Lethal Injection Under Fire Again

[Roland]

Just because someone is old enough to understand that "yes" means yes and "no" means no does not mean that they have the mental capcity to understand the ramifications of their "consent."

Ah, but is that the government's job to say so, or the parents?

Oh no, I've opened another can of worms! :P

(BTW - I'm for the latter. While I'm morally against sex under a relative age {17 being the usual number I come up with, but IMO it's all arbitrary anyway, subject to the persons involved}, at least to an extent, I don't believe that it should necessarily be outlawed. As far as I'm concerned, there is not enough medical and scientific evidence to prove that being ABLE to have sex under the age of 18 has any truly harmful effect on the involved individuals, speak scientifically / medically. And, there's also no proof, of any kind, that just because someone CAN do something that they necessarily will Myself, I waited until I was 19, simply because I didn't feel comfortableon a spiritual level until then, and even then I knew full-well the risks involved, so I took all the proper precautions I possibly could to avoid any complications, be they STDs, pregnancy, whatever. I've always been in the "knowledge is power" camp, rather than the "shelter everyone from everything" camp. To me, teaching is the greatest power. Although we all have free will, it's the knowledge and wisdom we have that really determines whether that will causes harm or not, and because of that teaching is so powerful. If we teach that irresponsible sex {and even "responsible" sex} can have dire consequences, than we have done all we truly can and should. It is up to the individual to decide what they end up doing. As far as I'm concerned, the "age of consent" should be left up to the parents and their child. It should not be the government's job to babysit our children. That is what parenting is all about. If two consenting children of 13 wish to have sex, AFTER they have been taught all they can be about the risks, then let them hang by however much rope they thread themselves, and let the parents help share the burden. There is no reason, that I can see, for the government to be regulating an "age of consent", especially when it can classify an otherwise normal law-abiding citizen into a criminal. Morality can only be regulated so far, and quite frankly, I think it's being regulated too much. But that's an even bigger discussion that I have no desire to get into, and I've said more than I intended already.)

Edit:
To clarify one point - I don't think sex between a minor and an adult should be allowed, but that such limitations should be within reason. I see no reason why, for example, a 17 year old cannot have sex with an 18 year old. OTOH, a 12 year old having sex with an 18 year old definitely strikes me as wrong. Again, it's all arbitrary, and so I'm ducking out of this discussion after this post, but I wanted to clarify my views. I don't think adults having sexual relations with children is appropriate, but then we get into the argument of "what is an adult". My rule of thumb? Beyond 3 years is sketchy, at best. Personally, I think the age of consent should be 16, period. Anything less, and it starts to look a little too early to me, thinking of a human's mental development. Any later, and it's just too arbitrary, and too "against nature".

Anyway, that's the last I'm going to say on the subject. It's already devolving into way too convoluted a "discussion" for me to even keep track of, let alone add anything constructive, so I'm out.