![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Wait, what?
Jan. 14th, 2009 10:11 amWashington court: Sex between teachers, 18 year-olds OK
That's not what bothers me. Yeah, you can argue all day whether or not 14 or 15 or 16 year-olds are mature enough mentally to consent to sex or not. (Frankly, I don't think 14 or 15 year-olds are, some 16 year-olds might be, but it's iffy at that age.)
18? Shit yes. If they're old enough to serve in the military, they're old enough to get laid.
No, here's what bothers me about this article.
What.
Okay, so a 21 year old student has sex with a teacher that is older then 26, and that would be a crime? It doesn't even have to be their teacher, and it's still a crime?
WHAT THE FUCK WASHINGTON, OVER?
That's not what bothers me. Yeah, you can argue all day whether or not 14 or 15 or 16 year-olds are mature enough mentally to consent to sex or not. (Frankly, I don't think 14 or 15 year-olds are, some 16 year-olds might be, but it's iffy at that age.)
18? Shit yes. If they're old enough to serve in the military, they're old enough to get laid.
No, here's what bothers me about this article.
Some state legislators are set on changing the law. On Monday, six state representatives introduced legislation that would make it a crime punishable by a mandatory minimum of five years in prison for a teacher to have sex with a student up to age 21, as long as the teacher is five years older than the student and at the same school.
What.
Okay, so a 21 year old student has sex with a teacher that is older then 26, and that would be a crime? It doesn't even have to be their teacher, and it's still a crime?
WHAT THE FUCK WASHINGTON, OVER?