In December of 1996, National Public Radio ran a story about a group of newly arrived Iraqi immigrants in Lincoln, Nebraska, several of whom had been jailed because they had married, as is the custom where they came from, 13 and 14 year old women. They were in jail for statatory rape. There are several issues here of import. First, the way "minors" are treated and thought of in the dominant, christianized American culture, and second, the way that culture has manipulated and abused the legal system to enforce their moral beliefs and practices. There was a time in the history of America when it was legal to own an African slave and illegal for a woman to vote. Both of these are now embarrassments, but they were the law of the land at the time. Blacks and women were once considered by reasonable, respected people as being mentally inferior to caucasian males. The law merely reflected this belief. Today, it is young people who are considered inferior. They can legally be treated in a way which would result in assault charges between adults. They have fewer rights and freedoms than "adults", they can and are legally manipulated and mistreated, and they are thought to be (and generally are) unable to make important decisions or run their own lives. Of course, a three year old is too biologically young to take care of herself; she must have help. But twelve year olds are something else: they don't have much life experience, but can they make important decisions about their lives and bodies? It depends, I think, on several factors, one of the most important being how they were raised. Africans and women were once raised to be "inferior". They had substandard education, virtually nonexistent opportunities, and a culture that constantly told them they were inferior. The same is true of children today. They are often raised to have low self-esteem, poor self-image, and to fit into an inferior-to-adults pattern. What else should we expect of them? Children can make choices if they're raised to honor their own boundaries, recognize and internalize their worth as an individual, and are taught about the world and others. These are tools they need, just like anyone else, to be a functioning human being. And they both need and deserve these tools much earlier than they traditionally receive them, if they get them at all. Infancy is not too young to begin fostering this intelligent personhood. The term "child", and certainly the word "minor", are themselves a problem. They represent a seperate class of people who can be and are treated differently than adults. That is, worse. I believe that in the future, young people will be much more independent, free, and respected than they are now, and choices will be more open, even to the youngest toddler, as long as they are not exposed to harm. But aye, there's the rub: what is harm? To radical Pagans, disrespecting a young person is harmful. Add sexuality to this mix, and the issue of children and teens making their own decisions and running their own lives becomes downright volatile. Sex is already a noxious issue in the non-Pagan culture. If it isn't being manipulated, it's being vilified and criminalized. From a futurist viewpoint, the controversy over gay and lesbian rights, for example, is at once laughable, ridiculous, and offensive. I believe future generations will scoff at such nonsense just as we scoff at the once-heated debate about whether African-Americans and women deserved legal recognition. Yet the law in some places in America (as of this writing) regard gays and lesbians as criminals. Absurd! So, too, people of differing enough ages can be imprisoned for having sex. If a 30 year old woman has mutually desired sex with a 14 year old boy, the woman is who will end up imprisioned because the boy, simply because of his age, is considered unable to make his own decision. And with obvious gender descrimination, it is often the male who is charged with "statory rape". If two 13 year olds have mutually desired sex, it's often the boy who gets the rap. For Radical Pagans, and many in the greater Pagan community, the keys terms are 'mutually desired' and 'harm'. All sexual activity, without exception, must always be mutually desired. Does the 14 year old boy desire the 30 year old woman and vice versa? Do two 12 year olds desire each other? Do four 70 years olds? Harm is less clear cut. Some 12 year olds will be harmed, meaning physically injured or psychologically scarred, even by a sexual union that they think they desire at the time. But so will many 30 year olds. If the 12 year old is brought up in Pagan ways, knows their boundaries, their likes and dislikes, understands yes and no, and has the self-confidence and esteem to make their preferences known and manifest, then they have the right to have safe sex with anyone they choose and who also chooses them. If this seems controversial now, its only because we're mired in an historical context which will change with time. I believe sex between most older people and most younger people is harmful at this time, but I think most of the harm is socio-cultural, not biological or inherent. The determination of sexual maturity is mental and spiritual, not chronological. But the heavy layer of Puritan Christian morality lays like a toxic fog over the issue, even the discussion of the issue. But I should not be so judgemental. It isn't the morals of the christianized majority I have any objection to. They have the right to their beliefs and morals just like everyone else in America. What must and one day will end is the abuse of the legal system in the cause of that majority morality. Morals should never be codified into law, neither the majority's nor a minority's. That isn't what law is for. The law is for solving problems between persons or entities. Note that there must be a conflict between persons serious enough for the law to step in. If two teens are having sex and they mutually desire it, and there is no harm occurring, then the law has no place there. It should not be wielded like a battle-axe in the cause of whatever moral interest can successfully manipulate it. Pagans should not be able to use law either, say in some future county where we become a majority, to try and coerce everyone into celebrating the Sabbats, or being skyclad, or adopting liberal sexual mores. Yet the legal system is constantly abused in such a manner to suppress "deviate" sexual behavior. Of course, to be sexually "deviate," "immoral," "perverted," or "indecent" you have to start from some moral standard; in this case the christianized moral hedgemony which lies at the nearly invisible center of legal right and wrong, for which dissenting citizens may be arrested and imprisoned. This abuse of the law has occurred because, from the founding of the Republic, religion has been legally separated off from religious morals, so that while Religion, meaning the outer display and trappings, of a tradition is Constitutionally protected, the morality of a religion, if far enough away or different enough from, the christianized norm, is unprotected and subject to legal harrassment. The farther away a religion or individual is from the christianized norm, the more illegal they're likely to be. Now, none of this touches ethics. Ethics, as I am using the word here, is about the basic human rights we all share, the ones explicated in documents such as the U.S. Constitution's Bill of Rights, and the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights; and they're the same ones you learn in kindergarten: don't hurt anyone else, don't rip anyone else off, respect others and yourself. Everyone's rights extend out until they meet another, different, person. Then they stop. This is why rape is wrong. No matter how old or young someone is, rape is rape. It's involuntary and a crime. These are the reasons "statatory rape" is a bankrupt, unconstitutional, and wholly false concept. It is nothing more than an thinly disguised attempt at forcing one set of morals on others, regardless of their own beliefs or morals. Rape is always involuntary. When both or all parties desire the same sexual activity, it isn't rape. The minorities of this country have often suffered under the laws of the majority, but times are coming when there will be a gradual decrease in laws which activity discriminate against minority moral traditions and an increase in the acceptance of diversity and acknowldgement of diverse belief and practice. It has happened before, is continuing today, and I think will continue into the future. Which brings us back to the Iraqi husbands. They evidently weren't aware of the law which would land them in jail as rapists. In their homeland, marrying (and consumating the marriage to) early teens was common practice. It wasn't wrong. It's "wrong" here only because the law is used to enforce Christian and christianized values. The position of this author and of Radical Pagans in general is that mutually desired sex between persons of any age isn't wrong, should not be illegal, and ought to be addressed as a serious issue in hopes that all persons, regardless of age or religious beliefs, will be free to be sexual with anyone who they choose and who chooses them. [I would like to acknowledge the difficulty of this issue to those who have suffered rape or other hurtful sexual experiences in their childhood. I hope that by empowering our kids, they can avoid what so many of us could not.]