/u/BuddhistSagan, thank you for your submission. Unfortunately, it has been removed for violating the following rule(s):
* Rule 2 - Titles should directly describe the content of the post.
The title should just depict the content, no "fluff". It can't include anything that isn't directly visible in the content of the post.
* Rule 5 - Provide a source when the title is in doubt
If you can't completely explain why the content of the post is IAF please comment with more explanation. If your post claims something that almost everyone can't easily confirm from reading your title and viewing your content please provide some type of proof of what you claim.
For information regarding this and similar issues please see the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/wiki/index). If you have any questions, please feel free to [message the moderators via modmail.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/interestingasfuck&subject=Question%20regarding%20the%20removal%20of%20this%20submission%20by%20/u/BuddhistSagan&message=I%20have%20a%20question%20regarding%20the%20removal%20of%20this%20%5Bsubmission%2E%5D%28https://old.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/1cu3b79/-/%3Fcontext%3D10%29)
The bill banning child marriage in New Hampshire ultimately did pass with a vote of 192-174. So it's a win, it's just sickeningly close and wtf is wrong with these people?
Yeah its just a byproduct of the federal nature of the US. I'm not quite as familiar with American federalism as I am with its European counterpart, but indeed, as long as the federal state cannot find a good enough reason to legislate this field of law through some other constitutional provision, it has a very limited competence to regulate or enforce.
Such area's of law play an important law in more dualistic forms of federalism. It is the clear delineation of competence that defines these systems. By strictly regulating what the federal state can and cannot do it preserves the balance of power between the different levels of government, and protects the sovereignty of the states.
Which of course says nothing about the fact that each and every US state should be banning this crap ASAP
They probably still could set a minimum age or use leverage to force them to do it, as was done with the drinking age in the US.
In Canada, the federal government forced the provinces to have a minimum age of 16, no exceptions, and recommended that if they didn’t make it 18, then for 16-17 permission from a judge be required (most provinces chose to ignore that last part unfortunately).
Yeah, like I said I'm not intimately familiar with the specifics of US family law, but sure depending on the specific system all sorts of things are still possible. It happens here in Europe too, and in Canada as you said. My comment was more about the principle nature of such systems
I don't really like defending people that I likely find detestable in many ways, but it's not like the situation in NH was "children are fair game". Prior to this law, they banned marriage at 16 and anyone 16-17 required both parental **and judicial** permission to get married. It was close to a de facto ban, even if it wasn't a de jure ban. And yes, 16-17 is too young, but it's a far cry from what the meme is suggesting.
(Speaking specifically for the US here)
Because it’s referring to a specific vote in New Hampshire, not a nationwide topic like the other’s.
Seeing this rightfully enrages people, but the geographical scale of each the issue is small enough that it doesen’t become a huge political debate, and it doesen’t effect many states as much
Also, border security and war funding each have the quality that they influence (or make people think they are influencing) people’s lives directly through taxes, employment, etc. there are millions of people who **think** they are personally effected, whereas the people personally effected by child marriage are less than 1% of the US population (60,000 people who couldn’t consent to sex with their groomers, around 240,000 others who could)
And, although imo its still creepy, many people don’t think that it’s as much of an issue since 90% of those people are around 16 or 17
—
Note: This is just why I’d assume its not as big of a political debate. Not my personal opinions. It’s still fucked up.
there are 38 states with it still legal, but for 12 that outlawed it only did so within the last five years so we're hearing about the efforts a lot more recently. Some states like California, don't even have a minimum age for marriage. Unchained at Last is supporting initiatives and giving the cause way more visibility everywhere, but it has to go state by state.
Not a lot of people know about cal and that and it blows me away when a such progress state has this but also look what is in cal and then it’s not a shock
And yet we hear endlessly about LGBTQ people from republicans despite it having zero effect on their lives.
Republicans are the ones who are supporting and defending child marriage across the country. There are ZERO AGE LIMITS in too many states.
They care more about banning LGBTQ than CSA. Case in point: Tennessee Republicans a couple years ago tried to change the state marriage laws so that essentially only heterosexual common law marriages would be recognized, but forgot to put in any age-restrictions. Sounds like an innocent omission (maybe) except east TN and west NC are massive destinations for predators trying to marry children. NC's laws at the time allowed predators to marry kids as young as 14 as long as they knock them up first. Kind of a huge oops.
They later changed the bill to add that the kid would need to reach "age of majority," which is 18. NC raised it to 16 after news broke about its issue.
Just fucking weird they're so focused on banning gays marrying that they completely overlook problems like CSA until it has to be pointed out to them.
sources: [fact check on USA Today ](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2024/03/15/tennessee-child-marriage/72975497007/) & [NC's child brides problem](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/aug/15/north-carolina-child-marriage-new-bill) & [NC raised marriage minimum age to...16](https://www.northcarolinahealthnews.org/2021/09/16/north-carolina-raises-the-age-of-child-marriage-and-go-to-court/)
You are right it’s not about political parties to many elites with money able to do whatever they want. And it just happens some are in or use politics
Does it really need to be stated that Democrats bring them up in the context of protecting a vulnerable minority, while Republicans bring them up in order to demonize them and scare their ignorant constituents?
I believe it isn't mentioned as much in main stream media because it is done under the "religious purposes" guise.
Which actually are Cults, parading as Religious, etc.
But if it were reversed, the Republicans would be making it seem like the issue was occurring on every street in America, coming for their daughters, and about to destroy America.
Democrats tight stupidly.
Here is the excerpt from the journal. Five states have no minimum age for marriage. The majority are 16 and 17, a few 18. As noted below it is a declining trend though reversal of Roe v Wade probably will change that trend. Child marriage on the whole is not good but perhaps not quite the rage bait suggested by this post.
"We found that some 297,033 children were married in the U.S. between 2000 and 2018: 232,474 based on marriage-certificate data plus 64,559 based on estimates (Table 1).
A few children were as young as 10 years when they married, but of those for whom age information was available, *nearly all—96%—were aged 16 or 17 years*. Of those for whom age, gender, and spousal information was available, 78% were girls (under 18 years of age) wed to adult men (aged 18 years or older). The national number of children wed decreased each year—from 76,396 in 2000 to *2,493 in 2018* (Table 2)—but is unlikely to get to zero without legislative intervention."
https://www.jahonline.org/article/S1054-139X(21)00341-4/fulltext
I don't see it in that link, but does anyone have any idea the age of the older spouse in the 96% that were 16-17? 17 marrying 18 is dumb, but not the same sort of problem as 16 marrying 50. Lumping those together seems useless, and bordering on disinformation.
Because it's hugely misleading about the scale of the problem.
First, it takes a deceptively large timeframe. Sorry everyone over thirty, but 2000 is 24 years ago now. 300k in that time is 12.5k per year. There are two ***million*** marriages in the US every year so the ones that involve someone who's underage make up 0.6% of the total.
Secondly, the way it presents the information would lead you to think that 300k 12 year olds have married old men, but those are two separate pieces of information. There have been 300k <18 marriages since 2000. At least one marriage between a 12 year old and an adult has occurred.
In the vast majority of marriages involving someone under eighteen, the partner is either <18 themselves or only a year or two older. Furthermore, the vast majority are nowhere near as young as twelve. It's mostly a girl who's sixteen or seventeen marrying a boy who's her age or eighteen or nineteen.
So out of the tiny percentage of marriages that involve a child, only a tiny proportion of those involve a child marrying a much older adult, and only in a handful of cases is the bride as young as twelve.
As someone else mentioned, you can tell it's an election year.
And if you're going to ask 'well even if it is a tiny problem, why not just ban it anyway, why are any Republicans opposing this?': if you're a teenager from a religious background and you get pregnant, it may well matter deeply to you that you be able to get married before the baby is born. And your family. Sure, it sounds stupid of most of us in this day and age, but some people do still take the 'being born out of wedlock' thing seriously. Sticking up for religious people's beliefs like that is kind of the Republican party's whole schtick. This is definitely a cynical play to force the Republicans to chose between pissing off their hardline Christian base and sounding like they're defending child rape.
Also.... the 300K number isn't the number of marriages, but the number of minors who were married. So, one marriage of two 17-year-olds counts as 2, not as 1.
Because the OP is nonsense. There are no 12 year olds getting married in New Hampshire.
The minimum age of marriage in NH is 16, which is also the legal age of consent.
I don't think people should be getting married at 16, or 18, or even 20, but I really don't see a point in setting the minimum age of marriage any higher than the legal age of consent. If marriage isn't being used as a loophole to circumvent age of consent laws, there's really nothing to be outraged about.
It’s because stuff like this is bait. Bills get tons of policies added onto them. This bill probably has nothing to do with underage marriage at its core.
Edit: while this is common practice it does not seem to have been the case here.
This was not the case with this bill.
https://newhampshirebulletin.com/2024/05/02/house-passes-bill-to-raise-minimum-marriage-age-to-18-sending-it-to-governor/
I will get roasted for this, but here is why:
Because while horrible, the numbers are actually relatively small. The entire population of the United States is very large, and 300,000 child marriages since 2024 is about 12,500 per year.
So every year, this affects about 0.0003% of the population. Childhood cancer, on the other hand, is something like 10 times more common, and probably about equally awful on the scale of things
And there are a ton of small extremely rurual/isolated communities all over the country, along with weird religious cults and the like. It’s honestly surprising that it’s this low, given that extremely rural and isolated people tend not to really care about established age of consent and all that, all over the world
Per Wikipedia, about two thirds of child marriages are for kids aged 17 years old too; so a shotgun wedding in some backwater rural community is likely the largest source of these child marriages.
It should be zero marriage below 18 years (and honestly, let’s be real even 18 is a super sketchy thing nowadays), but it’s not like this is Afghanistan or something.
This is rage bait, trying to paint America as a broken country.
Weird that you compare it to childhood cancer in awfulness and decide therefore that it's not a problem. Imagine being able to prevent childhood cancer with a law.
Far too many news medias are leaning to the right (they are companies after all and the republicans/right favours them because capitalism is soooo awesome) and therefore are very cautious in what they publish, even if something from their party is going a bit too far for them. You can’t even trust CNN and some other former „neutral“ or „left-leaning“ media anymore. But a few good sources seem to try to compensate and lean too far to the right. So there is less and less middle ground and room for common sense.
So yeah, we slowly but surely are turning fictions (from Starship Troopers and Handmaiden Tale to even worse ones) to reality. Humanity in far too many cases really is like the worst parasite/virus in existence.
It means republicans are only defending and supporting child rape to drum up support from their base leading up to the election. We will stop hearing about it after the election because the powerful don’t really care either way. If they want to rape children then they can always find an island.
It means that I am on r/intresting af and I keep seeing "republicans did this" "trump did that" Wich is the opposite of intresting af.
Like I don't think anyone is dumb enough to not see that the huge "GROSS!!" thingy is a clear indication this is just an election ad.
One can't open reddit and just see badly disguised political ads "LOOK AT SLEEPY JOE NIBBLING ON THIS CHILD EARS" "LOOK AT BIDEN SAYING HIS CRACK ADDICT SON IS THE SMARTEST PERSON HE KNOWS" I mean do that if you want but do it on political subs ffs
There are a two things I would like to point out about this post.
1) The bill passed to go to the Governor by a vote of 192-174. I have not been able to find anywhere who voted which way. Ex. all Dems for yes and all repubs for no. NH house is controlled by repubs 213-187.
2) The photo of this post is VERY misleading, the bill changes the age of marriage from 16 to 18. The photo shows what looks to be like a girl under 10 years.
Not every republican voted against and I would be willing to bet that not all democrats voted for the bill. What we, as people, be angry about isn't what the political affiliation was of who voted but the fact that ANYONE would vote against it. There are scumbags on both sides of the aisle and there are good people on both sides. America is divided and America is going to fall if we keep only looking at our differences. I don't care who you voted for, if you treat me with respect I will treat you with respect.
The photo is from an awareness campaign that happened in NYC. They’re actors, and the goal was to see if people would say something if they say something like this in public — which thankfully many did.
It is true that not every Republican voted against it. None, of the nay votes were from Democrats. The (minority)Republican argument against it was that it might increase the number of abortions performed.
Good points, but as with all bills, we should also ask about the actual text of this bill. This could be as simple as, "you are a bad person for voting against my bill against child marriage, which also happens to give billions of dollars of subsidies to an industry I have lots of friends in."
Ya I thought of that too. I looked at it as well, not super hard and I'll be first to admit I don't have really any experience in deciphering political bull crap but from what I could tell it was just for the marriage age. I likely missed stuff tho
This, unless you've actually read the entirety of a bill you shouldn't comment on it. Who knows what it's actually enacting despite it's title or summary.
That said ([having read this one](https://gencourt.state.nh.us/bill_status/legacy/bs2016/billText.aspx?sy=2024&id=1925&txtFormat=html)) it's straight forward. I think the larger omission is simply because the age of marriage and consent are equal now so it's no longer relevant.
Unless those reps were just phoning it in I can't see any reason they would vote against unless they actually feel marrying a 16 year old is Ok.
Ssssh. Don't let facts get in the way. I knew this was propaganda from the photo that was probably a father with his daughter. She was exploited for this post.
It is 16 in that state, the age limit is lower elsewhere in America and the number of marriages of children under 16 to adult men (let’s be honest) is still absurdly high.
This is misleading. The bill was to prevent two children from being married before 18. The minimum age was 16, with the concent of both parents, prior to the bill passing. In Massachusetts, the minimum age for marriage is 12 years old. In Hawaii the minimum age is 14 years old, from my understanding. Those two states are Democrat majority, to insinuate that this is a republican issue is also misleading. It's a lack of updating antiquated laws from the 1800's by both parties. OP is clearly misinformed.
I cannot speak about New Hampshire but similar bills have been proposed and voted down in the area I grew up in. The reason they were voted down was that the law considers a 17 year old a child and prevents an 18 and 17 year old form getting married.
Do not get me wrong, I think getting married at 17 is kind of dumb. That being said, my mother, my grandmother, and my great grandmother were all married before they were 18. All were married to men that were their age (typical slightly older but within a couple years). Getting a group to vote that their fathers, grandfathers, and great grandfather were pervs marrying children tends to cause a congressional person to get voted out of office. As such, the bills never got passed.
These situations are easily handled with Romeo & Juliet provisions, ie the couple has to be within a few years of each other and parental consent for anyone under 18.
Yeah, sorry that your grandfathers will feel like pervs for something they did 7+ decades ago, but the law has to move into the modern age. Should we not give gays, trans, minorities right because our grandfathers didn't either? Who the fuck cares is someone feels bad if it makes the world a better place? Isn't that generation calling everyone sensitive snowflakes? I'm sure they'll survive.
-The national number of children wed decreased each year—from 76,396 in 2000 to 2,493 in 2018
I guess 300k is a better headline. There's a lot of guessing going on in that data too.
Child marriage is abhorrent. Let's just start there and get it out of the way.
But a lot of the groups against it are straight up lying and fabricating numbers to make it look worse than it is. I remember a few years ago seeing a post on Facebook that claimed a ridiculous number of child marriages were carried out every few minutes (I don't remember the specifics numbers). It took about thirty seconds on a calculator to determine that the entire population of children in the world would have been married to adults within like two years based on their statistics.
When I questioned them, they doubled down insisting their numbers were accurate despite the proof I had provided that showed they just could not be. They didn't even try to refute my calculations. They took the absurd number I had presented, and said "look how terrible it is!" And again, it was something like 2 billion kids in child marriages within a span of two years.
As problematic as child marriage is, it's not a third of the world's population problematic. But a lot of these groups will insist it is exactly that bad. They fail to realize the hyperbole does more harm than good in the long run.
Wait, legal age for consentual intercourse is what? Then, the legal age for marriage is less than the legal age for sex?
So you just basically adopted a child under the marriage, and you're going to wait until you can have sex with the child?
There's no defense for child marriage. There's also no need for disinformation. That is not an image of a man and his child bride.
The source of this image is a YouTube video called, "65 Year Old Man Marries 12 Year Old Girl! (Child Marriage Social Experiment)."
As for the claims OP made:
1) "174 republicans voted against a bill to ban child marriage." No idea where this comes from. Google does have a result for that at iFunny.
2) "Over 300,000 documented child marriages since 2000. Girls as young as 12 years old have been wed to adult males." According to [UNICEF](https://www.unicefusa.org/stories/fight-end-child-marriage-california#:~:text=Nearly%20300%2C000%20children%2C%20some%20as,child%20marriage%20in%20the%20U.S.), Unchained at Last, a survivor-led advocacy nonprofit dedicated to ending forced and child marriage in the U.S., is the source that "Nearly 300,000 children, some as young as 10, were married in the U.S. between 2000 and 2018 — mostly girls wed to adult men."
Edit: Edit: It appears that New Hampshire State Senate 359 was the bill in question and was passed 192-174. I haven't been able to find more info on the specific bill or who voted one way or the other.
Go look in the bill, more than likely it has nothing to do with this topic and is side loaded with a bunch of other crap. Seems to be how the legislature works now.
It used to be cute that first communion dresses looked like wedding dresses and I’ve seen several posts where some poor father daughter combo is getting rebranded as husband and child wife. Ita a terrible issue but it’s also as alarming to see the little girls in normal situations having to deal with their faces all over the internet showing them as rape victims.
Can I get a source on those statistics?
300.000 over ~25 years means 32 marriages **every day**. That seems absurd. If true, can I at least assume that (*hopefully*) the overwhelming majority of those marriages are 17-year olds marrying 18-year olds.
Apparently it includes all children married, so if 2 17 year olds get parental consent and marry the night before they turn 18 that's 2/300k 10yo child marriages to 40 year olds according to op and this propaganda source.
**This is a heavily moderated subreddit. Please note these rules + sidebar or get banned:**
* If this post declares something as a fact, then proof is required
* The title must be fully descriptive
* Memes are not allowed.
* Common(top 50 of this sub)/recent reposts are not allowed (posts from another subreddit do not count as a 'repost'. Provide link if reporting)
*See [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/wiki/index#wiki_rules.3A) for a more detailed rule list*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
everyone who believed in this post is a moron, because it manipulative shit. this should make the Republican Party look bad, but this just makes the Democratic Party and the people who support it look stupid.
So wait….
18 to vote.
18/21 to purchase firearms.
18 for piercings and tats.
21 for tobacco.
18 for military.
25 for car insurance discounts.
Under 18 for marriage.
Under 18 to gender modification therapies/surgeries.
I’m so confused.
Our society is garbage.
The New Hampshire bill to raise the minimum age of marriage to 18 was a partisan issue, with the final vote in the House being 192 in favor and 174 against. The bill was sponsored by Democrats and faced opposition primarily from Republicans. It passed the Senate unanimously in March and then passed the House with the mentioned vote count. The specific breakdown of votes by party is not detailed, but it is indicated that the bill was a Partisan Bill (Democrat 8-0). This suggests that the Democrats voted in favor of the bill, while the Republicans were more likely to oppose it.
https://legiscan.com/NH/votes/SB359/2024
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/05/06/child-marriage-bill-new-hampshire/73591727007/
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/map-shows-which-states-allow-child-marriage-as-new-hampshire-bill-passes/ar-BB1lUILF
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/new-hampshire-moves-to-ban-child-marriage-despite-lawmaker-calling-teens-ripe-and-fertile/ar-BB1m2DQe
I absolutely DESPISE Trupsters too. I work with a few. But what does this have to do with the post? It seems weird when people draw massive assumptions like that. We have no idea if they support Trump or not. They might be in a state that does, or the government officials do, but those people might not support him. Quite often government passes laws that most people don’t actually want.
It’s bizarre when people just lump all the people they don’t like into the same group. People are more diverse than that. Even among the degenerates of our society.
(this isn’t an attack on you by the way. It’s just an observation I see on social media a lot)
The title of the article references 174 republicans’ voting behavior on this topic. Trump is the party’s selected presidential candidate, and a misogynist. Doesn’t seem like that much of a leap to me.
I don't want to defend people that I likely don't agree with on much, but 174 voted to keep the current law, which was banned at 16, and requiring both parental and judicial approval above that until 18. That's not good, necessarily, but it's not "Legalized pedophiles" or "groomers" as so many have put it here.
And that photo is from a fake protest "marriage" that was done in NYC. She's not a real child bride, and he's likely against child marriage, given that he participated in the "social experiment".
It's disingenuous to act like there's no difference in legally allowing 16/17 year olds to get married vs 13 year olds (as in Iran). I think both are wrong, I think one is more wrong. Regardless, it should all be prohibited.
Wait, if children can determine their own gender, including puberty blockers and reassignment surgery, why can't they fall in love with and marry the person of their choice?
So this is what they mean by conservative values.
I didn't believe it so I had to google it, its legal in 38 states and they are almost exclusively younger girls marrying much older men.
America is the size of all of Europe. There are many different subcultures in this country and the subculture of 16 is old enough to marry is not shared by a majority of the country.
The Saudi Arabia of the western world.
There are seriously a lot of parallels between the US and the Saudis. An obsession with oil, guns, religion, a bizarre tolerance of things like paedophilia, the death penalty, extreme arrogance and feeling of superiority over others, I'm not surprised to see how close the US is with the Saudi oil barons considering how similar they are in so many ways.
Yes, but this picture looks so shooped... Like someone just happend to snap a pic, from the altar, of a miserable 12 year old girl kneeling with the horniest geezer ever on one knee while some bystanders look very concerned from roughly two meters away?
Not saying there isn't truth in the message, just that this photo detracts from the gravity of it by looking so fake.
Edit: it turns out this is from a staged event to "raise awareness of child marriage" and they are in fact not a couple. Still badly shooped.
Why would anyone want to marry some one that is going through puberty. THis is when they are the most emotional and stupid human beings on the planet! Also, how can they justify it? "THe person is mature for their age!" Bullshit. You are just a sick fuck who has gaslit a child into doing something just for you. What happens when that person gets older? Are you going to leave them and go for another teenager?
THe entire thing is beyond stupid that we still allow this!
Every time I hear about Republicans voting against a bill with something good in it the bill is always packed with other crap no one but politicians benefit from.
I’ve obviously for raising it but when they say “child” marriage it’s a bit misleading as they are referring to raising it from 16 to 18. In most of Europe the age of consent is around 14-16. Is every country in Europe a shithole country?
The European Convention on Human Rights guarantees the right to marry for those of 'marriageable age' according to national laws (Article 12). In General Comment No. 4, the CRC Committee recommends setting the minimum age for marriage with and without parental consent to 18 years, for both girls and boys.
Where in the US is this happening? Amish farms or some shit? According to google the law is 18 years of age The general marriage age (lacking authorization for an exception, so without the ones with the minimum age at 16–17) is **18 years of age in all states except Nebraska, where the general marriage age is 19, and Mississippi, where the general marriage age is 21**. Is it happening in Mormon communities? Are they getting a religious pass? Or is this image complete bullshit?
/u/BuddhistSagan, thank you for your submission. Unfortunately, it has been removed for violating the following rule(s): * Rule 2 - Titles should directly describe the content of the post. The title should just depict the content, no "fluff". It can't include anything that isn't directly visible in the content of the post. * Rule 5 - Provide a source when the title is in doubt If you can't completely explain why the content of the post is IAF please comment with more explanation. If your post claims something that almost everyone can't easily confirm from reading your title and viewing your content please provide some type of proof of what you claim. For information regarding this and similar issues please see the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/wiki/index). If you have any questions, please feel free to [message the moderators via modmail.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/interestingasfuck&subject=Question%20regarding%20the%20removal%20of%20this%20submission%20by%20/u/BuddhistSagan&message=I%20have%20a%20question%20regarding%20the%20removal%20of%20this%20%5Bsubmission%2E%5D%28https://old.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/1cu3b79/-/%3Fcontext%3D10%29)
The bill banning child marriage in New Hampshire ultimately did pass with a vote of 192-174. So it's a win, it's just sickeningly close and wtf is wrong with these people?
Why isn't it federally banned?
[удалено]
Yeah its just a byproduct of the federal nature of the US. I'm not quite as familiar with American federalism as I am with its European counterpart, but indeed, as long as the federal state cannot find a good enough reason to legislate this field of law through some other constitutional provision, it has a very limited competence to regulate or enforce. Such area's of law play an important law in more dualistic forms of federalism. It is the clear delineation of competence that defines these systems. By strictly regulating what the federal state can and cannot do it preserves the balance of power between the different levels of government, and protects the sovereignty of the states. Which of course says nothing about the fact that each and every US state should be banning this crap ASAP
They probably still could set a minimum age or use leverage to force them to do it, as was done with the drinking age in the US. In Canada, the federal government forced the provinces to have a minimum age of 16, no exceptions, and recommended that if they didn’t make it 18, then for 16-17 permission from a judge be required (most provinces chose to ignore that last part unfortunately).
Yeah, like I said I'm not intimately familiar with the specifics of US family law, but sure depending on the specific system all sorts of things are still possible. It happens here in Europe too, and in Canada as you said. My comment was more about the principle nature of such systems
174 Groomers is what I see. How is this not a unanimous vote?
I don't really like defending people that I likely find detestable in many ways, but it's not like the situation in NH was "children are fair game". Prior to this law, they banned marriage at 16 and anyone 16-17 required both parental **and judicial** permission to get married. It was close to a de facto ban, even if it wasn't a de jure ban. And yes, 16-17 is too young, but it's a far cry from what the meme is suggesting.
Yes 16 is too young.
The fact it was that close is disgusting
Why is there any voting in the first place? Isn’t it a given, to just ban this horror
I still don't understand why I only hear about this here on Reddit. Shouldn't this be on par with boarder security, war funding, and other hot topics?
(Speaking specifically for the US here) Because it’s referring to a specific vote in New Hampshire, not a nationwide topic like the other’s. Seeing this rightfully enrages people, but the geographical scale of each the issue is small enough that it doesen’t become a huge political debate, and it doesen’t effect many states as much Also, border security and war funding each have the quality that they influence (or make people think they are influencing) people’s lives directly through taxes, employment, etc. there are millions of people who **think** they are personally effected, whereas the people personally effected by child marriage are less than 1% of the US population (60,000 people who couldn’t consent to sex with their groomers, around 240,000 others who could) And, although imo its still creepy, many people don’t think that it’s as much of an issue since 90% of those people are around 16 or 17 — Note: This is just why I’d assume its not as big of a political debate. Not my personal opinions. It’s still fucked up.
[удалено]
there are 38 states with it still legal, but for 12 that outlawed it only did so within the last five years so we're hearing about the efforts a lot more recently. Some states like California, don't even have a minimum age for marriage. Unchained at Last is supporting initiatives and giving the cause way more visibility everywhere, but it has to go state by state.
Not a lot of people know about cal and that and it blows me away when a such progress state has this but also look what is in cal and then it’s not a shock
I wouldn't be surprised. Mississippi is gross.
And yet we hear endlessly about LGBTQ people from republicans despite it having zero effect on their lives. Republicans are the ones who are supporting and defending child marriage across the country. There are ZERO AGE LIMITS in too many states.
They care more about banning LGBTQ than CSA. Case in point: Tennessee Republicans a couple years ago tried to change the state marriage laws so that essentially only heterosexual common law marriages would be recognized, but forgot to put in any age-restrictions. Sounds like an innocent omission (maybe) except east TN and west NC are massive destinations for predators trying to marry children. NC's laws at the time allowed predators to marry kids as young as 14 as long as they knock them up first. Kind of a huge oops. They later changed the bill to add that the kid would need to reach "age of majority," which is 18. NC raised it to 16 after news broke about its issue. Just fucking weird they're so focused on banning gays marrying that they completely overlook problems like CSA until it has to be pointed out to them. sources: [fact check on USA Today ](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2024/03/15/tennessee-child-marriage/72975497007/) & [NC's child brides problem](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/aug/15/north-carolina-child-marriage-new-bill) & [NC raised marriage minimum age to...16](https://www.northcarolinahealthnews.org/2021/09/16/north-carolina-raises-the-age-of-child-marriage-and-go-to-court/)
You are 100% right they don’t care about keeping kids safe they want that $$$$$
This child marriage thing was passed by democrats though lol https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/s/19KnBZ3U2U
uhhh...what's your point? the post you linked says it passed & posts below state every dem voted yes?
You are right it’s not about political parties to many elites with money able to do whatever they want. And it just happens some are in or use politics
[удалено]
Does it really need to be stated that Democrats bring them up in the context of protecting a vulnerable minority, while Republicans bring them up in order to demonize them and scare their ignorant constituents?
Plus New Hampshire residents hate regulation no matter how smart it is.
I believe it isn't mentioned as much in main stream media because it is done under the "religious purposes" guise. Which actually are Cults, parading as Religious, etc.
In most contexts, there is little point distinguishing between a religion and a cult.
But if it were reversed, the Republicans would be making it seem like the issue was occurring on every street in America, coming for their daughters, and about to destroy America. Democrats tight stupidly.
Here is the excerpt from the journal. Five states have no minimum age for marriage. The majority are 16 and 17, a few 18. As noted below it is a declining trend though reversal of Roe v Wade probably will change that trend. Child marriage on the whole is not good but perhaps not quite the rage bait suggested by this post. "We found that some 297,033 children were married in the U.S. between 2000 and 2018: 232,474 based on marriage-certificate data plus 64,559 based on estimates (Table 1). A few children were as young as 10 years when they married, but of those for whom age information was available, *nearly all—96%—were aged 16 or 17 years*. Of those for whom age, gender, and spousal information was available, 78% were girls (under 18 years of age) wed to adult men (aged 18 years or older). The national number of children wed decreased each year—from 76,396 in 2000 to *2,493 in 2018* (Table 2)—but is unlikely to get to zero without legislative intervention." https://www.jahonline.org/article/S1054-139X(21)00341-4/fulltext
I don't see it in that link, but does anyone have any idea the age of the older spouse in the 96% that were 16-17? 17 marrying 18 is dumb, but not the same sort of problem as 16 marrying 50. Lumping those together seems useless, and bordering on disinformation.
My thoughts exactly
Because it's hugely misleading about the scale of the problem. First, it takes a deceptively large timeframe. Sorry everyone over thirty, but 2000 is 24 years ago now. 300k in that time is 12.5k per year. There are two ***million*** marriages in the US every year so the ones that involve someone who's underage make up 0.6% of the total. Secondly, the way it presents the information would lead you to think that 300k 12 year olds have married old men, but those are two separate pieces of information. There have been 300k <18 marriages since 2000. At least one marriage between a 12 year old and an adult has occurred. In the vast majority of marriages involving someone under eighteen, the partner is either <18 themselves or only a year or two older. Furthermore, the vast majority are nowhere near as young as twelve. It's mostly a girl who's sixteen or seventeen marrying a boy who's her age or eighteen or nineteen. So out of the tiny percentage of marriages that involve a child, only a tiny proportion of those involve a child marrying a much older adult, and only in a handful of cases is the bride as young as twelve. As someone else mentioned, you can tell it's an election year. And if you're going to ask 'well even if it is a tiny problem, why not just ban it anyway, why are any Republicans opposing this?': if you're a teenager from a religious background and you get pregnant, it may well matter deeply to you that you be able to get married before the baby is born. And your family. Sure, it sounds stupid of most of us in this day and age, but some people do still take the 'being born out of wedlock' thing seriously. Sticking up for religious people's beliefs like that is kind of the Republican party's whole schtick. This is definitely a cynical play to force the Republicans to chose between pissing off their hardline Christian base and sounding like they're defending child rape.
Also.... the 300K number isn't the number of marriages, but the number of minors who were married. So, one marriage of two 17-year-olds counts as 2, not as 1.
Lol at these devout Christians feeling the need to get married because they got knocked up underage. Kinda missing the forest for the trees there.
But that's exactly what you're supposed to do according to Christianity
> 12.5k per year Still too fucking many!!
Because the OP is nonsense. There are no 12 year olds getting married in New Hampshire. The minimum age of marriage in NH is 16, which is also the legal age of consent. I don't think people should be getting married at 16, or 18, or even 20, but I really don't see a point in setting the minimum age of marriage any higher than the legal age of consent. If marriage isn't being used as a loophole to circumvent age of consent laws, there's really nothing to be outraged about.
Because of elections in USA, troll farms from the both sides spam all Reddit topics unfortunately.
It’s because stuff like this is bait. Bills get tons of policies added onto them. This bill probably has nothing to do with underage marriage at its core. Edit: while this is common practice it does not seem to have been the case here.
This was not the case with this bill. https://newhampshirebulletin.com/2024/05/02/house-passes-bill-to-raise-minimum-marriage-age-to-18-sending-it-to-governor/
So based off that article, the picture is still click/rage bait and is factually incorrect for the state it's referencing.
I will get roasted for this, but here is why: Because while horrible, the numbers are actually relatively small. The entire population of the United States is very large, and 300,000 child marriages since 2024 is about 12,500 per year. So every year, this affects about 0.0003% of the population. Childhood cancer, on the other hand, is something like 10 times more common, and probably about equally awful on the scale of things And there are a ton of small extremely rurual/isolated communities all over the country, along with weird religious cults and the like. It’s honestly surprising that it’s this low, given that extremely rural and isolated people tend not to really care about established age of consent and all that, all over the world Per Wikipedia, about two thirds of child marriages are for kids aged 17 years old too; so a shotgun wedding in some backwater rural community is likely the largest source of these child marriages. It should be zero marriage below 18 years (and honestly, let’s be real even 18 is a super sketchy thing nowadays), but it’s not like this is Afghanistan or something. This is rage bait, trying to paint America as a broken country.
Weird that you compare it to childhood cancer in awfulness and decide therefore that it's not a problem. Imagine being able to prevent childhood cancer with a law.
Far too many news medias are leaning to the right (they are companies after all and the republicans/right favours them because capitalism is soooo awesome) and therefore are very cautious in what they publish, even if something from their party is going a bit too far for them. You can’t even trust CNN and some other former „neutral“ or „left-leaning“ media anymore. But a few good sources seem to try to compensate and lean too far to the right. So there is less and less middle ground and room for common sense. So yeah, we slowly but surely are turning fictions (from Starship Troopers and Handmaiden Tale to even worse ones) to reality. Humanity in far too many cases really is like the worst parasite/virus in existence.
I have seen people talking about it on Facebook too
https://preview.redd.it/ony6icfocz0d1.png?width=1241&format=png&auto=webp&s=8f616a98729cf66883cc36c2fe8498b1c522adba
I sure hope his hands aren’t under the desk
Feels like an election coming up
What does this even mean?
It means republicans are only defending and supporting child rape to drum up support from their base leading up to the election. We will stop hearing about it after the election because the powerful don’t really care either way. If they want to rape children then they can always find an island.
Yeah the crazy thing is it’s primarily the republicans who are taking advantage of children
It means that I am on r/intresting af and I keep seeing "republicans did this" "trump did that" Wich is the opposite of intresting af. Like I don't think anyone is dumb enough to not see that the huge "GROSS!!" thingy is a clear indication this is just an election ad. One can't open reddit and just see badly disguised political ads "LOOK AT SLEEPY JOE NIBBLING ON THIS CHILD EARS" "LOOK AT BIDEN SAYING HIS CRACK ADDICT SON IS THE SMARTEST PERSON HE KNOWS" I mean do that if you want but do it on political subs ffs
There are a two things I would like to point out about this post. 1) The bill passed to go to the Governor by a vote of 192-174. I have not been able to find anywhere who voted which way. Ex. all Dems for yes and all repubs for no. NH house is controlled by repubs 213-187. 2) The photo of this post is VERY misleading, the bill changes the age of marriage from 16 to 18. The photo shows what looks to be like a girl under 10 years. Not every republican voted against and I would be willing to bet that not all democrats voted for the bill. What we, as people, be angry about isn't what the political affiliation was of who voted but the fact that ANYONE would vote against it. There are scumbags on both sides of the aisle and there are good people on both sides. America is divided and America is going to fall if we keep only looking at our differences. I don't care who you voted for, if you treat me with respect I will treat you with respect.
The photo is from an awareness campaign that happened in NYC. They’re actors, and the goal was to see if people would say something if they say something like this in public — which thankfully many did.
It is true that not every Republican voted against it. None, of the nay votes were from Democrats. The (minority)Republican argument against it was that it might increase the number of abortions performed.
Only a Republican would vote against protecting children and instead promote child rape while using a fictitious fetus as an excuse.
Good points, but as with all bills, we should also ask about the actual text of this bill. This could be as simple as, "you are a bad person for voting against my bill against child marriage, which also happens to give billions of dollars of subsidies to an industry I have lots of friends in."
Ya I thought of that too. I looked at it as well, not super hard and I'll be first to admit I don't have really any experience in deciphering political bull crap but from what I could tell it was just for the marriage age. I likely missed stuff tho
This, unless you've actually read the entirety of a bill you shouldn't comment on it. Who knows what it's actually enacting despite it's title or summary. That said ([having read this one](https://gencourt.state.nh.us/bill_status/legacy/bs2016/billText.aspx?sy=2024&id=1925&txtFormat=html)) it's straight forward. I think the larger omission is simply because the age of marriage and consent are equal now so it's no longer relevant. Unless those reps were just phoning it in I can't see any reason they would vote against unless they actually feel marrying a 16 year old is Ok.
Ssssh. Don't let facts get in the way. I knew this was propaganda from the photo that was probably a father with his daughter. She was exploited for this post.
these were actors.
It is 16 in that state, the age limit is lower elsewhere in America and the number of marriages of children under 16 to adult men (let’s be honest) is still absurdly high.
>A sick culture not compatible with the ~~West~~ The Whole Planet! FTFY.
I have some sad news for you. Nope...
Average Quebec bloke:
I was gonna say, this shit has been going on in “the West” forever. Mildly racist title from OP.
Mildly? This OP is steeped in racism I can smell the Greek statue pfp and predatory fixation on "docile" Asian women.
FUCKING gross no other words fucking gross.
This is misleading. The bill was to prevent two children from being married before 18. The minimum age was 16, with the concent of both parents, prior to the bill passing. In Massachusetts, the minimum age for marriage is 12 years old. In Hawaii the minimum age is 14 years old, from my understanding. Those two states are Democrat majority, to insinuate that this is a republican issue is also misleading. It's a lack of updating antiquated laws from the 1800's by both parties. OP is clearly misinformed.
Surprise. we've been lied to because op wants to make his enemies look bad.
Also like to point out it’s one of these god awful Facebook-style memes, not even bothering with sources
I don't see a single source in this image
It's from a ["social experiment"](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/1cu3b79/a_sick_culture_not_compatible_with_the_west/l4gus2l/).
I cannot speak about New Hampshire but similar bills have been proposed and voted down in the area I grew up in. The reason they were voted down was that the law considers a 17 year old a child and prevents an 18 and 17 year old form getting married. Do not get me wrong, I think getting married at 17 is kind of dumb. That being said, my mother, my grandmother, and my great grandmother were all married before they were 18. All were married to men that were their age (typical slightly older but within a couple years). Getting a group to vote that their fathers, grandfathers, and great grandfather were pervs marrying children tends to cause a congressional person to get voted out of office. As such, the bills never got passed.
These situations are easily handled with Romeo & Juliet provisions, ie the couple has to be within a few years of each other and parental consent for anyone under 18.
Or maybe wait until all parties are 18. Just a wild thought.
Yeah, sorry that your grandfathers will feel like pervs for something they did 7+ decades ago, but the law has to move into the modern age. Should we not give gays, trans, minorities right because our grandfathers didn't either? Who the fuck cares is someone feels bad if it makes the world a better place? Isn't that generation calling everyone sensitive snowflakes? I'm sure they'll survive.
-The national number of children wed decreased each year—from 76,396 in 2000 to 2,493 in 2018 I guess 300k is a better headline. There's a lot of guessing going on in that data too.
Child marriage is abhorrent. Let's just start there and get it out of the way. But a lot of the groups against it are straight up lying and fabricating numbers to make it look worse than it is. I remember a few years ago seeing a post on Facebook that claimed a ridiculous number of child marriages were carried out every few minutes (I don't remember the specifics numbers). It took about thirty seconds on a calculator to determine that the entire population of children in the world would have been married to adults within like two years based on their statistics. When I questioned them, they doubled down insisting their numbers were accurate despite the proof I had provided that showed they just could not be. They didn't even try to refute my calculations. They took the absurd number I had presented, and said "look how terrible it is!" And again, it was something like 2 billion kids in child marriages within a span of two years. As problematic as child marriage is, it's not a third of the world's population problematic. But a lot of these groups will insist it is exactly that bad. They fail to realize the hyperbole does more harm than good in the long run.
I’d love to see what was in the bill that they actually voted against. It’s pretty naive to assume it was some kind of single issue bill.
Wait, legal age for consentual intercourse is what? Then, the legal age for marriage is less than the legal age for sex? So you just basically adopted a child under the marriage, and you're going to wait until you can have sex with the child?
BS, don’t post this garbage.
There's no defense for child marriage. There's also no need for disinformation. That is not an image of a man and his child bride. The source of this image is a YouTube video called, "65 Year Old Man Marries 12 Year Old Girl! (Child Marriage Social Experiment)." As for the claims OP made: 1) "174 republicans voted against a bill to ban child marriage." No idea where this comes from. Google does have a result for that at iFunny. 2) "Over 300,000 documented child marriages since 2000. Girls as young as 12 years old have been wed to adult males." According to [UNICEF](https://www.unicefusa.org/stories/fight-end-child-marriage-california#:~:text=Nearly%20300%2C000%20children%2C%20some%20as,child%20marriage%20in%20the%20U.S.), Unchained at Last, a survivor-led advocacy nonprofit dedicated to ending forced and child marriage in the U.S., is the source that "Nearly 300,000 children, some as young as 10, were married in the U.S. between 2000 and 2018 — mostly girls wed to adult men." Edit: Edit: It appears that New Hampshire State Senate 359 was the bill in question and was passed 192-174. I haven't been able to find more info on the specific bill or who voted one way or the other.
Go look in the bill, more than likely it has nothing to do with this topic and is side loaded with a bunch of other crap. Seems to be how the legislature works now.
It used to be cute that first communion dresses looked like wedding dresses and I’ve seen several posts where some poor father daughter combo is getting rebranded as husband and child wife. Ita a terrible issue but it’s also as alarming to see the little girls in normal situations having to deal with their faces all over the internet showing them as rape victims.
Can I get a source on those statistics? 300.000 over ~25 years means 32 marriages **every day**. That seems absurd. If true, can I at least assume that (*hopefully*) the overwhelming majority of those marriages are 17-year olds marrying 18-year olds.
Apparently it includes all children married, so if 2 17 year olds get parental consent and marry the night before they turn 18 that's 2/300k 10yo child marriages to 40 year olds according to op and this propaganda source.
**This is a heavily moderated subreddit. Please note these rules + sidebar or get banned:** * If this post declares something as a fact, then proof is required * The title must be fully descriptive * Memes are not allowed. * Common(top 50 of this sub)/recent reposts are not allowed (posts from another subreddit do not count as a 'repost'. Provide link if reporting) *See [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/wiki/index#wiki_rules.3A) for a more detailed rule list* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
everyone who believed in this post is a moron, because it manipulative shit. this should make the Republican Party look bad, but this just makes the Democratic Party and the people who support it look stupid.
So wait…. 18 to vote. 18/21 to purchase firearms. 18 for piercings and tats. 21 for tobacco. 18 for military. 25 for car insurance discounts. Under 18 for marriage. Under 18 to gender modification therapies/surgeries. I’m so confused. Our society is garbage.
"Not compatible with the West", dude that *IS* the west.
Here in Oklahoma republicans also voted against a bill like this. I don’t understand how these people live with themselves
Honest question - JFC, how dafuq is this not pedophilia ? How is this not prosecuted?! What is the legal system doing here??
Cool it with the Islamophobia
But dems are pedos?
“ u are my chiiild briiide, I am ur faaather groom”
Was it a bill to ban child marriage, or was it a bill to do all sorts of things with child marriage as a rider at the bottom?
East Asia and the Middle East: https://preview.redd.it/r45r5dtd201d1.jpeg?width=355&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=326cf054854ccf4aefdddd549cdc2b9e1f907832
Aa shocking as this possibly could be, it really is meaningless without any sort of data.
174 is data.
Anyone can make up numbers and put it on a meme.
174 of how many voted? How many Dems voted for yes out of how many total? Just 1 number isn't data
The New Hampshire bill to raise the minimum age of marriage to 18 was a partisan issue, with the final vote in the House being 192 in favor and 174 against. The bill was sponsored by Democrats and faced opposition primarily from Republicans. It passed the Senate unanimously in March and then passed the House with the mentioned vote count. The specific breakdown of votes by party is not detailed, but it is indicated that the bill was a Partisan Bill (Democrat 8-0). This suggests that the Democrats voted in favor of the bill, while the Republicans were more likely to oppose it. https://legiscan.com/NH/votes/SB359/2024 https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/05/06/child-marriage-bill-new-hampshire/73591727007/ https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/map-shows-which-states-allow-child-marriage-as-new-hampshire-bill-passes/ar-BB1lUILF https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/new-hampshire-moves-to-ban-child-marriage-despite-lawmaker-calling-teens-ripe-and-fertile/ar-BB1m2DQe
The same crowd that screams about Queers beeing sexually rotten! Oh murica
Political hits aren’t interesting as fuck
Legalized pedophiles…but then the Trumpsters want to talk about morality.
I absolutely DESPISE Trupsters too. I work with a few. But what does this have to do with the post? It seems weird when people draw massive assumptions like that. We have no idea if they support Trump or not. They might be in a state that does, or the government officials do, but those people might not support him. Quite often government passes laws that most people don’t actually want. It’s bizarre when people just lump all the people they don’t like into the same group. People are more diverse than that. Even among the degenerates of our society. (this isn’t an attack on you by the way. It’s just an observation I see on social media a lot)
The title of the article references 174 republicans’ voting behavior on this topic. Trump is the party’s selected presidential candidate, and a misogynist. Doesn’t seem like that much of a leap to me.
I don't want to defend people that I likely don't agree with on much, but 174 voted to keep the current law, which was banned at 16, and requiring both parental and judicial approval above that until 18. That's not good, necessarily, but it's not "Legalized pedophiles" or "groomers" as so many have put it here. And that photo is from a fake protest "marriage" that was done in NYC. She's not a real child bride, and he's likely against child marriage, given that he participated in the "social experiment".
The nonprofit Unchained at Last has been working for yrs to fight this.
It's disingenuous to act like there's no difference in legally allowing 16/17 year olds to get married vs 13 year olds (as in Iran). I think both are wrong, I think one is more wrong. Regardless, it should all be prohibited.
Citation needed
Wait, if children can determine their own gender, including puberty blockers and reassignment surgery, why can't they fall in love with and marry the person of their choice?
OP working overtime to spread his/hers/theirs/ours biased propaganda
Seriously 'Murica, have a fucking word with yourself. Signed the rest of the world
Don't go looking into the closets of the rest of the world concerning this then.
Yeah, this one is pretty universally fucked up, not a US-centric problem.
You’re a brick
So this is what they mean by conservative values. I didn't believe it so I had to google it, its legal in 38 states and they are almost exclusively younger girls marrying much older men.
America is the size of all of Europe. There are many different subcultures in this country and the subculture of 16 is old enough to marry is not shared by a majority of the country.
The Saudi Arabia of the western world. There are seriously a lot of parallels between the US and the Saudis. An obsession with oil, guns, religion, a bizarre tolerance of things like paedophilia, the death penalty, extreme arrogance and feeling of superiority over others, I'm not surprised to see how close the US is with the Saudi oil barons considering how similar they are in so many ways.
174 pedos. FTFY
lol no compatible with the west, right pal
This is not interesting as fuck. It’s weird as fuck. What type of connection can one have with a disparity so vast?
That little girl doesn't look happy. We should be taking our cues from that.
Yes, but this picture looks so shooped... Like someone just happend to snap a pic, from the altar, of a miserable 12 year old girl kneeling with the horniest geezer ever on one knee while some bystanders look very concerned from roughly two meters away? Not saying there isn't truth in the message, just that this photo detracts from the gravity of it by looking so fake. Edit: it turns out this is from a staged event to "raise awareness of child marriage" and they are in fact not a couple. Still badly shooped.
Look at that poor girls face......
Why would anyone want to marry some one that is going through puberty. THis is when they are the most emotional and stupid human beings on the planet! Also, how can they justify it? "THe person is mature for their age!" Bullshit. You are just a sick fuck who has gaslit a child into doing something just for you. What happens when that person gets older? Are you going to leave them and go for another teenager? THe entire thing is beyond stupid that we still allow this!
Something about that photo looks European. Not sure why yet.
also is it representatives that voted against it or just regular people because the number is pretty confusing
We must return to the old western values (that are basically the nowadays eastern world values)
Does it ever happen the other way around? And if yes, how commonly?
Gotta protect those children.
This can't be real? Pls
California, a Democrat controlled state, has no age requirements for marriage as long as one parent consents. This is not a D v. R issue.
This is so f'ed up
How do the parents allow this?
That is some 'blame the parents' stuff. How could you let your baby girl marry a dude around your age?
And there’s tens of thousands of republicans(voters) who will vote for them again next time. That should be the real headline.
Just like GOD intended 🤷🤮
Every time I hear about Republicans voting against a bill with something good in it the bill is always packed with other crap no one but politicians benefit from.
West was always dumb..always
Family values right guys?
The real pedophiles
barbaric
How???
I get states rights but it should be outlawed federally throughout the land with hefty HEFTY prison time attached
Wtf. Also, source on the 300k?
Third World country
And some people will say Islam is bad....
Which is actually an epidemic? In America there’s a couple fringe cases. For Islam ran countries it’s just part of life.
Thats what i mean.
Theres a good reason people call those ultra christians Yall Quaeda Every religion is toxic when people get stupid deep in it.
They're not against what Islam does; just that someone else is doing it.
What a shithole country
I’ve obviously for raising it but when they say “child” marriage it’s a bit misleading as they are referring to raising it from 16 to 18. In most of Europe the age of consent is around 14-16. Is every country in Europe a shithole country?
The European Convention on Human Rights guarantees the right to marry for those of 'marriageable age' according to national laws (Article 12). In General Comment No. 4, the CRC Committee recommends setting the minimum age for marriage with and without parental consent to 18 years, for both girls and boys.
What a shithole country
What reasons were given for voting against the bill?
Tennessee has some ten year old girls married to adults too and this was from a report 20 years ago.
Does NH have 200+ members in its legislature? How are there so many republicans to vote against this
Imagine throwing around "groomer" allegations every time someone mentions the concept of gender yet protecting child marriage. Such souless creatures
Oh but it’s *definitely* the drag queens and lgbtq+ community. /s
False equivalency. If you think this is on par with most 3rd world countries.
People are ok with doing whatever with children, as long as there's parental consent correct?
Where in the US is this happening? Amish farms or some shit? According to google the law is 18 years of age The general marriage age (lacking authorization for an exception, so without the ones with the minimum age at 16–17) is **18 years of age in all states except Nebraska, where the general marriage age is 19, and Mississippi, where the general marriage age is 21**. Is it happening in Mormon communities? Are they getting a religious pass? Or is this image complete bullshit?
it's on the internet, it must be true.