My point

And my point is generalizing by drawing a line takes human rights away from some people. Who are the ones, who are over that line, to draw it behind them, removing rights away from a class of people? This is discrimination. All of it is backed up by pseudo-science studies that ignore the main fact that humans in general ARE in fact sexual beings. Their sexual awakening starts at different ages (most are before 18), and their sexual sunset is at different ages (some are at menopause, others go on to be horny up until death). Creating an arbitrary line as the moral police because those in charge are delusional to natural science is wrong. Many countries have a lower line and a range where it is on a case by case basis. This is a more humane system. This brain development argument is total bullshit. If it were true, then there would be no child actors, no child singers or performers, no children working in the family shop. And most of all, NO CHILDREN CHARGED AS AN ADULT in the criminal justice system. Using this logic is nonsense. It's like having a highway speed limit set at 100 km/h (or 65mph US) ignores the reality that most drivers drive over the speed limit because the higher speed is more natural for them. They never DO NOT drive as fast as the car will go, because they feel it is too fast. It is all about the natural speed that a person feels safe. Speed limits are known to be imposed, not because of safety, however for governmental revenue generation. Actual danger is due to other factors (to which speed is not one of them, speed only intensifies an accident cause by other means). Other factors are: Not paying attention (texting or not slowing for a curve or traffic), Macho-Ego taking over like road rage or racing, improper auto maintenance, Improper judgement or skill (panic, inability to make correct quick decisions), or other drivers (loads falling off trucks, objects in the road, improper road maintenance). If you argue that point, I have a bridge to sell you.