End child marriage in the U.S.? You might be surprised who’s opposed.

End child marriage in the U.S.? You might be surprised who’s opposed

[Actually, I’m not in the least surprised.]

Read in NBC News: https://apple.news/ARm9AJ_eJTz-MjBxEtu5PEQ


Is consent to marriage not covered under a state’s “age of consent laws”?

If a person can consent to marry and make a lifetime commitment, should they not also be allowed to vote? And what about the reverse? If a child cannot vote due to immaturity, can they be considered mature enought to consent to marriage?

There should be one age of majority and it should be used for everything—marriage, voting, signing contracts, joining the military. If a minor gets pregnant she should have a guardian appointed to handle her legal affairs. If no family member is available the court should appoint a conservator as they do for others who are unable to handle their own affairs—until she reaches the age of majority. This should apply to all minors of both sexes. IMO, any “marriage” of a minor should be considered legally null and void, just as all contracts are.

"Obviously, I'm against child marriage," the GOP lawmaker told NBC News. "But basically marriage is a contract between people that shouldn't require government permission." -- from the article
This is one of those bizarre libertarian statements. Contracts are exactly why we have government. To have contracts you need laws and a way to enforce them. Once we decide to delegate that, we also need a way to keep it in check, so we have democracy. Any other system I know of uses force with no check on it. The reason democracy is failing is that people who hold the title "lawmaker" don't understand that and people keep voting for them. It's a weakness in the system.

Democracy is failing because people are giving up on it. After all it does require and informed and engaged citizenry !

Americans Aren’t Practicing Democracy Anymore As participation in civic life has dwindled, so has public faith in the country’s system of government.




Res Publica

February 2018, Volume 24, Issue 1, pp 31–52| Cite as Democracy Without Participation: A New Politics for a Disengaged Era


As for the child marriage a large contingent of our population may praise woman, but they still look at them as chattel, more than real people. No right to self determination, or right to self defense - all that is reserved for the daddy warbucks of this world.


They gave us a system that works and we are pretty much tossing it into the dust bin of history.


September 10, 2019 at 11:32 am#307168REPLY | REPORT

Sherlock Holmes
Well as opposed as I am to exploiting vulnerable children I’ll throw a spanner in the works here:

How do we <i>scientifically</i> determine the right age to allow a female to marry?

I’m interested in the humanists position here.

How in the world is that an appropriate “Scientific Question” ?

Marriage is a human union, under human laws and ethics. Has little if anything to do with science.

IF you were to have asked something realistic such as when is a child able to bear children?

That science could answer.


Here again is an example of how Holmes and by extension religious people can not separate what’s going on in our heads from what physical reality is all about.


Obviously there’s no scientific measurement of when a person is mentally and emotionally mature enough to understand what marriage is and if they are ready for it.

We know that the vast majority of people in their mid-teens and younger are not mature enough, so making the age of consent above that is reasonable.

I know people who are in their 40’s who aren’t mature enough to have a meaningful relationship, so there is no definite age that is perfect. But since the percentage of people who are mature enough reaches a reasonable level by around 18, I’d say that’s a potential minimum cut-off point.

Measuring emotions and maturity is not an exact science, so we have to use ethics, morals, and common-sense to make laws that protect the most people without inconveniencing too many others.

Seems to me this thread deserves an update - further examples of how the Republican Party is driving itself right off the rails

GOP Forced To Amend Bill That Would Have Legalized Child Marriage In Tennessee

“The very party that claims to be very concerned with protecting children—that’s accusing their enemies of being literal pedophiles—wrote a bill that apparently would have allowed children to get married,” says Chris Hayes.

Tennessee’s child marriage bill pushes another purpose: Gutting same-sex marriage

Republicans signaled a way to gut Obergefell during KBJ’s hearing — now red state legislators are heeding the call


A new bill proposed by Republicans in the Tennessee state legislature is mostly getting attention because it would reinstate legal child marriage, which was ended in the state in 2018. But digging in a bit deeper, it becomes clear that the legalization of child marriages, for Republicans, is more of an ancillary benefit to this law. Mostly, it looks like a scheme to outlaw same-sex marriage without directly overturning Obergefell v. Hodges, the Supreme Court decision that cemented marriage equality.

RELATED: I was one of the lawyers who helped win marriage equality. And yes, the GOP can take it away

Republicans love nothing more than setting up their own “alternatives” to the cultural institutions they believe have been “tainted” by liberalism. Did Twitter ban you for racist vitriol and inciting domestic terrorism? Then try to start (but fail) at creating a Twitter of your own. Don’t like that Disney disavows hatred of LGBTQ people? Try to start a children’s entertainment company that pushes dull right-wing propaganda instead. Angry that major razor companies won’t financially support fascism? Make your own razors! Are you just generally mad at Starbucks because you have a sneaking suspicion that drinking coffee is somehow effeminate? Start your own coffee company that’s draped in gun-related imagery and pretend it doesn’t scream “overcompensation.” There will surely be a “conservative” Oreo to come out any day now that the right is mad about the company running pro-LGBTQ ads.

Well, you have to use whatever tools are available to get things done. But it’s probably not going to go anywhere.

More control over women. Just think, if they get females while they are young, they can make them like Barrett. Anything the men tell the girl to do, she’ll do, no matter what, because she’d be brainwashed to do so. That and if she doesn’t might be beaten and/or raped in an effort to make her do as she’s told. So much abuse and molestation will happen if the Repugs get their way, but do they care? No, they just want to control women. This bill shows what sort of character these Repug men are and the Repug women who do their bidding. They are very sick people.

If it does though, we’ll end up like Muslim countries, only it would be Xian, which would be just as bad.

You are missing the point.

Republicans ARE doing their damndest to pass these sorts of off -the-rails fundamentalist religious doctrines as laws in a democratic society - these religious notions are dear to their hearts. That’s worth being concerned about and worth confronting

Only an awful lot of people standing up to say: NO not like that - will these Republican fever dreams ever be stopped.

Not to mention the Republicans astounding double standard - much more needs to be done to confront their dishonest edifice, that’s built on a stack of liar poker cards

If gay marriage is blocked nothing would change for 99% of Americans.

If child marriage is not blocked, a lot of people will be adversely affected by it, so your 99% figure means nothing. Besides, why do you want to block gay marriage?

Child marriage is a non-issue in America. It’s mainly a practice of non-White peoples.

Approximately 6.2 of every 1,000 children surveyed had ever been married. Prevalence varied from more than 10 per 1,000 in West Virginia, Hawaii and North Dakota to less than four per 1,000 in Maine, Rhode Island and Wyoming. It was higher among girls than among boys (6.8 vs. 5.7 per 1,000), and was lower among white non-Hispanic children (5.0 per 1,000) than among almost every other racial or ethnic group studied; it was especially high among children of American Indian or Chinese descent (10.3 and 14.2, respectively). Immigrant children were more likely than U.S.-born children to have been married; prevalence among children from Mexico, Central America and the Middle East was 2–4 times that of children born in the United States. Only 20% of married children were living with their spouses; the majority of the rest were living with their parents.

But legalizing child marriage in not the point of this strategy. The point is to block gay marriage in a backhanded way.

Yes, by sexually abusing little girls. :rage: