Re: Why were age of consent laws created?

Sounds fairly reasonable as a compromise ,but I believe that , instead of an actual age , we should simply allow those in question to make their own decision . Its not a question merely on the adults "rights" to have sex with younger people ,but also the kids rights to make their own choices with their own life . I was having a debate with a guy i met today about age laws in the United States and he said that if you get rid of the drinking age then kids wont be tempted to sneak out of the house and get drunk because it would be socially acceptable ,but when I came to sexual rights of ,say a 14 year old girl , he said that ,at that age they are not mature enough to make a informed decision , so I suggested thath America simply take a European approach and keep the AoC low and teach kids better sex ed (condoms, ect abstinence only) and then he said " well they are not mature enough psychologically ,older men might attempt to manipulate them" . Lol that is an idiotic approach to the problem. He said that legalism is at least an attempt to curb this phenonomen and protect the immature. That is SO funny because it has been proven that bringe-drinking in general ,and especially under the age of 25 causes developmental damage to the young adult brain so ,does that mean we should raise the drink age to 25 under that logic? He left the room soon afterwards and I have a feeling that he thought less of me afterwards .( The guy in question is about 19 and I am of a similar age ).My point I was trying to argue was for the rights of others , not the rights of what he called "creepers " to take advantage of immatature girls . Also , even IN the case of sleazy but non violent creepers or "wolves" trying to exploit younger girls with whatever rugged charm or wealth the offer , there are PLENTY of Immature legal "adults" who are just as daft as many teenagers ,and ,is it not someone's RIGHT to choice who they wish to be "seduced" by ,provided that it is non coersive in nature ? I never felt that you could "protect" someones rights by taking them away and being forbidden to do something or to be pitied for my own bad choices and as a "victim". If protecting people from exploitation or forbidding them to do things that they want because they are "harmful or dirty" then wouldnt they have illegalized porn by now ? Wouldnt Wal-Mart be driven out of buissness by anti trust laws for exploiting workers in China , driving small buisnesses out , and hiring people for below living wages ? The same logic can be applied to most of the illegal drug legistration in the US , E.U and the world ...It does NOT matter if the drug hurts you if you choice to take it BUT people need to be educated about such substances .Its like one of the major arguements for the AoC Ive heard from Americans : the girl could get pregnant and she could die in childbirth .This arguement is based on isolated cases in 3rd world countries and other places of inhumane conditons and much less often in the developed countries . If the girl was not ready to have children , then WHY did Nature allow her to become pregnant ? Why were the hormones present in the first place ? Also , even in situations where the girl is at risk for a fatal pregnacy ( which , I will admit ,is always present in all women) there is always condoms and the "Pill" ,ect . As I like to say , "If you cant muster up a condom ,then sex is not important enough ...Unless you plan on dealing with the consequences . The point here is , that everyone HAS a "God" given ,or Natural right to do their true will as Aleister Crowley said and not the right to do that which is not their will .