I don't think there is a State in the country that requires presenting a State ID before having sex.
Neither do I. I simply said that with our current system of "You are legally an adult at midnight of your Xth birthday" it is very simple and straight forward to verify and confirm this.
The ID will say you are over X years old, and lack of ID (or an ID that says otherwise) means you are not over X years old.
That is the entire basis why the "your Xth birthday" is simple and cheap, compared to what the GP claimed was better (individually judging each individual as competent as an adult, at the time they actually are)
It is -- by necessity -- based on the "reasonable person" concept. Would a reasonable person believe that this person was of age?
If we were to switch to a per child based metric, as the GP stated should be the requirement, how would the reasonable person test even work?
If legal adulthood was no longer based on age, but instead was based on a certificate you got after being deemed fit to handle adult responsibility, what kind of reasonable person test would even work except "I need to see your adult certificate please" ?
I would assume a reasonable person would think a 10 year old is not a sexual object, however under the GPs system that 10 year old just might have been granted a "You are an adult legally" certificate. (In this case I would be thinking that person is a sick fuck, despite they are having sex with a legal adult)
I would also assume a reasonable person would think a 40 year old is able to handle sex, but again under the GPs system that 40 year old might not have got their "You are an adult" certificate, and thus it would be criminal to have sex with them.
That's a lot of reasonable people in prison for child molestation!
With the current standard of "midnight of your 18th birthday", it's very simple to apply the reasonable person test. Do they look 10? If so, you fail, plz go to jail. Do they look 40? Easy enough, get your unz on.
I still stand by my statement that using Xth birthday is simpler, easier, and more efficient than judging adulthood on a person by person basis, even if it is less accurate and with a higher chance of being incorrect.
While I dislike hearing of the "18 year old arrested on his birthday because of 17 year 11 month 15 day old girlfriend" stories, nor feel passing out in a park and pissing your pants warrants being on the sexual offenders list, these are more problems with abuse of existing laws for purposes they were not intended, and not problems with the spirit of the original laws.
Specific to this case, I am perfectly OK with any law saying its illegal for an adult to have sex with a 10 year old. Despite abuses of such laws, the laws themselves are still a good idea (IMNSHO)
I disagree we should stop prosecuting all sexual abuse cases like the GP said.
I also disagree it would be simpler to individually judge adult capability on a per-person basis instead of using a simple "Your Xth birthday" metric as the GP said (While also not saying the Xth birthday method is more accurate.)
I also feel your argument only reenforces mine, in that the reasonable person test would be useless if we change to judging adulthood by a metric that one couldn't readily and easily prove.