It’s important to understand the legal definition of “age of consent,” and how it pertains to Supreme Court Justice Ruth Ginsburg’s views on pedophilia:
Age of consent refers to the legally defined age at which a person is no longer required to obtain parental consent to get married. It also refers to the age at which a person is held to have the capacity to voluntarily agree to sexual intercourse. Sexual intercourse with a person under the age of consent may lead to criminal charges of statutory rape or sexual assault . . . .
Statutory rape is sex between an adult and a minor below the age of consent. Every state has a statutory rape law in some form. The age of consent varies from state to state, but is generally from 16 – 18 years of age. . . . Consent of the victim and belief that the victim is of the age of consent are usually considered immaterial.
A pedophile is an adult with “sexual fondness for and activity” with children, i.e., minors below the age of consent. Pedophilia is legally defined as sexual child abuse, i.e., any sexual activity with a minor below the age of consent, which includes fondling a child’s genitals, intercourse, incest, rape, sodomy, exhibitionism, and commercial exploitation of children through prostitution or the production of pornographic materials.
Since the age of consent in the United States which varies from state to state is from 16 to 18, lowering the age of consent to 12 would legalize pedophilia of children age 12 and above.
That is exactly what Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a Clinton appointee, recommends in a co-authored book that led to sweeping changes made by the federal government in the name of sex equality.
In 1977 when Ginsburg was General Counsel of the ACLU, she co-authored (with Brenda Feigen-Fasteau) Sex Bias in the U.S. Code: A Report of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, which was published by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights in April 1977, for which Ginsburg and Feigen-Fasteau were paid with federal funds under Contract No. CR3AK010.
The 230-page Sex Bias in the U.S. Code identifies hundreds of federal laws alleged to discriminate against women and recommends an avalanche of government and social changes, including:
- Military draft and combat duty for women.
- Legalization of prostitution (see pages 97, 99, 215-216 of Sex Bias in the U.S. Code)
- Sex integration of prisons, reformatories, schools and colleges and their activities (including sports), all-girls and all-boys organizations, and fraternities and sororities.
- Changing the names of the Boy Scouts, Girls Scouts and Big Brothers of America to reflect sex integration (see pages 145, 205 of Sex Bias in the U.S. Code).
- Elimination of the traditional family concept of husband as breadwinner and wife as homemaker.
- Comprehensive government child-care.
- Adoption of sex-neutral language, e.g., “artificial” instead of “manmade”; “person, human” instead of “man, woman”; and plural nouns “they” and “them” instead of “singular third person pronouns”. At the same time, however, Ginsburg and Feigen-Fasteau hypocritically insist that the U.S. Department of Labor retains its “Women’s Bureau”.
It is time for Ruth Ginsburg to step down, before she starts falling down.
On p. 102 of Sex Bias in the U.S. Code, under the sub-heading “Recommendations,” Ginsburg and Feigen-Fasteau recommend a revision of 18 U.S.C. §2032 from “carnal knowledge of any female, not his wife who has not attained the age of sixteen years” to “A person is guilty of an offense if he engages in a sexual act with another person, not his spouse, and . . . the other person is, in fact, less than 12 years old“. Below is the pertinent paragraph:
18 U.S.C. §2032 — Eliminate the phrase “carnal knowledge of any female, not his wife who has not attained the age of sixteen years” and substitute a Federal, sex-neutral definition of the offense patterned after S. 1400 §1633: A person is guilty of an offense if he engages in a sexual act with another person, not his spouse, and (1) compels the other person to participate: (A) by force or (B) by threatening or placing the other person in fear that any person will imminently be subjected to death, serious bodily injury, or kidnapping; (2) has substantially impaired the other person’s power to appraise or control the conduct by administering or employing a drug or intoxicant without the knowledge or against the will of such other person, or by other means; or (3) the other person is, in fact, less than 12 years old.
Ginsburg (and her co-author) also recommends that the Mann Act be repealed. The Mann Act is a federal law passed in 1910 which makes it a felony to engage in interstate or foreign commerce transport of “any woman or girl for the purpose of prostitution or debauchery, or for any other immoral purpose”.
From Sex Bias in the U.S. Code, pp. 98-99:
The Mann Act . . . poses the invasion of privacy issue in an acute form. The Mann Act also is offensive because of the image of women it perpetuates . . . . It was meant to protect from ‘the villainous interstate and international traffic in women and girls,’ ‘those women and girls who, if given a fair chance, would, in all human probability, have been good wives and mothers and useful citizens. . . .’
In other words, if Ruth Bader Ginsburg has her way, sexual abuse of children 12-years or older would not be a crime, nor would child sex trafficking.
Ginsburg will be 84 next month. May President Trump be given the opportunity to nominate her replacement on the Supreme Court.
H/t Executive Director of Eagle Forum Susan Hirschmann’s Testimony Re. Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the Senate Judiciary Committee, July 23, 1993.
Posted by Dr. Eowyn