The age of consent is regarded usually in Western society as the age at which a person is considered to be an adult as well as is able to engage in adult things including enlisting in the army, marital relations, buying cigarettes, and with the notable exception of the US, to consume alcohol. There are also various exceptions to these laws that exist in select cases. For example, marriages can be contracted in some states as young as fourteen, and a seventeen-year-old can join the military in certain cases. Others states such as Alabama require a man to wait until he his nineteen to purchase cigarettes.
Given the presence and force of the American Empire, the generally accepted age of “adulthood” is that used as the average in the US, which is eighteen. The is an arbitrary number in many respects, for a man does not generally undergo a fundamental transformation from child to adult on the eve of his eighteenth birthday. The more one looks at it, the more it appears to be a compromise between 15 and 20. In this case, there is much truth in this, as well as the fact that such a late age of consent is scarcely a century old in the US. As Wikipedia notes, there is no consistent pattern to such age, and up until 1880 the age of consent was set at between 10 or 12 in most states, with the exception of Delaware where it was 7. This had changed gradually so that by 1920, ages of consent generally rose to 16–18 and small adjustments to these laws occurred after 1920. In Europe, owing largely to this historical influence of the Catholic Church even in spite of the rejection of the Church centuries later, the age of consent fluctuates between fourteen to sixteen in most nations, generally reflecting the latest possible age at which a woman would generally undergo puberty and this be able to produce a child if relations were to be had.
There is a legitimate argument based on historical development and biological reality to justify lowering the age of consent in the US. However, the current time is not the time to debate this because it is at a point in history when the standard itself is under assault.
The principle behind this is that rules exist in a society for a reason. They might seem to be silly, irrelevant, or just odd, but barring a serious moral objection to the principles which the uphold, they generally should be respected and changed seldom but with purpose. Likewise, in the middle of a serious social argument in which the rules serve as markers of standards for behavior, it is not the time to start changing rules because to do so is to change the standards for disagreement between parties and is almost always done so in order to give one side an unjust advantage over the other. To use an example from sports, it is akin to “moving the goalposts” closer or further from their current location, or altering markers on the field set in place for measuring distance. One may not like the markers, and perhaps there is a reason to discuss moving them later, but not at a time when there are teams playing against each other on the field.
Shoebat.com has consistently exposed the evils of the sodomite agenda. One of the most underreported facts and is proven consistently be it in the scandals involving sodomite priests, teachers, or other figures, is that the prevalent of sodomite abuse involves both ephebophilia (pubescent and post-pubescent teenagers) and pedophilia (pre-pubescent children). In the case of sodomite priests, it is approximately two-thirds in favor of ephebophilic abuse. One can see online that there is also the incredible growth of pedophilic-type abuse as indicated through the popularity of such material in “artistic” format that do not involve photos or videos of real children, a trend that was established and promoted by the “adult industry” back as early as the Bush II administration under former Attorney General John Ashcroft.
One of the end objectives of the sodomite agenda is to legalize the sexual abuse of children regardless of age. However, since this cannot be done immediately, it needs to be done progressively. The absolute majority of society supports sodom and sodomite marriage, so the environment is ready for more advancement in this are. However, many will still not accept the abuse of small children. Hence is the reason why sodomites such as Milo Yiannopoulous and defenders of those from sodom (as well as claiming to be a “former” sodomite”) Michael Voris have advocated for a lowering of the age of consent to sixteen:
Dennis Prager, another defender of Sodom, has said that there is a difference between sodomizing “eight year olds” and “fifteen year olds”:
Clearly there is an effort being made here in this way to push for sodomite ephebophlia.
But there is another case that few have considered, which is that of heterosexual relations between usually older women and underage men.
For example, People Magazine reported that a 38-year-old high school teacher from Kentucky, Haley Reed, was a choir director at Oldham County High Schools when she was arrested after authorities allege she admitted to having sex with a teen student eight times between April and June in 2018. She was charged with multiple accounts of third-degree rape, third-degree sodomy and first-degree unlawful transaction with a minor and was later released on a $25,000 bond.
Reed, who was married at the time, is arguing that the two statutes in Kentucky which govern age of consent relations are inconsistent, that one says a teenager between the ages of 16 and 18 can consent to having sexual contact, but a different Kentucky statute — the one under which Reed was charged — says that it is rape in the third degree for “a person in a position of authority or special trust” has sex with someone under 18. Her argument is that the two Kentucky statutes conflict with each other, and that the 17-year-old student should have been able to consent to having sex with Reed.
It is unlikely that Reed is going to win, but her case makes an interesting suggesting, which is that if she does win, that a much older person could consent to relations with a much younger person if that relationship is deemed “consensual.”
Now the fantasy of “hot for teacher” or an older woman with children (as the teen comedy American Pie possibly created and certainly popularized the term “MILF”) is common around the world as a fantasy and for something that is forbidden. However, if this were to become a reality, it would immediately be seized upon not merely by teenagers with fantasies, but by powerful lawyers for the sodomite agenda, who would ensure that in the name of “human rights” and “tolerance” it applied for sodomites, and then would work to lower the age even further.
It is true that the sodomites are the biggest advocates for lowering the age of consent. But could it be that American women, so many who claim to have a “gay best friend” and yet so many who are also in or have been in illegal relationships with teenagers, would be the ones to, in the name of pursuing their own hedonistic ends, happen to do the work of the sodomites by breaking down the current age of consent rules and thus opening the way for the rivers of sodom to flood society?
It is to be seen.