We have seen that for reasons unknown, Pastor Doug Wilson of Christ Church in Moscow, Idaho, waived his long-held belief that “age of consent” laws are foundational to Christian civilization. Mr. Wilson abandoned this conviction to assert that a 14-year-old girl consented to the abuse she suffered from a 24-year-old man. We also saw that when a local columnist asked Douglas Wilson if he believed “our current age of consent laws” applied to Mr. Wight’s abuse of Natalie, Doug Wilson did not tell the truth. He said yes even though he argued otherwise to the court. This matters because Idaho’s age of consent was 18 when Mr. Wight committed his crimes, which means a 14-year-old girl could not legally consent.

Readers should tattoo this point on their brains because of Doug Wilson’s unrelenting assault on Idaho’s age of consent law — in Natalie’s case only. We’ve cited the following quote many times because the State of Idaho made this motion to remind Team Wight, which included Doug Wilson, that state code prohibited them from arguing consent to defend Mr. Wight:

COMES NOW the state of Idaho, by and through the Latah County Prosecuting Attorney, and respectfully moves the court for entry of orders in limine as follows:

Prohibiting the defendant from offering evidence of or arguing either express or implied consent of the victim or her parents. It is well settled in the State of Idaho that consent is not a defense to the crimes of Sexual Abuse of a child Under the Age of Sixteen (Idaho Code 18-1506) or Lewd and Lascivious Conduct with a Child Under Sixteen Years of Age (Idaho Code 18-1508) State v. Oar, 129 Idaho 337 (1996). (State’s Motions in Limine and 404(b) Notice)

Idaho code states that a child cannot consent to sexual activity, contra Doug Wilson, which brings us to Mike Lawyer’s recent comments about Mr. Wight’s sexual abuse of Natalie. Mr. Lawyer is “Pastor of Discipleship/Counseling” at Christ Church. During the YouTube interview Mr. Lawyer rationalized Mr. Wight’s crimes saying, “From what I’ve seen of journals and things like that, Natalie was not opposed to that, at the time.” The words “not opposed” mean “consented.” Mike Lawyer actually believes “Natalie” consented “to that, at the time.”

Mike Lawyer learned this argument from Doug Wilson, who has advanced it several times in public as official Kirk policy: This 14-year-old girl consented to her abuse. Douglas Wilson is the Presiding Minister of the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches (CREC).

But as Doug Wilson reversed his “age of consent” position in Natalie’s case only, so Mike Lawyer reversed his position on the subject of rape, in Natalie’s case only. In 2004, about 18 months after Mr. Wight ended his criminal activities, Mike Lawyer posted this opinion to the local community bulletin board:

Sex with a woman who is not consenting is rape whether it happens on a date or the guy hides in the woods (I would say that sex with a woman who is not your wife is a kind of rape as well, but that’s another issue). In both cases it is violent and in both cases it is a sexual act. We can talk about both of these aspects, but we must never separate them. (Mike Lawyer, January 19, 2004)

According to Mr. Lawyer, rape takes place when two conditions are met: (1) “a woman” (2) “is not consenting.” And if we apply this definition to Jamin Wight’s criminal activities, we may conclude that Natalie Greenfield did not meet the first condition because she was a 14-year-old girl and not “a woman”; and Natalie did not meet the second condition because Idaho code states that children cannot consent. Therefore, according to Mike Lawyer, Jamin Wight committed rape.

And when we apply Mr. Lawyer’s secondary definition of rape to this crime — viz., “sex with a woman who is not your wife is a kind of rape as well” — we may conclude that Jamin Wight committed “kind of rape as well.”

But that’s another issue.

*   *   *

Here are all of Mike Lawyer’s contributions to this thread:

*   *   *