LONDON â?? A man with a low IQ has been banned from sex by a judge who said the case raised questions about civil liberties, The Telegraph newspaper reported.
The 41-year-old man, known as Alan, has an IQ of 48 and a moderate learning disability, the newspaper reported. Alan was living with a man and having sex with him.
His local council decided that his “vigorous sex drive” was not appropriate and he didn’t understand what he was doing, the Telegraph reported.
High Court Justice Nicholas Mostyn agreed that Alan did not have the mental capacity to understand the health risks and should not have sex with anyone. The judge’s order put Alan under the local authority that provides his housing.
Still, the judge called the case “legally, intellectually and morally” complex and said the court must “tread especially carefully” when the state tries to curtail such a basic human function as sex.
The case began in June 2009, when the local council started court proceedings to restrict Alan’s contact with the man, identified as Kieron. Alan has been prevented since then from sexual activity, except when he’s alone, the Telegraph’s report said.
In Britain, the Court of Protection can make decisions for people deemed to lack the intelligence to make them themselves. These people can be ordered to undergo surgery, have abortions, be forced to use contraception â?? even have life support switched off.
Alan was described as “sociable” but â??seriously challenged in all aspects of his mental functionality.â?? He had been accused of making lewd gestures at children, but no police action was taken, the Telegraph said.
[quote]Blaze_108 wrote:
in this case it sounds more like thinly veiled homophobia. [/quote]
I agree. My concern with this type of situation would be that the retard is being taken advantage of by some creep. The “man” probably is a creep but from what Ponce pasted it sounds like the retard is highly sexual and in this case probably not being taken advantage of. He’s 42, so yeah, “thinly veiled homophobia” is well said.
[quote]Blaze_108 wrote:
in this case it sounds more like thinly veiled homophobia. [/quote]
I agree. My concern with this type of situation would be that the retard is being taken advantage of by some creep. The “man” probably is a creep but from what Ponce pasted it sounds like the retard is highly sexual and in this case probably not being taken advantage of. He’s 42, so yeah, “thinly veiled homophobia” is well said.[/quote]
My concern is that the “retard” is being used as scapegoat to placate parents. Yeah, the guy is shacked up with a consenting adult, he leered at kids (which isn’t true because they’d have made more of it). He is not a criminal offender otherwise they would have mentioned it in the first paragraph of the article, but voters can still sleep soundly safe in the knowledge that he’ll never sleep with their kids.
And then they can reward the political party who stopped the pervert from doing what they thought he was going to do by voting them into power the next time. Except for the tiny detail that he was never going to do the unspeakable anyway.
If ‘Alan’ was being taken advantage of then they would have pinned the blame on the other guy without even thinking about it. They are probably just two retarded gay guys with high sex drives and the local council created a beef about it.
Put it this way : genuine kiddy snatchers don’t run around advertizing themselves to concerned parents, they don’t shack up in monogamous relationships, and they aren’t intellectually retarded. If it was that easy, kids would never be abducted.
The real retards are the ones who think they can win votes from this.
[quote]Blaze_108 wrote:
in this case it sounds more like thinly veiled homophobia. [/quote]
I agree. My concern with this type of situation would be that the retard is being taken advantage of by some creep. The “man” probably is a creep but from what Ponce pasted it sounds like the retard is highly sexual and in this case probably not being taken advantage of. He’s 42, so yeah, “thinly veiled homophobia” is well said.[/quote]
