Things like this are still allowed and legal with parental/guardian consent in some states.

@linxminx Then again, if the judge didn't know about the rape, why wouldn't he approve it? I'd be interested to know if Missouri law gives any guidance as to when it should not be approved.

@linxminx @bingst. Doesn’t matter whether it is with or without parental or judicial approval, a fourteen year old is a child, still at school, and should not be able to be married off, especially to a rapist. This is medieval thinking!

My honors 9th grade classes read "Romeo and Juliet" this year, and voiced that it would be illegal nowadays for a girl of almost 14 (Juliet) to marry. I assumed this was true, but did a little research to find out that it is legal in many, many states with court and parent approval. This seems to stem biblical ideas. I read an article a few months ago that Idaho tried to outlaw it for those under 16...but it didn't pass because it was seen as too liberal.
[idahostatesman.com]
“I do not think courts should be involved in marriage at all,” said Bryan Zollinger, R-Idaho Falls. “I don’t believe there should be a license required to get married. I think two willing people should be able to go and get married.”

It does amuse how Americans think the USA is the most advanced country in the world

@m69458kelos I know!!

@greyeyed123 Zollinger sounds like a dyed-in-the-wool idiot. He also said it's plausible Obama staged Charlottesville riots (https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article168173127.html)

Probably because one has to really dig pretty deep to find a non-Muslim example of this kind of practice. I think we're probably seeing part of a SJW agenda here. Trying to make at outlier look typical. Not sure what purpose that actually serves, other than to prove all religions are capable of really sick practices?

at very least hold him at gunpoint for the police to arrive.

@F-IM-Forty

@camne This is precisely why IQ tests are renormed every so often. By definition, average IQ will always be 100 with one standard deviation to either side of the mean (usually 15 points on either side). So the "average" IQ will always be between 85 and 115. Always. As soon as it departs significantly from that, the tests are renormed. Otherwise they become meaningless.

Now, I will conceded that the level of intelligence that the average range represents is probably declining. I have seen a lot of anecdotal evidence for that.

@Piratefish this my observation also. The stupid are breeding voraciously and the clever people are not countering with smart genes into society. Trajectory of society...? Makes a reasonable case for eugenics!

@Geoffrey51 If you haven't already, watch the movie "Idiocracy". It's a 2006 sci-fi comedy by Mike Judge that explores this exact problem, and what the future will be like as a result. It is hilarious, but also kind of sobering.

@Piratefish Thanks, I’ll check it out.

It all highlights the ideas of Francis Galton and Julian Huxley. Controversial as it was, some application may have stemmed the social demise we face now.

Distopia Discovered!

Not necessarily shocking, but a lot less common in Christianity.

If someone says they really do get their morals from the bible alone stay the F away from them!

faith is NOT a virtue in any context.

@JOHNGALT That sort of faith is a dangerous thing at best. It leads to evil too much of the time.

religion nuf said

What a backward system America must have, over here in Australia ANY man who sires a child, be it by rape or consented sexual intercourse, etc, and IS determined to be the parent MUST pay child support by Law until the child reaches 18 years.
There is NO get out here such as the 'religious reason' of the Rapist MUST marry the victim bullshit, do the rape and be proven a rapist and you do the prison time and it IS NOT a mere 120 days either.
Plus there IS a strict adherence to the Age of Consent Law here as well, breach that Law and your 'arse is grass' and the Judge sets the height at which the mower blades will spin, so to speak.
FFS yanks get into the 21st. Century with the rest of the truly enlightened world, STOP this idiocy from happening and DESTROYING the lives of young, vulnerable women and girls.

@Triphid Somehow you have made some odd conclusions about the US. Of COURSE the father is financially responsible for the kid. Not sure how you concluded otherwise. The bigger problem is enforcing it, but that is another matter. The case cited in the article is a one off bizarre situation, which is why it is news. FFS man, use your common sense.

@itsmedammit BUT , is it actually a "One Off" situation or has such situations gone "under the Media Radar" previously?
ere in Australia there is a Law that the proven Father, whether on Welfare or Employed, MUST contribute to the Financial needs of the Child.
If on Welfare, Unemployment Benefits as the are known here, the Government Agency can, and does, take a minimum of $10 per fortnight from the benefits paid to the Father, IF employed the Employer is bound by Law to ensure, where ever possible, that a certain percentage of the Fathers pay is deducted and sent directly to the Agency and then on to the Child via the Mothers Bank Account.
Plus, IF that had happened out here where I live those 2 bastards wouldn't be serving a mere 120 days behind bars, they'd be looking at a few YEARS or more.
In 1948, well before I was born, a young man, aged in his late 20's, raped 3 young girls on separate occasions on the same night, when caught he 'claimed' that " God told him to do it because wanted him to have children from pure virgins," the girls, btw, were aged 10, 11 and 13 at the time.
A 'misguided' Judge gave him a 3 year Suspended sentence, he then went on to rape yet another young girl who identified him to police, BUT before the police could capture him he mysteriously 'vanished' leaving only his genitals hanging from a wire noose over the Winding Frame over a disused Mining Shaft. It was determined that the Mine Shaft was far too dangerous and unstable for any attempt at rescue or recovery and the case was summarily closed.
I never condone violence in any shape nor form but I do feel that justice MUST been seen to fit the crime.

@Triphid I think we are confusing issues here.

First, the article has nothing directly to do with financial responsibility, so I am not sure how that even entered the conversation. It is about an ignorant, or perhaps mentally ill, father forcing his child to marry her rapist. Although there are some backward states that still allow marriage of children, it is not typical and it is certainly not normal for a child to be expected to marry her rapist. If it were typical, it would not be news.

Second, in the US, both parents are financially responsible for their children. If the parents are not living together, the noncustodial parent, usually the father, is required to contribute to the financial requirements of the child. In reality, the custodial parent, usually the mother, generally winds up contributing much more financially (and otherwise) to the care of the child. If the noncustodial parent does not comply with a court order for child support, his/her wages are garnisheed. Of course there are many variations on the theme, depending on situational differences, but the bottom line is that the government does not want to use my taxes to support someone else's offspring.

Sometimes the hardest part is identifying the father. We all know who the mother is, of course, but the father can be elusive, sometimes with the mother's help. In some poor communities, money and services obtained from the government for child is significant. If the father is unknown, the mother can receive more benefits. Bizarrely, mothers sometimes feel a sense of honor in protecting the father from having to support the child.

It is fortunate that we have made moral progress as well as scientific progress in the last several hundred, as well as the last several thousand years.

Right?!