If you have been paying attention to the news stories out of college campuses over the last decade or so, then you’ve heard a lot of talk of sexual assaults on college campuses, and the movement to try and stop future assaults from happening. The government has tried pushing harsher legislation to combat rape on college campuses — but many young men are being convicted in the court of public opinion instead of a court of law.
The legislation has resulted in many male students being expelled from universities just for being accused of sexual assault. There have been a number of cases where the male student was found to be completely innocent, but the damage was already done. These students were expelled from their current universities — and many are unable to enroll anywhere else because of the stigma attached to them.
With all of the harsh penalties surrounding sexual crimes these days, it was quite a shock this week when the Oklahoma appeals court said that it is not illegal for a man to perform certain sex acts on a woman who isn’t even conscious. To read about this perplexing decision out of the Sooner State, continue reading on the next page:
Im at a loss as to how you get a passed out drunk woman to do anything but throw up much less oral sex
YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING..
Omg.. Stupid laws to protect rapist
Hope this c**p is f**e.
this can’t be right…
Ok LADIES, let get those pearly whites a nice sharp edge on them, and if they know they have a risk of getting it bit off,,,,,,,,
This world is really close to ending
Having trouble understanding! Not forced if person being “used” is passed out drunk! Bet it was more than oral sex!
They call that the Clinton rule???
If you did some research, you would learn that this ruling was because of the FLAWED DRAFTING of the legislation. It requires action by LEGISLATORS to correct it.
I imagine that many of you would complain about “activist judges” creating law out of poorly drafted legislation, yet here you are, bemoaning that the court refused to move beyond the letter of the law. To safeguard it being seen as precedent for any other cases, they made their ruing excluding the setting of any precedent.
Legislators responded by promising new law.