You should really read what he said very carefully. The point he's making is that these one-size-fits-all morality laws remove the entire concept of consent from an extraordinarily complex social system. He's not protecting pedophiles that prey on children. He's talking about young teenagers who decide they want to have sex with older people. Telling those teenagers that they just don't know what's good for them and they're just children that don't know any better is very harmful. It leads to the sort of high-risk, rebellious activity that he himself engaged in when those teens know what they are feeling and are being told they're wrong. it leads to ridiculous consent laws that put 19 year olds on sexual predator databases for life because they fucked a 16 year old at a party. His point is simply that it's way more complex than either side tries to make it and consent changes the entire dynamic. Not only that, consent isn't always a form signed in triplicate like the left insists. Human sexuality lives and dies on suggestion and innuendo, but hardline consent laws make people out to be rapists and sexual predators when the reality is they had consensual sex with someone who later regretted it, or had consensual sex with someone who is legally still under their parents' control and their parents drop the hammer.
He does not now, nor has he ever, tried to protect people who prey on children, who seek them out. He's just saying that some people can honestly give consent at a far younger age than others and the law absolutely does not take that into account.
, he'd do alright for a while.
