LINCOLN, Nebraska (AP) -- The lawyer for a man convicted for videotaping consensual sex with his 17-year-old girlfriend argues that the former high school teacher should not have been prosecuted under a child pornography law.I guess the reason this topic interests me so much is that it's an incredibly clear example just how specious a great deal of modern morality is. We want to have everything both ways, but eventually all such internally inconsistant constructs begin to break down.
Todd Senters, 31, was convicted last year for manufacturing child pornography after his roommate found the tape in their apartment and turned it in to authorities. Senters was put on probation and required to register as a sex offender.
In briefs filed with the Nebraska Supreme Court seeking to overturn the conviction, Senters' lawyer James Martin Davis noted that state law allows people age 16 or older to have consensual sex.
So what do you think is the proper resolution (for this court, and overall)? Raise the age of consent to 18? Lower the child pornography age to 16? Keep the current system and leave enforcement to prosecutorial discretion? In the past, fear of social ostracisation served to suppress immoral behavior and there was little need for legal involvement, but since we now live in a blameless society we seem to have no choice other than criminal prosecution.
(HT: Orin Kerr.)