philosophy Benjamin P. Jenkins Biology Sound of silence I was one of the scientists sitting at the table that caused so much of a threat to University activism, according to Kyla Schuller's letter (April 22, ODE). I’m sorry, but campaigning against SETA’s budget increase request was sim ply not a campaign of censure. SETA is in no danger, with or without 12 cents from every student, of being exterminated. The "measly” budget (according to Ms. Schuller) that SETA currently receives from the ASUO is the same budget that would be given to a student group in sup port of medical research on animals. The fact is that SETA is using the ballot to request the special consideration of Uni versity students for a budget increase, above and beyond the fees it already re ceives. SETA’s stated goal is the elimination of animal research. I personally do research on animals and consider it a benefit to hu manity. These are two views of a contro versial subject. I thought a politically active campus was one where people felt free to make a public stand for their opinions. Yet several letters on this page and com ments from a few of the people who stopped by the table suggest that it was the researchers’ point-of-view that “should” be silent and leave poor SETA alone. Very democratic. Kelli Lopardo Institute of Neuroscience HUD Ballot Measures The Emerald's Endorsements: Raising Club Sports incidental fees will make the YE&? program |\£[ less ex pensive and acces sible to more stu dents. Footnotes: Because Footnotes is not a student ’j money from pri vate fund raising, not student fees. For students with out a car and for a cam a park ing structure, free bus service bene fits everyone. Club Sports: group, they should raise Lane Transit District: pus without Pocket i Playhouse: At only a $0.09 in- j crease per year, student theater outweigh the costs. Saferide: Saferide benefits many women on campus, and this mea sure would help make Saferide wheelchair acces sible. Students for the Ethical Treatment of Animals: Because SETA doesn’t represent the views of the whole campus and is already well-fund ed, an ad ditional increase is not needed.
