Effort to bar child marriage in California runs into opposition

child bride
If you’re going to allow minors to “choose” their sex and mess with their biology because they “deserve” it, then they are certainly entitled to make other adult decisions.
From SF Chronicle: A Bay Area legislator was shocked when he learned from a young constituent that while Californians cannot legally consent to sex until they are 18, they can — with the permission of a parent and a judge’s order — get married at any age, even if their spouse is many years older.
“I thought, that can’t be true in California,” said state Sen. Jerry Hill, a Democrat from San Mateo. “We found that it is true in California and true in many states throughout the country.”
But Hill’s resulting proposal to bar juveniles from getting hitched has been watered down after it prompted strong objections from civil rights groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union.
As the emotional fight unfolds in Sacramento, there’s no agreement even about a basic piece of information — how many minors get married each year in California. People who want to limit such marriages say the total is in the thousands, while those who oppose the bill say that’s vastly inflated.
The state doesn’t keep such numbers, and even efforts to change that are running into resistance.
Within the past year, elected officials in several states have pushed to restrict juvenile marriage, with a law passed last month limiting matrimony by minors in New York to 16- and 17-year-olds who have become legal adults emancipated from their parents, and one in Texas holding the line at age 17 — with a judge’s permission.
Hill wanted California to set a strict line at age 18, but the effort encountered swift opposition from fellow legislators, as well as groups that include the ACLU and Planned Parenthood.
While SB273 is still alive and moving through legislative committees, amendments have removed any age restriction. The measure in its current form increases family court oversight to ensure that a minor’s marriage isn’t coerced, including a requirement that judges interview individuals privately.
It’s a compromise, Hill said, but still a positive step. “It’s our responsibility to protect those kids,” he said.
Among those disappointed by the result of the compromise is Sara Tasneem of El Sobrante, who said the amended bill won’t help children and will only make elected officials feel like they did something.
Tasneem was 15 when her father, who belonged to a cult in Southern California, introduced her to a man 13 years her senior. She was forced to marry the 28-year-old in a religious ceremony that evening. Six months later, at 16, she was pregnant and legally married in a civil ceremony in Reno.
“A person who marries a 15-year-old, there’s obviously something wrong,” said Tasneem, now 36. “Putting that label of husband and wife makes something disgusting and not OK seem normal and OK.”
As a teenager, Tasneem dreamed of becoming a lawyer. Instead, she became a mother, with two children by age 19. She would ultimately defy her husband and return to school, and later file for divorce.
“Once you leave your childhood, there’s no going back to it,” said Tasneem, now a business student at Golden Gate University in San Francisco. “All those opportunities and freedom of being a child are gone.”
Activists aiming to stop such marriages say they occur across demographic groups, spurred by religious reasons, cultural norms, pregnancy, financial incentives or, in some cases, to protect someone from statutory-rape accusations because marriage circumvents the age-of-consent requirement.
Nationally, about 5 of every 1,000 children ages 15 to 17 were married as of 2014, according to U.S. census data analyzed by the Pew Research Center — figures that don’t specify where the marriages occurred. Activists for age restrictions estimate that California sees about 3,000 marriages per year that include a minor.
The ACLU and other opponents say that estimate is inflated, noting that just 44 petitions for juvenile marriage were filed in Los Angeles County — which has a population just above 10 million — over the past five years.
The focus of efforts should be on abusive and coerced relationships, regardless of marital status, said Phyllida Burlingame of the ACLU’s Northern California chapter.
Read the rest of the story here.
DCG

Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0Shares
0 0
 
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Alma
Alma
3 years ago

Why not let the children run the country? A sure way for the US go to hell!

Anonymous
Anonymous
3 years ago
Reply to  Alma

Well, with Democrats, that’s pretty much what we get…comment image

Gary Jones
Gary Jones
3 years ago

Minor girls being sold to older males is common in parts of Mexico and
now thanks to immigrant invasion in California. One father sold his
15 year old daughter to another man for the promise of a case of beer,
which was never delivered. The father went to the local police in
California about the non-delivery. When arrested for selling his
daughter, the father explained that such practices were common
in the region of Mexico where he came from.

brackenkaren
3 years ago

We should not be allowing children to decide their sex and we should not allow children under the age of 18 to marry. What we are seeing creep into this country is the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. There are only 2 countries that have not signed on to this UN controlled initiative which when adopted takes away all parental rights to decisions made for their children and also gives the UN control over your countries welfare programs. The 2 countries that have not adopted this UN agenda are the US and Somalia. Obama and Hillary tried… Read more »

Paul B.
3 years ago

If you’re going to allow minors to “choose” their sex and mess with their biology because they “deserve” it, then they are certainly entitled to make other adult decisions. This is exactly what Kinsey had in mind with his fraudulent sex reports. They were lies designed to influence public opinion and policy, to normalize homosexuality and sex with children. Kinsey was warned that his methodology was critically flawed, but he knew what he was doing. He was back by Margaret Sanger and the rest of the secular, and even religious, humanist crowd, who hated God and purposed to attack His… Read more »

stlonginus
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul B.

According to Dr. Judith Reisman’s research (she has written several books on Kinsey) Kinsey was a predatory sodomite and pederast. His “methodology” was no methodology at all. He and his “researchers” buggered little children and babies and stated they “reached climax” because they were screaming during the torture. The screaming meant, to him, they were experiencing orgasms. The Kinsey Institute for “Sex, Gender and Reproduction” is funded (to this day) by Indiana State University and the Rockefeller Foundation –as it was from the beginning in 1941. Kinsey used homosexuals, prostitutes, pederasts and pedophiles as his “typical American man and woman”… Read more »

Paul B.
3 years ago
Reply to  stlonginus

Exactly, and most, if not all, of Kinsey’s subjects were taken from prison populations, where sexual and moral values were skewed either due to being a perp, or due to having one’s boundaries broken due to victimization.

marblenecltr
3 years ago

Why not give children the right to vote and hold any political office? Governor of California?

carly
carly
3 years ago

Kids under 18 should not decide anything!! What a mess I was at that age. I am lucky to be alive at 60 years old.

lophatt
lophatt
3 years ago

Just as a note, I always dislike seeing the word “allow” used in connection with “government”. We derive our rights from God, the government either supports those or opposes them, but they do not bring them into being. Society either supports ideas such as this or it doesn’t. The governments of those societies may be the instruments of control used to enforce or oppose the society’s wishes. That said, as a society, we’ve attached arbitrary ages to when we recognize people as adults in making decisions. These vary from state to state. It seems to me that these “marriages” are… Read more »

Auntie Lulu
Auntie Lulu
3 years ago
Reply to  lophatt

lophatt . . . Excellent addition to this post . . . “We derive our rights from God, the government either supports those or opposes them, but they do not bring them into being!!!!”

Dr. Eowyn
Admin
Dr. Eowyn
3 years ago

“But Hill’s resulting proposal to bar juveniles from getting hitched has been watered down after it prompted strong objections from civil rights groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union.”
So according to the degenerate ACLU, although children under age 18 don’t have the right to vote, the ACLU thinks kids age 1-17 have the “civil right” to marry. I can just see pedophiles and pederasts salivating over legalizing child-adult marriages — the way to legalize pedophilia is to “marry” the child, female or male (“gay” marriage).

lophatt
lophatt
3 years ago
Reply to  Dr. Eowyn

Sort of begs question of their motives, eh? I’m sure it’s “all about the children”. I mean, really! Just step back and look at this. Western Civilization left beastiality and now they want to force a return. Who would want to do this to Western Civilization…..? Oh, I know.

Auntie Lulu
Auntie Lulu
3 years ago
Reply to  Dr. Eowyn

Dr Eowyn . . . thank you for bringing up that slippery slope that no doubt we will slide down.

trackback

[…] Effort to bar child marriage in California runs into opposition — Fellowship of the Minds Tony Bennett : “Fly Me To The Moon (In Other Words)”   Poets often use many words To […]

Glenn47
Glenn47
3 years ago

Oh God, this is nauseating to say the least. It seems to be a way for pedophiles to circumvent all laws of decency to commit a crime and the states as well as the pathetic self serving ACLU is putting their stamp of approval on it. Just who are these people? They need to be exposed. I doubt the majority of the people of this country are in the know about this.

trackback

[…] via Effort to bar child marriage in California runs into opposition — Fellowship of the Minds […]

Anonymous
Anonymous
3 years ago

I’m sure the ACLU’s pandering to a certain constituency…comment image

Jurist
Jurist
3 years ago

For millenia, girls became marriagable at around 15 (think Quinceanera), but teen marriage hasn’t been a thing anymore in the West for quite some time.
What is this forum’s opinion on the optimal age for marriage?
I’ll start by throwing out some slightly, but not entirely, arbitrary #s. Girls: 17-23. Guys: 20-29.
I invite others’ input.

Dr. Eowyn
Admin
Dr. Eowyn
3 years ago
Reply to  Jurist

optimal age? 30!
Most people aren’t fully mature until their 30s, if even that. LOL
Also, we live longer nowadays.

truckjunkie
truckjunkie
3 years ago
Reply to  Dr. Eowyn

I’m inclined to agree with you-under 30,most people are still learning what to do and NOT do to HAVE a successful marriage. (SOME at 30 STILL don’t know what to do…) Unfortunately though,this won’t matter,since unless there’s an EASY way to skirt the law,many pre-30’s will just “live in sin”,because “they want what they want”,legal or not. Thanks LibTards,for the crash-dump of Morals and Ethics.

Jurist
Jurist
3 years ago
Reply to  Jurist

By 30, both spouses have gotten too accustomed to choosing whatever they want, and will have a harder time learning to compromise.
Also, it’s almost impossible for kids these days to remain virgins until 30, and we know that premarital șex is a HUGE precursor to divorce.
The reason kids are maturing so slowly these days is because society doesn’t expect them to. Encourage them to marry young, then gather around them as family and community, and they will thrive. It’s how it always used to be.

CalGirl
3 years ago
Reply to  Jurist

For what it’s worth, in this theatre, biology/sociology/man-made legal systems are differing points of the human spectrum–w/each working in opposition against the others. Biologically, a female human is born w/all reproductive eggs she will EVER have. By age 30 (a good marriageable age suggested by some here) these eggs are ancient & ability to reproduce/deliver a healthy child is so narrow, esp if it is a first pregnancy, that it threatens our survival as human beings on Earth due to diminished reproduction. Additionally, a female ends reproductive abilities after a certain number of years…but a male never does.Too– The female… Read more »

Dr. Eowyn
Admin
Dr. Eowyn
3 years ago
Reply to  CalGirl

Good point about the aging of a woman’s eggs. That’s why some career women are freezing their eggs, to be fertilized and implanted later.
With the dizzying speed of science-technology changes, I fully expect marriage and natural-childbirth and -conception to disappear. The legalization and rapid acceptance/approval of “gay” marriage is both a symptom and a hastening of the demise of marriage as an institution.

lophatt
lophatt
3 years ago
Reply to  CalGirl

All good points. I suppose the argument has at least somewhat to do with “life’s purpose” as opposed to cultural sensitivity. For most of human existence women didn’t have much to say about this if they were to have children. “Careers” outside of parenting, were virtually unheard of or confined to “spinsters”. Biologically girls are set up to be at their most physically attractive at a young age. They are strongest to survive childbirth and the duties of rearing children as well. Setting aside “equality” and social conditioning, there is competition for mates. Girls instinctively want the strongest breeding stock… Read more »

stlonginus
3 years ago
Reply to  Jurist

For normal women, the age should be anywhere from 18-29 and for normal men, anywhere from 21-35, but the earlier the better. The problem is that young people are no longer normal. They’ve been infantilized AND oversexed at the same time, a very bad combination. The pressure to have sex at an early age outside of marriage has driven people to promiscuity and to greatly lessening their chances to being able to bind with one person for a long lasting relationship — meaning for life. They’ve lost touch with what it means to be women and men and to procreate,… Read more »

Seumas
Seumas
3 years ago
Reply to  Jurist

Given the data available, anyone 18 and under, especially in the U.S. is more likely to be mentally, and emotionally, unfit for marriage, and thus unfit to be a parent, one should not rely solely on the body’s measure of reproductivity as a determining factor, the body can be artificially matured (and I would say that it is, by the dumping of synthetic estrogens and other compounds in the water supplies via recycled water systems and the overwhelming amount of birth control pills which aren’t fully metabolized by the body, being dumped into the supply, among other factors.) A girl… Read more »

filia.aurea
3 years ago

Just whose civil liberties are the ACLU and Planned Abortions protecting? The sight of older males “marrying” children should shock anyone with an ounce of decency. If we are to prevent this obscenity from occurring, teenage girls younger than 18 shouldn’t be ‘for sale’ or married.

lophatt
lophatt
3 years ago
Reply to  filia.aurea

I might ask just what they’re doing involving themselves in moral and/or religious matters? Knowing the sort of values they represent is disturbing.

filia.aurea
3 years ago
Reply to  lophatt

There’s a massive push (Open Society, CAIR, NGO’s, Foundations, Civil Rights groups, Black Lives Matter, Pink hat feminists, etc.) to desensitize and program acceptance by the population, of every evil, immoral, degenerate practice antithetical to our traditional culture. Softening us up, so to speak…

alan
alan
3 years ago

The canon law of the Catholic church states that a woman must be a minimum of 14 and the male must be a minimum of at least 16 to wed. Any marriage which is not entered into freely is absolutely null. I would bet that any girl in California who is forced to wed before 18 can get out of it, as it is viewed as a contract by the state, and a minor cannot be bound to a contract. I would go for 18, unless the minor has been emancipated (meaning responsible for oneself). Thirty is way too old.… Read more »

lophatt
lophatt
3 years ago
Reply to  alan

I’ll go with canon law. If one believes (as I do) that marriage is a sacrament and a religious “state”, it isn’t a civil matter at all. In fact, at least initially, government didn’t and shouldn’t have much at all to do with it. There were obviously civil considerations such as property, etc.. Beyond that, government had no right to meddle with religious belief or practice. I suppose, as people no longer have a faith that they practice, this leaves a void. Government is only too happy to fill any void. “We” are the ones who decide who and how… Read more »

CP
CP
3 years ago
trackback

[…] via Effort to bar child marriage in California runs into opposition — Fellowship of the Minds […]