Replies

DA (Clint there's something special for you at the end) we have a diagreement on the arbitrariness of the restriction on children contractng or consenting.

I believe the limitations on children are rooted in religion,and/or nature. Either way I think over time it is a widely help principle that parents have responsibility and authority over children. My understanding of anthropology and religion is that this has been practically universal.

If you agree on this point then children could not give consent (and yes I too had sex before 18). Now I do believe that where you draw the age of consent is arbitrary. For instance, I think it's somewhat ironic, that the age of consent is higher than in the past when kids seem to grow up faster than before. It seems that sexual consent used to be tied more to puberty and now we have decided it's voting or some other magic at 18. Of course, you can't discuss lowering the age of consent on the ole FR because you are labelled as a pedophile or pushing the gaystapo agenda.

Also, wouldn't it be more arbitrary if each family decided on their own. As a wannabe Libertarian, I might like the exclusive parental authority, but I believe that would be chaotic and impractical (open to counterpoint on this one). I do believe government has a role to play drawing the line of the age of consent as part of a balance against total parental control which can be abusive to kids.

Clint, I will never answer your question about the legal differences between having sex with your blow-up doll and your pets. The question is idiotic. Either you already know the answer, which I suspect from the fact that you get in a real quality question now and then; or you are playing a psuedoSocratic-method game of string the other guy along with innane questions.

If and when you want to engage as adults, you might start by stating your complete position on the legality of homosexual sex. I suspect that once you put the dools, pets, and kids away, you don't want to put these people in jail afterall. I have totally lost your position in our ongoing bizarro dialogue.

Either way I think over time it is a widely help principle that parents have responsibility and authority over children

Of Course. The only other option is the government owns all the kids. That's a HUGE no-no.

But I kinda like my test idea, too.
Got bad parents? Well, if you can't pass the civics test, then you can engage in contracts and you can't vote until 18.
Smart cookie with good role models? You can pass at 16, then.

But you're wrong about something. I don't want to repost the chart here, it's too big.

Age OF Consent chart

The age of consent is NOT 18 in most states. It's 16.

Shhh... Don't tell the fundies. They'll be after the heteros next...

Be vewwwy vewwy quiet. I'm hunting Sodomites.

Clint, I will never answer your question about the legal differences between having sex with your blow-up doll and your pets. The question is idiotic.

That’s because you can’t, it makes you a hypocrite if you do. It’s a good question you can’t answer with any integrity. The fact that you won’t only puts you in a long line of hypocritical Liberaltarians that want to regulate some sexual behaviors and not others.

As far as children are concerned, whether sex is rape depends on consent. A child cannot consent only through arbitrary changeable law. But what defines a child? Under the 10th Amendment, the Constitution grants the authority to make such laws to the states or the people, disclaiming any authority over the judgement. It does not give the federal government any power over the issue of defining what constitutes a child. Therefore, whether or not rape seems to you to be a violation of basic liberty is utterly irrelevant, it’s left in the hands of the legislature.