Were the Founding Fathers Pedophiles?

[Delta4Embassy]

"In the late nineteenth century,"Age of consent" referred to the legal age at which a girl could consent to sexual relations. Men who engaged in sexual relations with girls who had not reached the age of consent could be criminally prosecuted. American reformers were shocked to discover that the laws of most states set the age of consent at the age of ten or twelve, and in one state, Delaware, the age of consent was only seven."

Campaign to Raise the Legal Age of Consent, 1885-1914, Lesson Plan

If they weren't, that the first age of sexual consent laws were so low is rather curious. Those laws also didn't require marriage, so apparently fornication was okay by them as well.

 

[Publius1787]

"In the late nineteenth century,"Age of consent" referred to the legal age at which a girl could consent to sexual relations. Men who engaged in sexual relations with girls who had not reached the age of consent could be criminally prosecuted. American reformers were shocked to discover that the laws of most states set the age of consent at the age of ten or twelve, and in one state, Delaware, the age of consent was only seven."

Campaign to Raise the Legal Age of Consent, 1885-1914, Lesson Plan

If they weren't, that the first age of sexual consent laws were so low is rather curious. Those laws also didn't require marriage, so apparently fornication was okay by them as well.

The average life expectancy in 1775 was approximately 50 years and the maturity of a woman was defined more or so weather she could properly bare children. In a time of high infant mortality rates, if you weren't married by 25 you were unlikely to find a husband interested in having children. Furthermore, the elite class of the day prided themselves on marrying refined and matured women, which of course, was often pressed upon them at an early age as to make them more desirable to upper class males. I suppose what I am saying is 1) Don't distrust the maturity of the 18th century "women." 2) It is often misguided to apply modern standards to past practices. 3) The standard across the world was that child bearing ability was the age of adult maturity and to single out the Founding Fathers for an act that was common, regular, and legal everywhere must have something to do with you disdain for them. The question is why?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

That's true, but age of consent law isn't about life expectency. Or today it'd reflect the higher life expectency. And in many locales it's much as it was back then. Spain and Japan are 13, The Netherlands is 12 with parental consent (16 without,) one of the Mexican states is 12. Proof life expectency isn't a factor.

It's the Delaware one that lept out at me. Even the Bible didn't have it that low. Traditionally, age for marriage was 12/13 girls/boys, but all premarital sex with sinful. So what kind of thinking went into making it 7 is very bizarre.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

[alan1]

Hey Delta4Embassy,
Can you name anybody married in the US or whom sexually consented from the 19th century that was under 13 years of age?
Just curious.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Not off the top of my head, but the legal sites I read don't mention that. Could look into it.

 

[alan1]

I suggest that you do.

 

[PixieStix]

Oh good grief

 

[alan1]

We have now determined that the founding fathers were not pedophiles.
It only took six posts.
Will wonders never cease?

 

[Sunni Man]

On another thread a few days ago Delta4 Embassy was saying that child porn should be legalized.

Now this thread.

Are we seeing a pattern?? ...

 

[Publius1787]

That's true, but age of consent law isn't about life expectency. Or today it'd reflect the higher life expectency. And in many locales it's much as it was back then. Spain and Japan are 13, The Netherlands is 12 with parental consent (16 without,) one of the Mexican states is 12. Proof life expectency isn't a factor.

It's the Delaware one that lept out at me. Even the Bible didn't have it that low. Traditionally, age for marriage was 12/13 girls/boys, but all premarital sex with sinful. So what kind of thinking went into making it 7 is very bizarre.

Japan is 13? That explains a lot.

 

[Pop23]

We have now determined that the founding fathers were not pedophiles.
It only took six posts.
Will wonders never cease?

Imagine that????

 

[Delta4Embassy]

On another thread a few days ago Delta4 Embassy was saying that child porn should be legalized.

Now this thread.

Are we seeing a pattern?? ...

Wasn't what I said at all. Said that if evidence exists supporting legalizing child pornography results in fewer incidences of child sexual abuse, then we should investigate whether that is something we should do.

That you have to lie to be popular is sad.

 

[Againsheila]

"In the late nineteenth century,"Age of consent" referred to the legal age at which a girl could consent to sexual relations. Men who engaged in sexual relations with girls who had not reached the age of consent could be criminally prosecuted. American reformers were shocked to discover that the laws of most states set the age of consent at the age of ten or twelve, and in one state, Delaware, the age of consent was only seven."

Campaign to Raise the Legal Age of Consent, 1885-1914, Lesson Plan

If they weren't, that the first age of sexual consent laws were so low is rather curious. Those laws also didn't require marriage, so apparently fornication was okay by them as well.

The average life expectancy in 1775 was approximately 50 years and the maturity of a woman was defined more or so weather she could properly bare children. In a time of high infant mortality rates, if you weren't married by 25 you were unlikely to find a husband interested in having children. Furthermore, the elite class of the day prided themselves on marrying refined and matured women, which of course, was often pressed upon them at an early age as to make them more desirable to upper class males. I suppose what I am saying is 1) Don't distrust the maturity of the 18th century "women." 2) It is often misguided to apply modern standards to past practices. 3) The standard across the world was that child bearing ability was the age of adult maturity and to single out the Founding Fathers for an act that was common, regular, and legal everywhere must have something to do with you disdain for them. The question is why?

25? If you were 16 and not married, they considered you a spinster. Don't buy the child bearing ability as the standard though as back then, most women didn't start their period until they were sixteen, whereas today, it's what? 10?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

As to THIS thread, question isn't answered at all. Fact remains Delaware put the age of consent at 7. Presumedly then someone in Delaware made use of the law or there would have been no reason for it. And if the Founding Fathers hadn't had a much higher age in place already, then the question remains.

"Near the end of the 18th century, other European nations began to enact age of consent laws. The broad context for that change was the emergence of an Enlightenment concept of childhood focused on development and growth. This notion cast children as more distinct in nature from adults than previously imagined, and as particularly vulnerable to harm in the years around puberty. The French Napoleonic code provided the legal context in 1791 when it established an age of consent of 11 years. The age of consent, which applied to boys as well as girls, was increased to 13 years in 1863.

Like France, many other countries, increased the age of consent to 13 in the 19th century. Nations, such as Portugal, Spain, Denmark and the Swiss cantons, that adopted or mirrored the Napoleonic code likewise initially set the age of consent at 10-12 years and then raised it to between 13 and 16 years in the second half of the 19th century. In 1875, England raised the age to 13 years; an act of sexual intercourse with a girl younger than 13 was a felony. In the U.S., each state determined its own criminal law and age of consent ranged from 10 to 12 years of age. U.S. laws did not change in the wake of England's shift. Nor did Anglo-American law apply to boys.

Behind the inconsistency of these different laws was the lack of an obvious age to incorporate into law. Although scientists and physicians had established that menstruation and puberty occurred on average around age 14 in Europe at this time, different individuals experienced it at different ages -- a fluid situation at odds with the arbitrary line drawn by whatever age was incorporated into law."

Children and Youth in History | Age of Consent Laws

 

[PixieStix]

On another thread a few days ago Delta4 Embassy was saying that child porn should be legalized.

Now this thread.

Are we seeing a pattern?? ...

Wasn't what I said at all. Said that if evidence exists supporting legalizing child pornography results in fewer incidences of child sexual abuse, then we should investigate whether that is something we should do.

That you have to lie to be popular is sad.

Supporting legalized child pornography is sick. And if it was legalized, it only makes sense that there would be fewer incidences of child abuse. What's to investigate?

I see pink in your future

 

[Delta4Embassy]

"In the late nineteenth century,"Age of consent" referred to the legal age at which a girl could consent to sexual relations. Men who engaged in sexual relations with girls who had not reached the age of consent could be criminally prosecuted. American reformers were shocked to discover that the laws of most states set the age of consent at the age of ten or twelve, and in one state, Delaware, the age of consent was only seven."

Campaign to Raise the Legal Age of Consent, 1885-1914, Lesson Plan

If they weren't, that the first age of sexual consent laws were so low is rather curious. Those laws also didn't require marriage, so apparently fornication was okay by them as well.

The average life expectancy in 1775 was approximately 50 years and the maturity of a woman was defined more or so weather she could properly bare children. In a time of high infant mortality rates, if you weren't married by 25 you were unlikely to find a husband interested in having children. Furthermore, the elite class of the day prided themselves on marrying refined and matured women, which of course, was often pressed upon them at an early age as to make them more desirable to upper class males. I suppose what I am saying is 1) Don't distrust the maturity of the 18th century "women." 2) It is often misguided to apply modern standards to past practices. 3) The standard across the world was that child bearing ability was the age of adult maturity and to single out the Founding Fathers for an act that was common, regular, and legal everywhere must have something to do with you disdain for them. The question is why?

25? If you were 16 and not married, they considered you a spinster. Don't buy the child bearing ability as the standard though as back then, most women didn't start their period until they were sixteen, whereas today, it's what? 10?

Dunno what the average age of menarche is now. But it's shockingly low. Recall a case in one of the Carolinas a few years ago about a 9 year old giving birth.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

On another thread a few days ago Delta4 Embassy was saying that child porn should be legalized.

Now this thread.

Are we seeing a pattern?? ...

Wasn't what I said at all. Said that if evidence exists supporting legalizing child pornography results in fewer incidences of child sexual abuse, then we should investigate whether that is something we should do.

That you have to lie to be popular is sad.

Supporting legalized child pornography is sick. And if it was legalized, it only makes sense that there would be fewer incidences of child abuse. What's to investigate?

I see pink in your future

We already covered this is the other thread. Think it got moved to the Tea Party group since it was a thread about some guy who busted for child pornography.

 

[Coyote]

On another thread a few days ago Delta4 Embassy was saying that child porn should be legalized.

Now this thread.

Are we seeing a pattern?? ...

Wasn't what I said at all. Said that if evidence exists supporting legalizing child pornography results in fewer incidences of child sexual abuse, then we should investigate whether that is something we should do.

That you have to lie to be popular is sad.

I understand the distinction you are making - however, it creates a bit of a circular argument that doesn't bode well.

In order to create child pornography, you have to use children....engaged in pornography - do you get what I'm saying?

It's not like adult pornography which engages consenting adults.

 

[PixieStix]

On another thread a few days ago Delta4 Embassy was saying that child porn should be legalized.

Now this thread.

Are we seeing a pattern?? ...

Wasn't what I said at all. Said that if evidence exists supporting legalizing child pornography results in fewer incidences of child sexual abuse, then we should investigate whether that is something we should do.

That you have to lie to be popular is sad.

I understand the distinction you are making - however, it creates a bit of a circular argument that doesn't bode well.

In order to create child pornography, you have to use children....engaged in pornography - do you get what I'm saying?

It's not like adult pornography which engages consenting adults.

Thank you for articulating that