Originally posted by DanL
View Post
Additionally, a 19 year old and a 17 year old having consensual" sex is not by definition a situation of disparity.
A 17 year old "allegedly consenting" and 70 year old has a age greater disparity.
A 10 year old and a 30 year old has a even greater age disparity.
It is the disparity that is the "spirit of the law" where one party is much more intellectually intelligent and manipulative, older, or the gap between the two is greater that makes it wrong morally.
For lawful purposes, each government defines the age of consent a little different.
Additionally, in the United States according to law (like it or not) everyone under 18 is technically by law property of the United States government, which is why if the government deems your parents as unqualified they can select new parents for you and remove you from your problem-home.
Pre 18 you are not allowed to sign a contract.
And the United States law system defines consent for sex as a type of contract; an agreement between two or more parties technically.
There is no situation a pre-18 year old in the US can consent to sex, they cannot legally contract. the law does allow for a relaxing to such rules as I recall if both parties are within 2 years of age, and that's it.
Edit: Oh, also -- whether by definition this qualifies as rape is debatable, but it most definitely qualifies as Extortion. A BIG no no.
Edit 2: For anyone considering the law as a factor, RMS is a United States Citizen and MIT is a United States university, so obviously United States law would be #1 relevant to this discussion of what is and is NOT legal. Any other discussion on laws elsewhere are a diversion and expansion away from the topic with little to no benefits to compiling the situation that happened inside US MIT and US FSF.
Comment