So you're fine with 17 year olds fucking 80 year olds, since that would still be legal under that law? Or are you going to stop trying to put words in my mouth?

My point was this is dishonest journalism, the writers know that most people reading, apparently including you, won't read far enough to get to the part I quoted and will come away from this article thinking that child marriage in general is legal without restrictions there, when in reality it's a small window of people five or less years apart that are allowed to marry each other.

Which if you do the math, the current law still meets the standard of half your age plus seven in every case except the absolute edges of that window.