“The whole issue of consent is bullshit.”
Okay, i can KINDA see arguing the exact age. Not for any GOOD reason but i can see arguing it. Rejecting the whole concept, however, is a red flag the size of a car dealership’s flag.
“Why is sex so special?”
It’s not. WE also put age limits on tobacco, driving, drinking, contracts, military service, bottom surgery, and credit cards, so as to limit unnecessary harm and/or predation.
"Other than because a religion tells you it is.”
There are secular concerns. Not everyone practices superstitions.
"Look at how muslim countries approach it, it's illegal to even hold hands.”
Okay…. And?
"Should holding hands be illegal before the age of consent here?”
Can you show any harm being caused by holding a little kid’s hands?
“It's just as logical.”
And we back to ‘not everyone…superstition.”
“But I don't think the big religions are in support of a 17 years old age of consent when Mary was only 13 and Mohammad married a 7 year old.”
No one cares if a church establishes an age of consent. Like David Koresh or the Mormon separatist enclaves. You’re subject to a totally secular limit, idiot.
"If you believe in God,”
Not part of the issue.
“why would he make us biologically sexually active at around 12,”
I don’t think anyone just turns ‘sexually active’ at 12. I certainly didn’t.
“The age of consent was upped to 16 to stop the common act of forced child prostitution which was a just law, but it shouldn't apply anymore.”
You don’t think people would start offering underage virgins if it was legal?
"My state has a year extra from the others because of crazy puritans. The fact that secular liberal countries have different ages shows how arbitrary and unfair they are.”
Arbitrary i’ll grant you.
Unfair to whom, though?
“Do we need to use age in the law?”
Yes. We need a limit. Age works better than something more subjective.
“What about driving for another example. If the best 12 year old in the country can pass their driving test and has provably higher ability than any adult, should they not be allowed to drive?”
Nope.
For one thing, who’ll insure them?
“There are plenty of 18 year olds psychologically unfit to be driving but they're allowed to because the law is based on age only, and then they go and get other people killed because of it.”
Come up with an entirely objective psychological test for driving competency, then. G’head. We’ll wait.
"It doesn't make sense to draw the line based on the position of the Earth around the sun.”
Makes loads of sense to me, though.
"What would happen if like in many sci-fi stories, adult humans could be farmed much quicker. Would a 6 month old that had the body of a 20 year old have to wait until 37 to have sex?"
When that becomes possible, we’ll address it.
"I don't like having laws without clearly defined loopholes”
If they’re clearly defined as part of the law, they’re not loopholes.
“that allow the innocent people their basic rights in life,”
You don’t have a basic right to fuck a minor.
“and the most basic is that you own your own body.”
AND a more basic responsibility of the goverment is to protect people who are unable to rationally make choices.
“To me defining a law by age is no more logical than defining it by sex or race.”
Your grasp of logic seems a bit poor.
More like you want to fuck a 12 year old, so you’re working backwards to the law to change it. You’re not arguing in good faith, and your ‘logic’ only serves your desires.