"One of the guys who was in the room said 'This is her fault. She got drunk and she did this to herself.'"

Words any parent would be proud to hear their son utter. These men need their day in court to explain their side of the story (if there is any way to explain that kind of mindset). And this young girl needs justice. (Assuming it is possible that she truly consented to this act, she need serious medical theraputic intervention).

I hope the DA reconsiders her decision, and I'm gratified to hear the county say they haven't closed the case.

Miss Grolle and Miss Chief Elk are heroes. They rescued this girl in March, and they are rescuing her - and others like her - now by seaking out. I hope they get a mention in a future State of the Union address.

Lastly, to whomever thought 15 year-olds should be as resposible as adults for their behavior. We are finlly starting to understand the adolescent brain, and we are learning it is not as responsible as an adult brain. The part of the brain that thinks through long-term consequences to acts is the last part of the brain to mature, which often doesn't happen until 18-20 years old. (This is why we recruit soldiers at 18: not only are they in good physical condition, but they are more likely to take risks than older soldiers, and more likely to accept authority without asking thoughtful questions). To expect a 15 yo or 17 yo to behave like a 20 or 22 or 25 or 30 yo is naive at best.

Not all brains develop at exactly the same moment, but we have chosen 18 to be the delienation of "adulthood" in our society. The victim in this case is not an adult, but she was surrounded by 8 or 10 "adults" who should have known better.

I can't wait to hear Ben Dover's nuanced and well-reasoned response to this. But if these men are never brought to trial, I hope Miss Chief Elk and Miss Grolle continue to make their case. If these men suffer because of it ... maybe it's their fault for letting themselves being naked in a room with an underage, unconscious, drunk, unclothed girl?

I know! I yelled at her! Have you read "Life Mask" by the same author? Very fun as well, wit a (slightly) less-maddening ending.

I'm hardly "upscale" (though I'm flattered you think so!) The details of the 2 examples I showed are lengthy, but would prove I'm very middle-class. I chose them because they were the northern-most and southern-most beaches I've been to.

Most of my beaching has been at the public, decidedly non-tony, popular to "regular people" beaches in New England. Ocean, lake, pond, and public swimming pool (nt technically a beach, but my towel was near water). Also my decidedly not "upscale" parents' yar and driveway ( too buggy to really stay out long there. Plus, no water unless I turned on te sprinkler).

I read by all of them. Books. Not magazines. (How else was I supposed to lay still long enough to get that ever-elusive tan without losing my mind?) My mom, my husband (once upon a time my boyfriend), my friends, my cousing, even my in-laws, none of us "upscale" people all read. (One loooong family vacation in Maine resulted in a huge book swap as the days stretched on. In a week I'd read a novel about Shakespeare, some sci-fi future space opera, a John Grisham book and a Danielle Steele novel.)

I'd say reading books at the beach isactually more the norm than not.

I know I'm comingfrom a post- sex revolution perspective. But I find something very ... sad about the "effortless orgasm" (hich is truly a misnomer if one has to raise $2k to get one). But, shouldn't something as deliciusly wonderful as an orgasm require a little effort? Doesn't one's partner take a little pride in paying the appropriate attention to bring on a satisfying orgasm?

If women all had easy buttons, why would we date? And why would men bother trying to please them?

Broadsheet had the quotation correct. And here's more from the same press release (Chris Whittington again):

"Abortion ends the lives of more than 3,500 American babies a day. This bloodshed dwarfs any other issue, including poverty."

He is clearly saying that being anti-abortion is more important than bring anti-poverty. He also seems to think that more babies are aborted than die of poverty. (And of cousse he is neglecting the fact that some women abort their pregnancies because they are poor, but let's let that rest for a moment).

Anyone with a goodhead for math can see that poverty kills more babies (granted, worldwide, not just in America, but I am assuming the good Christian views non-American life as equally sacred as American life) in an hour (in 10 minutes? 5?) than legal abortions.

He is saying that whikle it's wonderful that Christians care about enfing poverty, they should be putting their energy, brain power, compassion and (most importantly?) money towards ending legal abortion in America. It's faulty logic, it's faulty Christianity, and it's politically motivated.

I will barf if I se one more "debate" where candidates are asked to raise their hands over an issue.

Please give Blitzer a definition of the word "debate"