‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

California bans child marriage, a practice still legal in 32 US states

83 points · 136 comments · dabinat

  1. GeekyBear · · focus · HN ↗

    [dead]

    1. stackghost · · focus · HN ↗
      > states like California decide that those under 18 are too young to make a decision on marriage, but old enough to decide that they want to have sex change surgery.

      I don’t think this is factually accurate.

      Sex-reassignment surgery (or whatever we are calling it these days) requires parental consent in California if the person seeking it is a minor.

      1. GeekyBear · · focus · HN ↗
        > Sex-reassignment surgery (or whatever we are calling it these days) requires parental consent in California if the person seeking it is a minor.

        So why shouldn't you be allowed to get married with parental consent in the same state?

        I'm OK with a state deciding it either way, but I'm looking for a little consistency.

        1. stackghost · · focus · HN ↗
          >So why shouldn't you be allowed to get married with parental consent in the same state?

          >I'm OK with a state deciding it either way, but I'm looking for a little consistency.

          I'm not Californian, but in most democracies things default to "legal" until there's explicitly a law passed against it, or if a broad concept is already illegal then edge cases default to "illegal" until a specific exemption law is passed. In general, parental consent is required for all medical procedures performed on a minor, so I would hazard a guess that:

          a) sex reassignment surgery on a minor falls under the broader category of "medical procedures you have to get parental consent for"

          b) somebody was sufficiently bothered by the previous state of affairs with regards to minors getting married and the potential for harm[0] that they passed a law against it, but no such explicit ban has been passed for minors seeking sex reassignment surgery (yet?).

          To me that seems wholly consistent with basic common sense, plus laws are notorious for lagging behind the times.

          >I'm OK with a state deciding it either way, but I'm looking for a little consistency.

          Why is consistency (parental consent vs not) in this matter this so important to you?

          [0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=49917494">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=49917494

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.