Report from UN linked NGO the ICJ recommends decriminalising sex with minors, pimping, gender affirming surgery

submitted by bife_de_lomo from icj2.wpenginepowered.com

all 9 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Femaleisnthateful 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

It also recommends decriminalizing public shits and panhandling. They want every city to look like San Francisco.

[–]bife_de_lomo[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

From the report:

Sexual conduct involving persons below the domestically prescribed minimum age of consent to sex may be consensual in fact, if not in law. In this context, the enforcement of criminal law should reflect the rights and capacity of persons under 18 years of age to make decisions about engaging in consensual sexual conduct and their right to be heard in matters concerning them.

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

If they mean 2 underage people together it's fine

[–]bife_de_lomo[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

If they meant to say "between two persons below the age of consent" they could have said that.

Given it's written by senior judges I believe the wording is meticulous, not vague.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Sexual conduct involving persons below the domestically prescribed minimum age of consent to sex may be consensual in fact, if not in law.

Well it does only say "sexual conduct involving persons below the domestically prescribed minimum age of consent to sex" and not "sexual conduct involving persons below the domestically prescribed minimum age of consent to sex and persons at or above the domestically prescribed minimum age of consent to sex". Technically the law only refers to persons under the AOC.

The wording should be amended though because you're right that ambiguity does exist.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

You mean like the Republicans who want to protect underage marriage?

https://news.yahoo.com/gop-lawmaker-defends-supporting-12-234116361.html

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/child-marriage-ban-struck-down-west-virginia-republicans-1234693670/

https://mybighornbasin.com/wyoming-gop-email-suggests-opposition-to-amendment-ending-underage-marriage/

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/end-child-marriage-u-s-you-might-be-surprised-who-n1050471

Grooming for me but not for thee, yeehaw! Protect them kiddos!

[–]LordoftheFliesAmeri-kin 2.0. Pronouns: MegaWhite/SuperStraight/UltraPatriarchy 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Okay, but we're not talking about what fuckery American politicians are doing. Because while America does have a presence internationally, the things you link to still only affect America. This post deals with an NGO that has a global presence and seeks a global application of the material presented.

I'm not a fan of whataboustisms in any case, but you didn't even manage to make one that was appropriately comparable there.

[–]IMissPorn 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Underage marriage is a good thing, because if you get married you're automatically emancipated, and slavery is bad. Figures the Democrats would be the once still fighting emancipation after all these years.

[–]bife_de_lomo[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No one may be held criminally liable for consensual practices aiming to assist others with the exploration, free development and/or affirmation of sexual orientation or gender identity, unless there was force, coercion, fraud or medical negligence, or a lack of free and informed decision-making on the part of the person concerned.