Liz Randol calls Kaua`i and Hawai`i “backwoodsy” in the pejorative sense, and goes on to say Kauai looks as ignorant as Alabama, Louisiana and Mississippi (Nov. 12, “Hawaii’s age of consent law is backwoodsy”). Pinpointing the exact age a child
Liz Randol calls Kaua`i and Hawai`i “backwoodsy” in the pejorative
sense, and goes on to say Kauai looks as ignorant as Alabama, Louisiana and
Mississippi (Nov. 12, “Hawaii’s age of consent law is backwoodsy”).
Pinpointing the exact age a child can legally give consent to engage in
sexual intercourse is a difficult task, judging by the fact that Ms. Randol did
not propose a solution in her column. I have a modest proposal. Let’s follow
the international legal standards governing the use of child soldiers. After
all, recruiting and sending children into a war to fight surely can result in
greater negative emotional consequences than having premature sex with adults.
The child could even be killed.
The recruitment and use of child soldiers
is governed by the International Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Unfortunately, this may not satisfy Ms. Randol because under current
international law, children as young as 15 can be legally recruited and
deployed in combat.
Recognizing this standard to be unacceptably low, in
1994 the United Nations initiated negotiations to raise the minimum age for
recruitment and participation in armed conflict to 18, the age used for every
other provision in the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The Convention,
adopted in 1989, has become the most widely adopted human rights treaty in
history, with only the United States and Somalia having not yet ratified. To
paraphrase Ms. Randol, aren’t we better than Somalia? Although even asking such
a question smacks of elitism, the answer is evidently not.
The United
States is a leading opponent of the proposed international ban on using
children under 18 years old as soldiers. If the United States supports sending
children into combat to be killed, I don’t think Ms. Randol can expect the
government to be overly concerned about adults sexually abusing them.
Ms.
Randol’s criticism of Judge Clifford Nakea could also be applied to President
Bill Clinton. While she claims Nakea slaps adult sexual abusers of children on
the wrist, Clinton supports other countries sending their 15-year-old children
into combat. To make matters worse as the world’s largest arms dealer, the U.S.
allows corporations to make big bucks off the slaughter by allowing the sale
of weapons to these countries that use their own children as cannon
fodder.
It appears that Hawai`i is no more “backwoodsy” or
ignorant than the United States as a whole. It’s a national problem and
international embarrassment. Both sending children off to die in combat and the
sexual abuse of children are immoral, but death has a finality that’s hard to
ignore. If we can’t agree to stop sending children off to be killed in combat,
I see little chance of ending adult sexual abuse of children.
We need to
stop both. Let’s start by stopping the U.S. support for sending children into
combat.
Please write President William J. Clinton, The White House, 1600
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, D.C. 20500, or Fax (202) 456-2461 or e-mail
president@whitehouse.gov and urge he support the optional protocol to the
Convention on the Rights of the Child, an international agreement establishing
18 years old as the minimum age for recruitment and participation in
hostilities.
ED COLL
Lihu’e
