Re: Idaho still in favor of child marriage [slowguy] [ In reply to ]

Mar 3, 19 17:02

Post #26 of 50 (1243 views)

slowguy wrote:

JSA wrote:

slowguy wrote:

So I'm not sure what the issue is, specifically. Is it that 15 year olds are permitted to marry? Or is it that people don't like the idea of a 30 year old marrying a 15 year old?

If they've decided that 15 is old enough to marry, then I don't suppose it matters who they marry.

I may be wrong, but, it does not appear there are a lot of 15-18 year olds getting married to one another. It seems much more likely it is 30-some men marrying 15 year old girls, based on the links posted in this thread.

Well ok, but again, is the issue that 15 year-olds aren't mature enough to marry anyone, or is it that 30 year-olds are acting within the law to 15 year-olds?

If the law deems that 15 year-olds are old enough to marry, it doesn't matter if they're marrying 18, 25, 30, or 65 year-olds. Why is the age disparity brought into the argument, other than to imply some sort of ick factor?

Well, right now, in all states, the age of consent to marriage is at least 18 (if not lower). But, it is still unlawful for a teacher to have a romantic relationship with his/her high school student, regardless of age. Why? Because the law recognizes the inequity in positions between teachers and students. That same inequity applies quite often with age disparity. So, the law does recognize those factors and makes exceptions.

Just because the law says a 15 year old can marry does not mean the law sees acceptable a marriage with that type of age disparity.

The age disparity is about inequity of power far more than about the ick factor.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Re: Idaho still in favor of child marriage [JSA] [ In reply to ]

Mar 3, 19 17:14

Post #27 of 50 (1235 views)

Did someone say Ickey?!?

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Last edited by: BLeP: Mar 3, 19 17:17

Re: Idaho still in favor of child marriage [dontworry] [ In reply to ]

Mar 3, 19 17:21

Post #28 of 50 (1228 views)

dontworry wrote:

Perhaps sex with 16 year olds, but with 35 year olds?

To be clear I don't think 15 year olds should be having sex with anyone

Re: Idaho still in favor of child marriage [windywave] [ In reply to ]

Mar 3, 19 17:30

Post #29 of 50 (1215 views)

windywave wrote:

dontworry wrote:

Perhaps sex with 16 year olds, but with 35 year olds?

To be clear I don't think 15 year olds should be having sex with anyone

Not even with Ickey Woods?

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Re: Idaho still in favor of child marriage [JSA] [ In reply to ]

Mar 3, 19 17:42

Post #30 of 50 (1213 views)

JSA wrote:

slowguy wrote:

JSA wrote:

slowguy wrote:

So I'm not sure what the issue is, specifically. Is it that 15 year olds are permitted to marry? Or is it that people don't like the idea of a 30 year old marrying a 15 year old?

If they've decided that 15 is old enough to marry, then I don't suppose it matters who they marry.

I may be wrong, but, it does not appear there are a lot of 15-18 year olds getting married to one another. It seems much more likely it is 30-some men marrying 15 year old girls, based on the links posted in this thread.

Well ok, but again, is the issue that 15 year-olds aren't mature enough to marry anyone, or is it that 30 year-olds are acting within the law to 15 year-olds?

If the law deems that 15 year-olds are old enough to marry, it doesn't matter if they're marrying 18, 25, 30, or 65 year-olds. Why is the age disparity brought into the argument, other than to imply some sort of ick factor?

Well, right now, in all states, the age of consent to marriage is at least 18 (if not lower). But, it is still unlawful for a teacher to have a romantic relationship with his/her high school student, regardless of age. Why? Because the law recognizes the inequity in positions between teachers and students. That same inequity applies quite often with age disparity. So, the law does recognize those factors and makes exceptions.

Just because the law says a 15 year old can marry does not mean the law sees acceptable a marriage with that type of age disparity.

The age disparity is about inequity of power far more than about the ick factor.

Does the law, in any State, impose a restriction on marriage due to age disparity between the participants? Are there any States that allow a 15 year-old to marry, so long as the other party to marriage is no more than X years older?

I understand the concept behind the power disparity that can exist with adults and kids/young people that is reflected in things like statutory rape laws.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Re: Idaho still in favor of child marriage [slowguy] [ In reply to ]

Mar 3, 19 17:50

Post #31 of 50 (1210 views)

slowguy wrote:

JSA wrote:

slowguy wrote:

JSA wrote:

slowguy wrote:

So I'm not sure what the issue is, specifically. Is it that 15 year olds are permitted to marry? Or is it that people don't like the idea of a 30 year old marrying a 15 year old?

If they've decided that 15 is old enough to marry, then I don't suppose it matters who they marry.

I may be wrong, but, it does not appear there are a lot of 15-18 year olds getting married to one another. It seems much more likely it is 30-some men marrying 15 year old girls, based on the links posted in this thread.

Well ok, but again, is the issue that 15 year-olds aren't mature enough to marry anyone, or is it that 30 year-olds are acting within the law to 15 year-olds?

If the law deems that 15 year-olds are old enough to marry, it doesn't matter if they're marrying 18, 25, 30, or 65 year-olds. Why is the age disparity brought into the argument, other than to imply some sort of ick factor?

Well, right now, in all states, the age of consent to marriage is at least 18 (if not lower). But, it is still unlawful for a teacher to have a romantic relationship with his/her high school student, regardless of age. Why? Because the law recognizes the inequity in positions between teachers and students. That same inequity applies quite often with age disparity. So, the law does recognize those factors and makes exceptions.

Just because the law says a 15 year old can marry does not mean the law sees acceptable a marriage with that type of age disparity.

The age disparity is about inequity of power far more than about the ick factor.

Does the law, in any State, impose a restriction on marriage due to age disparity between the participants? Are there any States that allow a 15 year-old to marry, so long as the other party to marriage is no more than X years older?

I understand the concept behind the power disparity that can exist with adults and kids/young people that is reflected in things like statutory rape laws.

Then I don't understand what you don't understand about this topic.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Re: Idaho still in favor of child marriage [JSA] [ In reply to ]

Mar 3, 19 17:56

Post #32 of 50 (1203 views)

JSA wrote:

slowguy wrote:

JSA wrote:

slowguy wrote:

JSA wrote:

slowguy wrote:

So I'm not sure what the issue is, specifically. Is it that 15 year olds are permitted to marry? Or is it that people don't like the idea of a 30 year old marrying a 15 year old?

If they've decided that 15 is old enough to marry, then I don't suppose it matters who they marry.

I may be wrong, but, it does not appear there are a lot of 15-18 year olds getting married to one another. It seems much more likely it is 30-some men marrying 15 year old girls, based on the links posted in this thread.

Well ok, but again, is the issue that 15 year-olds aren't mature enough to marry anyone, or is it that 30 year-olds are acting within the law to 15 year-olds?

If the law deems that 15 year-olds are old enough to marry, it doesn't matter if they're marrying 18, 25, 30, or 65 year-olds. Why is the age disparity brought into the argument, other than to imply some sort of ick factor?

Well, right now, in all states, the age of consent to marriage is at least 18 (if not lower). But, it is still unlawful for a teacher to have a romantic relationship with his/her high school student, regardless of age. Why? Because the law recognizes the inequity in positions between teachers and students. That same inequity applies quite often with age disparity. So, the law does recognize those factors and makes exceptions.

Just because the law says a 15 year old can marry does not mean the law sees acceptable a marriage with that type of age disparity.

The age disparity is about inequity of power far more than about the ick factor.

Does the law, in any State, impose a restriction on marriage due to age disparity between the participants? Are there any States that allow a 15 year-old to marry, so long as the other party to marriage is no more than X years older?

I understand the concept behind the power disparity that can exist with adults and kids/young people that is reflected in things like statutory rape laws.

Then I don't understand what you don't understand about this topic.

I don't understand if the OP is upset that Idaho allows 15 year olds to marry, or that Idaho allows 30 year-olds to marry 15 year-olds, or that some 30 year-olds want to marry 15 year-olds.

The proposed bill in Idaho didn't do anything to prevent age disparity in marriage. It seems to have simply proposed to raise the legal age of consent for marriage.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Re: Idaho still in favor of child marriage [slowguy] [ In reply to ]

Mar 3, 19 18:01

Post #33 of 50 (1198 views)

slowguy wrote:

JSA wrote:

slowguy wrote:

JSA wrote:

slowguy wrote:

JSA wrote:

slowguy wrote:

So I'm not sure what the issue is, specifically. Is it that 15 year olds are permitted to marry? Or is it that people don't like the idea of a 30 year old marrying a 15 year old?

If they've decided that 15 is old enough to marry, then I don't suppose it matters who they marry.

I may be wrong, but, it does not appear there are a lot of 15-18 year olds getting married to one another. It seems much more likely it is 30-some men marrying 15 year old girls, based on the links posted in this thread.

Well ok, but again, is the issue that 15 year-olds aren't mature enough to marry anyone, or is it that 30 year-olds are acting within the law to 15 year-olds?

If the law deems that 15 year-olds are old enough to marry, it doesn't matter if they're marrying 18, 25, 30, or 65 year-olds. Why is the age disparity brought into the argument, other than to imply some sort of ick factor?

Well, right now, in all states, the age of consent to marriage is at least 18 (if not lower). But, it is still unlawful for a teacher to have a romantic relationship with his/her high school student, regardless of age. Why? Because the law recognizes the inequity in positions between teachers and students. That same inequity applies quite often with age disparity. So, the law does recognize those factors and makes exceptions.

Just because the law says a 15 year old can marry does not mean the law sees acceptable a marriage with that type of age disparity.

The age disparity is about inequity of power far more than about the ick factor.

Does the law, in any State, impose a restriction on marriage due to age disparity between the participants? Are there any States that allow a 15 year-old to marry, so long as the other party to marriage is no more than X years older?

I understand the concept behind the power disparity that can exist with adults and kids/young people that is reflected in things like statutory rape laws.

Then I don't understand what you don't understand about this topic.

I don't understand if the OP is upset that Idaho allows 15 year olds to marry, or that Idaho allows 30 year-olds to marry 15 year-olds, or that some 30 year-olds want to marry 15 year-olds.

The proposed bill in Idaho didn't do anything to prevent age disparity in marriage. It seems to have simply proposed to raise the legal age of consent for marriage.

Ah! Ok, I'm following you now.

If I'm reading correctly, I think the purpose of the law is not so much to prevent large disparities in marriage, but, to prevent young women from being taken advantage of. The theory is that it would be easier for a 35 year old man to pressure a 15 year old girl into marriage than a 38 year old man pressuring an 18 year old young woman. Both relationships are 20 years apart, but, the 18 year old is (supposedly) able to make better decisions that are more of her own free will than the 15 year old. At least that is the theory.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Re: Idaho still in favor of child marriage [JSA] [ In reply to ]

Mar 3, 19 18:46

Post #34 of 50 (1187 views)

JSA wrote:

slowguy wrote:

JSA wrote:

slowguy wrote:

JSA wrote:

slowguy wrote:

JSA wrote:

slowguy wrote:

So I'm not sure what the issue is, specifically. Is it that 15 year olds are permitted to marry? Or is it that people don't like the idea of a 30 year old marrying a 15 year old?

If they've decided that 15 is old enough to marry, then I don't suppose it matters who they marry.

I may be wrong, but, it does not appear there are a lot of 15-18 year olds getting married to one another. It seems much more likely it is 30-some men marrying 15 year old girls, based on the links posted in this thread.

Well ok, but again, is the issue that 15 year-olds aren't mature enough to marry anyone, or is it that 30 year-olds are acting within the law to 15 year-olds?

If the law deems that 15 year-olds are old enough to marry, it doesn't matter if they're marrying 18, 25, 30, or 65 year-olds. Why is the age disparity brought into the argument, other than to imply some sort of ick factor?

Well, right now, in all states, the age of consent to marriage is at least 18 (if not lower). But, it is still unlawful for a teacher to have a romantic relationship with his/her high school student, regardless of age. Why? Because the law recognizes the inequity in positions between teachers and students. That same inequity applies quite often with age disparity. So, the law does recognize those factors and makes exceptions.

Just because the law says a 15 year old can marry does not mean the law sees acceptable a marriage with that type of age disparity.

The age disparity is about inequity of power far more than about the ick factor.

Does the law, in any State, impose a restriction on marriage due to age disparity between the participants? Are there any States that allow a 15 year-old to marry, so long as the other party to marriage is no more than X years older?

I understand the concept behind the power disparity that can exist with adults and kids/young people that is reflected in things like statutory rape laws.

Then I don't understand what you don't understand about this topic.

I don't understand if the OP is upset that Idaho allows 15 year olds to marry, or that Idaho allows 30 year-olds to marry 15 year-olds, or that some 30 year-olds want to marry 15 year-olds.

The proposed bill in Idaho didn't do anything to prevent age disparity in marriage. It seems to have simply proposed to raise the legal age of consent for marriage.

Ah! Ok, I'm following you now.

If I'm reading correctly, I think the purpose of the law is not so much to prevent large disparities in marriage, but, to prevent young women from being taken advantage of. The theory is that it would be easier for a 35 year old man to pressure a 15 year old girl into marriage than a 38 year old man pressuring an 18 year old young woman. Both relationships are 20 years apart, but, the 18 year old is (supposedly) able to make better decisions that are more of her own free will than the 15 year old. At least that is the theory.

The 15 year old needs parental permission whereas the 18 year doesn't for marriage. Abortion on the otherhand not so much. Discuss

Re: Idaho still in favor of child marriage [windywave] [ In reply to ]

Mar 3, 19 19:42

Post #35 of 50 (1178 views)

windywave wrote:

JSA wrote:

slowguy wrote:

JSA wrote:

slowguy wrote:

JSA wrote:

slowguy wrote:

JSA wrote:

slowguy wrote:

So I'm not sure what the issue is, specifically. Is it that 15 year olds are permitted to marry? Or is it that people don't like the idea of a 30 year old marrying a 15 year old?

If they've decided that 15 is old enough to marry, then I don't suppose it matters who they marry.

I may be wrong, but, it does not appear there are a lot of 15-18 year olds getting married to one another. It seems much more likely it is 30-some men marrying 15 year old girls, based on the links posted in this thread.

Well ok, but again, is the issue that 15 year-olds aren't mature enough to marry anyone, or is it that 30 year-olds are acting within the law to 15 year-olds?

If the law deems that 15 year-olds are old enough to marry, it doesn't matter if they're marrying 18, 25, 30, or 65 year-olds. Why is the age disparity brought into the argument, other than to imply some sort of ick factor?

Well, right now, in all states, the age of consent to marriage is at least 18 (if not lower). But, it is still unlawful for a teacher to have a romantic relationship with his/her high school student, regardless of age. Why? Because the law recognizes the inequity in positions between teachers and students. That same inequity applies quite often with age disparity. So, the law does recognize those factors and makes exceptions.

Just because the law says a 15 year old can marry does not mean the law sees acceptable a marriage with that type of age disparity.

The age disparity is about inequity of power far more than about the ick factor.

Does the law, in any State, impose a restriction on marriage due to age disparity between the participants? Are there any States that allow a 15 year-old to marry, so long as the other party to marriage is no more than X years older?

I understand the concept behind the power disparity that can exist with adults and kids/young people that is reflected in things like statutory rape laws.

Then I don't understand what you don't understand about this topic.

I don't understand if the OP is upset that Idaho allows 15 year olds to marry, or that Idaho allows 30 year-olds to marry 15 year-olds, or that some 30 year-olds want to marry 15 year-olds.

The proposed bill in Idaho didn't do anything to prevent age disparity in marriage. It seems to have simply proposed to raise the legal age of consent for marriage.

Ah! Ok, I'm following you now.

If I'm reading correctly, I think the purpose of the law is not so much to prevent large disparities in marriage, but, to prevent young women from being taken advantage of. The theory is that it would be easier for a 35 year old man to pressure a 15 year old girl into marriage than a 38 year old man pressuring an 18 year old young woman. Both relationships are 20 years apart, but, the 18 year old is (supposedly) able to make better decisions that are more of her own free will than the 15 year old. At least that is the theory.

The 15 year old needs parental permission whereas the 18 year doesn't for marriage. Abortion on the otherhand not so much. Discuss

Under the proposed bill, the only real difference is that a 16 or 17 year-old would have to ask for permission, and the 15 year-old wouldn't be allowed at all. So if it's a 30 year-old with a 15 year-old, it's disgusting child marriage, but if it's a 31 year-old with a 16 year-old, I guess that's ok.

As for abortion, it's a different animal from marriage. Marriage is about two people entering into a legal contract with the State. Abortion is about a person's ability to take medical action regarding their own body, and that of their unborn child. I don't really know why the two concepts would need to be linked.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Re: Idaho still in favor of child marriage [slowguy] [ In reply to ]

Mar 4, 19 5:53

Post #36 of 50 (1131 views)

Quote:

So if it's a 30 year-old with a 15 year-old, it's disgusting child marriage, but if it's a 31 year-old with a 16 year-old, I guess that's ok.

I totally see your point but you have to draw a line somewhere....

And to look at it another way, what’s the hurry? Why can’t a couple where one is 15 just wait until he or she is 16?

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

Re: Idaho still in favor of child marriage [DavHamm] [ In reply to ]

Mar 4, 19 6:38

Post #37 of 50 (1112 views)

DavHamm wrote:

Skipjack wrote:

Check out the heatmap (minors wed 2000-2010) on UnChained At Last. While any number of minors being wed is terrible Idaho is pretty far from the top of that list when it comes to total numbers: http://www.unchainedatlast.org/child-marriage-shocking-statistics/ .

Uhm Idaho is number one from the link you provided.

Idaho is number one in child marriage rate. The quote that you yanked from my post is me pointing out total numbers by state. In the following section I even directly mentioned this.

You may not know what a heatmap is? If that's the case look at the map of the US and hover your pointer over each (red) to see the total numbers.

Re: Idaho still in favor of child marriage [Duffy] [ In reply to ]

Mar 4, 19 6:44

Post #38 of 50 (1107 views)

Quote:

So if it's a 30 year-old with a 15 year-old, it's disgusting child marriage, but if it's a 31 year-old with a 16 year-old, I guess that's ok.

I totally see your point but you have to draw a line somewhere....

DIng, ding, ding, we have a winner! There are so many laws in which there is an age-restriction (drinking/driving/voting/etc.). Take the opposite, if 15 is okay , why not 14?

Re: Idaho still in favor of child marriage [Duffy] [ In reply to ]

Mar 4, 19 7:34

Post #39 of 50 (1086 views)

The hurry is that it is illegal (statutory rape) for a 30 year old to have sex with a 15 year old. However, it is not illegal for a married man to have sex with his wife.

Ryan

Re: Idaho still in favor of child marriage [slowguy] [ In reply to ]

Mar 4, 19 7:46

Post #40 of 50 (1077 views)

slowguy wrote:

JSA wrote:

slowguy wrote:

So I'm not sure what the issue is, specifically. Is it that 15 year olds are permitted to marry? Or is it that people don't like the idea of a 30 year old marrying a 15 year old?

If they've decided that 15 is old enough to marry, then I don't suppose it matters who they marry.

I may be wrong, but, it does not appear there are a lot of 15-18 year olds getting married to one another. It seems much more likely it is 30-some men marrying 15 year old girls, based on the links posted in this thread.

Well ok, but again, is the issue that 15 year-olds aren't mature enough to marry anyone, or is it that 30 year-olds are acting within the law to 15 year-olds?

If the law deems that 15 year-olds are old enough to marry, it doesn't matter if they're marrying 18, 25, 30, or 65 year-olds. Why is the age disparity brought into the argument, other than to imply some sort of ick factor?

FWIW I think in modern US society both of those are a problem, rather than an either or thing.

Re: Idaho still in favor of child marriage [Kay Serrar] [ In reply to ]

Mar 4, 19 8:10

Post #41 of 50 (1064 views)

You have to be 16 in Canuckastan to get married. We hate freedom. Well sometimes we do but in this case it is reasonable

They constantly try to escape from the darkness outside and within
Dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good T.S. Eliot

Re: Idaho still in favor of child marriage [DavHamm] [ In reply to ]

Mar 4, 19 8:16

Post #42 of 50 (1062 views)

DavHamm wrote:

Skipjack wrote:

Check out the heatmap (minors wed 2000-2010) on UnChained At Last. While any number of minors being wed is terrible Idaho is pretty far from the top of that list when it comes to total numbers: http://www.unchainedatlast.org/child-marriage-shocking-statistics/ .

Uhm Idaho is number one from the link you provided.

This is an anti-abortion law.

To stop the child weddings, you need a better economy and education. Mass's laws are more lenient than Idaho's - 18 without consent, in ID 16, 17 need parental consent, under 16 with a court order.
Mass: 18 without parent consent. ANY AGE with parental consent! THERE IS NO MINIMUM AGE TO GET MARRIED IN MASS! Some opinions say that common law dictates 12 though.

Either way, MA is tied for the 2nd least underage weddings without laws.

NH statue says 16 absolute minimum age as of January.

Re: Idaho still in favor of child marriage [scorpio516] [ In reply to ]

Mar 4, 19 9:40

Post #43 of 50 (1037 views)

This is definitely a weird phenomenon, to me anyway.

My dad is wholly a die hard conservative. Rush Limbaugh listener for decades. Definitely pro-birth.

However, he's pretty legalistic in the sense that he would be 1000000% against allowing 13 and 14 year olds to marry people. Especially older people in weird mixes of ages. Abortion opportunities or whatever in the law or not. He's also really legalistic in the sense that he'd never be a conspiracy theory or "religious rights" weirdo about vaccines. He'd probably berate you for not vaccinating your child. I've heard him make comments about weirdos marrying young people and idiots not vaccinating, his words.

So, super die hard conservative and religious and he'd never agree with this kind of stuff.

Re: Idaho still in favor of child marriage [ThisIsIt] [ In reply to ]

Mar 4, 19 11:16

Post #44 of 50 (1013 views)

ThisIsIt wrote:

slowguy wrote:

JSA wrote:

slowguy wrote:

So I'm not sure what the issue is, specifically. Is it that 15 year olds are permitted to marry? Or is it that people don't like the idea of a 30 year old marrying a 15 year old?

If they've decided that 15 is old enough to marry, then I don't suppose it matters who they marry.

I may be wrong, but, it does not appear there are a lot of 15-18 year olds getting married to one another. It seems much more likely it is 30-some men marrying 15 year old girls, based on the links posted in this thread.

Well ok, but again, is the issue that 15 year-olds aren't mature enough to marry anyone, or is it that 30 year-olds are acting within the law to 15 year-olds?

If the law deems that 15 year-olds are old enough to marry, it doesn't matter if they're marrying 18, 25, 30, or 65 year-olds. Why is the age disparity brought into the argument, other than to imply some sort of ick factor?

FWIW I think in modern US society both of those are a problem, rather than an either or thing.

The obvious answer is for all states to agree to the half plus seven rule for sex and marriage. That would get rid of 17 year olds having to be registered sex offenders for getting caught with a 16 year old. And it eliminates gold diggers marrying people just before they die.

Re: Idaho still in favor of child marriage [BCtriguy1] [ In reply to ]

Mar 4, 19 15:18

Post #45 of 50 (981 views)

BCtriguy1 wrote:

Marriage is required to make a loving family? Especially in the scenario this law is dealing with?

Remember this is GOP 'logic' we're dealing with here...

Re: Idaho still in favor of child marriage [Duffy] [ In reply to ]

Mar 4, 19 15:22

Post #46 of 50 (977 views)

Duffy wrote:

Quote:

So if it's a 30 year-old with a 15 year-old, it's disgusting child marriage, but if it's a 31 year-old with a 16 year-old, I guess that's ok.

I totally see your point but you have to draw a line somewhere....

And to look at it another way, what’s the hurry? Why can’t a couple where one is 15 just wait until he or she is 16?

The hurry (since they obviously are trying to get in front of any abortions) is to put a bow of legitimacy on it before Jr arrives into the world...

Re: Idaho still in favor of child marriage [windywave] [ In reply to ]

Mar 4, 19 15:27

Post #47 of 50 (974 views)

windywave wrote:

So just to be clear people think 15 year olds are mature enough to a) have sex and b) get abortions but not mature enough to get married?

Huh? You mean the bill's sponsors?

Seeing as how it got voted down, it would seem that they can abide 15-year-olds having sex and getting married, just not having any abortions. Is that better?

Re: Idaho still in favor of child marriage [Duffy] [ In reply to ]

Mar 4, 19 16:06

Post #48 of 50 (963 views)

Duffy wrote:

Quote:

So if it's a 30 year-old with a 15 year-old, it's disgusting child marriage, but if it's a 31 year-old with a 16 year-old, I guess that's ok.

I totally see your point but you have to draw a line somewhere....

And to look at it another way, what’s the hurry? Why can’t a couple where one is 15 just wait until he or she is 16?

I'm totally ok with setting a limit somewhere. I'm trying to figure out what the primary concern is.

It the concern that Idaho allows 15 year olds to marry, and we think that's too young?

Or is it ok to allow 15 year olds to marry, but we don't want them to marry people twice their age?

Or is it some combination of both concerns, and if so, is there an age at which the disparity is no longer something we want to limit by statute?

The OP seemed concerned about the 30-15 year gap, but the proposed law in Idaho wouldn't have done anything to eliminate that kind of gap.

Personally, I think 15 is too young to get married in the U.S. these days. The world is more complex and marriage itself is too complex for 15 year-olds (in general) to be able to handle. I'm not sure that somehow that's different at 16, but if that's where we set the dividing line, I guess that's fine.

I think it's typically pretty weird for a 30 year-old to be interested in marrying a 15 year-old, but I don't think we want to set a limit on age disparity for people who would otherwise be legally allowed to marry. In other words, I wouldn't be in favor of saying that a 16 year-old is allowed to get married, but only to someone who is within 10 or 5 years of their age.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Re: Idaho still in favor of child marriage [slowguy] [ In reply to ]

Mar 4, 19 16:31

Post #49 of 50 (959 views)

slowguy wrote:

Duffy wrote:

Quote:

So if it's a 30 year-old with a 15 year-old, it's disgusting child marriage, but if it's a 31 year-old with a 16 year-old, I guess that's ok.

I totally see your point but you have to draw a line somewhere....

And to look at it another way, what’s the hurry? Why can’t a couple where one is 15 just wait until he or she is 16?

I'm totally ok with setting a limit somewhere. I'm trying to figure out what the primary concern is.

It the concern that Idaho allows 15 year olds to marry, and we think that's too young?

Or is it ok to allow 15 year olds to marry, but we don't want them to marry people twice their age?

Or is it some combination of both concerns, and if so, is there an age at which the disparity is no longer something we want to limit by statute?

The OP seemed concerned about the 30-15 year gap, but the proposed law in Idaho wouldn't have done anything to eliminate that kind of gap.

Personally, I think 15 is too young to get married in the U.S. these days. The world is more complex and marriage itself is too complex for 15 year-olds (in general) to be able to handle. I'm not sure that somehow that's different at 16, but if that's where we set the dividing line, I guess that's fine.

I think it's typically pretty weird for a 30 year-old to be interested in marrying a 15 year-old, but I don't think we want to set a limit on age disparity for people who would otherwise be legally allowed to marry. In other words, I wouldn't be in favor of saying that a 16 year-old is allowed to get married, but only to someone who is within 10 or 5 years of their age.

Thanks for clarifying. I have no disagreement with you on this.

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

Re: Idaho still in favor of child marriage [Pun_Times] [ In reply to ]

Mar 6, 19 4:28

Post #50 of 50 (912 views)

Pun_Times wrote:

It’s also an obsession of people (and the politicians) they vote for to have a government that’s “hands off” and regulates as little as possible.

At least one of the two house reps (the only one if the two I voted for) from my district voted like a normal human being. We need some Californians to move here to bring the state a bit less far right.

Uh no.....we don't. You see, people are moving here for the freedom that this state offers vs. the lack of freedom the others (especially CA) do not offer. So like the rest of us,,,if you don't like it here, move back to CA. Watch,,,,the liberals (you?) are trying their best to ruin Boise. Right now, you can walk around downtown without stepping in human waste, worrying about becoming a victim, viewing property damage in the form of graffiti all over, or having to smell the disgusting odor of marijuana. But yet....people like you come from CA, Portland, Seattle etc. because this place is so clean and free of nonsense liberal rules and laws and then.......you bitch about it and wish more Californians would move here. Why not just move back to CA and join your friends? Why are you here if you don't like?

Our Partners

transition-DOT-area-AT-slowtwitch-DOT-com

Advertise with us

©1999-2024 Slowtwitch, Inc., and Slowtwitch.com
Reproduction of material from any Slowtwitch.com page
without written permission is strictly prohibited.