Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Thu, 15 May 2008 18:01:59 -0500, Tim Daneliuk wrote:

I'm not. We choose an age of majority as a society. It is an average
that will be too high or low for some people. But we choose one as
a matter of rule of law. People engaged in sexual activity with partners
below that age are committing a crime, period. Having said that, I think
you have to have a scaled set of responses. How about 10 years
in jail for every year the minor was below majority age. Have sex
with a 12 year old, go to jail for 60 years. A 17 year old, 10 years.
Something like that.

Well, I don't think anyone supports legal sex with a 10 year old - there's
no gray area there. But it hasn't been that long ago that 14 was
considered the age of consent in several states, and may still be in some
- at 71 I don't keep up with that sort of thing :-).

Yeah, but that was when people died at 40 and you needed all the kids
you could have to keep the farm alive. One of the great blessings
of Capitalism, specialization, and industry is that we can live longer
with fewer children, enjoy the children we do have by seeing them
well into their middle age before we die, and not have to resort
to teenage reproduction. 14 is just plain too young. Then again,
there are people I know that I pray *never* have such contact at any
age on the off chance they reproduce, thereby polluting the gene pool.


And what if the male having sex with the 14 year old is himself 14?
Surely that's less of an offense than if he was 40. Maybe your list needs
to be a table :-).


I shudder to contemplate any of the above...

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/