"Consensual sex" is just sex.

[Squinch]

25. It is not a false sense of protection. It is a protection.

We have two choices. We can either say, "Not before 16" or we can say to the 30 year old who wants to shag the 15 year old, "We're not setting a date here because, hey, maybe she's a really mature 15, so let's just play it by ear." Or worse, we can say that to your 18 year old. Seriously? You think that's the preferable option? And then, well, 15 isn't much different from 14 or 13, sooooo....

No, each case should not demand unique evaluation. Each case demanding a unique evaluation is tantamount to saying, "It's OK guys. You are thinking you might like to have sex with that 15 year old? Go right ahead and we'll work out the details later."

So we have a line in the sand. It's a protection. It isn't a false protection. It's a protection.

15 is 15. An older man does not need to be having sex with a 15 year old. And what does that mean, "when the minor exists along the upper limit?" How much of an upper limit do you think you are going to find among 15 year olds? How is that different from the creeps saying, "Well, she was really mature?"

Age of consent laws do regard intent. They regard the intent by an older person to be having sex with a 15 year old child. That intent is criminal, and it should be.

And I'll stand by my original statement. Rape and sex are mutually exclusive, and statutory rape is rape.