Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam
Sorry, from this I thought the article was about a 20 y/o coach and a 17 y/o player or something. 30-16? That's not arbitrary. It's wrong, and he should know better regardless of how supportive her mother was.
|
Your response is wildly subjective and arbitrary. The argument isn't that there is an acceptable range, it's what is acceptable between the 2, and how do we define that age is the determining factor when it comes to certain decisions but not others.
We have laws based on what's best for a group but 20-16, 30-16, or even 60-16, as morally disgusting I may think that is projecting my values on others. If both parties understand the implications and make a lucid decision who cares. That's the basis of my comment. Is why do we make a big deal over arbitrarily designated values that are different based on the 2 involved.
In our case, for sexual contact, we have deemed 18 as the fail safe for when someone is "old" enough to do what they may want to with their body.
If this was 18-30, would you be ok with it? If so, what changed, besides the legality of the situation?