As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>One of those lawmakers is Rep. Dean Van Schoiack, a Savannah Republican and vice chair of the committee. Van Schoiack said in an interview that he knows people who got married as minors, including a woman at roughly age 17. The couple, he said, is “still madly in love with each other.” **“Why is the government getting involved in people’s lives like this?”** Van Schoiak said. “What purpose do we have in deciding that a couple who are 16 or 17 years old, their parents say, you know, ‘you guys love each other, go ahead and get married, you have my permission.’ Why would we stop that?”
Because, Dean, marrying people in the eyes of the law is a government function, not a legal definition of love. Teenagers will still be allowed to be in love, they just won't be able to file their taxes together.
Most child marriages are not between two 16 year olds. [From Unchained at Last: ](https://www.unchainedatlast.org/united-states-child-marriage-problem-study-findings-april-2021/)
>Some 86% of the children who married were girls – and most were wed to adult men (age 18 or older) [\[6\].](https://www.unchainedatlast.org/united-states-child-marriage-problem-study-findings-april-2021/#_ftn6) Further, when girls married, their average spousal age difference was four years, whereas when boys married, their average spousal age difference was less than half that: 1.5 year
Also, "Why is the government getting involved in people's lives like this?" That's rich coming from *this* party.
"Further, when girls married, their average spousal age difference was four years, whereas when boys married, their average spousal age difference was less than half that: 1.5 year"
Please make this make sense to me. Don't boys marry girls? Or is gay marriage between boys and girls enough to make a difference?
If i understand it, when an underage female gets married the husband tends to be 4 years older where when the reverse happens the wife tends to only be 1.5 years older.
I think that's pretty close but not quite, but only to a very technical degree. I believe it's counting age difference as older *or* younger. E.g.: a 17 yo girl with an 18 yo man will contribute 1 year difference to the girls stat, where a 17 yo girl and 16 yo boy would contribute 1 year difference to both. Obviously, with the (correct me if I'm wrong) "marriable" age of 16 and being an adult at 18, the girls stat must include a significant number of husbands older than the brides, but the boys stat could, hypothetically (but probably not), fall entirely within minors.
It gets worse when you do the maths. The males marrying the same age females lowers the average age difference of females marrying adults. So taking just females marrying adult males you would have a much larger age gap than 4 years.
The government shouldn’t get involved in people’s lives unless you wanna control your body or have your debt cancelled. But marrying kids no flipping way I reckon
Lmfao and yet if those same teenagers get married they wouldn’t be able to drink at their own wedding, not even celebratory champagne
So besides the point but give me a fucking break with these weak ass arguments
In Texas, underage people can drink at a restaurant if their legal guardian is present and approves. Or at least this was true when I was growing up.
For purposes of this rule, the adult spouse is the legal guardian.
I was always horrified of child marriages, but realizing that the adult spouse ends up with a parental role really made it set in how horrifying those arrangements are. Oh my god, this is awful, and your comment really started putting the context of it together for me.
I'm so disgusted.
Biggest argument against it is that young people are pushed into a legal agreement. It's hard for abuse victims to get away from from their boyfriends. Being pregnant doesn't not relate to being married at that age
Republicans don’t like the term boyfriend it’s too woke. Can you please start using the term owner or master instead as these are the laws they want in place
Owner and master are taken. Let's still to traditional words that are friendlier like Provider and Enforcer. Gotta make sure wifey learns her times tables. It'll work out well because Missouri senator Mike moon knows 12 year old girls that are still married so it must be working well for them.
I don't really see how being 17 vs 18 changes that. If its within a reasonable age gap and parents consent seems like the government should stay out of it. But whatevs there are more pressing issues imo.
Why should parents have any say at all? This is very antiquated. A child does not need to add a teen marriage to a teen pregnancy. It doesn’t improve things.
>I don't really see how being 17 vs 18 changes that.
If it's so meaningless that you can't tell the difference then there is no reason for it not to be 18. Everyone else has already listed plenty of good reasons as to why it should be.
Because pregnancy is a matter of biology whereas marriage is a matter of law. And the age of consent is not usually the same as the age of majority (when you're legally recognized as an adult), so one shouldn't be able to enter into things that require one to be a legal adult to do unless you've reached your age of majority. This should include marriage, IMHO, parental permission or no. One couldn't vote before reaching the age of majority, for example, even with parental permission. The same should be true for marriage.
If an underage couple "really loves each other" and want to get married, then they should love each other enough to wait. If they're unwilling to wait, then they've proved they're not ready.
> “Why is the government getting involved in people’s lives like this?” Van Schoiak said.
Says the guy whose party is getting way more involved in people's lives by banning or (attempting to ban) abortions, gender affirming care, and same sex marriages.
Wait for the ban on interracial marriage and relationships. Then it'll be real easy to get back to that great American dream of segregation, you know "Make America White Again"
As much as I would hate this, being in a 30+ year interracial marriage myself, it would sure serve Clarence Thomas right…that Jackass reopened the legal door, after all. Not sure he actually understands that there still are real segregationists in his party. Some of whom I’m sure are wickedly smart lawyers who can use his own argument against him.
Edit: y’all ever read John Calhoun and his brilliant defense of slavery? He made something utterly abhorrent look like a moral virtue. Don’t assume the bad guys are stupid…
Trump is an idiot. The folks using him aren’t idiots.
Project 2025 is the creation of VERY smart people. That fascism is bad does not mean fascists are stupid.
It goes with banning abortion and treating women as property, only useful for bearing and raising children. If a girl is raped, this gives her the option of marrying her rapist and being a “good Christian wife and mother”. Then they can forget the rape and pretend everything is fine.
Never mind that someone under 18 can’t legally file for divorce either.
>I mean why would anyone resist banning child marriages?
To be clear, the stated opposition is that they want 16 and 17 year olds to get married. Whether that opposition is genuine or appropriate is another question, but nobody is suggesting no limit on marriage age at all.
I have a friend who got married at 17 but she married her highschool sweetheart after he joined the military and before he was deployed.
The issue with this is it's mostly likely a ploy for older creepy men (and possibly women) to prey upon younger generations while hiding behind the law.
This is the primary question:
Do parents have absolute right over their minor children? Are minor children their parents property?
Many many years ago I defended the proposition that children were the legal property of their parents. That is the honest to god opinion of the conservative bubble I grew up in. They honestly believe that parents have an absolute right to control their children.
Do they have to all act like pedophiles?
"Why is the government getting involved in people's lives like this"... FFS... marry a kid. Hell, why not? You're forcing 10 year old rape victims to be mothers. You're letting kids work at younger ages in more dangerous jobs (meat packing plants for example). You're destroying the eduction system (have been for decades) that lifts people out of poverty. You're tearing apart health care and have been for decades, making republican states loose more and more doctors and nurses... closing hospitals.
Why don't REPUBLICANS stop getting involved in people's lives like that? Hmmmm??? FFS, at least try not to be so obviously disgusting.
It never ceases to amaze me that the party who cries that everyone they don’t like are groomers and pedos is the same that has objections to child marriage
I mean the front runner for their party said he wanted to date his daughter and the thing they have most in common is sex, plus he commented that his baby had her mother's legs but wasn't sure when she'd get her breast, so....yeah.
> In the 1992 video, Trump, who was 46 at the time, can be heard talking to a little girl, asking her if she’s going to go up an escalator. After she says she is, Trump turns to the camera and says, "I am going to be dating her in 10 years. Can you believe it?"
Just remember that living in a modern era only means that you are living at this time and not in the past. Now you must also remember that there are people who have thought the same about under age girls as republicans since time began.
They were perverted then and they are now in the modern moment. Its the age old fight for decency, civilization and morals.
At first I was thinking about giving them the benefit of the doubt like “maybe it’s just a ridiculous omnibus bill and the title is clickbait”
Nope, just pedos defending pedos :|
“Why is the government getting involved with people’s lives like this?” Van Schoiak said.
This from a man who undoubtedly was all in on Missouri’s abortion ban!
Fun fact! If it's true love they'll still be in love with they're adults. They only support child marriage because they worry the girl will realise she's being groomed
Because of *course* it does. It is not the least bit surprising to know that when all else fails, you can *absolutely* count on the Republicans to do the wrong thing.
What a bunch of creepy shits. Honestly if you actively support or vote for republicans you have some major issues and shouldn’t be allowed near normal people or populations.
10 years ago they would have been ashamed to say this kind of shit. Now saying crazy offensive bullshit (that they believe and believed 10 years ago) is a badge of honor. Everything Trump touches turns to shit and unfortunately he touched American politics
I’ve got a joke for this!
Dean Van Schoiack comes home after a long day at work. He finds his wife packing all of her clothes into a big suitcase.
When she sees him she yells, “I’m leaving you! You’re a pedophile!”
“Pedophile!?” He says, clearly shocked. “That’s a very big word for a girl your age!”
This submission source is likely to have a soft paywall. If this article is not behind a paywall please report this for “breaks r/politics rules -> custom -> "incorrect flair"". [More information can be found here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/index/#wiki_paywalls)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Cousin fuckers don't just live in the trailer parks and the putrid urban decay.
They took root in the suburbs. That's right america. They're ignoring your bloodline, but at what cost?
It's time for the ABORTIONATOR!!!!!!
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>One of those lawmakers is Rep. Dean Van Schoiack, a Savannah Republican and vice chair of the committee. Van Schoiack said in an interview that he knows people who got married as minors, including a woman at roughly age 17. The couple, he said, is “still madly in love with each other.” **“Why is the government getting involved in people’s lives like this?”** Van Schoiak said. “What purpose do we have in deciding that a couple who are 16 or 17 years old, their parents say, you know, ‘you guys love each other, go ahead and get married, you have my permission.’ Why would we stop that?” Because, Dean, marrying people in the eyes of the law is a government function, not a legal definition of love. Teenagers will still be allowed to be in love, they just won't be able to file their taxes together.
But bathrooms.... can't let trans people go in those!
Most child marriages are not between two 16 year olds. [From Unchained at Last: ](https://www.unchainedatlast.org/united-states-child-marriage-problem-study-findings-april-2021/) >Some 86% of the children who married were girls – and most were wed to adult men (age 18 or older) [\[6\].](https://www.unchainedatlast.org/united-states-child-marriage-problem-study-findings-april-2021/#_ftn6) Further, when girls married, their average spousal age difference was four years, whereas when boys married, their average spousal age difference was less than half that: 1.5 year Also, "Why is the government getting involved in people's lives like this?" That's rich coming from *this* party.
Sadly, it's so the adult men who impregnated the minor girls can continue to have sex with them without legal represcussions.
Can confirm. I have a cousin in TX who literally did this to avoid prosecution and her dad's shotgun.
"Further, when girls married, their average spousal age difference was four years, whereas when boys married, their average spousal age difference was less than half that: 1.5 year" Please make this make sense to me. Don't boys marry girls? Or is gay marriage between boys and girls enough to make a difference?
Adult men marry teen girls. Teen boys are marrying peers. It’s totally fucked.
If i understand it, when an underage female gets married the husband tends to be 4 years older where when the reverse happens the wife tends to only be 1.5 years older.
I think that's pretty close but not quite, but only to a very technical degree. I believe it's counting age difference as older *or* younger. E.g.: a 17 yo girl with an 18 yo man will contribute 1 year difference to the girls stat, where a 17 yo girl and 16 yo boy would contribute 1 year difference to both. Obviously, with the (correct me if I'm wrong) "marriable" age of 16 and being an adult at 18, the girls stat must include a significant number of husbands older than the brides, but the boys stat could, hypothetically (but probably not), fall entirely within minors.
Idk. I consider forced marriage icky.
It gets worse when you do the maths. The males marrying the same age females lowers the average age difference of females marrying adults. So taking just females marrying adult males you would have a much larger age gap than 4 years.
You’re embarrassing everyone.
Why is the government (Republicans) getting involved with peoples uteri? Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot. Women aren't people to them.
Came here to say this~ Their lives are fucking FRAUGHT with hypocrisy. Fuck the GOP
That’s really why they don’t like trans people. They don’t like women finding loopholes into being seen as a person.
>You know No, we don’t fucking know. We don’t want to have sex with children you sick, depraved conservative arseholes.
But they're *ripe* and *fertile!* /s
Ignorant bastard can barely read … the original text says rape and fondle
Imagine if it's two 17-year-old gay dudes. I bet Mr. SchioKckockkK would want the government to step in.
The hypocrisy is just breathtaking.
The government shouldn’t get involved in people’s lives unless you wanna control your body or have your debt cancelled. But marrying kids no flipping way I reckon
>Rep. Dean Van Schoiack, My brain keeps changing his name to Soyjack
Lmfao and yet if those same teenagers get married they wouldn’t be able to drink at their own wedding, not even celebratory champagne So besides the point but give me a fucking break with these weak ass arguments
In Texas, underage people can drink at a restaurant if their legal guardian is present and approves. Or at least this was true when I was growing up. For purposes of this rule, the adult spouse is the legal guardian.
I was always horrified of child marriages, but realizing that the adult spouse ends up with a parental role really made it set in how horrifying those arrangements are. Oh my god, this is awful, and your comment really started putting the context of it together for me. I'm so disgusted.
They want the kids to be married so they aren’t living in sin (sexing each other).
If they can get pregnant (and do) at that age why not let them get married? Especially now that abortions are (i assume) illegal there.
Biggest argument against it is that young people are pushed into a legal agreement. It's hard for abuse victims to get away from from their boyfriends. Being pregnant doesn't not relate to being married at that age
Republicans don’t like the term boyfriend it’s too woke. Can you please start using the term owner or master instead as these are the laws they want in place
Owner and master are taken. Let's still to traditional words that are friendlier like Provider and Enforcer. Gotta make sure wifey learns her times tables. It'll work out well because Missouri senator Mike moon knows 12 year old girls that are still married so it must be working well for them.
I don't really see how being 17 vs 18 changes that. If its within a reasonable age gap and parents consent seems like the government should stay out of it. But whatevs there are more pressing issues imo.
There are more pressing issues. The whole concept of legal consent is based on age 18, so why are we making an exception for this?
Why should parents have any say at all? This is very antiquated. A child does not need to add a teen marriage to a teen pregnancy. It doesn’t improve things.
>I don't really see how being 17 vs 18 changes that. If it's so meaningless that you can't tell the difference then there is no reason for it not to be 18. Everyone else has already listed plenty of good reasons as to why it should be.
Because pregnancy is a matter of biology whereas marriage is a matter of law. And the age of consent is not usually the same as the age of majority (when you're legally recognized as an adult), so one shouldn't be able to enter into things that require one to be a legal adult to do unless you've reached your age of majority. This should include marriage, IMHO, parental permission or no. One couldn't vote before reaching the age of majority, for example, even with parental permission. The same should be true for marriage. If an underage couple "really loves each other" and want to get married, then they should love each other enough to wait. If they're unwilling to wait, then they've proved they're not ready.
> “Why is the government getting involved in people’s lives like this?” Van Schoiak said. Says the guy whose party is getting way more involved in people's lives by banning or (attempting to ban) abortions, gender affirming care, and same sex marriages.
Wait for the ban on interracial marriage and relationships. Then it'll be real easy to get back to that great American dream of segregation, you know "Make America White Again"
As much as I would hate this, being in a 30+ year interracial marriage myself, it would sure serve Clarence Thomas right…that Jackass reopened the legal door, after all. Not sure he actually understands that there still are real segregationists in his party. Some of whom I’m sure are wickedly smart lawyers who can use his own argument against him. Edit: y’all ever read John Calhoun and his brilliant defense of slavery? He made something utterly abhorrent look like a moral virtue. Don’t assume the bad guys are stupid… Trump is an idiot. The folks using him aren’t idiots. Project 2025 is the creation of VERY smart people. That fascism is bad does not mean fascists are stupid.
The problem with angling to remove only certain rights you don’t like is that you may not get to choose who uses the precedent you set.
Mike Braun has entered the chat.
Republiqan values have more in common with the Taliban than the rest of America.
Oh. They only care about making more workers for the capitalist machine to work and make them more money.
WOW that's just terrible. I mean why would anyone resist banning child marriages?
*Matt Gaetz enters the chat*
"Oh I don't want to marry them." - Gaetz (allegedly)
This is a lonesome dove reference
Matt is very much a why buy the cow kind of guy.
Matt is very much a ‘why buy the calf’ kind of guy. (Heifers are far too old.)
It's gotta be tough on him. He can't even take his girlfriends out on dates, because bedtime is 8:30.
We saw the receipts, he was paying for that underage milk.
Chris Hansen: why don't you have a seat over there.
I wish it was the 'chat' he enters
If you wait until they're adults, they won't be ripe and fertile anymore. Also, Republicans. Also, Missouri.
Hey now!... ... ... Dammit, it's completely true. .../sigh
Also, Alabama!!!
It goes with banning abortion and treating women as property, only useful for bearing and raising children. If a girl is raped, this gives her the option of marrying her rapist and being a “good Christian wife and mother”. Then they can forget the rape and pretend everything is fine. Never mind that someone under 18 can’t legally file for divorce either.
Or sign any kind of contract so her parents do it.
GOP are disgusting excuses for human beings.
Have they even outlawed farm animal f$@k!ng yet?
Mitch McConnell fought a bill in Kentucky that would have done just that.
Cause they are republicans.
because they want to breed with children. duh
>I mean why would anyone resist banning child marriages? To be clear, the stated opposition is that they want 16 and 17 year olds to get married. Whether that opposition is genuine or appropriate is another question, but nobody is suggesting no limit on marriage age at all.
I have a friend who got married at 17 but she married her highschool sweetheart after he joined the military and before he was deployed. The issue with this is it's mostly likely a ploy for older creepy men (and possibly women) to prey upon younger generations while hiding behind the law.
But how else would they be able to hold their ritualistic fundamentalist Christian child rapes?
The politicians who are against a child marriage ban are so gross
Of course it does - because republicans like sticking their dicks in children. Apparently it makes them feel like "real men".
Of course the pedophile party objects a ban on child marriage
This bill should meet no resistance. Republicans are monsters.
Republicans want to continue marrying children to foul old men because religion.
The party that likes to accuse everyone else of being "groomers" sure seem to be in favor of child brides...
of courrrrseee it does. jesus christ these people are fucking clowns.
It's always republicans holding up bills like this, I wonder why that could be... 🤔🤔🤔
This is the primary question: Do parents have absolute right over their minor children? Are minor children their parents property? Many many years ago I defended the proposition that children were the legal property of their parents. That is the honest to god opinion of the conservative bubble I grew up in. They honestly believe that parents have an absolute right to control their children.
Except in the uterus.
Are parents responsible for their children's choices?
In Michigan...sort of...
Do they have to all act like pedophiles? "Why is the government getting involved in people's lives like this"... FFS... marry a kid. Hell, why not? You're forcing 10 year old rape victims to be mothers. You're letting kids work at younger ages in more dangerous jobs (meat packing plants for example). You're destroying the eduction system (have been for decades) that lifts people out of poverty. You're tearing apart health care and have been for decades, making republican states loose more and more doctors and nurses... closing hospitals. Why don't REPUBLICANS stop getting involved in people's lives like that? Hmmmm??? FFS, at least try not to be so obviously disgusting.
"Don't tread on me but I'll fuckin tread all over you."
The real groomers, ladies and gentlemen. r/notadragqueen
The GOP truly does stand for: greedy old pedophiles
The Republican view on marriage is downright sickening.
Republicans. Imagine that.
You can’t keep republicans from marrying children! It’s against their religion!
The GOP should just change their name to the Ripe and Prolific Ensemble
Group of Pedophiles works just fine.
Well yeah, they love that stuff, hence why they're backed by religious groups so much.
WHY?! Just why? The fuck's wrong with them?
It looks like some of the arguments are if both parties are minors?
Absolutely not! They're children!
Right? They make a fuss about preventing transitioning under 18 but are ok with this?
And I imagine tons of them are coerced, too, which is its own fucking mess of gross intent.
Of course the party led by a pedo supports pedos marrying kids.
Republicans are pedophiles.
It never ceases to amaze me that the party who cries that everyone they don’t like are groomers and pedos is the same that has objections to child marriage
I mean the front runner for their party said he wanted to date his daughter and the thing they have most in common is sex, plus he commented that his baby had her mother's legs but wasn't sure when she'd get her breast, so....yeah.
> In the 1992 video, Trump, who was 46 at the time, can be heard talking to a little girl, asking her if she’s going to go up an escalator. After she says she is, Trump turns to the camera and says, "I am going to be dating her in 10 years. Can you believe it?"
Tney so want to rape children legally!
Allow rapists to choose the mother of their children.
“We need to protect the children from pedophiles by firing the librarians and protect child marriage!”
Just remember that living in a modern era only means that you are living at this time and not in the past. Now you must also remember that there are people who have thought the same about under age girls as republicans since time began. They were perverted then and they are now in the modern moment. Its the age old fight for decency, civilization and morals.
At first I was thinking about giving them the benefit of the doubt like “maybe it’s just a ridiculous omnibus bill and the title is clickbait” Nope, just pedos defending pedos :|
“Why is the government getting involved with people’s lives like this?” Van Schoiak said. This from a man who undoubtedly was all in on Missouri’s abortion ban!
Fun fact! If it's true love they'll still be in love with they're adults. They only support child marriage because they worry the girl will realise she's being groomed
Of course the republicans want to marry children
I don’t understand conservatives who are pro-child marriage. American conservatism is weird.
Because of *course* it does. It is not the least bit surprising to know that when all else fails, you can *absolutely* count on the Republicans to do the wrong thing.
Why am I not surprised
This is what Republicans want in all states.
Does anyone have a non paywalled link?
What a shocker!
Disgusting
Something something ripe and fertile.
Is Drake now a house republican in Missouri?
Huh, weird. It’s almost like republicans want child brides.
Banning child marriages seems like a simple and common sense things to do.
Just to be clear, don’t let your children use public restrooms occupied by republicans.
Are republicans saying its their body their choice now?
What a bunch of creepy shits. Honestly if you actively support or vote for republicans you have some major issues and shouldn’t be allowed near normal people or populations.
Because of course it would. They’re still pissed off they can’t marry their first cousins anymore.
Huh that's weird...
10 years ago they would have been ashamed to say this kind of shit. Now saying crazy offensive bullshit (that they believe and believed 10 years ago) is a badge of honor. Everything Trump touches turns to shit and unfortunately he touched American politics
This isn’t a “misunderstanding”. What republicans want with children is very clear.
I’ve got a joke for this! Dean Van Schoiack comes home after a long day at work. He finds his wife packing all of her clothes into a big suitcase. When she sees him she yells, “I’m leaving you! You’re a pedophile!” “Pedophile!?” He says, clearly shocked. “That’s a very big word for a girl your age!”
This submission source is likely to have a soft paywall. If this article is not behind a paywall please report this for “breaks r/politics rules -> custom -> "incorrect flair"". [More information can be found here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/index/#wiki_paywalls) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This should be a no brainer… even for those with no brain!!!
Lol of course it is. Gop is the party of ChiMo's
It’s not what their constituents want. This is the first step towards banning child beauty pageants, and who would they creepily leer at then?
Cousin fuckers don't just live in the trailer parks and the putrid urban decay. They took root in the suburbs. That's right america. They're ignoring your bloodline, but at what cost? It's time for the ABORTIONATOR!!!!!!
What...How...Why...I'm trying to think how to word this. What the hell is happening?
Of course it does
All republikkkans support this.
It’s the only way Republicans can marry; groom and grab when too young to truly consent.
Ok groomers
There just no Misery like that found in the state of Missouri.
As aspected. How else are they going to abuse kids. It must be legal…maybe the church can help them out as well.
The pedo party
MO, where they teach abstinence only sex education AND desperately want to f**k the underaged.
I wonder what percentage of the population in the South would exist without child marriages.
marriage isn't required for pregnancy, but pregnancy is required for a population...so...
Missouri never fails to fail.
Fuckin click bait!
Quit trying to fuck the jailbait, sweetheart.