See above.
You mean this?
If one cannot legally consent then one is technically forced.
So there's no distinction between, on the one hand, two teenagers under the age of consent agreeing to have sex with each other and, on the other hand, a man putting a knife to a woman's throat to make her have sex with him? I doubt most legislators, prosecutors, judges or juries would agree with you that they are really the same, which is why our criminal justice resources are, thankfully, far more likely to be devoted to punishing the latter than the former.
And Blackstone? Wow. That is the most misguided reference I've ever seen. You refer to the man who said there's no such thing as marital rape and that a rape complaint can only succeed if there was a third witness or corroborating physical injury when discussing consent? Do you even know who he was?
Misguided is ignoring the fact that Blackstone was working with the mores of the 1700s. At least you have the benefit of 250 years of moral and legal evolution, which doesn't seem to have sunk in if you can't concede that there's a difference between the two situations described above.
But the GOP congressman are the ignorant Neanderthals, right?
