California Democrats have decided it’s not that bad to buy sex from teenagers, stripping a provision that would have made it an automatic felony to purchase minors for sex.
At a Glance
- California Democrats removed a provision from a bill that would have made buying sex from 16 and 17-year-olds an automatic felony
- Currently, paying for sex with minors 16-17 is usually treated as a misdemeanor in California
- Democrats claim the bill could “disproportionately affect” LGBTQ and minority youth
- Some Democratic lawmakers bizarrely argue that purchasing sex from minors is already a felony, despite contradictory current law
- The decision has sparked outrage among child protection advocates and Republicans
Democrats Choose Predators Over Children
Just when you thought California couldn’t possibly sink any lower into the progressive abyss, Sacramento Democrats have outdone themselves. In a move that should shock the conscience of every parent and decent American, California Democrats stripped a key provision from Assembly Bill 379 that would have made it an automatic felony to buy sex from 16 and 17-year-old children. Let that sink in for a moment. In California, you can be punished more severely for misgendering someone than for paying to sexually exploit a teenager.
The legislative gymnastics here are mind-boggling. Currently in California, if you pay for sex with a 15-year-old, it’s a felony. But mysteriously, once that child has a 16th birthday, the same predatory behavior magically downgrades to a misdemeanor in most cases. This loophole isn’t some obscure technicality – it’s a glaring failure to protect vulnerable teenagers from exploitation. AB-379 sought to close this loophole, but apparently protecting children from sex trafficking wasn’t progressive enough for California Democrats.
The Absurd Excuses
When confronted with their decision to block protections for exploited teens, Democrats retreated to their favorite playbook – identity politics. Some Democrats claimed the bill would “disproportionately harm certain marginalized groups—LGBTQ and minority youth.” This is perhaps the most twisted logic I’ve encountered in years. How exactly does protecting children from being purchased for sex harm them? The mental contortions required to arrive at this conclusion would win gold medals if mental gymnastics were an Olympic sport.
“Some Democrats argue it could disproportionately harm certain marginalized groups—LGBTQ and minority youth.” – Alicia Summers
Even more baffling, Democrat Assemblyman Nick Scholtz tried to gaslight the public by claiming that buying sex from minors is “already a felony.” This directly contradicts California’s current law, which treats these cases as misdemeanors. It’s becoming increasingly difficult to determine whether these lawmakers are deliberately lying or simply don’t understand the laws they’re paid to write. Either explanation is deeply troubling for the governance of America’s most populous state.
A Dangerous Pattern
This isn’t some isolated incident but part of a disturbing pattern in California’s approach to protecting children. Remember, this is the same state that passed laws allowing schools to hide children’s gender transitions from parents and that reduced penalties for adults who commit certain sex acts with minors. The message from Sacramento Democrats seems increasingly clear – adult sexual access to children is more important than child safety. What other explanation could there possibly be for repeatedly weakening protections for minors?
“California Democrats just removed a key provision from a bill this week that would have made it an automatic felony to buy sex from a 16- or 17-year-old child.” – Alicia Summers
Meanwhile, Senator Scott Wiener – whose last name becomes increasingly ironic with each bill he supports – has consistently championed legislation that weakens protections for minors against sexual exploitation. When lawmakers prioritize the desires of adults over the safety of children, we’ve entered truly dangerous territory. The fact that California voters continue to elect these people speaks volumes about how far the state has fallen from basic moral consensus about protecting children from predators.
The Constitutional Crisis
This isn’t just a policy disagreement – it’s a constitutional crisis. Our founding documents and the entire American system of governance are predicated on protecting the vulnerable and ensuring equal justice. When lawmakers deliberately create a system where wealthy predators face minimal consequences for exploiting children, they’re betraying the fundamental compact of American governance. If California Republicans and concerned parents can’t reclaim control of the state legislature in upcoming elections, one shudders to think what other protections for children will be stripped away in the name of “progress.”
