By John F. Di Leo -
Why is it illegal for a 30-year-old man to have sex with a 15-year-old girl?
She might be cute, willing, single… Heck, she might even have initiated the contact. If they both want to, why should it be illegal?
Well, statutory rape laws exist for a good and important reason: under the law, even if that girl says “yes,” the man cannot accept that “yes.” She is not deemed old enough under the law to give her consent. She is not considered ready, in our society, to make such a serious and potentially life-altering decision.
As in the cases of a high school student and her teacher, or a young athlete and her coach, or an employee and her employer… there is an assumption that the inequality of the relationship means that the girl’s judgment may be clouded. She may fear repercussions in the classroom, the sports team, the workplace, even subconsciously, if she resists his advances, causing her to make a choice that is handicapped by these external forces.
And this is most critical where age is concerned. Western Civilization just recognizes that the young are not yet old enough to apply the experiences of life to practical, important situations.
Our society, therefore, has always tried to protect our children, by placing certain highly consequential decisions out of their reach.
Over the centuries, Western Civilization has seen variations on this concept, from subject to subject, but we have held true to the general idea:
Below a certain age, you cannot buy tobacco… Below another age, you cannot buy alcohol… Below another age, you cannot marry, or vote, or serve in the military, or run for political office.
At the time, those of us below that age – whatever it is, usually between 15 and 25 – generally believe that we are being discriminated against. Later in life, however, we usually grow up to understand, and to appreciate the protections that our society so carefully provided to us when we were young.
Why is this concept in the news today? Because, more and more, one political party in the United States is seeking to undo this system – and rob both our children and our society at large of this joint protection.
For yes, these protections are not just for the children; they apply to our entire society, in protecting us all from the avoidable errors of those children.
When you are just learning to drive, you are particularly at risk from the effects of alcohol. When you are just out of puberty, you are particularly at risk from the bad choices that the human libido can encourage. When you’re still in school, and have thus far been subject to nothing but the brainwashing of the pop culture and the educational establishment, you are not yet ready to think for yourself in a voting booth.
The errors that a child can make, if empowered to make them, have repercussions on all society: The car crash caused by a drunken teenager… the descent into addiction caused by the cool high school drug dealer… the unplanned pregnancy, destruction of self-esteem, venereal disease, and the host of other destructive ends that result from an adult taking sexual advantage of a minor.
These are not victimless crimes.
And our society used to be unanimous, at least on this, if on nothing else.
Our Modern Politics
The news of the day, with surprising frequency, involves the misguided “adult” choices of children who should not have been empowered to make those choices, in this case, where politics are concerned.
An unfortunate, brainwashed 16-year-old Scandinavian girl named Greta Thunberg was transported from Europe to the United Nations building in New York, to deliver a petulant rant at the world, parroting the lies her teachers and parents have drilled into her head, presumably unaware that her status is merely that of a pawn in the great PR scam known as “global climate change.”
She follows in the shoes of so many other politicized teens in recent years – kids attracted by cameramen’s lights and reporters’ mics, exhilarated at the prospect of appearing before a congress, or on television, or on the front pages of newspapers, to say something perceived as important, something that might actually change the world for the better… even though they really don’t know what they’re talking about, and at some level, even these self-important camera hogs must realize it.
But this isn’t just about Greta Thunberg. She is just the poster child of a dangerous wave of political action:
A few years ago, Democrats started pushing to allow 17-year-olds to vote in primaries, if they were going to be 18 by the general election. That sounded limited enough, so few Republicans stood up to fight it.
Building on this success, the left is now pushing for lowering the voting age still more, to 17 or even 16, wherever they can without facing federal pushback (the Constitutional age requirement of 18 only applies to federal elections).
They shout that if the future we leave behind is for the children, then those children should certainly have a say in what kind of future they inherit.
And this would indeed be fair, except for the fact that these children are not yet prepared to make such decisions.
Americans used to understand such things.
At the same time, the left also encourages mass immigration, while undermining the citizenship requirements of both English language familiarity, and comprehension of the American economic and political system, two elements of the citizenship process that were long bulwarks against election abuse. They want the newest of newcomers, people who often cannot read a newspaper or understand campaign debates and political ads, to have an equal vote in choosing between candidates whose policies are utterly unknown to them. The MTV message is that “voting is important,” not that wise, deliberate voting is important.
Today’s Democratic Party, in fact, seeks to grant suffrage to everyone possible… from non-English speakers to non-citizens, from the non-adults to the non-existent.
It might be too easy a joke to say that the Democrats just know that their side is most likely to appeal to those without the experience or understanding to know better, but there is still a truth at the core of the joke.
The Democratic Party does, in fact, seek to empower the ignorant, in giving them media time – to the exclusion of more capable experts – and in giving the ignorant electoral power – and in so doing, diluting the voting strength on election day of those who have been here longer, and might know better.
For centuries, Western Civilization recognized that children should be protected from making choices they might regret later. We in the United States once respected the ballot box, and restricted it to citizens who had had a chance to study the Constitution, to earn a living, to respect the complex society in which they lived.
No longer. Today’s popular culture declares that the bigger your audience, the bigger you are; the more important people you can con into paying attention to you, the more of a success you have become.
Deserving such respect by actually knowing what you’re talking about is unnecessary, as long as the cause you promote has earned the modern left’s seal of approval.
One day, these young pop culture marionettes of the rabid left may realize how they were abused. But until then, oh, what damage they are doing.
Copyright 2019 John F. Di Leo
John F. Di Leo is a Chicagoland-based writer, actor, and international transportation manager.
His columns are regularly found in Illinois Review, and his small contributions to the culture include performing in local theatre productions, helping hard-working Americans get a good laugh at the end of a hard week. He will next appear in the Kirk Players’ production of the classic Oscar Wilde comedy, “Lord Arthur Savile’s Crime…” it will run one weekend only, October 4 through 6, at Mundelein High School in Chicago’s northern suburbs.
Don’t miss an article! Use the tool in the margin above, to sign up for Illinois Review’s free email notifications whenever new content is published!
