No I am the most conservative

But no execution for pedophilia?

<:watts:459545655250255903>

If someone rapes a child yes

>oh but she gave consent

Still execution

Below puberty, no sexual consent should be accepted then

Yes

14+ was the traditional start of marriage age for women here

15 and under

But obviously most would not marry til perhaps 16

For numerous reasons

Puberty does not allow consent

Post-puberty teens don't have the capability to understand

The consequences

The brain area responsible for long term decision making doesn't even develop until 25

Well you can't force marriage

No it does not. But if you have 13 year olds trying to hook up for sex like you have now, I would say they or their parents are responsible too

Teens have sex because it feels good in the moment

Not because they fully understand what they are getting into

Pre marital sex should be illegal

@هيثم عبدالرحمن agreed

@Draco it's due in part to unfinished brain development, and impulse

I agree. But I won't put whole responsibility on the rapist. That would literally shield parents or pimps using underage girls

Which happens quite a lot

If a pimp or parent is responsible

Death for both

Especially during specific events

Even past 18, you can't absolutely understand the consequences of sex long term

Your prefrontel cortex isn't finished development until your around 25

Which is responsible for long term decision making and reflection

I want a prudent system in which all parties are afraid to cross boundaries.
That works best.
Putting it only on one gives license to other party to act like a scum.

The post-puberty teen should be put into a correctional facility

For a few months maybe

So the teens don't jailbait

Or deathbait in this case

I have seen shitty teens who think they can do it and it is ok because they are teens
They need to be scared too. And if parents fail then law should

All parties responsible should be put to death

The teen should be put into a correctional facility

IMO the death penalty works as a deterrent, the issue of the modern death penalty is that it is not public or broadcast and the punishment is usually benign, you drop, you get shot and its over. However looking at medieval times (which were effective mind you, as the medieval world was not a hell hole that is a myth, it was actualyl relatively civilized and not perpetually violent) we see that they did deter crime to a large degree, of course petty crime persisted however major crime, things today that have relatively mediocre sentences, were punished by physical harm and death. You cheat on a spouse well prepare to either be killed, castrated, lose a limb. Did you rape a child, or someone, prepare to lose your testicles and be eaten by rats, or boiled alive etc.

Did you murder someone, well your gonna get burned and then hung.

This is and was perfect at what it did, it stopped these crimes in a world where there was no mass surveillance, imagine the same authoritative reaction now. The reason in modernity that the death penalty is ineffective is because it is literally too clean. You lay there, get injected, and pass away. However if the lead up to your death would be years of hard labor, gulags or otherwise labor camps, then most crime like this, the prospect of it, would be questionable to even the most unstable.

Also rehab only works for petty crime and with a booming economy. It does not work for more serious crimes. Also mental intability is not a reason for lack of punishment. Mental assylums are cruel in and of themselves. Pedophiles, albeit often mentally ill, cannot be exempt from their crimes and the punishment thereof, simply because they have a warped view of reality. Its like a slap on the wrist, and examples need to be made that will even make the most insane question their course of action.

<@&509916914957549608> Daily Question :🔖

Who will win the 2020 election and with how many electoral votes?