The Age of Consent According to Democrats

Taking the first steps to make sure sex with minors is legal and safe. This is all about the nitty griity details regarding age of consent for young teenage girls, men and the legalizing of sex between them. Parents of course, have little say in it all.

IS A 13-year-old girl capable of consenting to sex with a 20-year-old man? Under New Hampshire law, she is not. A bill passed by the House in March and being considered in the Senate would alter that.

I have seen arguments over at ARS that claim ANY teenage girl who consents to a sexual relationship with ANY age man should be allowed. I have also heard arguments that young men, boys really shouldn't be forced to carry the label of sex offender just because they preyed upon a young girl.

House Bill 504, sponsored by Rep. Jennifer Brown, D-Dover, would allow convicted sex offenders younger than 21 to have their names removed from the sex offender registry if their victims were between the ages of 13 and 16, "the offender did not use force or coercion in the commission of the act and a period of 10 years or more has elapsed since the conviction without any other misdemeanor or felony convictions."

It figures a Democrat would write this, and it doesn't shock me or anyone else that this legislation is written by a woman either. Morals mean nothing to people like Jennifer Brown.

But New Hampshire has an age of consent for good reason. Some men prey on impressionable girls, and for their safety the law holds that no matter how in love they feel they cannot legally consent to sex. The age difference itself, in other words, is proof of force or coercion.

Many argue the age should be changed simply because the LAW is too outdated.
The age of consent is an important factor. Young teenage girls are not emotionally ready to handle being USED. Let's be blunt about it. Yes, they fall "in love" with adult boys (those men who are around 21 years of age) and they view him as their savior- their Prince who will marry them someday and whom they will live happily ever after...and we all know what the adult boys want. Robbing young girls of their chance to learn how to deal with the emotional ups and downs of their teen years, with peers their same age is wrong.
Girls who become involved in one sided relationships like these tend to be depressed and grow up with self esteem problems. They also tend to become involved in abusive relationships later in their lives. But it's okay because it's just sex, right?
Adult boys who crave young naive and impressionable girls never learn to become decent men who hold decent morals and values. And what makes anyone think a 21 year old boy ages a decade and suddenly desires an more mature and emotionally stronger woman? It's too easy to take advantage of that 13 year old; we know men in their 30's, 40's and 50's do this.

Furthermore, the law already has an exception for young teen lovers. A teen no more than two years older than the victim is not necessarily guilty of felonious sexual assault on a person between the ages of 13 and 16. A 17-year-old high school senior caught on prom night with a 15-year-old sophomore would not be guilty of felonious sexual assault. If he were caught with a 14-year-old, he would.

Exactly. Why Ms. Brown seems determined to change a law that already protects close-age sexual relationships is unknown to me. Perhaps she is a feminist who wants to further liberate women?

It does not take a criminologist to see that adult men who seduce girls between the ages of 13 and 15 are sexual predators. This bill would let them slip off the sex offender registry so that parents would have no warning that these men are a threat to their children. If the bill passes, it will endanger children all across America, as sex offenders under age 21 could move to New Hampshire, petititon to have their names removed from the registry, then move wherever their predatory impulses took them.

Laws like this invite a state to become a haven for predators. It doesn't surprise me that one of the few tools a parent has in their arsenal is potentially going to be removed; in the eyes of the Democrats, parents should depend upon the state to keep their children, (young teenage girls) safe. The very things we want to protect our daughters from are being made legal now.

XPosted @ ARS