Quote: Chappers @ 19th April 2015, 9:53 PM BST
Just get over it!
Did you mean 4 or 14? Whatever those Labour wankers should all be strung up (by their balls or tits) for supporting PIE.
Arguably 4.
Although what I should have said is "The Independent newspaper said in February 2014 that Hewitt (of the NCCL executive) 'allegedly backed lowering the age of consent to 10'". That was its position.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/pie-controversy-shadow-police-minister-jack-dromey-denies-supporting-call-for-age-of-consent-to-be-lowered-to-10-9160362.html
So the NCCL executive didn't advocate 4 as such. I used the wrong word in the above post.
But:
Quote from the following website:
"A page from PIE's manifesto in 1975 which proposes that there be no age of consent.......in other words almost any child over the age of 4 (under 4 and it still wouldn't be a 'criminal' matter) could be a victim. This manifesto was widely available and handed out at various (NCCL) conferences for 50p".
http://biasedbbc.org/blog/2014/02/24/manufacturing-the-age-of-consent/
While it is also important to clarify the NCCL Executive did not officially propose an age of consent of 4 to Parliament either, PIE were full affiilates of NCCL. The age proposed in 1976 by NCCL was 12 or 10 depending on interpretation. It was really 10 as they felt it was ok if it could be demonstrated by someone older there had been consent. Details of that position are also on the "Biased BBC" website.
I have now edited my original post so that it is entirely accurate.