I don’t agree with the judges, but there are several cases that say it is constitutional for a state to pick a certain profession, such as teaching, and determine that a sex act they participate in is illegal, even though the same sex act involving two parties would be legal if neither was a member of that specified profession. Here is the latest publicized court case involving a female teacher challenging that concept.
![]()
A Teacher is in Court Fighting for Her Legal Right to Have Sex With Students on School Property
Source – A year after a married former high school choir director was arrested for allegedly having sex with one of her students, her lawyer is now claiming that the sex was consentual.Haley Reed, 38,...www.barstoolsports.com
And if we are going to accept that the All Men Are Created Equal in the constitution is bullshit, which it is if the law can make an act committed by a teacher illegal when the same act would be legal if committed by an auto mechanic, why not just say fuck it and make the law only applicable to male teachers. The male student victim has to get an erection to have sex. That makes the male student fundamentally different than the female student, even more of a fundamental difference than the teacher and the auto mechanic, in my opinion.
The issue here is Consent. Students, as minors, are deemed unable to consent. That infantilize all student, no matter what age.
Let's be clear: Rape is rape. Sex without consent should be punished. Sex with children should be punished. But that's not the point. Even if they consent, even if they are adults or late teens, all are treated the same way as a 7 y.o. girl. What they do is effectively take away that person's ability to consent and replace it with what the "right-minded" legislator consider they should have consented to. That reminds me of a certain anti-prostitution bill here in Canada that does the same thing...




