In the first phase.
...the general public leads a fight to prevent the fight from occurring. Although the Constitution prohibits the imposition of a ban argue the "wrong" view, the society tries in every possible way - both from the official community and from mob side - to silence them with the "wrong" views.
Web hotels refuses to put server available to web pages with the "wrong" but 100% legal views, employers refuse to hire people with the "wrong" views, and the anti-democratic terrorist mob trying to silence them with the "wrong" views in the same manner as in dictatorial states.
Even the highest science is not allowed to reveal the views and research, that the mob do not like.
In the first phase it is not dangerous to argue, that the age of consent should be raised, but it is dangerous to argue, that it should be lowered.
Second phase
In the second phase the laws are the same, but it is no longer taboo to discuss the laws. You argue for and against, on the one hand and on the other hand, advantages, disadvantages and all the nuances.
The world is no longer black / white but a grayscale with many steps between black and white.
In the second phase, it is no longer taboo for the highest science - PhDs, professors etc. - to research the topic and reveal views and research results, which was not allowed in the first phase. The researchers will no longer be fired because of the "wrong" views, as they would in the first phase.
In the second phase, it is not dangerous to argue BOTH that the age of consent should be raised, AND that it should be lowered.
Third phase
In the third phase the debate within the second phase - in some areas - converted the past majority to a minority and the past minority to a majority. Then some of the laws are changed - for example, lowering the age of consent to 13 years.
That is what people are afraid of, and therefore they try to avoid / prevent the fight from occurring.
But both the United States Constitution, the European Convention on Human Rights and the United Nations Convention on Human Rights prohibits it.
First Amendment to the United States Constitution:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
The European Convention on Human Rights says in article 11.1:
"Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers."
The United Nations Convention of Human Rights article 19 which says:
"Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."
Amen!
No comments:
Post a Comment