Condoms can't prove consent

Wearing black pants, only a summer out of a high school full of prom queens and most-likely-to superlatives, some freshmen girls visit the frats, ready to find the perfect college guy that they are sure will be their boyfriend.\nDrunk after two beers, some freshmen guys join the same party, happy they are finally surrounded by chicks with breasts who are actually willing to go further than second base on the first night.\nWhile many freshmen probably don't have sex at any of these parties, and some don't even consider it, the facts from every resource from the Health Center to government awareness Web sites state that many teenagers do choose to have sex on nights like these -- with partners whose last names will forever remain unknown.\nOn the bandwagon for protection is the Health Center, a place that freely distributes condoms on their Women's Clinic floor, Planned Parenthood and many other resources that can regurgitate on command such statistics as 90 percent of teenagers who don't use protection wind up pregnant within a year. \nOne of the newest gadgets on the market, the ultimate buzz kill for a couple's sex drive, is the Consent condom -- a hot commodity in the British sex market that always pushes the envelope.\nThe idea behind this new condom is that the partner removes an inner sleeve from the outside packaging. The sleeve that is removed then records the fingerprints of the partners, indicating a mutual consent. \nAccording to Newsweek magazine, the inventor feels that the partner's consent is proven by the removal of this sleeve and can substantiate any actions that might transpire once the sleeve is removed.\nThe partner can then tear numbers on the side of the sleeve to indicate the date of usage and after doing so can put it back in the package and give it to their partner to keep for proof, should anything go amiss when the morning comes.\nSounds wonderful to many partners who could fear potential rape charges, right? While this might be the latest fad overseas, it appears to be just another excuse for sex that shouldn't be happening in the first place.\nWhile random situations mixed with alcohol or drugs could wind up with one more willing partner than another, in which case the condom might come in handy, it is doubtful that two wasted people could even tear out the right date or remember to make sure that both sets of prints cover the sleeve.\nRapists never have consent, even with protection, so the fingerprints of a victim don't guarantee a victim's willingness, in any situation.\nThe Consent condom seems to provide a false sense of security for a sexual world that is not so secure. Rape doesn't stop for condom cases that can hold fingerprints just as it hasn't stopped at the word "no" for decades. \nAlcohol impairment won't instantly end when the sleeve is removed either, forcing eager freshman or college seniors to take it slow.\n What will probably happen with or without this Consent condom is what would have happened with a regular condom or without any protection at all. Those who would have jumped into the game of sexuality, willingly or unwillingly, will do so and the need for fingerprint proof that slows down the intimacy of the moment seems silly and doubtful.\nAlthough the idea for proof of consent seems like a good one, the true proof of consent should come from two willing people in love or with a mutual desire, who understand the repercussions of their sexuality and engage in it knowingly, understanding any and all consequences. \nAny sex other than that shouldn't exist. And rapists, even with some flimsy condom that can hold prints, know that they will never have consent, as that is implied by the word "rape" just as it is with the word "no"