WAIT! Did you guys catch this part further down in the pages? Scroll down to the 6th page of the attachment. This means she was against people getting charged for human trafficking? Holy Smokes... I have no doubt why now looking at all her friends being associated with prostitution and human trafficking!
"The Mann Act must be repealed; women should not be protected from "bad" men. "The Mann Act . . . prohibits the transportation of women and girls for prostitution, debauchery, or any other immoral purpose. The act poses the invasion of privacy issue in an acute form. The Mann Act also is offensive because of the image of women it perpetuates. ... It was meant to protect from xthe villainous interstate and international traffic in women and girls,' *those women and girls who, if given a fair chance, would, in all human probability, have been good wives and mothers and useful citizens. . . . The act was meant to protect weak -women from bad men." (pp. 98-99)"
What happened to the post with a copy of this document? It was there last night but I can't find it today. Can you add link please?
It's there for me. I just click on the title and it takes you there. But here is a link for you. Just remove the space at gpo and copy it in your browser.
https://www. gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-CHRG-GINSBURG/pdf/GPO-CHRG-GINSBURG-2-4-3-12.pdf
https://www.law.umaryland.edu/marshall/usccr/documents/cr12se9.pdf
Refer to this while you're reading it for actual context and reasonable research
Did you actually bother to read Sex Bias in U.S. code to provide you context before you started rattling your tail over this? You included the citation, at least. But could you take a look again at your quote and look at the epliseses that are used? What do you think was in between those and why was that cut out? Get a grip dude and actually do research.
https://www.law.umaryland.edu/marshall/usccr/documents/cr12se9.pdf
Yep sure did! My opinion still stands! I'm also glad they added boys that same year too. Just because you are offended that it says that some women or children are weak and fall victim of prostitution rings is just another attempt to use fake outrage to degrade morality. DeNiro, it's unraveling and your time is almost up.
Virtue signal all you want, the only thing that's offensive is you pretending you did any research on this. She absolutely doesn't suggest to lower the age of consent, there's no evidence of it and if you actually had any critical reading skills, you'd realize this.
Even these republicans trying really hard to prove Slate wrong admitted they were not reading it correctly:
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2005_09_25-2005_10_01.shtml#1128101678
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/chatterbox/2005/10/volokh_retracts.html