More dishonesty then. Might as well put: "I talked about pornographers on the moon turning cheese into robots" (silence from Town Heretic.)
You shotgun and conflate and expect me to follow along when you can't answer simple rebuttals on the points I've made and you've attempted to distort or out and out lie about?
Still waiting on some synaptic firing on my rejection of your attempt to paint a defense of right as a support for particular use of it. But we both know that won't happen, I suppose.
No, the Roe Court is responsible and I don't believe any of them were Libertarians. I'm not of the Libertarian mindset. It's another extremist point of view too often, but I'm not going to try to blame them for what the majority they don't belong to has managed.
See, that's the sort of intellectually dishonest nonsense I'm speaking to. You don't want my position on the point because you can't do with it what you so obviously and desperately want to...
Neither the President nor Mrs. Clinton agree with me on abortion and I'm not supporting her candidacy. The last guy I pushed to help elect was a Republican named Huntsman. But the party chose the wrong Mormon. Such is life.
Abortion wouldn't be here were it not for the Roe Court, appointed in majority by Republican conservatives. They were the best friend radicals on the left ever had on the point.
I'm sure there are ties between all sorts of organizations, especially those not in the majority who require the majority to accomplish any end. Still different issues with different support in law.
Arguable, outside of a particular moral perspective, but we've seen the harm smoking does, to the individual and the larger society left with the impact. We don't ban activities because some harm will come from it. You need to review the standard again, assuming you ever did.
You mean, is homosexuality immoral? The "not" confuses your question. But I've answered that one more times than you've been irrational: homosexuality is a sin. All sin is immoral.
See, you can't just throw out an undefined "other" and suggest a meaningful inquiry. As between humans, any agreement is a contract of sorts and all contracts require, among their elements, consent, which requires capacity to give it. That, as I've noted, is foundational in contract law and criminal law.
I've already done that prior and I'm not particularly interested in doing more leg work you'll ignore, but just a couple of things for you to not think about then:
Here's a rough from a Wiki that gets the trend right:
History
While the age of consent is now set between 16 and 18 in all U.S. states, the age of consent has widely varied across the country in the past. In 1880, the age of consent was set at 10 or 12 in most states, with the exception of Delaware where it was 7.[51]
The ages of consent were raised across the U.S. during the late 19th century and the early 20th century.[52][53] Until a few decades ago, many states used to have provisions requiring that the teenage girl must have been of previous "chaste character" in order for the sexual conduct to be considered criminal. In 1998, Mississippi became the last state to remove this provision from its code.[54] From 2005 onwards, states have started to enact Jessica's Law statutes, which provide for lengthy penalties (often a mandatory minimum sentence of 25 years in prison and lifetime electronic monitoring) for the most aggravated forms of child sexual abuse (usually of a child under age 12).
While the age of consent is now set between 16 and 18 in all U.S. states, the age of consent has widely varied across the country in the past. In 1880, the age of consent was set at 10 or 12 in most states, with the exception of Delaware where it was 7.[51]
The ages of consent were raised across the U.S. during the late 19th century and the early 20th century.[52][53] Until a few decades ago, many states used to have provisions requiring that the teenage girl must have been of previous "chaste character" in order for the sexual conduct to be considered criminal. In 1998, Mississippi became the last state to remove this provision from its code.[54] From 2005 onwards, states have started to enact Jessica's Law statutes, which provide for lengthy penalties (often a mandatory minimum sentence of 25 years in prison and lifetime electronic monitoring) for the most aggravated forms of child sexual abuse (usually of a child under age 12).
A number of states have raised their consent age and a handful since the 60s. Some are considering raising it again. My current state of residency is entertaining a bill to raise it from 16 to 18. A number of states have done that and moved the age upward since the permissive, sexually confused and so-called sexual revolution of the 60s.
Outside of the above, to touch on a few things we've done as a nation since the 60s: Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (I think around 1998); The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (begun in the 70s and reauthorized in 2010); Child Protective Services have been institutionalized since those same 60s; Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment (1974); Indian Child Welfare Act (1978); Adoption and Safe Families Act (1997), to name a few.
