What do Angola, Mexico, Philippines, and Zimbabwe all have in common with Vatican City?

[ZombieHorde]

http://www.avert.org/age-of-consent.htm?12">Answer

[DeSwiss]

1. K&R

[laconicsax]

2. Ooh! I like 20 questions.

Is it bigger than a breadbox?

[DeSwiss]

3. "Is it bigger than a breadbox?"

- Think a lot smaller. Way smaller.

[darkstar3]

6. I don't know...

it depends on how you look at...the situation...and what particular entity you're...measuring...it COULD be bigger than a breadbox.

[DeSwiss]

7. But you must admit.....

...it explains a lot about the Vatican's attitude regarding their pedo employees. It appears to me that they consider children "fair game" if they're 12. At least officially.

[darkstar3]

9. Perhaps it goes back to child brides...n/t

[Boojatta]

4. None of them is in South America, and unlike Atlantis, all are above water.

[LuvNewcastle]

5. The number 12

I guess we'll all know what's going on if Rush Limbaugh takes any trips to the Vatican.

[rug]

8. Not to derail a perfectly good anti-Catholic thread, but the "age of consent" list you link to

is entirely different from the capacity to marry addressed in Canon Law:

"Canon 1083 §1. A man before he has completed his sixteenth year of age and a woman before she has completed her fourteenth year of age cannot enter into a valid marriage.

"§2. The conference of bishops is free to establish a higher age for the licit celebration of marriage."

Carry on.

[darkstar3]

10. Yes, because the difference between 12 and 14 is SO large,

and WHY is it 16 for men but only 14 for women?

[rug]

11. It is the difference between the age of consent to sexual activity and the age of capacity to marry.

And the misleading implication.

As to your second question, why don't you ask the legislatures of Arkansas, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Utah, Washington and Wyoming?

[darkstar3]

12. Just as soon as I find someone who represents them, I will.

Of course, none of them has GLOBAL reach. And how is there a misleading implication here? Vatican City has an age of consent lower than the age set by Canon for marriage. Of COURSE the Catholic Church frowns on pre-marital sex, but then WHY is the age of consent lower than the marrying age? Someone passed that law, and as you already know Vatican City is under the jurisdiction of the Papacy, so I don't think there is any misleading implication here at all.

[rug]

14. The Vatican does not have an age of consent.

Nada. Period. There is no statute governing the age of consent.

In the pursuit of your agenda you've gone from a misleading implication to misinformation.

[darkstar3]

16. The site linked in the OP,

which has cobbled together research to show the ages of consent for all of these different locations, shows that there IS an age of consent in the Vatican State. If you now wish to dispute that fact, provide your own source.

As to my supposed agenda, it begins and ends with disgust at your attempt to defend the Catholic Church here. Not because of the church itself, but because you seem to have no problem at all with these facts:
1. Children as young as 14 are allowed to marry.
2. There are different rules for different genders.

You provided this information as a defense against this age of consent idea, and don't even seem to care that the difference between 12 and 14 is practically nothing with regard to sexual maturity. Obviously if the church says it's OK, then you're fine with it. I find that type of blind adherence to and defense of dogma disgusting in light of the current subject matter.

[rug]

17. That site "cobbled together research "? OK, I'm convinced.

[ZombieHorde]

13. Do you have any guesses as to why the age of consent is twelve in some places? nt

[rug]

15. Sure, don't you?

[ZombieHorde]

18. I do have guesses as to why the age of consent is 12 in some places, such as Vatican City.

One guess is the Vatican believes 12 year olds are mature enough to decide whether or not they should be having sex with other people, such as 30 year olds.

[rug]

19. You're entitled to believe that.

[ZombieHorde]

20. What is one of your guesses? nt

[rug]

21. My guess is the statutes haven't caught up the changing mores.

Argentina, Burkina Faso. Cyprus, Japan, Nigeria, Spain, Syria have it at 13 if that chart is to be believed. The original ages are probably long-rooted in culture.

BTW, my objection to that chart is that it conflates the age that one can marry without impedinent under Canon Law with the so-called age of consent.

[darkstar3]

22. Small problem in that claimed conflation:

There are two distinctly different statutes. According to the chart, the "age of consent" in Vatican City is 12, while your Canon reference shows the legal marrying age in the Catholic Church to be 14. Those are two different statutes.

Further, and probably more importantly, in the absence of a legal statute regarding the "age of consent", the legal age at which a person can get married should automatically be considered the "age of consent." Marriage, especially by the rules and standards of the Catholic Church, equals procreation.

I see no difference in sexual maturity between 12 and 14, so I don't really understand what you're quibbling about. I do, however, have a question for you: Do YOU think that 14 is old enough to fuck? And if not, why do you spout and defend the Canon law that says it is?

[rug]

24. That chart lacks any references or authority.

You still haven't produced a statute establishing that the Vatican has an age of consent. You wouldn't want me to prove a negative now, would you?

And please, don't try to turn this into a GD flamewar over when people are old enough to fuck. It's been done. Use the search option.

Nice try at changing the subject, though.

[darkstar3]

25. I'm not changing the subject.

You're quibbling over minutiae. The chart says 12, your Canon says 14. I personally see no difference. Now, since you think it SO important for everyone else to recognize that the Vatican requires girls to be 14 (instead of 12) before they are legally fuckable, then I think you should tell us WHY it's so important. What difference does it make? It's still child-fucking.

[rug]

26. You're repeating yourself.

Find somebody else to discuss child-fucking with.

I'm not interested.

[darkstar3]

27. Suuuuuuure...

That's why you posted on a thread about child-fucking expounding on exactly what level of child-fucking was legal in the Vatican.

:eyes:

[rug]

28. Yeah, that's exactly what I did.

:eyes: :eyes:

[darkstar3]

29. Oh that's NOT what you did in #8? n/t

[rug]

30. No, but I'm sure you equate Canon Law with age-of-consent sites.

[darkstar3]

31. Not at all.

Let me spell it out for you:

The concept of the "age of consent" is simple, and states that at a certain age children are considered to be adult enough to willingly choose to have sex with someone, regardless of that other person's age.

Now, marriage in the Catholic Church is a sacrament in which two people are spiritually bonded, and it is expected that after that spiritual bonding the physical bonding, or to be more clear the SEX, can begin.

Canon states that female children can marry at 14. Since marriage goes with sex, that means that Canon allows female children to be fucked at 14. That sounds like an "age of consent" rule to me. And whether that age is 12 as the chart says or 14 as Canon says matters not to me. Both are child-fucking.

[rug]

32. Reread that site.

40 countries and three U.S. states have 14 or less as the age of consent (which is an element of criminal law, not of marriage capacity).

Now do you want to start an argument in R/T about child-fucking and when someone can be prosecuted or do you just want to latch onto a convenient object to wrap around your anti-Catholic opinions?

[darkstar3]

33. And I am disgusted by each of those countries and states.

I'm very thankful that I don't live in any of them, and I think that if possible action should be taken to try and correct this problem.

You know, I don't think you noticed that I didn't start this whole stupidity about child-fucking. It started with the OP, and then YOU felt the need to clarify the church's position on child-fucking. In fact, you were pretty vehement about it. Now, when confronted with the fact that we're already talking about it, and that you've already been caught out trying to defend the church's position on it, you want to change the topic.

Sorry, this whole thread is already about child-fucking whether you like it or not. The fact that you are trying to change the subject only shows that you find the church's position on this as abhorrent as I do, but don't wish to admit it.

You can call me and the rest of the posters here anti-Catholic if you like, but it won't change the fact that Canon Law sanctions the fucking of 14-year-old girls. That is disgusting, and there is no way to look at it to make it less so.

[trotsky]

36. It's funny, you know...

a devout Catholic could just say, "Yeah, that's really stupid and probably some relic going back to the middle ages when the popes were thoroughly corrupt. This was likely done as a political favor to some king who wanted to marry into a family to gain territory or wealth."

And that would be the end of it!

But no, some feel the need to actually try and DEFEND the policy because they can't admit their church made a mistake or has done some pretty terrible things in the past as well as today.

[Dorian Gray]

38. True...

it can't be defended. My response is pretty much what you said a response would be to this.... relic of a law that needs to be changed and hopefully isn't still practiced. (Pedophilia notwithstanding.)

[darkstar3]

39. It's due to blind faith and allegiance.

I've seen it before, but usually at place people call "the sewer."

[ChadwickHenryWard]

40. Actually, I think what happened was that

the age of consent was 12 in Italy at the time of the Vatican's creation, and they just haven't bothered to change it. (Italy has.) I don't really think the age of consent is any big deal there, because they don't want you fucking at any age, anyway. Even sex within marriage is heavily discouraged.

[rug]

46. Oh, I must be mistaken. I didn't realize you were not anti-Catholic.

[darkstar3]

48. So, no answer at all to anything anyone here has said,

just a broadside sarcastic comment before you run away...typical. :eyes:

[ZombieHorde]

43. My OP is about pedophilia, but I understand I worded my OP in the format of

a riddle (a Vatican bashing riddle), so I guess the OP is a little about riddles as well.

[ZombieHorde]

23. Japan's age of consent is 13 because local laws have raised the age 18, so the national law does not

really need to be changed. I don't know about the other countries.

BTW, my objection to that chart is that it conflates the age that one can marry without impedinent under Canon Law with the so-called age of consent.

Sex and marriage are two different things, so I don't understand your argument, but I admit I have had a long day and the confusion is probably all on my end.

[struggle4progress]

34. UPDATE: Researching the Law of the Vatican City State

... Under article 3 of the Law of the Sources of the Law, provision is made for the supplementary application of the “laws promulgated by the Kingdom of Italy.” Article 3 also calls for the application of “the general regulations and local regulations of the province and government of Rome.” Although secondary to the laws of the Supreme Pontiff and the Code of Canon Law, much of the work conducted by the judicial organs of the VCS is done through the application of Italian law. However, the constitutional laws take great care to ensure that Italian law is not applied in instances where it might conflict with pontifical or canon law. This is evidenced by a new law which took effect on January 1, 2009 that resulted in a more selective adoption of relevant Italian legislation, in part due to the sheer volume of Italian laws which have to be reviewed in accordance with Church policy. This new statute, Law No. LXXI - Legge sulle fonti del diritto, was signed into law by Pope Benedict on October 1, 2008. Although a discussion of the Italian legal system is outside the scope of this article, it is still necessary to understand the relationship between the two legal systems. Not only has VCS law incorporated Italian law and adopted the same legal structure, it also permits Italian courts to prosecute certain criminal acts committed in the city state ... http://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/Vatican1.htm

Legge 01 ottobre 2008, n. LXXI
Legge sulle fonti del diritto ...
http://www.olir.it/documenti/?documento=4866

from Google translation of above:

Act October 1, 2008, n. LXXI - Law on the sources of law (*).
Pontificate of Pope Benedict XVI - Year IV
N. LXXI - Law on the sources of law.
October 1, 2008
BENEDICT PP. XVI ...
Article 3. (Reception of Italian legislation)
1. In matters which do not provide the sources provided in Art. 1, we observe, in the alternative and after implementation by the competent authorities of the Vatican, the laws and other regulations issued in the Italian State.
2. The transposition is prepared if the same are not contrary to the precepts of divine law, nor general principles of canon law and the rules of the Lateran Treaty and subsequent agreements and provided that, in the state of facts existing at the Vatican City, prove apply there ...

Since the claim that the "age of consent in Vatican City is 12" is based on the Vatican's traditional reliance on Italian law, where Italian law does not conflict with church teachings, as shown (for example) by the fact that the Vatican in 1929 adopted (together with other Italian laws) Italy's age of consent (which was at that time 12), the natural reading of "Legge sulle fonti del diritto" will be that the age of consent in Vatican City is the same as the current age of consent in Italy and that having sex in Vatican City with a minor below the current Italian consent age is prosecutable under Italian law in the Italian courts

[trotsky]

35. But since under Italian law the age of consent is 14...

then the Vatican has picked an even lower age. Your argument has absolutely no merit.

[struggle4progress]

41. Your interpretation is completely unsupported, and it seems unlikely and ill-informed:

First, as a general rule, the Vatican does not cognize general moral competence in minors under the age of sixteen:

Code of Canon Law
TITLE III.
THE SUBJECT LIABLE TO PENAL SANCTIONS (Cann. 1321 - 1330) ...
Can. 1323 The following are not subject to a penalty when they have violated a law or precept:
1/ a person who has not yet completed the sixteenth year of age ... http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_P4W.HTM

Second, until 2009, Vatican civil law was more or less automatically inherited from Italian civil law, under the Lateran Pacts of 1929: see http://www.hol.com/~mikesch/treaty.htm

There was a 1984 amendment to this relationship, which is worth quoting in part:

Agreement Between the Italian Republic and the Holy See
Signed by the Italian Republic and the Holy See on 18 February 1984.
Ratified by the Italian Parliament on 25 March 1985 ...
Article 8
1. Civil effects shall be recognized for marriages contracted according to the norms of canon law, provided that the act of marriage be entered in the registers of the vital statistics, and the notices of marriage have been previously published ... Immediately after the ceremony, the parish priest or his delegate shall explain the civil effects of the marriage to the parties, by reading the Articles of the Civil Code concerning the rights and duties of married people and he shall thereafter draw up, in original duplicate, the certificate of marriage, in which the spouses’ declarations permitted by civil law may be inserted.
The Holy See acknowledges that the registration shall not take place:
(A) When the spouses do not meet the requirements of age determined by civil law for celebration ... http://www.religlaw.org/template.php?id=578

The automatic inheritance of Italian law, as Italian society became less Catholic, eventually resulted in Vatican concern, and a decision to examine Italian law more carefully before adopting it as Vatican civil law, as indicated in this 2008 BBC news story:

Page last updated at 02:49 GMT, Friday, 2 January 2009
By David Willey
BBC News, Rome
... With effect from New Year's Day, the Pope has decided that the Vatican will no longer automatically adopt laws passed by the Italian parliament.
All Italian laws will be examined one by one before they are adopted. Under the Lateran treaties signed exactly 80 years ago between Italy and the Pope, and the Italian Parliamentary system, Italian laws were applied automatically. A senior Vatican Canon lawyer, Monsignor Jose Maria Serrano Ruiz, has gone on record as saying that Italian laws are too many, too unstable and too often conflict with the moral teachings of the Catholic Church ... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7807501.stm

Insofar as the Vatican teaches the serious sinfulness of all sexual expression outside of marriage, it seems unlikely that the church would regard marriage as governed by at least the minimal requirements of Italian law but would regard sexual expression outside of marriage as governed by weaker constraints

Please do feel free to provide any cogent links

[trotsky]

44. As usual, you post a lot of cut & paste, but nothing you've said disputes the fact in the OP.

Feel free to keep trying though.

[struggle4progress]

45. You post formulaic responses to posts without reading. You'd get more from this site

if you made more of an effort

[trotsky]

47. Is the legal age of consent in Vatican State 12 years?

Circle One:

YES

NO


As usual, you want to try and bury a simple question under a mountain of spam.

[Dorian Gray]

37. Holy cow

that should be changed immediately in all those countries.

You'd think Vatican state would be never!

[struggle4progress]

42. Congregatio pro Doctrina Fidei

Epistula a Congregatione pro Doctrina Fidei missa ad totius Catholicae Ecclesiae Episcopos aliosque Ordinarios et Hierarchas interesse habentes:
DE DELICTIS GRAVIORIBUS eidem Congregationi pro Doctrina Fidei reservatis
... Delictum contra mores, videlicet: delictum contra sextum Decalogi praeceptum cum minore infra aetatem duodeviginti annorum a clerico commissum ... http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20010518_epistula_graviora%20delicta_lt.html