Talk:Laws regarding child sexual abuse

"Kennedy vs. Louisiana"
The USA Supreme Court in a 5-4 judgment penned by Justice Anthony Kennedy on June 25, 2008, prohibited executions of accused convicted of child rape: "the death penalty is not a proportional punishment for the rape of a child, despite the horrendous nature of the crime." Kennedy reserved capital punishment only "for crimes that involve a victim's death." In this Louisiana case, Patrick Kennedy rape his 8-year-old stepdaughter, resulting into serious injuries which required surgery. 54 states prohibit death penalty for any kind of rape, but Louisiana and 4 other states permit it for child rape — Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Texas. There's disagreement over the status of a Georgia law permitting execution for child rape, but Justice Kennedy ruled it was still in force. The court, thus declared unconstitutional the Louisiana statute (La. Stat. Ann. §14:42, West 1997 and Supp. 1998): "the Eighth Amendment bars Louisiana from imposing the death penalty for the rape of a child where the crime did not result, and was not intended to result, in the victim’s death."ap.google.com, Unbowed, politicians vow to execute child rapistsonline.wsj.com, Justices Overturn the Death PenaltyKENNEDY v. LOUISIANA, No. 07–343, June 25, 2008--Florentino floro (talk) 09:56, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Countries with Islamic Law
I added that "The law does not define or prohibit child abuse" in Yemen. I hope other can add more information and make the article global in its scope.--71.108.16.233 (talk) 20:49, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Countries with Islamic law section is so clearly designed to defame that one looks forward to this page being handled by more responsible persons. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.250.224.20 (talk) 16:00, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I have updated this section, and moved it to the bottom as it is smaller in scope than the United States (my reason being that English Wikipedia is primarily read by people from the US, UK and other English speaking nations). I am not Muslim, but I want faiths to be treated fairly.  If you are more knowledge about Islam, especially if you speak fluent Arabic, please help out.Legitimus (talk) 18:38, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Recentism and the need for expert contributors
This article seems to describe the state of law in the 21st century, but as historical cases are still coming to light (e.g. dating back to 1936 and before in Ireland) it would be useful to have a timeline showing what was made illegal, with what penalties, by different statutes and judgements. Where's the section on mid-20th century laws in Ireland? I can see that the U.S. CAPTA was relevant from 1974 onward, and the UN convention in 1989 drove a variety of legal improvements, but for the UK the Sexual Offences Act 1956 article gives no idea of the legal situation before 1956 and the transition from 1956 to 2003 article doesn't help much either. We need expert contributors to explain the development of sexual abuse law over the past 75 years. - Pointillist (talk) 22:36, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Changes in the lead
The previous version of the lead was clearly biased, so I edited it as follows:

1. The statement that "Child sexual abuse is nowadays outlawed in almost all countries" was badly sourced, the two sources didn't say anything about it being outlawed, only that it should be outlawed based on international consensus. So I've deleted it and replaced it with a more neutral sentence.

2. The movement of material doesn't imply that the age of consent is US only. It implies that statutory rape is US only, which it mostly is, aside of some other common law jurisdictions. And it's the same with consent, that legal term is again specific only for some common law jurisdictions.

3. Also there was a formulation

"An adult's sexual intercourse with a minor below the legal age of consent is defined as statutory rape based on the principle that an abusing adult is a criminal deviant who takes advantage of a minor, who is not capable of consent, and that any apparent consent by a minor could not be considered legal consent.

Which was an obvious POV, so i deleted it. --Seerus (talk) 03:27, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmm, the lead did read a little awkwardly before, and your version is neutral, but it still feels incomplete somehow. It's hard to put my finger on it, but I feel like it should have at least a basic explanation for why laws of this kind exist.
 * Regarding "statutory rape," that and "age of consent" are both conceptual terms, not the names of actual laws. They both essentially represent the same principle, which is by no means unique to the US.  Just as most of the individual states of the US don't actually call the crime "statutory rape," many countries around the world don't call it that either, but the concept is the same.Legitimus (talk) 01:13, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * They don't represent the same principle simply because the principle doesn't exist. They have in common only the fact that sex with a minor is penalized, which is stated in the article. For example in European civil law there is no statutory rape, the crime is called "sexual abuse of a minor" (or similarly), with rape being a completely different crime. And there is no concept of "consent" either. It doesn't exist, there's only an age limit, under age is illegal, above age legal. It's as simple as that.--Seerus (talk) 21:13, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure I follow you. That really is all that age of consent and statutory rape mean:  Sex with a person under age X is penalized.  The American laws and the European ones refer to the same basic concept.  Yes the word "rape" by itself has specific meanings, as does "consent" but that is getting hung up on the individual words.  The principle of the laws is the same.Legitimus (talk) 00:45, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The principle of the laws is not the same, because people who have sex with a minor get convicted for two principally different crimes. Statutory rape falls under "rape" in American law, while in the civil law it has nothing to do with rape. Rape is defined differently. It's the same as killing an intruder in your house - you do the same thing, but in different legal systems it can be completely different crimes - from murder to manslaughter to no crime at all.


 * Similarly, consent exists in American law, but is absent in the civil law. --Seerus (talk) 04:12, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * You have a very bizarre idea of how the laws work. If a 25 year old has sex with a 12 year old, they have committed a crime in both the United States and in Germany, France, Austria, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Italy etc. And it is a crime in all these places for the same reason.  They just call it something different in each nation (they call it something different in each of the US's 50 states). What further do I need to explain?
 * Also per policy your changes have been reverted until some kind of consensus can be reached on this thread. I can see from your involvement in other articles that you have been informed of how this works, so do not revert until that time or I will have to you report you for edit warring.Legitimus (talk) 12:31, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't want to be vulgar, but you must have serious problems with reading comprehension. If a 25 year old has sex with a 12 year old, they have committed completely different crimes in different countries, or they haven't committed any crime at all, if the country has the age of consent set at 12, or at puberty, or has no age of consent at all.


 * If you kill an intruder in your house, you have committed completely different crimes in different countries, or you haven't committed any crime at all, if the laws of your country allow killing an intruder in your house.


 * Have I made myself clear? I didn't think that I would have to defend such an obvious thing. Besides, you didn't react on any of my other 2 points, so I assume you agree with them. That's why I don't understand why you reverted the whole text. To what purpose do you think it will serve? --Seerus (talk) 00:42, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm merely trying to address the philosophy of these laws. Nations with no age of consent or age of consent under 12 are the minority, often with multiple human rights problems, and therefore should not be used as some kind of Loki's Wager to skew the overall information of the article.
 * To address your concerns in your original post 1: Agree.  I will restore this part.  My revert was simply for reasons of convenience. 2:  Disagree that statutory rape, as a legal principle, is not unique to the united states, and that consent only exists as a legal principle in common law jurisdictions. 3:  Agree the phrasing is inappropriate, but contend that it is necessary to have some better-phrased explanation for the reasons these laws exist.  I will leave it removed until better language can be agreed upon.
 * I suspect their might be a language barrier here, and being a mental health expert rather than a legal one, I have requested assistance form the WikiProject Law page.Legitimus (talk) 16:48, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Laws regarding child sexual abuse. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140211151110/https://treaties.un.org/pages/viewdetails.aspx?src=treaty&mtdsg_no=iv-11&chapter=4&lang=en to http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-11&chapter=4&lang=en

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:49, 12 May 2017 (UTC)