Child marriage ban bill defeated in West Virginia House

https://apnews.com/article/child-ma...ill-defeated-4d822a23b5ffd70f5370a36cc914cfb0

Ah yeah. Nothing like a GOP dominated state where a 40 year old groomer can marry a 16 year old and rape her every night. How can out right wing posters defend this?

 

It's theoretically possible but unlikely. A judge still has to sign off on the marriage.

It seems Progressives would rather that 16 year old girl just have casual sex with lots of men rather than get married and have sex within marriage with only one man.

 

The whole idea behind child marriage is that it's a different situation if the man who is having sex with her is in a committed relationship with her, will be providing for her and will not be having sex with other women.

In the old days (1940s) how it worked was that if a woman were under the age of 21, she had to have her father's permission to be married.
Several states required a judge's approval if she were under the age of 16.

Several complex mathematical equations have been devised to try to determine when sex (or marriage) should be legal between persons of two different ages.
I think that is a more reasonable approach. It shouldn't just involve simple rules and a simple cut-off.

 

So this law gives pedophiles legal “blessing” to sexually abuse children under the false veil of a “ marriage”.

 

Beginning your defense, "The whole idea behind child marriage..." does not make what you are about to add, sound any more like credible reasoning, than had you begun, "The whole idea behind selling daughters, for a dowry..."

Would you be a good chap, and entertain us, by recounting what theoretical bases were used, for these complex mathematical calculations, and what data, fed into the equations?

If your information is correct, those days are not very old, to have been treating women like mental defectives, or children, until the age of 21. Though, I guess that's still a step up from being considered property, right?

 

You are bringing facts to a hyper partisan. I predict your facts will, sadly, be ignored.

 

Hey, it's not like they make them stay at home, like prisoners, barefoot & pregnant. They can go out & even earn their own money, as young as 14 in Arkansas (though Gov. Huckabee Sanders just signed a law so that the state will no longer be required to verify the ages of workers under 16 <wink, wink>). If GOP-backed legislation passes, in Ohio, minors will be able to stay out working as late as 9 PM, year round. And, if that WV man brings his lucky, child bride out to Iowa, their legislators have proposed a law which would allow her the widest range of industries, from which to pick: as young as 14, in meat-packing plants, and able to take a second job, serving alcohol, at 16. Also, with the passage of this law, student age children will be able to work in mines-- but only if the jobs are part of "work-based learning programs."


Begin at the 6:15 mark

 

What part of rape did you not understand?

 

You too? You think daily rape is desirable?

 

I think you're being ridiculous if you consider this "daily rape".
Conservatives in the U.S. are not trying to marry a girl against her will in what will obviously be a horrible situation for her.
Yes, it is true that in some other parts of the world, girls can be coerced into marriages.

I also think that when it comes to child marriages, girls should be entitled to more protections than women in ordinary marriages.

 

Hi, kazenatsu.

I found your argument, stated in the last sentence of the above quote, equally compelling when 16 was replaced by 15. Or 14. Or . . . .

Regards, stay safe 'n well.

 

If the wife is a prisoner in your scenario, then the man is a slave.

 

I like that you're trying to make statutory rape within a sham marriage sound good by comparison to something else. That's a defense of this practice on your part, however weak and veiled it may be.

 

It's funny. The Left claims that no women are getting late term abortions for bad reasons, and we are all expected to just believe that.
Do you have any evidence that white girls from conservative families are being forced into marriages which they do not want, and which are clearly exploitative?

At least marriage of a minor actually requires a judge to sign off on it, something that cannot even be said for late term abortions.

 

I'm also going to point out that, because of the progressive movement, in virtually every state, a wife can still claim "rape" on her husband.
So why would child marriage really be that big of an issue (for progressives) when it comes to the issue of sexual consent?
The girl can still get the man punished, not really so far different from a non-married situation when there are accusations of rape.

(and I'm sure the authorities would apply the situation differently, being more likely to prosecute if the girl making the complaint was under 16 or 17)

 

Even if (and this is purely hypothetical, because it is not the case at present in society) we did not allow a woman to claim rape on her husband, we could still have a law specifying that if the bride is under the age of 16, or so, there would be enhanced punishment if the husband had sex with her without her specific consent in that situation.

We could have three different categories of protection for women who are married. Women above the age of 20, females between the ages of 16 to 19, and then finally females under the age of 16. The lower the age group, the easier the law would make it to claim "marital rape".

 

can explain to you how it worked in old times.
If a man had already been married two times and divorced, or if he was a man whom everyone knew was carousing around, having sex with different females outside of marriage, then it would be very unlikely any judge would sign off on a marriage between that man and a girl under the age of 16.
They would have had to have had both the judge's approval, and the approval of the girl's father, the latter of which would be extremely unlikely to happen. (Although there are situations where the father had left the mother and could not be found, and in that case it would require only the judge's signature)
They would usually only ever grant a marriage to a 14 year old girl if either her family was extremely poor, or if she had become pregnant, and even only in that case if the man seemed like he might make a good match for, a be committed and able to financially provide for her. Marriages of 15 year olds were rare. Most fathers would not grant a marriage at that age. Even if she got pregnant, he might make her at least wait another year before marriage. A marriage of a 15 year old might only take place if the other man was a really good match, and probably would have had to be in the age range of 18 to 22, where he was not too old, yet was still old enough to reasonably be able to provide for her. Still, many fathers would not grant a marriage at 15, it was considered too young. Judges would be somewhat reluctant to grant a marriage at that age too. Probably the slight majority of women during that time (1940s) got married between the age of 16, more often when they were almost 17, and 18. She still had to have the permission of her father to marry if she was under 21. Fathers would most commonly deny their approval if they did not like the man, or knew he would be unlikely to ever financially provide for her. It was not an extremely uncommon thing for fathers of young women to make death threats to men who wanted to marry their daughter, even if the girl was above the age of 21. If the man who married the young girl (under the age of 20) refused to provide for her or was a terrible husband, sometimes the girl's brothers would get angry and beat the man up.

In less sophisticated parts of the South, you might have heard the term "shotgun marriage", which persisted all the way up to the early 1960s in some places (though probably more common before the 40s, and especially before the 20s). If a young man got a 15 or 16 year old girl pregnant, the girl's father would force the young man to marry his daughter. Sometimes bringing a shotgun with him into the church service to make sure the groom followed through with the marriage ceremony.

All this may sound exotic and imaginary to young people today, but that is how things worked. These sort of things were not uncommon, and were somewhat normalized.

West Virginia is considered part of "the South", culturally.

 

If it makes any of you progressives feel better, West Virginia does seem to be more amenable to abortion than other parts of the South.

thread: Abortions will resume in West Virginia

 

nope. At 16 it just needs parental consent.
Under it, you indeed need to befriend a judge. Not hard to do in a rural community.

You're confusing the catholic church with the dems.

 

Nice so a groomer can rape her, and make her be a gogo dancer or something for family and friends.... or on twitch.

 

I see stories about that kind of stuff in the news from time to time, usually associated with weird Christian sects.

 

Yeah, but I don't think any of those problematic marriages in those weird sects are legal marriages.
You're welcome to try to prove otherwise.

 

Seems they are in West Virginia.