(January 31, 2016 at 10:25 pm)ChadWooters Wrote:(January 30, 2016 at 2:08 am)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote: ...On the other hand, Hebephilia, which is adult sexual attraction to teenagers, is a slightly different proposition. If science discovers that we are wrong about this factor, then I can see the laws changing to suit a different figure than the ones we have artificially drawn (somewhere between 14 and 18, depending on the nation and/or the state in question)...
And so it begins. What was formerly unthinkable finds its way back into consideration.
The fuck are you talking about, calling it "formerly unthinkable"?
Until very very recently in history, it was normal for a woman to marry in her early teens. My own grandmother was married just after her 15th birthday, and had my mother at 16.
In many nations, the Age of Consent is 14 (and in 29 of the US states it's as low as 16, as well). In Mexico, it's 12. Twelve!
These figures are set almost arbitrarily, based on what that particular state/nation considers to be the age at which a person is capable of giving consent. As more data comes in, this figure could be revised upward or downward. I think the current science points to increasing the minimum age, not reducing it, but it is plausible that further discoveries could change that harm concept.
Far from being "back in consideration", it has always been in consideration; we simply have better ways to do it now, and it's possible legislators may take these factors into account when they raise or lower this number. I simply acknowledged that such is a possibility.
GTFOH with that judgmental bullshit, man.
A Christian told me: if you were saved you cant lose your salvation. you're sealed with the Holy Ghost
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.