Please read the actual description, the law adjusts the handling of sex offences of gay relationships to that of straight relationships when the victim is 15-17 and the offender is less than 10 years older.
The whole point is to treat gay and straight offences with the same rules.
If a 24 year old has consentual sex with a 15 year old, it is not relevant if the victim is male or female, currently the law treats females as allowed victims, but males not.
Then who cares. It's already immoral that we stopped treating biological adults as adults, and it's part of what stunts our emotional growth well into our twenties.
I have serious issues with some tangential things like the rise of degeneracy, but not with this. Women should be married by 20.
I re-read the article, but saw no mention of "15-17" only "10 years age difference. If what you're saying is true, than the bill isn't as bad as it first appears, but 15 to 25 is still pretty gross. [edit have an upvote
The article intentionally omits a lot of details to make it appear more bad than it is, which is to be expected from Breidbart.
The article linked in the article which properly explains the law is here https://archive.vn/eV3R5
Thank you for the link, and for the relavant reminder that one should be more skeptical of something that fits your bias. The AP article you linked indicated 14-17, which means that 14 and 24 is still a possibility.
age of consent differs from country to country and from region to region, in most country 16 is AOC, in some it is 14
14 AOC is barbaric unless it's attached to a Romeo & Juliette condition
What you said is true, but I wish they had just raised the straight penalties.
I mean, like, up to possible capital punishment.
(post is archived)