Lefora Free Forum
login join
Loading
597 views

Ballot Question - Constitutional Amendment 1 - Age of Consent

Categories > State Issues
Page 1
(items) 1–10 of 10
razmear
novice - member
50 posts
0 permalink

Up for voter approval is this Constitutional Amendment to the SC Constitution:

Must Section 33, Article III of the Constitution of this State be amended so as to delete the provision that no unmarried
woman shall legally consent to sexual intercourse who shall not have attained the age of fourteen years?

Now this is being done with the intent to raise the age of consent to 16, which is fine and dandy, but my question is:
What happens if they never get around to raising the age of consent to 16 due to political infighting, other distractions, or just plain stupidity?

Does the age of consent disappear making it possible for perverts to say that an 8 year old gave her consent as a defense against child rape?

If this passes will there be a safe haven for perverts from November 5th til they get around to writing the new law or is there a set date when the amendment takes effect?

Amendment Question 1 is one that I would lean towards voting for, but I don't see any safe guards in place to protect kids from perverts in the event the state legislature does not promptly pass a new law setting the age of consent to 16.

As a side question, would this amendment make it a crime for two 14 year olds to have consentual intercourse or does it only affect an adult with child incident?

reply
quote
25 October 2008 11:36 PM
ahammett
fanatic - member
1141 posts
1 permalink
razmear,

I haven't posted here in a while and just dropped by to see how bonkers you guys are going one week out.  After seeing all the confusion in your post, here is a brief explanation of Question #1.

A "Yes" vote on this Amendment would delete the language from the constitution and simply leave the age of consent in the hands of the legislature.  State law currently sets the age of consent at 16 (14 if with an under 18 year old).  The current legal age of consent in SC is 16, the constiution simply stipulates that it can't be lower than 14.  Under the constitution, the legislature has always had the power to raise the age of consent, and that's exactly what they've done already.

A "No" vote would simply leave the clause in the constituion, and the only effect of leaving it in the constitution would be to prevent the legislature from lowering the age of consent below 14, which doesn't seem very likely.

Please make sure that all of your friends are decided on the amendments and the local option sales tax before entering the ballot booth!  We are going to be in for one heckuva long day if people are in there for 3 minutes a piece.

Go here to read the questions ahead of time:
http://andersoncountysc.org/web/Admin/Documents/Voter/CANDIDATESCERTIFIED2008GENERAL.pdf
__________________
andrew.hammett@gmail.com
reply
quote
29 October 2008 08:09 AM
blogger
fanatic - member
1362 posts
3 permalink
A commentaty on Andrews please know the issues before you go in comment- I voted absentee Monday and waited in line about 40 minutes, and apparently that is the trend everywhere. If the absentee lines are any indicator as people think they are of what the election day turnout is going to be, it is going to be a long day indeed. Please, please take the time to know the issues before you go and encourage your friends and neighbors to do the same.
reply
quote
29 October 2008 11:04 AM
mr-hankey-the-d
fanatic - member
2351 posts
0 permalink

wow hammys back and has not posted in a while.
sure, hammy sure.

__________________
The voice for the free blogers! Mr. Hankey is your martyr! Eventus stultorum magister. 30/30-150 Remembers!
reply
quote
29 October 2008 12:37 PM
noeline
superstar - member
861 posts
-1 permalink


razmear,I haven't posted here in a while and just dropped by to see how bonkers you guys are going one week out. After seeing all the confusion in your post, here is a brief explanation of Question #1.A "Yes" vote on this Amendment would delete the language from the constitution and simply leave the age of consent in the hands of the legislature. State law currently sets the age of consent at 16 (14 if with an under 18 year old). The current legal age of consent in SC is 16, the constiution simply stipulates that it can't be lower than 14. Under the constitution, the legislature has always had the power to raise the age of consent, and that's exactly what they've done already.A "No" vote would simply leave the clause in the constituion, and the only effect of leaving it in the constitution would be to prevent the legislature from lowering the age of consent below 14, which doesn't seem very likely.Please make sure that all of your friends are decided on the amendments and the local option sales tax before entering the ballot booth! We are going to be in for one heckuva long day if people are in there for 3 minutes a piece.Go here to read the questions ahead of time: [url]

-ahammett

OMG what a liar

__________________
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.” William Pitt
reply
quote
30 October 2008 11:32 PM
jdtippett
fanatic - admin
6543 posts
3 permalink

Noeline, AHammett's explanation of that constitutional amendement question is as good as any. It's just bit of housecleaning to remove from the S.C. Constitution something that basically isn't necessary anyway, like the language that prohibited interracial marriage that was ruled unconstitutional decades before South Carolina got around to getting rid of the verbiage.

There's no "lie" to it. You can't legislatively alter the S.C. Constitution of 1895. It can only be done by statewide referendum, and every once in awhile it's just the right thing to do.

Currently, the age of consent is set at 16 BY LAW. The S.C. Constitution allows it to be set as low as 14. Now, I seriously doubt the General Assembly could get a majority to lower that to 14 and, even if they could, no Governor would sign it. And Constiutional restriction or not, any legislator who attempted to lower it below age 14 would find himself wearing tar and feathers by sunset. Really.

__________________
"Would you like to play a game?" - Department of Defense computer in "WarGames"
reply
quote
30 October 2008 11:46 PM
noeline
superstar - member
861 posts
1 permalink

JD I was referring to the fact that he said he hadn't been posting, not to what he said about the constitution

__________________
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.” William Pitt
reply
quote
31 October 2008 12:11 AM
jdtippett
fanatic - admin
6543 posts
1 permalink
Ohhhhhhh. Sorry. But I haven't seen his screen name but a time or two in ages. I miss debating him and Jack Ruby.
__________________
"Would you like to play a game?" - Department of Defense computer in "WarGames"
reply
quote
31 October 2008 12:21 AM
republikin
fanatic - member
2368 posts
0 permalink


Ohhhhhhh. Sorry. But I haven't seen his screen name but a time or two in ages. I miss debating him and Jack Ruby.

-jdtippett

They are here JD, they are here. There are so many posters who are not who they are, it's like Halloween everyday.

reply
quote
31 October 2008 03:37 AM
1-opinion
superstar - member
828 posts
1 permalink
AHammet & JD are correct about the a fore mentioned amendment. That's all it is and tarred and feathers it would be. Laughing

__________________
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into. ~Author Unknown
reply
quote
31 October 2008 01:06 PM
Categories > State Issues
Page 1
(items) 1–10 of 10

Locked Topic


You must be a member to post in this forum

Join Now!