Yeah, I understand why they have the law, but I just don't like that there are never any exceptions, like if both members actually know what they are doing and they agree to do it, instead of just assuming that the boy tried to take advantage of the girl, which is usually what is assumed. I think they should at least lower the age or something, maybe 15 at the very lowest, so that innocent young men don't go to jail for no reason.

Let me tell you a story. This happened to my Government teacher's brother, during college.

So the guy (don't remember his name) is at a college party. Long story short, he has sex with this girl who claims she is of age They both consented of course. Later, the cops show up, and they  use their trickery and their smooth-talking, and so the guy spilled all the beans. The police tracked down the girl. Turns out, she was using a fake ID, and so she lied about her age. But guess what? The guy was arrested for rape of a minor, and he went to jail. Doesn't matter that the girl lied to him about her age. He went to jail because a girl lied to him. Did she go to jail? Of course not, obviously she's the victim. That incident affected his entire life.

Imagine how difficult it would be to try and get a job when you have to put that you raped a minor on your resume.

This story right here is the essence of injustice. These situations are the things I probably hate most about our justice system. Even though it has never been an issue in my life, I hate it because it is invasive and takes away free will.

It's almost impossible to judge whether a minor is mature enough to make those kind of decisions, as everyone matures differently and not at the same age. So, their conclusion is to give everyone the same punishment. To form equality of punishment. Equal, unbiased, but not fair. It treats everyone the same. But the thing is, everyone is not the same. Everyone is not out to rape young women. But the government and the law enforcement seem to think so. 

Someone can be 15, even 14 (maybe even younger) and be mature enough to understand and accept the physical and emotional risks associated with sex. Just because the jury (or the judge or whatever) can't see that, doesn't mean the older member of the couple needs to be punished. It's just ridiculous. If that's not injustice, then slap my ass and call me grandma.

For this issue, the government cares more about equality than freedom. 

You and me baby ain't nothin' but mammals...

So let's do it like the do on the Discovery Channel. 

The law is far less strict where the age gap is less than five years. There would probably be no prosecution there. The law is supposed to protect 14 year olds from being sexually exploited by 40 year olds.

And I really don't think a dog humping your leg is equivalent to having full on intercourse with a dog.

Then they would have an awkward moment waking up to the dog everyday. 

I much more condone this than the awful treatment many animals receive in the food industry. And that seems to be legal because little is done (or can be done) to stop it.

they were making a documentary in Nat Geo called TABOO...

That's fucked up. Should definitely be considered animal abuse.

Well.....I say let the dogs be free and choose for themselves!

Or maybe not lol