Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,ba.politics
Subject: The Bigger Picture (Was: My Purpose In Getting NAMBLA Shunned)
From: mike.batchelor@pcb.batpad.lgb.ca.us (Mike Batchelor) 
Date: 30 Aug 92 01:16:00 GMT
Reply-To: mike.batchelor@pcb.batpad.lgb.ca.us (Mike Batchelor) 
Distribution: ca
Organization: The Batchelor Pad PCBoard ~ Long Beach, CA ~ +1 310 494 8084


cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:

CC$_Some of the participants have argued that because the age of
CC$_consent is arbitrary, that there is nothing magic about 18.  The
CC$_age could be 16.  Or 14.  Or 12.  I would hope that nearly everyone
CC$_can recognize that 6 is far too young.  So is 8.  Nearly everyone
CC$_(other than soc.motss regulars) seems to recognize that adults
CC$_shouldn't be having sex with 12 year olds, or even 14 year olds.
CC$_But in the pursuit of this ideal of "no age of consent" laws,
CC$_a number of USENETters have insisted that if the age of consent is
CC$_arbitrary, then it should be eliminated completely.

   What you left out is the continuation of the thought:

   "If age of consent is arbitrary, then it should be eliminated, AND
   REPLACED WITH SOMETHING THAT MAKES MORE SENSE."

   Personally, I am not very concerned with this question, because I
   have no desire to date or sleep with anyone under 21 or so.  I
   also recognize that changes to the age of consent laws have a
   snowball's chance in Hell of ever getting effected.  Nevertheless,
   there is merit to the idea that some youth who have not yet
   reached the legal age of consent, ARE capable of consenting.
   Probably not a very large percentage, but enough so that the
   question of "Is this fair to them?" becomes legitimate, although
   hardly pressing.  After all, the 15 year old who may happen to be
   capable of consent - assuming we could determine this - will be 18
   in just three more years, rendering the question moot.  Three
   years out of a lifetime spent waiting is a small price to "force"
   him or her to pay in order to protect the majority who are
   probably not mature enough to make a decision of this nature.

   But recognizing the reality of the situation - and I think I have
   a pretty good grasp of it - still does not make the question go
   away.  "Is this fair to them?"  Is there some other way where we
   could recognize the maturity and responsibility of those youth who
   can consent, without compromising the safety of those who can't?
   Not in today's society, that's for sure.

   [There is no question in my mind that NAMBLA is more interested in
   their own desires, than that of the children they pursue.  Their
   goals are irrelevant to the point I am about to make.  Please keep
   this in mind as I continue.]

   Another thing I am convinced of, is that if a truly Libertarian
   society is to evolve, people will have to learn at a very early
   age how not to be taken advantage of, and how to look out for
   their own interests.  Children will have to be raised to be
   independent agents of their own will.  Our collective attitudes
   towards children and their ability to determine the course of
   their own lives is exactly the same attitude as that of a
   socialist government towards the people it governs.

   I'm talking in general now, not just about the sexual consent
   question.

   Is it any wonder that we have a huge government, and a population
   that largely looks to it for protection and provision of the
   essentials for living, when we teach our children that they are
   not capable of making adult decisions, and then at the magical age
   of 18, turn them loose to fend for themselves?  They've been
   taught all their lives to this point that Mom and Dad will protect
   them, that they are not capable of making the important decisions
   for themselves.  Who will protect them now?  Who will decide for
   them?

   So they turn to government.  And here we are.  We made our bed,
   now we have to sleep in it.

   Think about that, Clayton.  The questions raised in this thread
   are quite a bit more complex than you would like for them to be.



[] Mike Batchelor
[] mike@batpad.lgb.ca.us -- Long Beach, California
---
 . OLX 2.2 . "Beam me aboard, Scotty" * "A 2x4, sir?"
                                      
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc