The Great American Controversy Over Underage Marriage [Part J; Section 1]

in news •  last year

[Please Read Part A, Part B, Part C, Part D, Part E, Part F, Part G, Part H And Part I Of This Article Before Reading The Segment Below]

Current Movements To Ban Teenage Marriage Here In America

Only two years after Kathleen Sebelius left Washington, D.C. in disgrace and stopped making appearances in the national news, our nation was confronted with another wave of self-righteous do-gooders just like her; except these fanatical femi-nazis and societal fundamentalists have been looking to do even greater damage to our nation than Ms. Sebelius did in her capacity as both the Governor of Kansas and the United States Secretary of Health and Human Services. Within the past year or so, the Tahirih Justice Center and Unchained At Last have conspired with fanatical femi-nazis and societal fundamentalists like Virginia State House Delegate Jennifer McClellan and Virginia State Senator Jill Holtzman Vogel to abolish underage marriage in the Commonwealth of Virginia. In July of last year, these two state legislators successfully pushed such a bill through their state legislature in Richmond and convinced Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe to sign it into law, which adds to his whole list of other idiotic actions that he has taken ever since he first entered office. Jeanne Smoot of the Tahirih Justice Center provided the ammunition that these two female state legislators needed to force this unjust fate upon the people of their state.

Under the original law in the Commonwealth of Virginia, a 16- or 17-year-old minor was able to get married so long as he or she had parental consent. If the minor was younger than 16 years old and pregnant or if the minor had no parent or legal guardian, there were special provisions in the law that allowed for that minor to get married. Considering that there are rural communities in the Blue Ridge Mountains and the Appalachian Mountains where it is both commonplace and socially acceptable for girls as young as 13 years old to get married and even wed someone significantly older than them, the original law pertaining to underage marriage in the Commonwealth of Virginia made perfect sense.

Ms. McClellan, who ironically is the granddaughter of a woman who wedded at 14 years old, argued alongside her political co-conspirators that the new law outlawing underage marriage in her state for the most part was aimed to curb forced marriage, human trafficking and “statutory rape” disguised as marriage. She and the activists who supported her efforts spewed the same nonsense that Kathleen Sebelius did back in 2005 in that they claimed that the previous law created a “fast-track to child marriages” for “abusers” to misuse as a bulletproof vest against child-welfare officials by simply marrying their “victims.” As I have stressed previously here in my article, most adult men who marry adolescent girls have honorable intentions in doing so. These fanatical femi-nazis’ ridiculous statements even bring to mind an interview I vaguely recall seeing on television over a decade ago in which this one woman who was identified as an author stared into the camera with a donut-shaped mouth and said that she didn’t believe that it should be legal for an adult man to marry a girl under 18 years old; and this woman never gave her reasons for having such an opinion. Hilariously, I couldn’t determine what this woman was the author of inasmuch as I had never heard of her before.

I find it insulting that Ms. McClellan and the femi-nazi amazons in league with her would even suggest that underage marriage has anything to do with human trafficking. I recall this one disturbing documentary that I had seen on an ABC news program so many years ago regarding a rich American man who had traveled to the Philippines and did the most unconscionable thing that anyone of wealth and power could have done. He preyed on this one poor family that had a 7-year-old daughter. I couldn’t tell how old he was from the picture of him that they showed on the television screen, but the fact that he was a grown man and wealthy clearly indicated that his intentions for the little girl were definitely not honorable, to say the least. He offered to continue to pay the little girl’s parents’ mortgage in exchange for their agreement that they would raise this little girl and allow for him to take her virginity once she got her menarche. Eventually, the girl became pregnant and gave birth to his baby when she was just 14 years old. Shortly thereafter, the rich man died. Then the young girl’s parents retained an attorney to go after the rich man’s family estate so that the young girl’s baby would be well provided for. The rich man’s family contested the legal proceedings and hired this rich man’s attorney to represent them in that matter. When a news reporter interviewed the rich man’s attorney and summed up the entire story to him, stressing that the young girl was a virgin before the rich man came into her life, the attorney made a bitter look and said, “None of those girls are ever virgins!” Accusing this attorney of being a male chauvinist would have been way too nice of a way to describe him.

This news story greatly disturbed me. It was no secret that this rich American man was a dangerous sexual predator. If he had still been alive after the young girl whom he victimized had become pregnant with his baby, I would have been more than happy to see the law come down upon him like a ton of bricks. What he did was clearly a case of reckless criminality that would have warranted harsh retributive action against him to the fullest extent of the law. What he did was wrong, and there is no way that he could not have known it. In any event, here is my point. This rich man never had any intentions of marrying the young girl whom he got pregnant. He only saw her as a sex object, and he had set out to ruin her life from the time she was 7 years old. For Ms. McClellan and her legion of political femi-nazi amazons to believe that someone like him would entertain the notion of marriage to his victim is extremely misguided, and it only gives other state legislatures here in our nation more reason to reject any bill attempting to eliminate underage marriage that gets introduced to them.

It does not do justice for Ms. McClellan and other activists like her to take these adult men who marry underage girls in their teens and compare them with or equate them to dangerous child predators like Jesse Timmendequas, John Couey, or Joseph Duncan III. It is as though they are comparing oranges to apples. In just about every article I could find online about Ms. McClellan and her legion of righteous do-gooders both in office and in non-profit organizations, they whined about the fact that adolescent girls as young as 12 or 13 years old were marrying men 21 years old and older, some of whom were even decades older than these girls. Her colleague, Virginia State Senator Jill Holtzman Vogel, went so far as to use an example of a 50-something-year-old man in her state who had allegedly dodged a “statutory rape” rap by marrying a high school girl. As you can see, she would have to use an example involving a man in his fifties rather than a man in his twenties or thirties so that she could draw as much disapproval from the public at large as she can. Also, she appears not to know how men’s minds and hearts work at all. If you have ever heard the 1964 Brazilian song titled “The Girl From Ipanema” by Astrud Gilberto and Stan Getz, the lyrics of that song are about a 14-year-old girl whose intense beauty wins the affections of a 50-something-year-old male onlooker whose heart breaks as he gawks at her on the beach and she walks straight ahead towards the sea without paying him a second or even first look. Some people may view that song as being morally bankrupt in its contents, but it does not dismiss the fact that men do not necessarily go blind to all the youthful beauty around them after a certain age. Some just have more going on in their lives to keep them distracted from such temptations than others.

First of all, as I have pointed out further back here in my article, the marriage exception has always been an essential ingredient in the age-of-consent laws throughout our country. If an adult man has honorable intentions for an adolescent girl regardless of whether she is above or below the statutory age of consent, the institution of marriage allows for that gentleman and that young lady to make their love for each other a legal reality. Also, I recall when Whoopie Goldberg got a few women angry on The View when she made it a point that there was rape and there was real rape. Well, allow me to elaborate on this controversy. Anybody over the age of majority can be charged with “statutory rape” if they have sexual relations with someone even one day shy of the statutory age of consent regardless of how obvious it is that nobody was harmed in any way and nobody actually got victimized. I’ve given a multitude of examples to this effect throughout this article. However, if Ms. McClellan and Ms. Vogel insist upon dwelling upon the issue of adolescent girls marrying significantly older men that range even up into the fifties, I can address this so-called concern of theirs really easily. I’m not saying that there will not be a few bad apples here and there, but everyone should not have to suffer because of a few irregularities within the system; and punishing everyone in this respect is the school of thought to which Ms. McClellan and Ms. Vogel subscribe.

Second of all, I recall seeing actress, Abby Lane, appear on Maury back in the 1990s and tell Maury Povich that she had married a man in his fifties when she was just 15 years old. Mr. Povich smiled at her and responded that he had felt heartbroken that she was no longer available to him when she did get married that young, because he was a teenager himself at the time and he had a crush on her back then. He also then said that as he was in his fifties at the time of that interview with her, he asked her whether she could see him with a 15-year-old girl. Then Ms. Lane chuckled and commented back to him that he would not dare do so, because his wife, Connie Chung, would get him; and then Ms. Lane made a gesture with her hand around her neck of someone being guillotined. Mr. Povich almost laughed after hearing her response, and the audience laughed. However, nobody on the television talk show got upset about it. Ms. Lane did not make any complaints of abuse against the 50-something-year-old man to whom she had been married when she was 15 years old. She admitted that it was a marriage of convenience so that this man could easily transport her across state lines for show business purposes in a legal manner. However, she never spoke as though she had ever been any kind of victim. Therefore, despite that Ms. Vogel has demonized the previously described 50-something-year-old man who married a high school girl, there are always two sides to every story. Also, public officials and law-enforcement officials can be like vultures just waiting to descend upon their prey.

I watched a YouTube video that had a recording of Ms. Vogel’s speech regarding her Senate Bill 415 that only allowed for adults over 18 years old and 16- and 17-year-old emancipated minors to get married in the Commonwealth of Virginia. She sensationalized her reasons for wanting this bill to pass by saying that 90 percent of 13- and 14-year-old  “children” were marrying people slightly and significantly older than them. She didn’t specify that the 13- and 14-year-old “children” who were getting married were mainly of the female gender, but it was more than obvious that she was talking about 13- and 14-year-old girls.  She stated that it wasn’t 14- and 15-year-olds they were marrying.  Once again even though she didn’t specify the gender of these 14- and 15-year-olds, it was more than obvious that she was talking about 14- and 15-year-old boys. Well, if I had been standing there in front of her, I would have said to her that it wasn’t 14- and 15-year-old boys that these girls in their early-to-mid teens were marrying, because boys that age don’t marry their girlfriends after they get them pregnant. Instead, they bail on them and then “slut-shame” them before their peers.  As a matter of fact, statistics show that NINETY PERCENT of teenage dads leave the pregnant girlfriend. Given these facts, it is no wonder why teenage girls are gravitating towards older male partners.

In an article titled “Should Deadbeat Teenage Fathers Be Drafted?”, Jason B Truth even described an incident that took place on a Spanish-language television talk show named Cristina in which a 16-year-old boy got into a heated argument with a 40-year-old man over the fact that the 40-year-old man was engaged to marry a 17-year-old girl; and the 40-year-old man pointed out that the fact that the 16-year-old boy had irresponsibly gotten girls as young as 13 years old pregnant over the past 3 years was why adolescent girls gravitated towards older men.  It is quite appalling that Ms. Vogel spoke as though the age-of-consent laws in the Commonwealth of Virginia were fair to everyone, when, in reality, that state is among the state jurisdictions that have the most Draconian age-of-consent laws in the country. In other words, she just wanted to aggravate a situation that was already detrimental to the public interests and give prosecutors and law-enforcement officials more opportunities to abuse their power and authority over everyday civilians. As for her speech, the most that Ms. Vogel proved was that the Puritans instead of the French colonized our nation.

At one point in her speech, Ms. Vogel acknowledged that some of these girls who married outside their age circles do live 50 to 70 years from that point on and live happily ever after. Then she turned around and painted a grim and grisly picture of what she believed usually happened to adolescent girls who entered into marriages, particularly with older individuals. She mentioned nothing about the epidemic of deadbeat teenage fathers in our nation. Hmm. Perhaps she is the mother of some deadbeat 15-year-old father. I would be interested in knowing if she has any teenage sons younger than 18 years old who fit that description. I’ve seen pictures of all three of her sons, and two of them look old enough to be in either middle school or high school. Then again, if she had a son over 18 years old who had gotten a 13- or 14-year-old girl pregnant and he were arrested on charges of statutory rape, I would not doubt that she would use all of her political influences in high places to get her son off the hook with the law. It makes me laugh on how some people will preach about how the law is the law, when, in reality, prosecutors and law-enforcement officials only appear to enforce the laws that they find to be popular and convenient to them. It could explain why so many young men get raped in prison and their assailants are never held accountable for their actions. Ms. Vogel focused her energies on disparaging any intentions an adult man might have for an adolescent girl regardless of how honorable they may be. The YouTube video below shows her making all these statements.

Interestingly enough, Virginia State Senator John S. Edwards contradicted Ms. Vogel’s arguments, and he made it a point that this same bill would infringe upon parental rights over their minor kids. He stated that he was not sure whether Juvenile and Domestic Relations judges in the Commonwealth of Virginia wanted to get involved in these matters. Moreover, the parents would know the situations of their minor offspring better than these judges would. Mr. Edwards proclaimed to be a child advocate; and he said that even in his role as such, he could not vote yes on this bill and he was, therefore, voting against it.

It has always been a toxic characteristic of the American culture to believe that adult men, particularly men over 30 years old, are the cause of most of teenage girls’ problems in our nation. On the other hand, whenever a teenage boy, say 14 or 15 years old, has sexual relations with a 12- or 13-year-old girl and then he abuses her in some way, it is as though the Puritanical Establishment is in a mindset that this young boy can do no wrong. Whenever a 13-year-old girl goes missing and then her dead body turns up somewhere after having been violated in every way possible, the public always suspects that her abductor is a man in his forties or older. Then when it turns out that her victimizer is a boy the same age as her or only one or two years older than her, there is likely an environment of disappointment that ensues among child advocates. It is like the incident in New Jersey from not too long ago in which two male juveniles murdered a 12-year-old girl.

Ms. Vogel impresses upon me as one of those child advocates, so to speak, who likely had an emotional meltdown after the TLC cable network cancelled 19 Kids And Counting. The way she complained in her previously described speech about how 90 percent of 13- and 14-year-old “children” have not married youngsters their own age in the Commonwealth of Virginia indicates that she is living in some kind of white picket fence fantasy world, and she probably got all sentimental and mushy every time that she heard Michelle Duggar tell her story on television about how she was only 14 years old and her husband, Jim Bob Duggar, was 15 years old when they first fell in love with each other. I begin to wonder how Ms. Vogel processed it all after the big sex scandal involving this couple’s oldest son, Joshua Duggar, hit the press and the media. I would not have put it past her to consort with someone like Joshua Duggar on a regular basis back when he was still the executive director of Family Research Council Action. I would not doubt that Ms. Vogel is one of the many sheep in this country who still believe that the Duggar family represents wholesome perfection, when nothing could be any further from the truth. I can clearly see that Ms. Vogel is of the opinion that the world would be a better and safer place if we lived in an age-appropriate utopia, so to speak, where everyone kept to their own generation in their romantic pursuits, especially whenever adolescents were involved. However, that delusion of hers just isn’t realistic.

When men are young boys here in our nation, their parents and society usually teach them that by the time they get to middle school, they need to be paying attention to pubescent and adolescent girls (12 years old and older) and admiring their physique. However, what parents and society make the mistake of teaching male youths when they are, say, 14 or 13 or even 12 years old is that when they approach their twenties, a light switch is going to grow on their bodies that they can easily flip off to put their hormones in check every time a middle school or high school girl smiles at them and says “Hi” in a flirtatious manner. Especially if she looks as though she could fit right in with a group of college women as for her physical and cosmetic precocity. That’s just not how it all plays out in the real world, and Ms. Vogel and others like her appear to be oblivious to this fact. If such a middle school or high school girl appears to be more sophisticated to a young man than even a college girl and he finds out how old she really is, his brain may tell him one thing and his hormones will likely tell him something different.

In response to Ms. Vogel’s complaints in her speech regarding the fact that teenage girls do gravitate towards older men and may end up marrying them before turning eighteen, if we are to allow Ms. Vogel and others like her to poison our criminal justice system even further than it has been in the form of laws that ban underage marriage, then our nation is in for some very trying times. In the YouTube video below, Dr. Judith Levine describes the irreparable harm that femi-nazis amazons like Ms. Vogel have caused and will continue to cause our nation and to what our nation will continue to be reduced.

The most interesting point that Dr. Levine and one of her audience members made in the above YouTube video was how much easier it was for the public to be on the winning side rather than on the side of reason.

Stephanie Nilva is a highly educated feminist who opposes an outright ban against teenage marriage.  Ms. Nilva is the executive director of Day One, which works against domestic violence. Therefore, she is an activist who is sensitive to the problems and concerns of adolescent girls as young as 12 years old, whereas Ms. Vogel is just an aggressive lawyer and a career politician who is only looking to make a name for herself by playing on the fears and insecurities of clueless civilians here in our nation.

If Virginia State Senator Jill Holtzman Vogel is elected as lieutenant governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia, that state will be stuck with another Kathleen Sebelius that Kansas was stuck with for so many years until President Obama appointed her as the United States Secretary of Health and Human Services. She may have flapped her jaws about her concerns over adolescent girls; but it is clear that she is really not concerned about adolescent girls, because if she were, she would have mentioned something about deadbeat teenage fathers in her previously described speech. She was even foolish enough to boast about her actions to ban teenage marriage in her state in her campaign materials that she mailed out to voters prior to the most recent June primary in her state. She was also foolish enough to do so in her official debate against her opponent, Justin Fairfax, on August 9, 2017. She is one of those politicians who believe that it is either their way or the highway. She would be an extremely poor choice as a leader. Therefore, I am urging anyone who is registered to vote in the Commonwealth of Virginia not to vote to elect Ms. Vogel as lieutenant governor of that state in the upcoming election in November. Even if you are a registered Republican, you should not vote for her.

I completely agree with Ms. McClellan’s point that “[s]ex with a child is illegal.” However, it is one thing for some 67-year-old man to grab a 3-year-old toddler off a playground and commit unspeakable acts upon her, whereas Matt Koso and Crystal Guyer Koso’s situation is another thing that is not to be compared with anything of the sort. I cannot subscribe to Ms. McClellan’s school of thought that when a 15-year-old boy gets a 14-year-old girl pregnant and then turns on her in a hostile manner, he can do no wrong; whereas if a 22-year-old man marries his pregnant 15-year-old girlfriend, then somehow magically he becomes a cross between the Marquis de Sade and Jack the Ripper. In any event, because she and Ms. Vogel have repeatedly brought up the subject of middle-aged men marrying middle school and high school girls, I believe that their argument deserves some recognition in the form of reproach and refutation. 

Now, I can understand why people’s eyebrows raise whenever they hear a story about a man in his seventies marrying an 8-year-old girl under Sharia law in Yemen or in one of the other Islamic nations. Conventional wisdom holds that a little girl who still has her baby teeth and still believes in the Easter Bunny should not be marrying a man who is old enough for a prescription of Levitra, Cialas, or Viagra. Also, I do not condone young girls being forced into polygamous marriages in these Latter Day Saints compounds out in Utah and throughout the southwestern part of our nation, because many of the Latter Day Saints sects that practice polygamy operate like gangs of mobsters. However, as I have stressed previously, I do not believe that our country will ever become a same-age-appropriate utopia; and the quest for one is futile at best.

Fourteen years ago, I came across a series of articles regarding underage marriage on the Internet, which Karen Tolkkinen had written and had published in the Mobile Register.  One of those articles was about a 42-year-old woman who had wedded a 14-year-old boy, and it is still published online.  Anyhow, Ms. Tolkkinen also published another article in the Mobile Register on the Internet in 2003 about an interview that she had done with a 34-year-old Alabama woman who had been married to a 63-year-old man for 20 years and had four kids with him. That is, this 34-year-old woman who chose to remain nameless in the interview was 14 years old and her husband was 43 years old when they both tied the knot back in 1983. I’ve gone back to the Mobile Register website to read that same article several times. Unfortunately, Ms. Tolkkinen unpublished this same online article in late 2015. There was still a cached copy of it available on the Internet up until the early part of 2016. In any event, I would like to provide a description to you of this same online article of hers herein.

According to Ms. Tolkkinen’s online article, when the husband, who was 43 years old at the time, asked the nameless 14-year-old girl to marry him in 1983, neither one of them had had any kind of sexual relations with each other previously. They claimed in the interview that they knew that they were both very much in love with each other and that marriage was the only way to make their relationship legal in the eyes of the law. The husband was a Vietnam War veteran, and the wife came from humble beginnings. As much of a shock as the marriage proposal may have been to the young girl’s mother back in 1983, the mother knew that this marriage was what her daughter wanted; and she already knew the 43-year-old man and had trusted that he would love and protect her daughter.

Throughout the interview between Ms. Tolkkinen and the 34-year-old woman who had married as a “child bride,” if you wish to call her that, the female interviewee had only one major complaint about her marriage to her husband, who was nearly three decades her senior. She hated that people might treat her, her husband, and their kids disparately just because of the age difference between her and her husband and the fact that she was only 14 years old when they first got married. She chose to keep her identity anonymous in the interview inasmuch as she was afraid that people in her community would not respect her marriage despite that she had been married to her husband for two decades by the time that this same online article regarding her had been published. Also, she did not want her four kids to be harassed. Somehow I find it to be a double standard on the part of society here in our nation that this interviewee and her husband dread getting treated like social outcasts because of the circumstances by which they got married, whereas adolescent boys 15 years old and younger who impregnate girls the same age as them or younger and then bail on them never seem to get any flak from society at all for their transgressions. In any event, this interviewee and her husband were happily married, and they had no regrets about their decision to get married when they did back in 1983.

At the time of the interview, the 34-year-old woman had a 10-year-old daughter, and Ms. Tolkkinen asked her what she would do if her daughter were to approach her and ask her for permission to get married four years from then when she got to be 14 years old. The 34-year-old woman responded that she would sit down with her daughter in that event and have a nice, long talk with her, but she would ultimately respect her daughter’s wishes, if push came to shove. The 34-year-old woman stressed that it was better to sit down and talk with your daughter if she was 14 years old and she wanted to get married rather than emphatically say no to her and refuse to listen to anything that she had to say.

Now, I am not going to pretend that this 34-year-old woman’s marriage to her 63-year-old husband for 20 years and counting was a scenario that would be shown on a rerun of Full House or even Growing Pains. There can be no question that this marriage was unconventional. Also, I can appreciate the point that anyone makes that the husband would have received many stares from his former classmates if he had brought his wife with him to his 25-year high school reunion right after he had married her. It’s not everyday that 42-year-olds, 43-year-olds, and 44-year-olds attend their 25-year high school reunion and run into a former classmate of theirs to discover that his or her spouse is only 14 years old and likely does not know any of the songs that are being played there at that event once the music starts playing and everyone begins dancing with their spouses. However, here is where I must defend this couple. There is no reason that this couple should have lived in fear that their children could be ridiculed and taunted if they had disclosed their names to the public in that interview with Ms. Tolkkinen back in 2003. There is no reason that anyone should have treated them like social outcasts, and I see way too much of this kind of ostracism going on throughout our nation.

This 34-year-old woman never complained about her husband abusing her or mistreating her. She never complained about suffering from any physical or psychological ailments as a result of her marriage at age 14 to a man in his forties. She never claimed that her husband ever raped her, and I would not have expected her to do so. She was every bit contented that she had married this man when she did, and she spoke as though she was going to stay married to him up until he died. Moreover, I would never sink so low that I would ever refer to their children as rape babies, and I would certainly hope that nobody else would do so either. In any event, in addition to what I stated above, the only major complaint that she had about her situation was that she wanted people outside her marriage and her family to mind their own business if they could not find it in themselves to treat her and her loved ones just like anyone else. Therefore, I have to question these so-called tragic-oriented findings and health problems that Ms. McClellan, Ms. Vogel, and the two non-profit organizations in league with them discovered in their research of the ills of underage marriage, so to speak. It as though these women find pleasure out of having an unlimited amount of control over the lives of others, particularly over the lives of men who are going to be adversely affected by these same laws. These femi-nonsensical politicians and activists are never going to have to see the inside of a men’s state correctional facility. So, what do they care what happens to men like Matt Koso who are railroaded and wrongfully locked up with the absolute garbage of society? I wouldn’t doubt that these same women even crack jokes about such trying ordeals among men. Ms. Vogel has been involved in hate-related activities, and, therefore, I must emphatically stress that nobody in the Commonwealth of Virginia should vote to elect her as the lieutenant governor of that state in November.  There is also indication that she has also committed sabotage against her political opponents in the form of slander.

I have seen Ms. McClellan’s video on YouTube regarding her efforts alongside Ms. Vogel to ban underage marriage in the Commonwealth of Virginia, and much like Kathleen Sebelius, she and Ms. Vogel speak as though this new marriage law is going to be so beneficial to adolescent girls and to society in general. According to them, now law-enforcement officials and child welfare workers will have full reign over situations involving suspected violations of the state’s age-of-consent laws, whereas previously they felt that the old marriage law put roadblocks in their way. Did it ever occur to Ms. McClellan and her legion of femi-nazi amazons that those roadblocks were there for a reason? After you read an online article titled “Epilogue: Koso couple still in love,” nobody can say that Crystal Guyer Koso, her kids, and particularly Matt Koso are in any way better off now as a result of former Nebraska Attorney General Jon Bruning’s actions against them; and, sure, they were able to get married legally down in Kansas before Kathleen Sebelius was able to zero in on them in her capacity as governor of that state, but their lives would have been so much different in a positive sense if public officials had stayed out of their personal business.

Because of his felony status, Mr. Koso has encountered severe difficulties in securing employment. Meanwhile, his wife, Crystal Guyer Koso, and their children have suffered the adverse effects of this setback for him. Taxpayers constantly complain about too many people being on welfare. However, it is elected officials like Ms. McClellan and Ms. Vogel who put these people on welfare. I have to say that if anyone votes for fanatical femi-nazis like them, they don’t have the right to confront anyone at a checkout counter in a grocery store about using a food stamps card to buy their groceries. Some ultraconservatives may argue that our nation just needs to do away with the welfare system completely. My response to that suggestion is, “Good luck!” I used to work at a social services agency, and I asked one of the caseworkers there what would happen if all the social welfare programs across the nation were eliminated; and she told me that mayhem would ensue everywhere. When you listen to Jeanne Smoot interview in this one YouTube video titled “Inside Scoop Virginia March 14, 2016,” she may initially give you the impression of being this maternal-like Good Samaritan. However, when you consider the fact that her efforts to eliminate underage marriage are going to continue to do more harm than good, there is no getting around the fact that she does not have our country’s best interests at heart. Like Ms. Vogel, she is a lawyer looking to make a name for herself so that she can score brownie points with the public at large.

Our nation has an epidemic of deadbeat teenage fathers, and here Ms. McClellan and her femi-nazi amazon colleagues are concerned about adult men over 21 years old marrying their pregnant teenage girlfriends to steer clear of “statutory rape” raps? Wow. I begin to wonder if any of these women have a 15-year-old son who goes around knocking up every 12-, 13-, and 14-year-old girl in sight and then bails on them and subsequently “slut-shames” them before their peers. If they do, I question whether they would do anything to stop their teenage sons from engaging in that sort of conduct. If their teenage son were to get a 14-year-old girl pregnant, I would not be at all surprised if one of these femi-nazis were to blow the young girl off and tell her parents that they should have put her on the pill when she was 11 years old. These femi-nazis are notorious for their nefarious hypocrisy. Also, I guess in their viewpoint, each and every one of us men should fit the mold of the Danny Tanner character on reruns of Full House or the Bill Miller character on reruns of Still Standing.

As I have pointed out previously, Ms. McClellan and her femi-nazi amazons claimed that this new marriage law was aimed at curbing human trafficking. Really? Okay. Let me get this. If a 19-year-old man is unable to marry his 14- or 15-year-old pregnant girlfriend, then everyone is going to be so much better off if he goes to prison and has to register on the sex offender registry for either a lengthy period of time or for the rest of his life and the girl ends up raising her baby on welfare? Ms. McClellan and her femi-nazi amazons certainly have their heads high up in the clouds. Take one look at the YouTube video below, and you will see that human trafficking is going on every day inside men’s state correctional facilities here in our nation right underneath our very own noses.

The two convicts interviewed in the above YouTube video who brag about how they force weaker inmates to become their prison wives comprise that kind of human garbage that young men harmed by Ms. McClellan’s agenda will be locked up with once a large number of carnal knowledge cases involving teenage girls begins to flood the criminal court dockets throughout the Commonwealth of Virginia. The two men in the above YouTube video do not belong in front of a television camera. They belong on death row in a cell only a few feet away from the electric chair in which they are to meet their final fate. It is more than obvious that these two men will never have remorse for their actions and they will never reform themselves to become pillars of society. I once saw a documentary on television about the prison system in Norway, and their prisons were so safe at the time of that documentary that they were able to house men and women in the same facilities. Well, as anyone can see, it is not that way here in the United States of America. 

It amazes me how fanatical femi-nazi amazons like Ms. McClellan and Ms. Vogel never seem to entertain bills that would make prison rape punishable by the death penalty. Of course, then again, public officials never seem to acknowledge that any such atrocities are going on within our prisons throughout our nation. They’re more concerned about some 14-year-old girl passing her 21-year-old boyfriend off as a 15-year-old boy to her parents and then wooing them into letting her marry him after they find out his real age.

Some of you reading my article may think that any adult man who even entertains the thought of marrying an adolescent girl deserves to be locked up in state prison with the scum of society and subsequently gang-raped. However, despite what you may believe, these convicts who commit prison rape have no moral compass whatsoever and are even hypocrites seeking whatever excuse they can find to commit sexual violence. For example, you may have heard of the MS-13 (Mara Salvatrucha-13) gang from El Salvador. They are notorious for not only harming teenage girls but also for raping girls as young as 8 years old. Many of them are doing time in prison and think nothing of sexually victimizing inmates whom they see as being vulnerable.

Do any of these femi-nazi amazons in elected positions understand or realize the kind of danger that a young man and possibly his adolescent fiancée or wife are exposed to whenever that young man is compelled to register on the sex offender registry for doing something for which most teenage boys younger than 18 years old would not even be stigmatized? Approximately a decade ago, there was an incident in which some vigilante lunatic named Stephen Marshall searched the names and addresses of men on the sex offender registry and traveled all the way to Maine to murder this one man who was only on the sex offender registry inasmuch as he had intimate relations with a girlfriend back when he was 19 years old and the girlfriend was only a few days shy of 16 years old, which was the statutory age of consent in Maine at the time.

Luckily, Mr. Marshall took his own life once police began closing in on him. He is an example of one of the many lunatics that are going to come out of the woodwork after carnal knowledge cases involving teenage girls begin inundating criminal court dockets across the nation in the event that femi-nazi amazons like Ms. McClellan and Ms. Vogel get their way concerning the marriage laws.

It was only back in 2014 that a vigilante couple, who were also white supremacists, murdered a man on the sex offender registry as well as his wife in South Carolina.  I don’t know what the circumstances were behind the male murder victim’s conviction. If his wife stayed with him, I am thinking that he could not have been that bad of a person. Then again, I don’t know all the details of his criminal history.  The vigilante couple that murdered him insisted that he was a child molester, but they were no more rational in their judgment upon doing what they did than Stephen Marshall was in his when he committed murder.  In any event, I can say this much. If this had been a situation in which this same vigilante couple had murdered a husband and wife who had fallen into similar or identical circumstances as Matt Koso and Crystal Guyer Koso did and if I were summoned to serve on the jury for that vigilante couple’s murder trial, I probably would have voted that they both received the death penalty as their sentence. In the YouTube video below, Dr. Judith Levine warns the public about the problems that our sex offender registry laws cause society as a whole.

An important point that Dr. Levine made in her YouTube video above was that we had ghettos throughout our country where clusters of individuals who had been convicted of non-violent sex offenses under the age-of-consent laws were usually living homeless, because they couldn’t live anywhere else near where minors congregated and they had an impossible time finding employment. If they were not living in these ghettos, then they were living underneath bridges. This problem could pose a national security risk to our country inasmuch as these individuals have so very little to lose and would make easy targets for terrorist organizations like ISIS to recruit. Of course, femi-nazi amazons like Ms. Sebelius, Ms. Vogel, Ms. McClellan and others like them are all too nearsighted to see this threat that their policies are causing our nation in this same regard. I’m not saying that these men are unpatriotic. However, our criminal justice system has treated them with such disdain enough to cause them to become disgruntled with our public officials and tempted to join forces with some subversive political group that is hostile towards our nation. 

Now, our government could arm our military and our police with more weapons and ammunition than they already have in order to prepare for such scary times to come, but here is my question. Do we really want to go down that road as a nation? Jesse Ventura once made a comment on television that many of us no longer lived in the same country in which we grew up. I believe him. When I was a little kid, I never saw police officers on television dressed in military attire and driving tanks as you may have seen on television right after the bombing at the Boston Marathon so many years back. Such events are a recipe for a Fascist military police state. Too many people are seeing this issue with tunnel vision rather than looking at the whole broad picture from a bird’s eye view.

Because of femi-nazi amazons like Ms. McClellan and Ms. Vogel, our nation is gradually turning into a maximum-security prison. Not before long, we’re going to be electing a warden every four years instead of a president, if we keep going on the same course we’ve been going on in the form of these Puritanical sex laws and their likes. I am all for protecting children, but I believe that we can only succeed at doing so as a society if we are sincere with ourselves about the difference between prepubescent children and adolescents. Everything is not black and white. There are many shades of gray regarding this topic. It absolutely appalls me that our criminal justice system will do everything in its power to destroy someone like Matt Koso and others like him. However, prison rapists can get on television and brag about all the inmates that they have sexually brutalized over the years without having to face any kind of penal retribution for their actions. Then, to make matters worse, gentlemen like Mr. Koso are housed with such human garbage and are left to fend for themselves in a dangerous environment where corrections officers are not going to have their backs. Of course, as I said before, Ms. McClellan, Ms. Vogel, Ms. Sebelius and femi-nazi amazons like them are never going to know what the inside of a men’s correctional facility is like. It is women like them who just love to throw around every derogatory word beginning with the letter “p” at every man who doesn’t meet up to their expectations of a knight in shining armor. There should be a law in every state that compels every female legislator to work as a corrections officer in a men’s penitentiary for at least one month every time these femi-nazi amazons get involved in making laws that hurt men’s lives and futures. Meanwhile, adolescent boys 12 years old and older continue to contribute to the increase in teen pregnancies, and adolescent girls eventually get trapped in the vicious vortex of poverty as a result; and Ms. McClellan and femi-nazis amazons like her continue to act oblivious to it all.

As I was reading articles regarding the new marriage bill in the Commonwealth of Virginia and watching YouTube videos about it on Ms. McClellan’s YouTube channel, the only two state legislators whose opinions and observations made any sense were Virginia State Senator J. Chapman “Chap” Petersen and Virginia State House Delegate David A. LaRock. Mr. Petersen made a point about this new marriage law likely giving the government too much power to meddle needlessly into the personal lives and decisions of pregnant teenage girls and their families. Mr. LaRock was worried about how this new marriage law would cause a dramatic increase in pregnant teenage girls obtaining abortions in the Commonwealth of Virginia. I have never been keen about anyone ending the life of an unborn baby. Of course, I know that there are others out there who sharply oppose my viewpoint on abortion, and I respect their opinions. Nevertheless, a very valid point that Mr. LaRock made was that he was not convinced that this new marriage law was going to be “an effective way to fix the problems it was targeting like forced marriage and sex trafficking.” His statement hit the truth right on the button. It is one thing to stop an unwanted marriage from going through, but there is no justification to make others suffer as a result of such an effort if those others have nothing to do with the forced marriage. Also, most men don’t marry their wives to pander them regardless of how young their wives may be. Ms. McClellan and her legion of femi-nazi amazons successfully pushed their anti-man agenda through the legislative process under the guise of a crusade to bring consistency to child-safety policies, so to speak.

If Ms. McClellan and Ms. Vogel had truly wanted to do something to benefit the welfare of adolescent girls in their quest to defend their safety and their honor, so to speak, they could have offered something more in the new marriage bill in their state. For example, they could have offered a provision that would grant legal immunity to adolescent girls who refuse to testify in frivolous and malicious statutory rape cases whenever they feel that they have been wrongfully labeled as victims and their boyfriends have been wrongfully labeled as perpetrators. They could have sought to expand the death penalty to execute convicts who sexually brutalize their inmates, but they didn’t want to go there despite that this tragedy in our nation’s prisons is undoubtedly a form of human trafficking and sexual slavery. Of course, they didn’t, because they weren’t looking out for anyone’s best interest and they were only looking to suit their own agenda. Ms. Vogel’s claim that she pushed this bill through the state legislature inasmuch as it was “looking out for the child’s best interest” is a mendacious statement on her part. I can confidently say that there are more women here in our nation that are happy that they got married at 13 years old than there are men that are happy that they got gang-raped in prison.

Rae Paoletta sensationalized on this event in the Commonwealth of Virginia in her online article titled “It’s 2016 and this state just made it illegal for 12-year-olds to get married.”  I could tell that she was another fanatical femi-nazi on a man-hating mission. She embedded this one ridiculous YouTube video in her online article that showed a fake staging of a 12-year-old bride and her 65-year-old groom getting wedding pictures in the middle of Manhattan to see how others around them would react. I wonder what one of the former presidents of Argentina, Juan Peron, and his sweetheart, Nelly Rivas, would think of that YouTube video, if they were still alive. The YouTube video was unrealistic, because if any such married couple did exist, they would not go flaunting their new marriage off to the whole world in the middle of a busy urban metropolis like New York City. They would have kept the whole matter private. Moreover, the producer of the YouTube video purposely had the young girl frowning throughout it to send some kind of chastising message to its audience with which not everyone is going to agree.

Ms. Paoletta had the audacity to poke fun at Mr. LaRock by preaching that he did not have a uterus. Okay, Ms. Paoletta. You’re never going to see the inside of a men’s correctional facility, even if you do someday get railroaded either for something you didn’t do or for something for which you should not be punished. Then she referred to Mr. Petersen as “Chap” in a way that suggested that she did not believe that his opinion should be taken seriously. Wow, Ms. Paoletta. Perhaps there are people who feel the same way about you.

Some of the so-called facts in Ms. Paoletta’s online article were questionable in terms of their credibility. For example, she stated that in Alabama, only a parent’s consent was needed for a person under the age of 16 to get married. However, Alabama Code § 30-1-4 specifies that nobody can get married in Alabama before 16 years of age under any circumstances.  She would use words like “egregious” and “horrifying” to mislead her readers in her description of underage marriage. I came across other online articles in which fanatical femi-nazis applied the same mind manipulation tactics on their readers.

One point that these femi-nazi amazons have made in support of eliminating underage marriage is the fact that minors cannot enter into contracts and yet they do not have the legal ability to dissolve marriages. My response to that complaint is that instead of eliminating underage marriage altogether, why not revamp the marriage laws so that they mirror the laws regarding contracts and minors? That is, the law could be revamped so that a minor can just as easily break out of a marriage as they can out of any other contractual relationship. Of course, such a solution would not have made sense to Ms. McClellan and her legion of femi-nazi amazons, because it would have made too many people happy and they wouldn’t want for that to happen. There were just so many other ways that these femi-nazi amazons could have passed legislation to address forced marriage, but they were just dead set on keeping adult men and adolescent girls apart so that these femi-nazi amazons’ middle school and high school sons can zero in on these young girls and turn them into single teenage mothers on welfare.

The average age when American women first got married increased from 20 years old to 27 years old between the 1960s and 2015. Underage marriages are significantly rarer here in our nation than they are in other parts of the world. Therefore, we should not allow ourselves to be fooled whenever Ms. McClellan or any femi-nazi amazons like her attempt to feed the public with their propaganda. Their definition of rape is obviously much different than that of rational people in that they obviously ignore what goes on in prisons across our nation and, at the same time, they favor state legislatures expanding the age-of-consent laws to incarcerate as many otherwise law-abiding men as they can. A similar bill has been introduced to the state legislature in California. New York actually passed the underage marriage ban. Well, I hear that California wishes to secede from the Union. I guess such a bill would give those Californians the incentive to do so. Also, when I lived in New York, I noticed that there were more unwed teenage mothers living on welfare than in any other part of the country. Therefore, I somehow don’t think that their new law banning underage marriage is going to improve that state’s economy. It should also be noted that someone is automatically tried as an adult if they are at least 16 years of age in New York. Therefore, wouldn’t it only make sense to allow for someone that age to be able to get legally married? New York’s only hope now is that Governor Cuomo is one of the few governors in the country who has questioned the fairness and integrity of the age-of-consent laws in our nation.

New Jersey, Maryland, and New Hampshire are smart states. Either their state legislatures voted down such bills attempting to ban underage marriage in their jurisdictions or their governors vetoed them for one reason or another. Fortunately, I guess irony prevailed this time around, as New Jersey is the same state where Unchained At Last is headquartered and Fraidy Reiss didn’t get what she wanted. Moreover, all these femi-nazis who are pushing to outlaw teenage marriage in the United States of America need to take this following piece of information and smoke it in their pipes. According to information I came across in the Reader’s Digest magazine, NEW JERSEY HAS THE LOWEST DIVORCE RATE OF ANY STATE IN THE NATION. In other words, that low divorce rate in New Jersey even applies to teen brides (and grooms). Therefore, such information contradicts these femi-nazis’ contention that underage marriage increases the divorce rate.

The criminal justice system has been given too much power and authority over the private lives of many people here in our nation as it is.  The Draconian age-of-consent laws in our country are greatly to blame for it. At the same time, the truly violent and dangerous criminals are getting away with everything under the sun, because they have the entire system mapped out and the system has been allowed to spread itself too thin in society’s efforts to make us into this perfect civilization that resembles a rerun of some 1950s television sitcom. As much as I regret to say it, it is the truth. Therefore, we should not allow for elected officials to dictate our private and personal lives in the way that Ms. McClellan and Ms. Vogel have done so to the people of Virginia. Whenever female elected officials claim to be champions of women and young girls, we should not take their word for it. Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is a notorious example of a two-faced hypocrite whose claims in that respect are mendacious at best.

[Article Continued In Part J; Section 2]

This article is copyright-protected.



Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

I have upvoted and shared this across the web. Very well written and well spoken. Thank you.
💛💚💙💜❤🌛🌞🌜❤💜💙💚💛

·

Thank you, ladyreijya. Today I'm going to be putting together a table of contents and posting it to make it easier for people to navigate through my article.

Ladies and gentlemen? Oops. I have detected two typographical errors in the above segment of my article. Above the first embedded YouTube video of Dr. Judith Levine, I wrote:
"In the YouTube video below, Dr. Judith Levine describes the irreparable harm that femi-nazis amazons like Ms. Vogel have caused and will continue to cause our nation and to what our nation will continue to be reduced."

It should read: "In the YouTube video below, Dr. Judith Levine describes the irreparable harm that femi-nazi amazons like Ms. Vogel have caused and will continue to cause our nation and to what our nation will continue to be reduced."

In the third paragraph below the second YouTube video of Dr. Judith Levine I have embedded in my article, it reads:
"Meanwhile, adolescent boys 12 years old and older continue to contribute to the increase in teen pregnancies, and adolescent girls eventually get trapped in the vicious vortex of poverty as a result; and Ms. McClellan and femi-nazis amazons like her continue to act oblivious to it all."

It should read: "Meanwhile, adolescent boys 12 years old and older continue to contribute to the increase in teen pregnancies, and adolescent girls eventually get trapped in the vicious vortex of poverty as a result; and Ms. McClellan and femi-nazi amazons like her continue to act oblivious to it all."

I apologize for any confusion these typographical errors may have caused.

Ladies and gentlemen? I'd like to clear something up about the above segment to my article. Therein I stated: [An important point that Dr. Levine made in her YouTube video above was that we had ghettos throughout our country where clusters of individuals who had been convicted of non-violent sex offenses under the age-of-consent laws were usually living homeless, because they couldn’t live anywhere else near where minors congregated and they had an impossible time finding employment. If they were not living in these ghettos, then they were living underneath bridges.]

It may appear that I was referring to the second video from Dr. Judith Levine that I included in the above segment of my article, but I was really referring to the first video from Dr. Levine that I included therein. I apologize for any confusion this may have caused. In any event, both of Dr. Levine's videos touch upon the topic and are very interesting.