[DRAFT] Proposal to lower the legal sexual limit

[Achaea-Graecia]

UNDERSTANDING the basic distinction between consensual and discordant intercourse between legal adults and minors,

DISDAIN for the compromising of confidential rights provided to young adults intimately connected,

RECOGNIZING risks involved with vulnerability and hormones activated during puberty,

1. DEFINES the characteristics of consensual partners, where at least one partner being a minor,

2. PERMISSIBLE activity would allow lenience between age difference of young adult and adult,

3. REVOKES the prohibition of actions of sexual intercourse between consensual minor couples, (barring that no immediate relations hold disdain for said actions).

Comments, suggestions, and any flaws you can point out would be very appreciated.
Council: General Assembly, Category: Human Rights, Strength: Mild.

[Achaea-Graecia]

*bump*

[Embolalia]

It really helps to participate in the rest of the debates around here. Seriously. Go take a look at the two other age of maturity/majority proposals, and come back.

[The Emmerian Unions]

*bump*

No need to bump after 10 minutes!

[Quelesh]

What?

This proposal is very poorly written, but it seems to be mandating an age of consent of 14. Setting specific chronological age limits in proposals is a very bad idea; please do not do it.

[Linux and the X]

What?

This proposal is very poorly written, but it seems to be mandating an age of consent of 14. Setting specific chronological age limits in proposals is a very bad idea; please do not do it.

Where does it say anything about those under the age of fourteen?

[Meekinos]

Your proposal is faulty and presumptuous. It assumes that maturity is reached on average by a certain age without accounting for different factors, such as genetic modification, or even different species. The ages given may never be reached by some races or may be considered extremely young by others due to actual biological factors.

[Achaea-Graecia]

Everyone note I have changed it drastically. It is no longer about the lenience of legality for each partner, it becomes an issue, "What if one partner is of age and the other is a minor?".

If this is passed it will eventually evolve to "People can have sex when they feel ready."

[Grays Harbor]

Everyone note I have changed it drastically. It is no longer about the lenience of legality for each partner, it becomes an issue, "What if one partner is of age and the other is a minor?".

If this is passed it will eventually evolve to "People can have sex when they feel ready."

Please explain how it shall "evolve"? Once passed, that is it. Amendments are prohibited.

[Achaea-Graecia]

Everyone note I have changed it drastically. It is no longer about the lenience of legality for each partner, it becomes an issue, "What if one partner is of age and the other is a minor?".

If this is passed it will eventually evolve to "People can have sex when they feel ready."

Please explain how it shall "evolve"? Once passed, that is it. Amendments are prohibited.

Well, you are the well-read user on this site where I am just a mere spokesperson with over 100 posts.

[Grays Harbor]

Which does not answer the question. You have made the statement that it shall 'evolve" into something else. How will it do that?

[Quelesh]

What?

This proposal is very poorly written, but it seems to be mandating an age of consent of 14. Setting specific chronological age limits in proposals is a very bad idea; please do not do it.

Where does it say anything about those under the age of fourteen?

The OP was edited after my post.

[Riggedhinsoma]

I can't agree with this proposal and yes, I would infact like to know what exactly Achaea-Graecia said regarding this "Evolve" he used

[Achaea-Graecia]

Where does it say anything about those under the age of fourteen?

The OP was edited after my post.

Actually I edited the OP after he posted his reply. You can note the linear qualities of the chronological post succession where I say "I've made drastic changes..." that is when I edited it.

@ Riggedhinsoma (I wonder whose puppet that is) and Grays Harbor,

I assumed that IC your courts would have... I don't even know where I'm going with this. This was my first proposal idea and I thought it was a good one, but all I got was s**t out the a** from each person that commented on here, but at least Quelesh could give some sort of constructive criticism rather than focusing on semantics.

[MegamanTTEX]

I can't agree with this proposal and yes, I would infact like to know what exactly Achaea-Graecia said regarding this "Evolve" he used

Come on you dumbfuck, it's evolving.

[Kryozerkia]

I can't agree with this proposal and yes, I would infact like to know what exactly Achaea-Graecia said regarding this "Evolve" he used

Come on you dumbfuck, it's evolving.

Two rule violations, one post. *** Warned for flaming AND for picspam. ***

[Charlotte Ryberg]

I'm not sure about this draft because many member countries have an age of statutory rape, where any sexual intercourse with an under-age person is considered rape regardless of reason. I suppose moral decency could be the backing for the existence of statutory rape, but Child Protection Act might have got parts of it in regards to abuse itself.

[Freeoplis]

We can't agree with this legislation, such a proposal would open sexual intercourse up to any age, all that would have to be claimed would be both parties consented, this could cause a very complex legal area where say a 9 year old and say a 50yr old had sex and the 9yr old just has to say she consented and there are no laws broken. Far too extreme in our eyes as we would like to retain a statutory age of consent, below this it is deemed consent cannot be given, we see great benefit in maintaining such a policy.

[The Altani Confederacy]

This is an issue best decided by individual nations, based on their own cultural and social preferences. We also shudder at the notion of legalizing, on an international basis, the potential for abuse by legal adults capable of convincing and/or controlling suggestible youth into believing that they "consent" to such actions. The Confederacy is completely opposed to this.

Sophie Fournier, Altani WA Ambassador

[Achaea-Graecia]

I can't agree with this proposal and yes, I would infact like to know what exactly Achaea-Graecia said regarding this "Evolve" he used

Come on you dumbfuck, it's evolving.

[Freeoplis]

The concern of a few members as to sex at any age as long as both individuals are consenting has yet to be addressed in a meaningful argument, without such a plausible argument we cannot support this legislation, we await a response?

[Quelesh]

I would support a proposal that mandated that nations that have a statutory age of consent also have a reasonable close-in-age exemption, but unfortunately Child Protection Act may need to be repealed first, as that resolution does not seem to allow close-in-age exemptions.

[Rechnarg]

Two words: Bad Idea. The legal age of consent should be left to nations, not mandated by any WA proposal. Also: some nations (I don't know of any particular ones, but they're out there) don't permit any sort of sexual relationship between minors, at all. Blessed be those nations. /ahem

[The Black Plains]

I support this in idea, but I do believe that similar legislation has been written if not passed in the WA.

[Darenjo]

Sorry, but i think this is best left to individual nations.