So, your position is that because he’s interested in her at 15 he must not view her as a person, but if he’d done the exact same thing 3 years later no problem? Just trying to get a grasp of EXACTLY how dumb and hypocritical you are.

Annoying, sure, but generally many people understand the mechanics and implications of relationships and sex as well at 15 as they will at 18.

What a cliche, pandering non-response that was.

I’m sure getting to the bottom of the “big South Park scandal” wasn’t priority number 1, or even priority number 100, for Isaacs family while they were dealing with his health problems.

I’ve already said it’s illegal and he should be punished, my illiterate friend. I just don’t find it immoral because she is almost legal, he’s young himself and there’s no one being tricked or forced in this situation. She’s into it; he’s into it; the only problem is they’re slightly below the line of legality.

Well aren’t you a fun combination of self-righteous and stupid. Enjoy spending the rest of your life being afraid of everything and not quite understanding anything.

It’s consentual and she’s not far from being legal. So, yes, I’m curious how exactly you know the extent to which this would damage her? How are you so intimately familiar with her limitations? You been stalking her?

So, what are his intentions exactly and what are the long-term consequences of them? You know the guy so well.

Oh please, do you really think you’re going to be able to scare me into backing away from my position with stupid accusations?

25 and 80 is only a problem if the 80 year old is senile.

Just by powering it up and attaching it to a TV you can probably interpret a lot about the XBox Ones intended functionality, so long as an OS with some kind of usable interface is installed. No games, but probably lots of menus and settings to peruse.

There’s a maturity disparity in most relationships; would you have a problem with a 25 year old girl dating a 40 year old man?

I’d say she clearly understood that he was sexually interested in her; given the context of their interactions she must have known.

Still a little off the mark with your analogy, but I think you’re closer to a moral parallel there.

That’s why I qualified my own statement by saying it’s illegal and he should be punished. I understand the line has to be drawn somewhere, and consistently enforced, or the laws simply won’t work.

Reading the article, I think it’s fairly obvious this girl knew what was going on and was legitimately interested.

It’s illegal and he deserves to be punished, but it’s hard to really be offended or disgusted by this. In 3 years this would’ve been a perfectly acceptable relationship.

I didn’t get the reference so I’m not going to argue whether the joke was actually funny, but people like you are a cancer on comedy and entertainment in general.

Ugh, more griping about Cindy’s outfit? Seriously, I hope in the final cut she’s topless with a string thong just so all of you moaning, prissy moralists will have consecutive heart attacks.

It’s not the kind of censorship that’s illegal, but it is indirect censorship.