But then...
I dont think age necessarily plays a factor in the psychological damages suffered from a sexual encounter. Rape victims for example suffer long term psychological problems regardless of their age. The fact is that everyone is their own individual and as such develop at different times.
There are admittedly many 14 year olds who feel that they are mature enough and are ready to have sex, but the fact is that there are also many that aren't. The law as an ideal is meant to be there to protect the innocent and as such the focus should always be on protecting those that aren't ready. Through this notion it has been decided that 16 is an age where the vast majority of people are ready to experiment sexually. That isn't to say that many aren't ready before that age, but in order to protect the ones that aren't a proper limit has to be set. I'd love to know what your alternative to that would be. By your logic it would seem that if an 11 year old decided they were ready and had gone through puberty, then he or she would be fare game. After all, if theres grass on the wicket, lets play cricket.
At the end of the day we could argue about the pedantics of the law forever and a day, and probably never agree. The fact is an old man is singing about how he loves to bugger children and sees nothing wrong in doing so, a mind set that I find morally reprehensible
(
Furness, Sat 10 May 2008, 0:56,
Share,
Reply)