= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
ChristianKl comments on Open Thread, October 7 - October 12, 2013 - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (312)
You want to make it easy for people to know whether another person has the legal ability to consent. If consent is about whether the person had taken an exam, it would be hard to know.
A twenty five year old woman who doesn't want to have sex before marriage for religious reasons could simply avoid taking the test. People who take the test before getting married could be expelled by the local church.
The proposal seems to give fundamental Christian's a ugly tool for charging people who engage in premartial sex with rape.
Although you raise some compelling arguments against the proposition of an exam, I'll note that in cases in the vicinity of the borderline, legal ability to consent by age is already quite hard to judge; people rarely card prospective sex partners.
Actually it was written by a self-declared pedophile (who had chosen not to act upon his urges) who argued that arbitrarily young people should be allowed to consent to sex provided they demonstrably know what they're doing.
It must have been taken down, because I've found that blog but that post no longer seems to be there, and the blog is not on archive.org.