"The conversation brought an awkward thought. I frequently opine, "no victim, no crime" for other issues. I doubt that I am unique in saying that I had sex before the age of 18." Yeah, there are a few important nuances to pick apart here. First, some laws are important even if there's no clear victim, no? Drunk driving springs to mind. I…
"The conversation brought an awkward thought. I frequently opine, "no victim, no crime" for other issues. I doubt that I am unique in saying that I had sex before the age of 18."
Yeah, there are a few important nuances to pick apart here. First, some laws are important even if there's no clear victim, no? Drunk driving springs to mind. I think drunk drivers should be punished if caught, even if they don't kill anybody on that particular drive. In this case, the law exists to prevent the behaviour, not because every time somebody commits the behaviour somebody dies. In fact, probably most of the time when somebody drives drunk, nobody dies.
I think age of consent laws are similar. Some people under the age of consent are nonetheless mature/intelligent enough to make informed decisions about sex. Like you, and I suspect many other people, I had sex before I was 18. I wasn't a victim of anything. But once we move out of the window of close-age exceptions already covered by law, once one of the parties is old enough that they should know better, I think there should be consequences simply for not exercising the restraint to protect that minor from the possibility of harm.
To put it in more concrete terms, let's imagine a 24-year-old who is genuinely in love with a 15-year-old. Let's gloss over the details of how that's possible without some other disturbing things happening first. Even if the 15-year-old "consents" to sex, I think the 24-year-old should refuse until that child is no longer below the age of consent. The 24-year-old is aware of the law, they should be mature enough to control their urges, and they have a responsibility to protect that minor from potential harm. Even (or, in fact, *especially*) if their feelings are genuine.
The choice to ignore all that and have sex anyway is not only against the law, it's an act of pure selfishness that I would strongly argue is abusive. None of this is perfect. As no laws are. The age of consent, sadly, can't be a scientifically determined safe point. It's a line in the sand. But it's a necessary one.
"The conversation brought an awkward thought. I frequently opine, "no victim, no crime" for other issues. I doubt that I am unique in saying that I had sex before the age of 18."
Yeah, there are a few important nuances to pick apart here. First, some laws are important even if there's no clear victim, no? Drunk driving springs to mind. I think drunk drivers should be punished if caught, even if they don't kill anybody on that particular drive. In this case, the law exists to prevent the behaviour, not because every time somebody commits the behaviour somebody dies. In fact, probably most of the time when somebody drives drunk, nobody dies.
I think age of consent laws are similar. Some people under the age of consent are nonetheless mature/intelligent enough to make informed decisions about sex. Like you, and I suspect many other people, I had sex before I was 18. I wasn't a victim of anything. But once we move out of the window of close-age exceptions already covered by law, once one of the parties is old enough that they should know better, I think there should be consequences simply for not exercising the restraint to protect that minor from the possibility of harm.
To put it in more concrete terms, let's imagine a 24-year-old who is genuinely in love with a 15-year-old. Let's gloss over the details of how that's possible without some other disturbing things happening first. Even if the 15-year-old "consents" to sex, I think the 24-year-old should refuse until that child is no longer below the age of consent. The 24-year-old is aware of the law, they should be mature enough to control their urges, and they have a responsibility to protect that minor from potential harm. Even (or, in fact, *especially*) if their feelings are genuine.
The choice to ignore all that and have sex anyway is not only against the law, it's an act of pure selfishness that I would strongly argue is abusive. None of this is perfect. As no laws are. The age of consent, sadly, can't be a scientifically determined safe point. It's a line in the sand. But it's a necessary one.