English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

The boy was a seventeen year old congressional page, and Studds was in his thirties. Studd was a congressman, and should have had criminal charges brought against him.

Studds recently passed away and Yahoo News now has an article sympathizing with his gay "spouse" because his partner received no death benifits or government pension check. Are articles like these supposed to illicit some type of feeling of compassion or sympathy from American citizens?

I don't feel sorry that same-sex partners are not eligible for thier partners death benefits or health benefits. This is currently not in our law, and hopefully, it never will be. It is not a constitutional right, nor was it ever meant to be one.

I certainly don't feel sorry for Gerry Studds or his "widowed" partner. I can't fathom that he was somehow repeatedly reelected, when obviously he wasn't fulfilling his obligation to public service in Congress, rather, he was receiving "personal services" from underage pages.

2006-10-18 07:51:51 · 6 answers · asked by short stuff 2 in News & Events Current Events

6 answers

Because he had a D for Democrat behind his name. There's an old saying that if you're a Democrat you can only ruin your career if you're caught in bed with a dead woman or a live boy. Well, apparently some people didn't think 17 qualified as a "boy". Had he been a Republican, he would have been expelled and imprisoned.

2006-10-18 08:03:51 · answer #1 · answered by af490 3 · 1 0

Foley wouldn't have been kicked out of Congress either. There's more a sexual predator hysteria these days thanks to folks like John Walsh than there was twenty years ago. This plays into it a lot these days.

2006-10-18 08:15:18 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

What he did was deplorable. This happened in Washington DC and in 1981 I believe the age of consent was lowered to 16yrs old.

2006-10-18 08:11:39 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Because at the time, under existing law, a 17 year old could consent to sex. Therefore NO crime was committed.

2006-10-18 08:10:33 · answer #4 · answered by jurydoc 7 · 0 1

because he was a democrate and we had no buisness poking our nose into his private life

Sarcasm a wonderful tool

2006-10-18 10:06:08 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Mock GOD = go to hell! Do not collect bonus! do not see heaven! Go sooner not later!

2006-10-18 08:02:30 · answer #6 · answered by K9 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers