Silly Dio. The successful argument that it can be ok for legally underage females to have sex with much older males has not only been made already, it’s been lived, therefore proved.
Your UNsuccessful argument, on the other hand, which is founded on the blind, completely unsupported assumption that the only applicable issue is the degree of brain development, is a completely worthless argument.
Here’s why: (this is where I support my assertions with reasoning and logic - It’s very satisfying, I highly recommend it.)
Not only is it based on a blind assumption (which is just your opinion; you haven’t even tried to make a case for why the only applicable issue is the degree of brain development, you just sort of decreed it, as though you were a king: “We Decree That The Question Shall Be Decided on teh Following Criteria…” and, like kings, once you’ve rigged the game you expect you will win. But since any command to cut off the head of dissenters is hollow, you find yourself without any subjects willing to throw the game for you…) but because if we do accept that as the only thing worth considering, then try to apply it, it instantly turns to mush in the real world, where individual human beings in their infinite variety lay waste to any assumptions about how prepared any particular girl is to successfully cope with the weighty issue of sex. And that, all by itself, actually functions as the proof that your pet belief that brain development is the only thing to consider is worthless as a basis for arriving at an answer. Or rather, a valid answer.
But wait, there’s more!
The only thing that science knows for sure is that yes, the brain continues to develop through adolesence and into adulthood. That’s it, the end, you can all go home now, nothing more to see…
Science does not know how much, which areas, if some areas develop more than others, if some brains stop earlier than others or go on beyond others, on and on and on, and most critical of all, science cannot tell us which parts of whose brains are being used to handle what decisions. Maybe Veronica makes her personal relationship decisions in a manner that is detached from her emotions, relying entirely on her intellect to guide her, while Bethia makes all her decisions impulsively, directly from her emotional responses. Which is more effective, better? No way to tell…especially after we learn that Bethia has an extraordinarily high IQ, while Veronica is barely average…so the brainiac acts on emotion, while the gal who barely clears the bar is relying on her less-than-stellar mind. Now who is making better decisions?
Your argument is goo. You lose.