Lutheran pedophiles

[Seth]

The reality that they are at a higher risk of committing suicide due to horrendous peer pressure (which didn't exist when we were younger in anything like the way it does now with social media).

You really don't fucking get it, do you? You still are thinking in terms of physical damage.

Is this a reality? I haven't seen the evidence that what you say is true. Kids are subject to peer pressure but these days it's as likely to be pressure to have sex as to be branded your favorite word, "slut" for having sex.

But let's assume arguendo that you are correct, and that May/December romances pose an abnormally high risk of peer rejection and peer ostracism. Is the solution to that imprisoning the December part of the relationship without regard to the actual situation or circumstances, or is the solution counseling for the May portion of the relationship as to the merits and demerits of having an affair with an older man based on the actual degree of stress being experienced by a particular teen?

[Seth]

He's an accomplished back flipper. He's been doing it for years.

No, I'm an accomplished debator who zeros in on the faults and flaws in your arguments and relentlessly demands the application of reason, logic and intellect in making arguments.

You could make more well-thought-out arguments not filled with logic and reason holes like a brick of Swiss cheese, but you don't.

[Seth]

He's an accomplished back flipper. He's been doing it for years.

In this instance it's not a case of backflipping. It is an outright denial of an obvious and manifest fact. I quoted his very words, and he brazenly denied having said them. Unfortunately for him he can't delete the words he posted. They remain plain for everybody to see. That makes his denial worthy of all the ridicule it gets.

I denied nothing. I simply answered your questions. You have been committing the black and white fallacy by asking questions proposing only two answers, neither of which are correct. I explained myself adequately previously and you chose to ignore that explanation and tried instead to trap me into answering the "have you stopped beating your wife" trick question.

I decline to participate in that charade.

When you have something substantive to say on the issue, I'll respond appropriately.

[Seth]

Please clarify. No, as in you didn't say that biology has provided an excellent indicator of the change between a protected child and a presumptively sexually mature young person: for girls it's menarche? No, as in you didn't say that you'd vote for the good old days when you were a woman when you became capable of having babies? No, as in you didn't say that there are a lot of girls who have reached puberty before they ought to give consent?

No.

Clearly yet another example of you being a "much better debator (sic) than anyone". How can anybody ever rebut your assertion that the copypaste of what you said in your posts is stuff you never said? In conjunction with your superior intelligence, articulation and education any such attempt would be doomed right from the outset. Oh, and I'm quoting your self-assessment, but it will not surprise me to see you denying that you ever said anything of the sort.

I didn't say that.

[surreptitious57]

The fact that the age of consent in various jurisdictions is pegged at any where between 12 and 21 years is pretty strong indication
that at least some of them are just wrong and there are reasonable grounds to argue that all of them are. The most obvious weakness
as has been pointed out previously is that a teenager is incapable of consenting to having sex one day before reaching the age of 16 but
24 hours later that is no longer the case. To my knowledge no body has ever been able to explain how the stroke of mid night marking the
day a person turns 16 suddenly causes an ability to consent to sex

The age of consent is a fundamentally legal concept that references the distinction between being a child and being an adult and has to
exist because the two alternatives are completely unacceptable for obvious reasons. So where it should actually be is of less significance

[Seth]

The fact that the age of consent in various jurisdictions is pegged at any where between 12 and 21 years is pretty strong indication
that at least some of them are just wrong and there are reasonable grounds to argue that all of them are. The most obvious weakness
as has been pointed out previously is that a teenager is incapable of consenting to having sex one day before reaching the age of 16 but
24 hours later that is no longer the case. To my knowledge no body has ever been able to explain how the stroke of mid night marking the
day a person turns 16 suddenly causes an ability to consent to sex

The age of consent is a fundamentally legal concept that references the distinction between being a child and being an adult and has to
exist because the two alternatives are completely unacceptable for obvious reasons. So where it should actually be is of less significance

What "obvious reasons" are you referring to, specifically?

[surreptitious57]

The fact that the age of consent in various jurisdictions is pegged at any where between 12 and 21 years is pretty strong indication
that at least some of them are just wrong and there are reasonable grounds to argue that all of them are. The most obvious weakness
as has been pointed out previously is that a teenager is incapable of consenting to having sex one day before reaching the age of 16 but
24 hours later that is no longer the case. To my knowledge no body has ever been able to explain how the stroke of mid night marking the
day a person turns 16 suddenly causes an ability to consent to sex

The age of consent is a fundamentally legal concept that references the distinction between being a child and being an adult and has to
exist because the two alternatives are completely unacceptable for obvious reasons. So where it should actually be is of less significance

What obvious reasons are you referring to specifically ?

You cannot be a child all your life and you cannot be an adult all your life
For you are only a child for some of it and only an adult for some of it too

[Seth]

The fact that the age of consent in various jurisdictions is pegged at any where between 12 and 21 years is pretty strong indication
that at least some of them are just wrong and there are reasonable grounds to argue that all of them are. The most obvious weakness
as has been pointed out previously is that a teenager is incapable of consenting to having sex one day before reaching the age of 16 but
24 hours later that is no longer the case. To my knowledge no body has ever been able to explain how the stroke of mid night marking the
day a person turns 16 suddenly causes an ability to consent to sex

The age of consent is a fundamentally legal concept that references the distinction between being a child and being an adult and has to
exist because the two alternatives are completely unacceptable for obvious reasons. So where it should actually be is of less significance

What obvious reasons are you referring to specifically ?

You cannot be a child all your life and you cannot be an adult all your life
For you are only a child for some of it and only an adult for some of it too

And how does this support the above argument?

[JimC]

The fact that the age of consent in various jurisdictions is pegged at any where between 12 and 21 years is pretty strong indication
that at least some of them are just wrong and there are reasonable grounds to argue that all of them are. The most obvious weakness
as has been pointed out previously is that a teenager is incapable of consenting to having sex one day before reaching the age of 16 but
24 hours later that is no longer the case. To my knowledge no body has ever been able to explain how the stroke of mid night marking the
day a person turns 16 suddenly causes an ability to consent to sex

The age of consent is a fundamentally legal concept that references the distinction between being a child and being an adult and has to
exist because the two alternatives are completely unacceptable for obvious reasons. So where it should actually be is of less significance

What obvious reasons are you referring to specifically ?

You cannot be a child all your life and you cannot be an adult all your life
For you are only a child for some of it and only an adult for some of it too

And how does this support the above argument?

statements by surreptitious are always somewhat gnomic...

[pErvinalia]

The fact that the age of consent in various jurisdictions is pegged at any where between 12 and 21 years is pretty strong indication
that at least some of them are just wrong and there are reasonable grounds to argue that all of them are. The most obvious weakness
as has been pointed out previously is that a teenager is incapable of consenting to having sex one day before reaching the age of 16 but
24 hours later that is no longer the case. To my knowledge no body has ever been able to explain how the stroke of mid night marking the
day a person turns 16 suddenly causes an ability to consent to sex

The age of consent is a fundamentally legal concept that references the distinction between being a child and being an adult and has to
exist because the two alternatives are completely unacceptable for obvious reasons. So where it should actually be is of less significance

What obvious reasons are you referring to specifically ?

You cannot be a child all your life and you cannot be an adult all your life
For you are only a child for some of it and only an adult for some of it too

And how does this support the above argument?

Stop trolling.

[JimC]

That's like Canute wanting to stop the tide...

[surreptitious57]

What obvious reasons are you referring to specifically ?

You cannot be a child all your life and you cannot be an adult all your life
For you are only a child for some of it and only an adult for some of it too

And how does this support the above argument ?

It does not support it but just demonstrates the need to have an age of consent
in order to differentiate between what is legally defined as a child and what is
legally defined as an adult and that is all I was referring to. No more or no less

[Seth]

Stop trolling.

Sorry, but no, it's my job.

[Seth]

What obvious reasons are you referring to specifically ?

You cannot be a child all your life and you cannot be an adult all your life
For you are only a child for some of it and only an adult for some of it too

And how does this support the above argument ?

It does not support it but just demonstrates the need to have an age of consent
in order to differentiate between what is legally defined as a child and what is
legally defined as an adult and that is all I was referring to. No more or no less

How does it demonstrate such a need? Is a child not a child until that child becomes an adult? Can a child not become an adult when the child is prepared to do so? Why is a random decision by society as to when children become adults appropriate or factually correct when applied to an individual child?

Is not the determination of adulthood best left to the individual child, possibly with the wise counsel of the child's parents, who know the child and the child's level of maturity better than some random unknown bureaucrat or politician?

[surreptitious57]

What obvious reasons are you referring to specifically ?

You cannot be a child all your life and you cannot be an adult all your life
For you are only a child for some of it and only an adult for some of it too

And how does this support the above argument ?

It does not support it but just demonstrates the need to have an age of consent
in order to differentiate between what is legally defined as a child and what is
legally defined as an adult and that is all I was referring to. No more or no less

How does it demonstrate such a need ? Is a child not a child until that child becomes an adult ? Can a child not become an adult when the child is prepared
to do so ? Why is a random decision by society as to when children become adults appropriate or factually correct when applied to an individual child ?

Is not the determination of adulthood best left to the individual child possibly with the wise counsel of the childs parents
who know the child and the childs level of maturity better than some random unknown bureaucrat or politician ?

You cannot have arbitrary definitions of when an individual child becomes an adult because as it is a legal concept then it has to apply to all children
equally. They as well as adults mature at different rates but without some basic framework which stipulates when one is a child and one is an adult the
law would be ineffective. It is not a perfect system but it is as perfect as it can be given the circumstances. In an ideal world all children would mature
at the same rate but we do not live in an ideal world so have to work within those limitations

As far as politicians are concerned they are responsible for passing law but as they are elected by the people then they can be removed by the people too
if they are unhappy with them. Bureaucrats may be unaccountable but in democracies it is actually the politicians who have the responsibility for passing
and repealing laws. And that is another important point for not everything on the statue remains there as laws can be rejected as well. Even ones which
are not can still be revised. So nothing is ever set in stone