I set up a hypothetical scenario - to reduce the situation to the absurd.
There IS no indication that they had sex before and right after her birthday - it should be obvious (even to you) that I was engaged in a hypothetical.
The fact that they never had sex AT ALL before her 18th birthday (or presumably the day immediately after) doesn't change the idiocy of the law that it would be legal one day, and illegal the next day.
Can you follow that? Do you really have that much problems with reading comprehension - or is it that you don't think your argument has much strength on the merits so you want to rehash your misunderstanding of what I was saying numerous times?
How many times do I have to explain it to you that I was OBVIOUSLY setting up a hypothetical for which there was no indication that it was directly applicable to the facts of this particular case?
We can do this forever if you like. Under no circumstances can your specific referral to this particular case be spun into hypothetical after the fact:
Well there is no indication that they had sex before and after her birthday
It is what it is. Stay down Rock.
The law is full of idiocy and arbitrary lines. If you steal a $499 suit in IL, it's a misdemeanor, while a $500 suit is a felony. Both are wrong, but one carries a significant penalty.
It is wrong for a 17 y/o about to turn 18 to have sex with a 15 y/o, but the legislatures have drawn the felony line at the birthday - the same line they drew for other adult responsibilities and consequences. As a parent, I would react adversely to a 17 y/o bedding my 15 y/o daughter. I would also react adversely a day later on the little rat's 18th birthday, with one more arrow in my quiver, thanks to the law.