GOP official argues in favor of child marriage: Girls are ‘ripe’ and ‘fertile’

It sounds really salacious, fertile, fecund, ripe, etc.
BUT, the bottom line is, it is true. It is a fundamental part of humanity. Just because we change the rules doesn't change nature.
It is in our modern societies interest that they wait. We need to educate you so you can afford to live here.
In subsistence cultures, you get married at 14-15 or earlier, then start popping kids. Child mortality is high, poverty is a way of life, your adult children are your retirement plan.
We have similar outcomes in poor cultures within the USA. Some kids are going to be there regardless of what we do,

 

And due to HIPPA and other such issues I suspect many cases of where MAGA Republicans have had to have their head removed from their a** will never be made public.

Suspect all you want...but when you start making claims you should have some evidence to back up said claim.

 

I'm on the left, but honestly this isn't as bad as you made it sound. The argument is over 16 vs 18 as age of consent. Biologically, he's correct that 16 is an adult and is not pedophilia (which implies sexual attraction towards those who are not biologically adults). Socially, life is more complicated now than in the medieval times when 14 was the age of adulthood. It's not an easy, black and white thing because it's not like every person wakes up on their 16th, 18th, or even 21st birthday and is suddenly a responsible adult. Maturation varies.

The expressed motive of the person was to give another option (marriage) to help discourage abortion, not to marry 16 year olds themselves.

 

We can, and have, "changed nature"
Medical advances allow people to live full lives after being diagnosed with what was a terminal disease a hundred years ago.
It is, in our modern society, in our interest for them to wait before having children and we have medical advances that make that a reality. Abortion is a safe procedure. If it is in our interest that 14 year olds not have children then it is in our interest to allow for them to have an abortion if they find themselves pregnant.

 

I think we have to let the maga crowd continue to live in their alternate world of make believe.

 

I think that was the result of post 2 or 3 in this thread bringing up pedophilia.
And not even knowing what pedophilia is.

Maybe take a look at ask that poster instead of those responding to that absurd post.

 

That link doesn't show double masectomies for 14 yr olds. In fact nothing at all about surgeries for 14 yr olds.
And nothing at all about being confused.
I think the confusion must be from those reading it incorrectly?

From the link...

The World Professional Association for Transgender Health said hormones could be started at age 14, two years earlier than the group’s previous advice, and some surgeries done at age 15 or 17, a year or so earlier than previous guidance. The group acknowledged potential risks but said it is unethical and harmful to withhold early treatment.

 

An admission that you're making this up as this goes along?
Since you, "suspect" !!

 

"Most states have a minimum marriage age for minors with parental consent, ranging from 12-17 years old. However, California, Delaware, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Virginia do not have minimum ages for minors to be allowed to marry with parental consent.

Some states have different minimum ages for males and females, with or without parental consent. For example, in Mississippi, the age of consent to marry with parental consent is 17 for males and 15 for females."
https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/marriage-age-by-state

Did anyine actually bother to look?

 

Not this nutty conservative. I would settle for a return to the 1950's.

 

do you labor under the delusion that doctors who perform these surgeries are free to discuss them with the public?

 

I don't think you have a professional athletic background as I do. one of the strong arguments against Transwomen competing against real (XX) women is that even with removal of male genitals and pumping the subject full of female hormones doesn't change that advantages that males gain in puberty such as bone structure etc. So some advocates are saying if a boy undergoes the surgery and drugs before puberty s/he shouldn't be denied being able to compete against XX girls because if s/he is "cut" before puberty, the advantages that remain for post pubescent individuals are not present

 

you apparently think medical procedures are divulged publicly

Your hard on for MAGA republicans is noted and deemed to be obsessive and irrelevant

 

No, I don't.

Someone claimed that 14 year olds are getting double mastectomies, something they have absolutely no proof for. But that's how MAGA Republicans work, make the claim first and then try to find evidence for it later....and usually failing

 

Doctors and surgeons can and do discuss procedure and operations with medical journals all the time. They just cannot give PPI when doing so because of HIPPA laws.

 

No, I do not.
I also don't make unjustified assumptions to fit a narrative.
You're doing so.
But surgery to those 14 and younger are not lawful.

Per your own link.

 

Jeepers, more bloviating.

And now a deflection of the subtopic.

 

And this from the party of "values"??? who are they kidding?? They have no values left when a person of influence makes such comments that make him sound like a pervert. The fact he said that out oud...... kind of confirms his perversion. The R's certainly have a weird group of peple in their party . Child marriage may have been a cultural thing in other nations at another time. It was done for a variety of reasons. Money, family connections. etc. Kids should be busy getting an education and learning how to cope in life as they plan for their future.

 

evasion and a classic case of feeling a need to respond but having nothing relevant to say

 

not yet in some states but there is a movement to change that

 

The same people arguing a couple 17 year olds who made a baby shouldn't be able to get married are the ones who think they should be able to make the decision to kill the baby.

The left hates the idea of a traditional family. Look how they have decimated the nuclear family in the black community.

It's their means of taking control.

 

Congress passed the Keating-Owen Act in 1916—the first federal attempt to regulate child labor. The most sweeping federal law that restricts the employment and abuse of child workers is the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (FLSA), which came into force during the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration.

 

Yes, your post was exactly that.

TBH, you never have anything relevant to say. So there's that.

 

On the flip side, those who think a 17 yr old couple should be allowed to marry, argue against letting them decide to not be able to terminate a pregnancy.
The RW is all about control. You just have a very narrow view of the world

The right hates the idea of a traditional rules to apply equally across the board.
The entire USA govt has decimated the black community with laws made to discriminate.

 

given your ratio of likes to posts, I would submit that more people feel that way about the nonsense you post versus what I submit