Sounds intellectually plausible (sophistry) until one notices there has been no attempt to distinguish between "consent" and "informed consent".
Don't you think that this goes to the heart of the discussion where pedophilia is involved?
We might begin by agreeing on whether those are moral or legal phrases.
Don't you think that this goes to the heart of the discussion where pedophilia is involved?
We might begin by agreeing on whether those are moral or legal phrases. "Consent" and "Informed Consent" are legal terms only as effective as the person making the argument.
Either way, I'm sure there's probably some precocious 5-year old out there who can be used to test the limits. The whole issue of whether consent is "informed" or not is so subjective as to be essentially useless.
At any rate, I notice that the whole "consent" debate is a pure and simple smoke screen. It dodges the real issue, which is whether or not sex with children is wrong.
And we know it's wrong!
BTW: there's a contingent of libertarians and liberals out there (including Hillary Clinton, IIRC) who advocate the idea that kids can "divorce" their parents once they prove their competence. It's interesting to note that their position dovetails quite nicely with the pro-pedophilia crowd....