NE1: Haverford Act-Amendment to Pornography and Age of Consent Act 2010 (Voting)

[Blair]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponser: Governor Sawx. You have 36 hours to advocate for this bill

[free my dawg]

Much appreciated.

As I said during this bill's original introduction, I feel as if the current law is much too lax. As it stands, a 16-year-old can legally have sex with a 12-year-old - something we all can agree is reprehensible - and have everything be fine. That's why I've narrowed the age gap to 3 years or less apart instead of less than 5 years.

[Blair]

I'd be open to a 2 year gap, I still think its bad that a 16 and 13 year old can have sex

[pikachu]

I'd be open to a 2 year gap, I still think its bad that a 16 and 13 year old can have sex

I'd prefer the three year gap, because it's not too unrealistic to see a situation where a 17-year old high school junior and 14-year old freshman are decide to have sex. I'd rather make sure that no one gets in trouble with for that.

[free my dawg]

I'd be open to a 2 year gap, I still think its bad that a 16 and 13 year old can have sex

So do I. That's why I added the clause about both people being 14.

[Clyde1998]

I think a two year gap if under sixteen. So: If 14 up to 16 and if 15 up to 17.

It's difficult to say what would be best though. I just feel that two years would be better.

[Lincoln Republican]

Exactly what does the 2005 act say?

We have to know what we are comparing this proposed amendment to.

Somebody please post the 2005 act.

[Blair]

I'd be open to a 2 year gap, I still think its bad that a 16 and 13 year old can have sex

So do I. That's why I added the clause about both people being 14.

Ah yes, I re-read the fine print and it's fine with me. I'll get up the 2005 act winfield.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Lincoln Republican]

My proposed amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[free my dawg]

Amendment is hostile. As I said before, setting the age of consent above 18 for anything is a non-starter. Federal supremacy and all. Hell, I personally would prefer setting the age for people to appear in pornographic material at 18, but the Sweet Sixteen Act ties my hands. 'Tis a shame - maybe you can lobby some socons or regionalists and try and repeal it if you want it passed.

It's also worth noting that I find the hostage-taking of my age of consent reform reprehensible. The attempts to tie closing this loophole of (what is essentially) legalized pedophilia to setting a pornography age are reckless at best and utterly sickening at its worst. The spread of pornography is so widespread with the advent of the Internet that there's no point in banning its sale. I remember I first found porn at 11 years old when I Googled "girl stripping". I knew how to look for porn and get it in sixth grade - just Google some celebrity's naked pictures and you'll find a treasure trove.

Furthermore, if some kid wants to go to the corner store and get a Playboy, then the owner still has the right to refuse service. And guess what? Considering most businessmen aren't money-grubbing douchebags, they'll probably refuse to sell it to young children anyway. This provision simply cuts out that "I'm actually 18" thing everyone blindly clicks yes on anyway and never gets enforced. The problem that I am trying to fix must be fixed ASAP - not because it's my pet project that I'm probably going to reintroduce every session, but because 16-year-olds can legally have sex with sixth graders. And we can all agree that that's some f**ked up sh*t.

[pikachu]

I don't see any problem with the proposed age of consent law. At least in the irl Northeastern states, something like that is the standard. I'm sympathetic to increasing the age to appear in pornography to 18, but considering federal laws, it doesn't look like we can do anything.

[Clyde1998]

Could we move the age of consent to sixteen then - without allowing under 16s in any circumstance to have sex (if we're worried about child paedophilia)?

[Blair]

As Winfield's amendment is deemed hostile, we need to hold a vote on it. Please vote Aye or Nay

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

[Clyde1998]

Nay. If it was the same, but 16, I would vote aye.

[free my dawg]

Could we move the age of consent to sixteen then - without allowing under 16s in any circumstance to have sex (if we're worried about child paedophilia)?

I would veto that if it hits my desk. People under 14 shouldn't be having sex, but if you're 15 and you're, say, dating someone a year above you, you're able to consent.

[Clyde1998]

Could we move the age of consent to sixteen then - without allowing under 16s in any circumstance to have sex (if we're worried about child paedophilia)?

I would veto that if it hits my desk. People under 14 shouldn't be having sex, but if you're 15 and you're, say, dating someone a year above you, you're able to consent.

Fair enough - so 15 absolute minimum:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[free my dawg]

Make it a two year gap and it's a go.

[Blair]

Voting Nay on winfields amendment

[Blair]

I support the two year gap, heck I'd even be open to supporting the original bill

[Lincoln Republican]

Voting aye on my amendment.

[pikachu]

Nay on the Winfield amendment.

[Clyde1998]

What about this?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Blair]

By 3-1 winfield's amendment has failed

[Clyde1998]

I didn't even see that we were supposed to vote on it - whoops...

[Blair]

I didn't even see that we were supposed to vote on it - whoops...

Haha you voted against though