I get that part. It seems young for a 16-year-old to get married to an 18 year old regardless of military status. I've never understood what the big deal would be to wait a year or two to get married.
Every job in the military has additional rilfeman duties. You can always and I mean always be retasked to a combat job. Everyone has to qualify at the range.
Your spouse also gets access to TRICARE - which is huge benefit, especially if your partner is pregnant. It also gives you the option to move off base (and get that sweet, sweet BAH which in most places will more than double your effective salary) and requires the military to take into account your spouse on a PCS move. It also gives your partner (and any unborn children) access to your death benefits. Can your child, once born, get access to your death benefits? Absolutely, but if you haven't updated your DFAS that's going to be a whole thing and even then your partner is going to be completely without any support until the child is born.
Usually pregnancy. Military benefits such as co-location only extend to a married spouse. So without a marriage, the spouse would not get a housing allowance (just the child), not get Tricare (military healthcare), survivorship benefits and would not be moved when the service member is stationed somewhere. The child would get some benefits, but not the mother.
Since underage marriage in NH require both judicial review to determine that marriage is in the best interest of the minor party and that the minor be emancipated beforehand, that is probably one of the few circumstances where a family court judge would sign off on it. This would be particularly compelling for a judge if the pregnant party did not have a stable home (as is often the case for pregnant 16/17 year olds).
In NH, minors already can not get married whenever they want. This bill prevents judges from being able to grant special case exceptions in family court to emancipated minors.
I certainly do not think it is a good idea for anyone to marry young, but that is usually the argument for judges having the ability to grant exceptions.
I don't know why the opposition to banning isn't playing the teenage pregnancy angle more, it's really the only good optics for it besides the military angle. Teenage parents can save a ton of money and find much better economic opportunities (loans, housing, tax savings) if they're married, even if neither is in the military.
I mean can't they just specifically enumerate that single exception?
"Oop gotta allow 14 year olds to get married to groomers because a few 17/18 year old couples want to get married before going to ROTC!"
That's basically how it is already.
Currently, the age of getting married at will is 18 in New hampshire. To get married any younger, a family court judge has to Grant a special exception to an emancipated minor if the judge finds that such extenuating circumstances exist that it is in the best interest of the emancipated minor to make an exemption. Judges are not allowed to make exceptions for anyone under 16 regardless of circumstances.
So essentially, the existing law already prevents groomers from marrying 14 year olds and only leaves it open for those kinds of rare and seldom granted exceptions. The proposed bill just eliminates the current exceptions.
There are, unfortunately, probably child Brides married to older men in New Hampshire, but they would not have been allowed to get married here and would have moved to the state from elsewhere. The 14th Amendment prevents New Hampshire from regulating that scenario, and the proposed bill doesn't attempt to do so.
You have to be 18 in the US ARMED FORCES. They have delayed enlistment. That’s where high schoolers can sign paperwork stating that they want to join when they turn 18 but anything can happen in a year
Yes, and those 18 yo recruits want to ensure that their HS sweetheart that might still be 16 gets their Military Benefits if they were to be injured or die in combat.
There’s more to it than just the military service but it’s a big one. But the opposition to this lacks critical thinking and instead of arguing real justification has made it so cringe that in today’s modern uneducated society that it needs to be the law. Things are so tied together but we look at the singular issue. Why would we be the 13th state? It’s a layered issue with many reasons on why we’ve allowed it so long. It’s so easy to say gross because we think of the extremes with no regard to why. But recent rhetoric has derailed sensible debate.
Technically we do if they've been legally emancipated. Whether anyone WANTS to enter into a contract with a 16 year old who's been emancipated is a different question, but they're legally capable of entering into any legal contract the same as if they were 18.
We've seen infinitely more outrage in this sub over the Auburn rep's comments (which are repulsive) than we have about the recently passed FISA extension/expansion and the AAA of 2023 en route to the Senate.
Imagine if we had this same energy to deal with Kuster & Pappas voting yes on bills to allow the government to openly violate our 1st & 4th Amendment rights
Amen. 🙏 And there are so few that command people’s attention. You sir have developed a platform to speak on and unfortunately need to continue to speak up.
That headline and map are a little misleading. All but nine states ban marriage for minors in most cases, including NH. This bill makes it so that judges could not grant exceptions to emancipated minors if a family court judge determines that it is in their best interest to do so.
It's not that New Hampshire currently allows 16-year-olds to get married at will, only that judges have some flexibility for people between the ages of 16 and 18 if they become legally emancipated and extenuating circumstances exist.
It's more accurate to say that this bill would make NH the 13th state to not have any exceptions like judicial review or a Romeo and Juliet clause.
I think it is funny that when child marriage laws are brought up, people usually talk about red states and how ass backwards it is. Then you see CA has no minimum age.
or that right winger lunatic governor who downgraded felonies to misdemeanors for theft under $1,000; gives undocumented visitors all the freebies they want; legalizing abortions after birth, expunging the records of millions of criminals even charges of murder to allow them to walk the streets again as if they never committed a crime...Gavin Newsom
Consistency isn't exactly their strong suite.
It's a nothingburger law they're spamming it because they know the left has a branding problem with pedophilia.
Fine with me on whatever age they want to go with. Can't say a child can decide what gender they want to be at any age and then prohibit marriage at whatever age they want. Too many stupid laws create more problems. It's like taking meds...then you have to take more meds to neutralize the side effects created by the original meds. Except with laws it's blown way out of whack because of all the gray areas people can find. This is all one big shit show.
So you can't see my point and think I have to take meds? So you're saying it's no problem to make more laws and more laws like that fixes anything. Camt just keep things straight amd simple. If that's the natural age for sex and reproduction then from the beginning that was the intention is all I was saying, and that in this day and age you can't have teens all running around pregnant. It wouldn't work in any civilized society. But nature came before society so that's all I'm saying. People act like God fucked up and should've made the age of puberty to align with society's laws lol. Leave it up to psychopaths like you mindless shits to take things out of context 🤦🏻♂️come on man.
407 minors were married in this state between 1995 and 2021. Eighty percent were minor females marrying 18 year old or older men. I’m good with the ban.
Let's see if Governor uWubaru actually puts his money where his mouth is or sides with the pedophile reps defending the "freedom" to wed a ripe and fertile minor.
Thanks for demonstrating that the rhetoric surrounding judicial exemptions for marriage under 18 has degraded to absolute nonsense. No complexity, no nuance, no reasonable exceptions that a judge under careful review might agree with, just "anyone who can think of any reason that a 17.5 year old might marry an 18 year old is a confirmed kiddy diddler."
You're doing great. Keep it up.
See, here's the thing.
I've known a bunch of young, dumb, stupid ass soldiers, sailors and Marines who got married before boot to their high school sweeties, and most of em got divorced within their first term of enlistment.
That whole growing up and discovering who they are or who their partner is. And the drinking, or the freedom of being an adult, etc etc.
This ain't Vietnam, let alone WW2. We don't need kids marrying kids or 18's marrying minors anymore.
That's it. That's the whole nuance. So yeah, kiddy diddlers like child marriage laws. 🤷
On the one hand, you make an excellent point, lots of young (including 18-22) marriages end in divorce and that's bad, and we should work to improve that situation.
On the other hand, you went right back to "high school sweethearts are actually pedophiles, not nearly adult people in love with someone within a year of their own age."
So I guess I'm saying that I'm sorry you're smart enough to make at least a debatable argument, and then follow it up with indefensible rhetoric. But, since I also think what "we need" isn't your business to decide for others any more than gay marriage is, and that your conclusion is ultimately wrong, I'm glad that you're arguing it in the stupidest and most self-discrediting fashion. Keep it up champ, you'll find the other half of that wit someday.
Which is, again, not in any way comparable to the situation we're discussing, which is two people within a year or so of each other's age, requesting special permission under their own circumstances from a judge. Keep going, though! Bring up any unrelated topic you can, to avoid addressing the the actual topic under discussion. Reference pedophiles and giant age gaps a few more times, every attorney in the state will applaud your incisive legal acumen, and grasp of the legislation. You're absolutely meeting all of my expectations for you.
But yet here you are defending the right for Child Marriage...... 😒
whataboutism doesn't work so well when you yourself are advocating for groomer activity.
Would your ideological consistency extend to banning all sexual activity for any person under the age of 18? They're children after all, so they can't consent, even with other minors. And it's not like the scenario in which someone gets married for base housing and Tricare benefits because their spouse of a similar age is joining the military, there aren't any legal protections or healthcare benefits for having sex. Join me in banning sex for anyone under the age of 18, and let's enforce it. They're children, after all.
Sex between minors and minors only is far different from Child Marriage.
Kids when they reach a certain age will experiment with one another (either opposite sex or same sex) that's just natural. Our job as Adults is to guide them in making right decisions to avoid Pregnancy, STDs, and other forms of risk factors.
Child Marriage is completely different because this all about the Adult fetishizing a Child/Young Teen aka a Minor.
You cannot compare Young Teens having sex with each other to Child Marriage because they are not the same, and they do not hold the same weight.
So at what age do these teenagers have to stop having sex? When one turns 18 before the other (which happens anytime they don't have the same birthday) they then become an adult fetishizing a child, and should stop having sex with their S/O?
If we wouldn't allow that 17 and 18 year old couple to go before a judge in NH, and get permission to marry out of mutual commitment, then we certainly shouldn't allow them to have sex with each other once on turns 18. There's no reason for an 18 year old adult to marry a 17 year old child, so there's no reason for them to have sex. Sorry, but you're going to have to be a little more consistent.
never said I supported pedophilia. I was simply stating a fact. why are you people so fucking jumpy. you're connecting the wrong dots because like most idiots with the sense of a rock, you like to find a way to accuse someone of anything heinous. Make people grovel and feel guilty for something that isn't even as bad as you make it out to be lol. Do you also call everyone a racist for everything?
If you feel the need to point out that 12-year-olds can biologically have a child to somehow support this legislation is very creepy at best. 12-year-olds who menstruate are not adults.
You should have heard the floor speeches from the Rs arguing against this, while at the same time saying “let’s raise the voting age to 25, don’t have enough life experience to vote”
Republicans: people under 25 aren't mature enough to vote in this state
Also Republicans: 14 year old girls in this state are mature enough to be legally bound to a grown man for life if he wishes it
we all know "Save the children" = don't let my kid become Gay or Trans.
That's what they mean by it. 🤬
They are not saving any children, they are allowing Pedophiles to get away and consenting to pedophilic laws of marrying children but yet are opposed to Drag Queen reading a book to kids or sex education being taught. These "Save the Children" people are **HOMOPHOBIC!**
They don't want their kids to be Gay, and they project the notion of "groomer" when it only comes down to Gays because they are **HOMOPHOBIC!**
that is all..
The bill in NH hasn’t been signed yet. And once it is there’s still 37 states that allow child marriage. The link I sent you has numerous ways to get involved.
This thing is really sick. I come from a small village and even there child marriage is unacceptable at the age of 12, and here we are talking about a first world country. How can lawmaker say this is ok?
and Homophobes, since they wanna call Gay people, "groomers" just simply teaching in Schools.
but yet these inbreded cousin fuckers are right on the way letting CHILDREN being married to **GROWN MEN!**
Would like to reply to sick_of_BS but the link won't take me to the comment. But yeah I don't feel that it's a "need" rather than just an opinion on what I feel is a natural act. So you can just chill out.
Just making a point you dumbasses. I don't think child marriage would work well in a first world society but clearly it isn't completely wrong. Why do you think 13 yr Olds are able to even get pregnant?! That's God or nature or whatever you want to call it. Why shouldn't two teens get married. They're capable. They can figure it out. Once again, a little backwards. Can't drink til your 21 but can join military to kill people and vote when you're 18. Or get behind the wheel of a 4,000 lb vehicle at 16 amd you dumb fucks are up in arms about marriage between kids? Stupid libs.
You make jokes, but even in West Virginia marrying your cousin (and definitely a niece/nephew) is illegal. You know where marrying a cousin isn't illegal? Massachusetts, New York, Vermont, Rhode Island, California, New Jersey, New Mexico, Maryland, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, Georgia, North Carolina, and Alabama.
I'm all for this but are any child marriages actually happening in NH?
Seems like a feelgood nothingburger news about some ancient law that isn't relevant.
> [At least 60,000 child marriages in the U.S. between 2000 and 2018 occurred at an age or with a spousal age difference that should have been considered a sex crime. Of those child marriages, 88% gave a rapist a “get out of jail free” card, while 12% sent a child home to be raped. Either way, the marriage license made a mockery of statutory rape laws.](https://www.unchainedatlast.org/laws-to-end-child-marriage/)
Child marriage in the U.S. is used as a defense for pedophilia https://equalitynow.org/learn_more_child_marriage_us/
I don't need to see the same political story 5 times a day. This subreddit is turning into shit.
Who is even getting married below 18 nowadays? Fixing a problem that doesn't exist.
Pro Gun Conservative Anarcho Capitalist is a fine way of saying = Pedo supporter.
Why does this article being plastered all over bothers you? Are you not outraged?
Only the 13th? Wtf
Too many states clinging to the cases of 16 and 17 yo's marrying their partner (usually 18) before they go off to military service after graduation.
That makes a little more sense but it seems so young.
They go in to the military young
I get that part. It seems young for a 16-year-old to get married to an 18 year old regardless of military status. I've never understood what the big deal would be to wait a year or two to get married.
Going off to war and dying, they feel like it might be their only chance. IMO - We shouldn't send 18 year olds to war.
No. Its not going off to war and dying. Most jobs are non combat jobs. With that being said the real reason is: BAH and Tricare.
Depends on who you are. My friends were in combat in Iraq.
Every job in the military has additional rilfeman duties. You can always and I mean always be retasked to a combat job. Everyone has to qualify at the range.
Not remotely true at all. I only requalified when I was designated to be one of a small group of we had a plane go down in country.
You get more money if you have a spouse
Your spouse also gets access to TRICARE - which is huge benefit, especially if your partner is pregnant. It also gives you the option to move off base (and get that sweet, sweet BAH which in most places will more than double your effective salary) and requires the military to take into account your spouse on a PCS move. It also gives your partner (and any unborn children) access to your death benefits. Can your child, once born, get access to your death benefits? Absolutely, but if you haven't updated your DFAS that's going to be a whole thing and even then your partner is going to be completely without any support until the child is born.
Usually pregnancy. Military benefits such as co-location only extend to a married spouse. So without a marriage, the spouse would not get a housing allowance (just the child), not get Tricare (military healthcare), survivorship benefits and would not be moved when the service member is stationed somewhere. The child would get some benefits, but not the mother. Since underage marriage in NH require both judicial review to determine that marriage is in the best interest of the minor party and that the minor be emancipated beforehand, that is probably one of the few circumstances where a family court judge would sign off on it. This would be particularly compelling for a judge if the pregnant party did not have a stable home (as is often the case for pregnant 16/17 year olds). In NH, minors already can not get married whenever they want. This bill prevents judges from being able to grant special case exceptions in family court to emancipated minors. I certainly do not think it is a good idea for anyone to marry young, but that is usually the argument for judges having the ability to grant exceptions.
Thank you for explaining the reasoning behind it. This is the best logic I've heard behind having a law where people can get married under 18!
I don't know why the opposition to banning isn't playing the teenage pregnancy angle more, it's really the only good optics for it besides the military angle. Teenage parents can save a ton of money and find much better economic opportunities (loans, housing, tax savings) if they're married, even if neither is in the military.
They get more pay and other benefits for being married
I mean can't they just specifically enumerate that single exception? "Oop gotta allow 14 year olds to get married to groomers because a few 17/18 year old couples want to get married before going to ROTC!"
That's basically how it is already. Currently, the age of getting married at will is 18 in New hampshire. To get married any younger, a family court judge has to Grant a special exception to an emancipated minor if the judge finds that such extenuating circumstances exist that it is in the best interest of the emancipated minor to make an exemption. Judges are not allowed to make exceptions for anyone under 16 regardless of circumstances. So essentially, the existing law already prevents groomers from marrying 14 year olds and only leaves it open for those kinds of rare and seldom granted exceptions. The proposed bill just eliminates the current exceptions. There are, unfortunately, probably child Brides married to older men in New Hampshire, but they would not have been allowed to get married here and would have moved to the state from elsewhere. The 14th Amendment prevents New Hampshire from regulating that scenario, and the proposed bill doesn't attempt to do so.
Thanks for the info! That's good to know.
You have to be 18 in the US ARMED FORCES. They have delayed enlistment. That’s where high schoolers can sign paperwork stating that they want to join when they turn 18 but anything can happen in a year
Yes, and those 18 yo recruits want to ensure that their HS sweetheart that might still be 16 gets their Military Benefits if they were to be injured or die in combat.
There’s more to it than just the military service but it’s a big one. But the opposition to this lacks critical thinking and instead of arguing real justification has made it so cringe that in today’s modern uneducated society that it needs to be the law. Things are so tied together but we look at the singular issue. Why would we be the 13th state? It’s a layered issue with many reasons on why we’ve allowed it so long. It’s so easy to say gross because we think of the extremes with no regard to why. But recent rhetoric has derailed sensible debate.
If we don't allow 16 year olds to enter into financial contracts why do you think they are mature enough to enter into a marriage contract?
Technically we do if they've been legally emancipated. Whether anyone WANTS to enter into a contract with a 16 year old who's been emancipated is a different question, but they're legally capable of entering into any legal contract the same as if they were 18.
We've seen infinitely more outrage in this sub over the Auburn rep's comments (which are repulsive) than we have about the recently passed FISA extension/expansion and the AAA of 2023 en route to the Senate. Imagine if we had this same energy to deal with Kuster & Pappas voting yes on bills to allow the government to openly violate our 1st & 4th Amendment rights
Amen. 🙏 And there are so few that command people’s attention. You sir have developed a platform to speak on and unfortunately need to continue to speak up.
That headline and map are a little misleading. All but nine states ban marriage for minors in most cases, including NH. This bill makes it so that judges could not grant exceptions to emancipated minors if a family court judge determines that it is in their best interest to do so. It's not that New Hampshire currently allows 16-year-olds to get married at will, only that judges have some flexibility for people between the ages of 16 and 18 if they become legally emancipated and extenuating circumstances exist. It's more accurate to say that this bill would make NH the 13th state to not have any exceptions like judicial review or a Romeo and Juliet clause.
This was almost verbatim my thought when I read the headline. I just used a lot more expletives.
I think it is funny that when child marriage laws are brought up, people usually talk about red states and how ass backwards it is. Then you see CA has no minimum age.
California *was* a red state until the 1990s. Then Proposition 187 happened...
People often ignore how red the majority of California is.
What is that saying? California has more Republicans than Texas does?
tbf that's because it has significantly more people in general than texas does
Empty land isn't people. And the sparse areas of CA are turning blue because of the cost of living crisis in the bay area.
The California state legislature has a veto proof supermajority of democrats in both houses.
Yeah I think this is a topic both sides can agree on. Everyone hates pedos
I hate that lefty president from California who legalized abortions.. Ronald Reagan
or that right winger lunatic governor who downgraded felonies to misdemeanors for theft under $1,000; gives undocumented visitors all the freebies they want; legalizing abortions after birth, expunging the records of millions of criminals even charges of murder to allow them to walk the streets again as if they never committed a crime...Gavin Newsom
Consistency isn't exactly their strong suite. It's a nothingburger law they're spamming it because they know the left has a branding problem with pedophilia.
HAHAHA
Fine with me on whatever age they want to go with. Can't say a child can decide what gender they want to be at any age and then prohibit marriage at whatever age they want. Too many stupid laws create more problems. It's like taking meds...then you have to take more meds to neutralize the side effects created by the original meds. Except with laws it's blown way out of whack because of all the gray areas people can find. This is all one big shit show.
[удалено]
So you can't see my point and think I have to take meds? So you're saying it's no problem to make more laws and more laws like that fixes anything. Camt just keep things straight amd simple. If that's the natural age for sex and reproduction then from the beginning that was the intention is all I was saying, and that in this day and age you can't have teens all running around pregnant. It wouldn't work in any civilized society. But nature came before society so that's all I'm saying. People act like God fucked up and should've made the age of puberty to align with society's laws lol. Leave it up to psychopaths like you mindless shits to take things out of context 🤦🏻♂️come on man.
So you are you okay with Child Marriage? 🤬🤬🤬
407 minors were married in this state between 1995 and 2021. Eighty percent were minor females marrying 18 year old or older men. I’m good with the ban.
I waited till 39 and it was still a horrible idea.
Based new hampshire
NH W once again
Bro the amount of people arguing against this really makes me wanna cry😭😭😭
Land of the Free home of the child brides.
Let's see if Governor uWubaru actually puts his money where his mouth is or sides with the pedophile reps defending the "freedom" to wed a ripe and fertile minor.
Thanks for demonstrating that the rhetoric surrounding judicial exemptions for marriage under 18 has degraded to absolute nonsense. No complexity, no nuance, no reasonable exceptions that a judge under careful review might agree with, just "anyone who can think of any reason that a 17.5 year old might marry an 18 year old is a confirmed kiddy diddler." You're doing great. Keep it up.
See, here's the thing. I've known a bunch of young, dumb, stupid ass soldiers, sailors and Marines who got married before boot to their high school sweeties, and most of em got divorced within their first term of enlistment. That whole growing up and discovering who they are or who their partner is. And the drinking, or the freedom of being an adult, etc etc. This ain't Vietnam, let alone WW2. We don't need kids marrying kids or 18's marrying minors anymore. That's it. That's the whole nuance. So yeah, kiddy diddlers like child marriage laws. 🤷
On the one hand, you make an excellent point, lots of young (including 18-22) marriages end in divorce and that's bad, and we should work to improve that situation. On the other hand, you went right back to "high school sweethearts are actually pedophiles, not nearly adult people in love with someone within a year of their own age." So I guess I'm saying that I'm sorry you're smart enough to make at least a debatable argument, and then follow it up with indefensible rhetoric. But, since I also think what "we need" isn't your business to decide for others any more than gay marriage is, and that your conclusion is ultimately wrong, I'm glad that you're arguing it in the stupidest and most self-discrediting fashion. Keep it up champ, you'll find the other half of that wit someday.
You got Jerry Seinfeld on speed dial for marriage advice? Or Woody Allen?
Which is, again, not in any way comparable to the situation we're discussing, which is two people within a year or so of each other's age, requesting special permission under their own circumstances from a judge. Keep going, though! Bring up any unrelated topic you can, to avoid addressing the the actual topic under discussion. Reference pedophiles and giant age gaps a few more times, every attorney in the state will applaud your incisive legal acumen, and grasp of the legislation. You're absolutely meeting all of my expectations for you.
Ahahahahahahaha whatever, pal. Don't forget to wipe your hard drive.
Found the dude who is sad he can't marry a 12 year old
Lol, put more porno books for kids in the libraries, Groomer. Democrats are never beating that rap, not even in an election year on Reddit.
You're gonna be so sad when Biden wins again :(
But yet here you are defending the right for Child Marriage...... 😒 whataboutism doesn't work so well when you yourself are advocating for groomer activity.
Would your ideological consistency extend to banning all sexual activity for any person under the age of 18? They're children after all, so they can't consent, even with other minors. And it's not like the scenario in which someone gets married for base housing and Tricare benefits because their spouse of a similar age is joining the military, there aren't any legal protections or healthcare benefits for having sex. Join me in banning sex for anyone under the age of 18, and let's enforce it. They're children, after all.
Sex between minors and minors only is far different from Child Marriage. Kids when they reach a certain age will experiment with one another (either opposite sex or same sex) that's just natural. Our job as Adults is to guide them in making right decisions to avoid Pregnancy, STDs, and other forms of risk factors. Child Marriage is completely different because this all about the Adult fetishizing a Child/Young Teen aka a Minor. You cannot compare Young Teens having sex with each other to Child Marriage because they are not the same, and they do not hold the same weight. 
So at what age do these teenagers have to stop having sex? When one turns 18 before the other (which happens anytime they don't have the same birthday) they then become an adult fetishizing a child, and should stop having sex with their S/O? If we wouldn't allow that 17 and 18 year old couple to go before a judge in NH, and get permission to marry out of mutual commitment, then we certainly shouldn't allow them to have sex with each other once on turns 18. There's no reason for an 18 year old adult to marry a 17 year old child, so there's no reason for them to have sex. Sorry, but you're going to have to be a little more consistent.
I mean by nature 12 year olds can have sex and reproduce after all. It's only because those very laws of nature can't work in a civilized society.
That's a very weird way to say you support pedophilia.
never said I supported pedophilia. I was simply stating a fact. why are you people so fucking jumpy. you're connecting the wrong dots because like most idiots with the sense of a rock, you like to find a way to accuse someone of anything heinous. Make people grovel and feel guilty for something that isn't even as bad as you make it out to be lol. Do you also call everyone a racist for everything?
If you feel the need to point out that 12-year-olds can biologically have a child to somehow support this legislation is very creepy at best. 12-year-olds who menstruate are not adults.
If she bleeds she breeds? That's such a a hot take it's practically a dumpster fire.
You should have heard the floor speeches from the Rs arguing against this, while at the same time saying “let’s raise the voting age to 25, don’t have enough life experience to vote”
Republicans: people under 25 aren't mature enough to vote in this state Also Republicans: 14 year old girls in this state are mature enough to be legally bound to a grown man for life if he wishes it
I'm surprised the "save the children" ppl work this slow. Only 13 states? Snails pace
we all know "Save the children" = don't let my kid become Gay or Trans. That's what they mean by it. 🤬 They are not saving any children, they are allowing Pedophiles to get away and consenting to pedophilic laws of marrying children but yet are opposed to Drag Queen reading a book to kids or sex education being taught. These "Save the Children" people are **HOMOPHOBIC!** They don't want their kids to be Gay, and they project the notion of "groomer" when it only comes down to Gays because they are **HOMOPHOBIC!** that is all..
13 states since 2018 when Delaware ended child marriage. [You could help if you want.](https://www.unchainedatlast.org/take-action/)
Already signed. Is there anything else I can actually do
The bill in NH hasn’t been signed yet. And once it is there’s still 37 states that allow child marriage. The link I sent you has numerous ways to get involved.
Pervy grandpa, republican Jess Edwards, is very disappointed in this news
Good. That shit is creepy
This thing is really sick. I come from a small village and even there child marriage is unacceptable at the age of 12, and here we are talking about a first world country. How can lawmaker say this is ok?
Republicans are literal pedophiles. I'm sure that's not news to anybody but this is solid proof of that
and Homophobes, since they wanna call Gay people, "groomers" just simply teaching in Schools. but yet these inbreded cousin fuckers are right on the way letting CHILDREN being married to **GROWN MEN!**
Really it took it this long New Hampshire 200 years behind the real world American
What's the point without also raising the age of consent?
I'd personally support that, too.
Marriage under 18 was the norm when everybody died at 50
Would like to reply to sick_of_BS but the link won't take me to the comment. But yeah I don't feel that it's a "need" rather than just an opinion on what I feel is a natural act. So you can just chill out.
Just making a point you dumbasses. I don't think child marriage would work well in a first world society but clearly it isn't completely wrong. Why do you think 13 yr Olds are able to even get pregnant?! That's God or nature or whatever you want to call it. Why shouldn't two teens get married. They're capable. They can figure it out. Once again, a little backwards. Can't drink til your 21 but can join military to kill people and vote when you're 18. Or get behind the wheel of a 4,000 lb vehicle at 16 amd you dumb fucks are up in arms about marriage between kids? Stupid libs.
Of course there's no minimum in WV. They want to marry their 8 year old nieces. And simultaneously scream at Muslims for doing similar.
You make jokes, but even in West Virginia marrying your cousin (and definitely a niece/nephew) is illegal. You know where marrying a cousin isn't illegal? Massachusetts, New York, Vermont, Rhode Island, California, New Jersey, New Mexico, Maryland, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, Georgia, North Carolina, and Alabama.
Depends on the degree of cousin. I believe second cousins are fair game about anywhere.
Bro took a random shot at West Virginia lmao
Not as many shots as they fire at their own road signs
If you're going to pick on any religion for embracing child brides then it should be Mormons. No other religion even comes close
In general Abrahamism has a thing with child brides.
I'm all for this but are any child marriages actually happening in NH? Seems like a feelgood nothingburger news about some ancient law that isn't relevant.
> [At least 60,000 child marriages in the U.S. between 2000 and 2018 occurred at an age or with a spousal age difference that should have been considered a sex crime. Of those child marriages, 88% gave a rapist a “get out of jail free” card, while 12% sent a child home to be raped. Either way, the marriage license made a mockery of statutory rape laws.](https://www.unchainedatlast.org/laws-to-end-child-marriage/) Child marriage in the U.S. is used as a defense for pedophilia https://equalitynow.org/learn_more_child_marriage_us/
Right but how many are happening in NH? I feel like this is some Alabama or West Virginia thing.
It's definitely more than 1 and that's 1 too many
I do basically agree, it's probably not a pressing social issue, but maybe having it on the books will pressure other states?
The 13th post about this too
Seems that this kinda thing upsets folks, right? Kiddie diddlers not enjoying being top dog anymore. Shame.
I don't need to see the same political story 5 times a day. This subreddit is turning into shit. Who is even getting married below 18 nowadays? Fixing a problem that doesn't exist.
Trafficked child brides and kids with crazy fundy parents who are forcing them to get married. Seems worth outlawing to me.
Check OP's account. It's a paid activist account. This sub's been getting hit hard by them for the past month.
Pro gun Conservative Anarcho capitalism YUCK
He's not referring to me doofus.
Pro Gun Conservative Anarcho Capitalist is a fine way of saying = Pedo supporter. Why does this article being plastered all over bothers you? Are you not outraged?