Do you think the age of consent (18 in the US) should be raised, lowered, or kept the same.
Discuss.
Full Version: Age Of Consent
U.S.A age of consent is decided by each state, ranging from 16 to 18. So it's not just 18 
I'd say 16 'across the board' would be better, but who follows age of consent regulations anyway?
I'd say 16 'across the board' would be better, but who follows age of consent regulations anyway?
It should be 12 IMO by then the girl o r bot should be smart enough to make her own choices. Anything like Blackmailing and threatening is considered rape anyways as is having sex with someone with authority over you so unless the person is stupid it's kinda hard to take advantage of someone whos 12 for sex. Proper education is the key we need to stop babying our children and hiding them from everything.
QUOTE (Meidou @ Sep 27 2009, 02:04 PM) 
It should be 12 IMO by then the girl o r bot should be smart enough to make her own choices. Anything like Blackmailing and threatening is considered rape anyways as is having sex with someone with authority over you so unless the person is stupid it's kinda hard to take advantage of someone whos 12 for sex. Proper education is the key we need to stop babying our children and hiding them from everything.
People shouldn't be having sex at 12.
QUOTE (Meidou @ Sep 27 2009, 11:04 AM)
It should be 12 IMO by then the girl o r bot should be smart enough to make her own choices. Anything like Blackmailing and threatening is considered rape anyways as is having sex with someone with authority over you so unless the person is stupid it's kinda hard to take advantage of someone whos 12 for sex. Proper education is the key we need to stop babying our children and hiding them from everything.
i disagree. i don't think anyone is ready mentally till their early 20's. maybe late teens but not usually. education doesn't help either, people are stupid and young people are emotional unstable. the age of consent is fine where it is
QUOTE (Meidou @ Sep 27 2009, 06:04 PM)
It should be 12 IMO by then the girl o r bot should be smart enough to make her own choices. Anything like Blackmailing and threatening is considered rape anyways as is having sex with someone with authority over you so unless the person is stupid it's kinda hard to take advantage of someone whos 12 for sex. Proper education is the key we need to stop babying our children and hiding them from everything.
I disagree. While they should be, most people in their early teens and, in some cases, late teens, show a great degree of recklesness so that it could lead to them making a decision, both sudden and that they would later come to regret. When someone's twelve, they have a high chance of not having enough maturity to make such a kind of decision which would bind them for life (ie. If she got pregnant/ he got someone pregnant).
Anyways, as to the general question, it is nigh impossible to quantify someone's ability or inability to make decisions, but I believe that at 18 almost everyone should be level-headed enough to make this decision. Of course, there's no problem jumping the restriction by a year or 2 if one feels like he knows what he's doing. Just always remember the consequences that may come from your acts.
Plus, does anyone REALLY pay attention to the age of consent when they are in the heat of the moment?
~Hen
Here in the UK, the age of consent is 16.
I am coming up to my 16th and haven't even considered that I will be... 'legal'.
That said, I know many children, aged 12-16, who are not following the law!
I am coming up to my 16th and haven't even considered that I will be... 'legal'.
That said, I know many children, aged 12-16, who are not following the law!
Wasn't the age of consent in England like 12 at one point or another?
QUOTE
I disagree. While they should be, most people in their early teens and, in some cases, late teens, show a great degree of recklesness so that it could lead to them making a decision, both sudden and that they would later come to regret.
That happens alot with adults to though. I'm 20 and i'm extremely reckless and probably the definition of immaturity. On the other hand I've seen 12 year olds who could be the president of the United States and would do a better job of it then anybody who's ever taken office before. Age doesn't matter as much as you think.
(Infact i think i was a little more mature when i was 12 then i am now)
18 is too high. If you're going into sex recklessly it can happen at any age. I don't see why a legal age is slapped on it really, if you want to do it then do it 
16 is just right really. I'm almost 15, and although I've not had a girlfriend yet, maybe in a little over a years time I will be in a relationship like that. That said, 16 should just be a guideline, and it basically is - I know loads of kids of 13 who have had sex. You're not gonna get in trouble unless you're an adult and the other person is a minor. Even that should have a bit of leeway - if I was almost 16 and my girlfriend was just over 16, I should still be allowed to have sex and not have her suffer the consequences.
The argument that 12 year olds aren't mature enough in most cases is pretty invalid - I don't feel ready to be taking my GCSE's (which incidentally, will follow me around for life if I fudge them up) but I still am. I know that's slightly different, but it's not as if the ones unready are FORCED. If they are, it's rape.
16 is just right really. I'm almost 15, and although I've not had a girlfriend yet, maybe in a little over a years time I will be in a relationship like that. That said, 16 should just be a guideline, and it basically is - I know loads of kids of 13 who have had sex. You're not gonna get in trouble unless you're an adult and the other person is a minor. Even that should have a bit of leeway - if I was almost 16 and my girlfriend was just over 16, I should still be allowed to have sex and not have her suffer the consequences.
The argument that 12 year olds aren't mature enough in most cases is pretty invalid - I don't feel ready to be taking my GCSE's (which incidentally, will follow me around for life if I fudge them up) but I still am. I know that's slightly different, but it's not as if the ones unready are FORCED. If they are, it's rape.
QUOTE (Click This @ Sep 27 2009, 07:23 PM)
Wasn't the age of consent in England like 12 at one point or another?
A looooong time ago
Spoiler: Click to Toggle the Spoiler.
QUOTE
The age of consent for heterosexual acts in England was set at 12 in 1275 and remained so for six centuries - due to the wording of the law, the age of consent only applied to women (consequently, all amendments to the law also only applied to women). The wording was along the lines of "It shall be deemed illegal to ravage a maiden who is not of age" - at the time "of age" being 12. Therefore, there was, and is, technically no age of consent for the male participant - unless the female participant is an adult in which case laws pertaining to sex with a minor and so on come into force. The English law became applicable in Wales following the Acts of Union (1536 and 1543). In medieval Welsh law there was no actual equivalent of the concept of the age of consent as such, but a girl was marriagable at 12-14 (the onset of puberty) and a fine was payable for the taking of a girl's maidenhood by force; the rules varied according to status and may not have been applied rigidly to commoners.[19]
A concern that young girls were being sold into brothels led Parliament to raise the age of consent to 13 in 1875 under the Offences against the Person Act 1875. After W. T. Stead's Maiden Tribute articles, the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885 raised the age of consent to 16. Male-male homosexual activity had been illegal since the Buggery Act 1533 and this was reinforced in the Offences against the Person Act 1861 and the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885 extended buggery laws to include any kind of sexual activity between males. It is common folklore that an amendment that would have criminalised lesbian acts was rejected by Queen Victoria because she refused to believe that some women did such things; but it is likelier that those presenting the amendment excluded it (as did the House of Lords 40 years later) on the assumption that it would give women ideas.[20]
Male homosexual acts were decriminalised under the Sexual Offences Act 1967, Section 1, although the age of consent for such acts was set at 21, whereas the age of consent for heterosexual acts was 16. However, the legislation applied only in England and Wales.
In 1994, on the second reading of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, the Conservative Member of Parliament Edwina Currie introduced an amendment to lower the age of consent for such acts to 16, in line with that for heterosexual acts; the amendment was defeated by 308 votes to 280. A compromise amendment that lowered the age of consent to 18 was accepted by 427 votes to 162. Also during the readings were motions to equalise the age of consent to 17 for all, to maintain the age of consent for homosexual acts to 21, and a further attempt to lower the age of consent to 16, all of which were rejected.[citation needed]
In 1997, the European Court of Human Rights case of Sutherland v the United Kingdom held that a higher age of consent for homosexuals than for heterosexuals was a breach of Article 14 in conjunction with Article 8 of the Convention. In response, the Government introduced the Crime and Disorder Bill which contained a provision lowering the age of consent for homosexual acts to 16. Though accepted by the House of Commons, the provision was rejected by the House of Lords. The Sexual Offences (Amendment) Bill, introduced in 1998, contained a similar provision, but once again it was rejected by the House of Lords. The Bill was reintroduced in 2000 and, despite opposition from the House of Lords, was passed under the Parliament Act 1911 (which allows the House of Commons to overrule the House of Lords under certain circumstances). As the Scottish Parliament had been established prior to the reintroduction of the Bill, and the relevant legislation was a devolved issue, the consent of that Parliament under the Sewel Convention was required – had that consent not been granted, the Scottish provisions would have had to be removed and it would not have been possible to use the Parliament Act. The Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 2000 thus equalised the age of consent at 16 for all sexual acts (including, for the first time, lesbian acts).
A concern that young girls were being sold into brothels led Parliament to raise the age of consent to 13 in 1875 under the Offences against the Person Act 1875. After W. T. Stead's Maiden Tribute articles, the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885 raised the age of consent to 16. Male-male homosexual activity had been illegal since the Buggery Act 1533 and this was reinforced in the Offences against the Person Act 1861 and the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885 extended buggery laws to include any kind of sexual activity between males. It is common folklore that an amendment that would have criminalised lesbian acts was rejected by Queen Victoria because she refused to believe that some women did such things; but it is likelier that those presenting the amendment excluded it (as did the House of Lords 40 years later) on the assumption that it would give women ideas.[20]
Male homosexual acts were decriminalised under the Sexual Offences Act 1967, Section 1, although the age of consent for such acts was set at 21, whereas the age of consent for heterosexual acts was 16. However, the legislation applied only in England and Wales.
In 1994, on the second reading of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, the Conservative Member of Parliament Edwina Currie introduced an amendment to lower the age of consent for such acts to 16, in line with that for heterosexual acts; the amendment was defeated by 308 votes to 280. A compromise amendment that lowered the age of consent to 18 was accepted by 427 votes to 162. Also during the readings were motions to equalise the age of consent to 17 for all, to maintain the age of consent for homosexual acts to 21, and a further attempt to lower the age of consent to 16, all of which were rejected.[citation needed]
In 1997, the European Court of Human Rights case of Sutherland v the United Kingdom held that a higher age of consent for homosexuals than for heterosexuals was a breach of Article 14 in conjunction with Article 8 of the Convention. In response, the Government introduced the Crime and Disorder Bill which contained a provision lowering the age of consent for homosexual acts to 16. Though accepted by the House of Commons, the provision was rejected by the House of Lords. The Sexual Offences (Amendment) Bill, introduced in 1998, contained a similar provision, but once again it was rejected by the House of Lords. The Bill was reintroduced in 2000 and, despite opposition from the House of Lords, was passed under the Parliament Act 1911 (which allows the House of Commons to overrule the House of Lords under certain circumstances). As the Scottish Parliament had been established prior to the reintroduction of the Bill, and the relevant legislation was a devolved issue, the consent of that Parliament under the Sewel Convention was required – had that consent not been granted, the Scottish provisions would have had to be removed and it would not have been possible to use the Parliament Act. The Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 2000 thus equalised the age of consent at 16 for all sexual acts (including, for the first time, lesbian acts).
[Close]
Apparently the age of consent in Spain is 13
Anyway, I think the age of consent is fine how it is where I live (16), although some people I know just pay no attention to the law at all
QUOTE (Cattius @ Sep 27 2009, 07:02 PM)
Apparently the age of consent in Spain is 13
Thanks. I'M OFF TO BENIDORM BROS!@!@@
Sounds just right to me. Same argument at the end of my previous post.
It is difficult to come up with a blanket age as to when someone is emotionally ready to have sex. Therefore, I am a little tentative about forming a solid opinion on a particular age of consent. Due to this, we must think about the majority here. In the United Kingdom the age of consent is 16, which I think is fine personally. Almost all teenagers have started or are well into puberty by this age (it is very unusual for anyone to start puberty after the age of 16) and most 16 years olds are physically mature. I disagree with pre-pubescent sex, so I also disagree that the age of consent should be 12; many 12 year olds are pre-pubescent and not even physically mature enough to have sex, let alone emotionally.
However, although the age of consent is a necessary law, ultimately I believe people should decide for themselves when they are ready to have sex. Sexual expression and exploration is an important part of the stage from adolescence to young adulthood and I believe these people should have the freedom they crave. Age of consent laws place artificial limits on this freedom. Sex is utterly natural and should be celebrated in the form of loving relationships.
However, although the age of consent is a necessary law, ultimately I believe people should decide for themselves when they are ready to have sex. Sexual expression and exploration is an important part of the stage from adolescence to young adulthood and I believe these people should have the freedom they crave. Age of consent laws place artificial limits on this freedom. Sex is utterly natural and should be celebrated in the form of loving relationships.
No matter what it is, people will have sex no matter if it's legal or not, they'll do it they're read for it themselves. It may as well be 21, it won't stop people.
I'm pretty sure that the law prevents anyone that is OVER the age of consent to have relations with anyone UNDER the age of consent; it's not preventing two people both under the age from doing it.
QUOTE (Mohorak @ Sep 27 2009, 03:40 PM)
I'm pretty sure that the law prevents anyone that is OVER the age of consent to have relations with anyone UNDER the age of consent; it's not preventing two people both under the age from doing it.
Only if certain clauses are put in place.
QUOTE (Meidou @ Sep 27 2009, 07:38 PM)
QUOTE
I disagree. While they should be, most people in their early teens and, in some cases, late teens, show a great degree of recklesness so that it could lead to them making a decision, both sudden and that they would later come to regret.
That happens alot with adults to though. I'm 20 and i'm extremely reckless and probably the definition of immaturity. On the other hand I've seen 12 year olds who could be the president of the United States and would do a better job of it then anybody who's ever taken office before. Age doesn't matter as much as you think.
There are people that are out of the normal bounds, but in general people are reasonably responsible at 18 and are not even close to being as responsible during my previously refered ages.
QUOTE
(Infact i think i was a little more mature when i was 12 then i am now)
lol
10 for penetration between female and male
14 for male-male relationships of penetration
and for everything not penertration and just all around messing around the only consent with you really should need is their approval, although their should be strict guidelines to make sure they aren't manipulated or anything(which would be illegal).
14 for male-male relationships of penetration
and for everything not penertration and just all around messing around the only consent with you really should need is their approval, although their should be strict guidelines to make sure they aren't manipulated or anything(which would be illegal).
QUOTE
10 for penetration between female and male
14 for male-male relationships of penetration
and for everything not penertration and just all around messing around the only consent with you really should need is their approval, although their should be strict guidelines to make sure they aren't manipulated or anything(which would be illegal).
14 for male-male relationships of penetration
and for everything not penertration and just all around messing around the only consent with you really should need is their approval, although their should be strict guidelines to make sure they aren't manipulated or anything(which would be illegal).
I agree with everything except the bolded part but you may have a reasoning for that so i won't go into it.
I think aslong as theres no manipulation occuring you should be able to make your own sex decisions. Problem is most 10 yr olds are incapable of sex and it's difficult to prove if the child was manipulated into having sex with someone. Unfortunately this is only ok in principle since manipulation is bound to occur.
Then again theres not really anything bad that can happen to a 10 year old if they had sex (aside from emotional damage which wouldn't apply with consentual sex)
QUOTE (Zon70 @ Sep 27 2009, 09:20 PM)
10 for penetration between female and male
14 for male-male relationships of penetration
and for everything not penertration and just all around messing around the only consent with you really should need is their approval, although their should be strict guidelines to make sure they aren't manipulated or anything(which would be illegal).
14 for male-male relationships of penetration
and for everything not penertration and just all around messing around the only consent with you really should need is their approval, although their should be strict guidelines to make sure they aren't manipulated or anything(which would be illegal).
First of all, what is your stance on the age of consent concerning female-female sexual relationships? Secondly, why do you believe male-male relationships should have a higher age of consent? I would consider that discrimination.
QUOTE (Zon70 @ Sep 27 2009, 09:20 PM)
10 for penetration between female and male
14 for male-male relationships of penetration
and for everything not penertration and just all around messing around the only consent with you really should need is their approval, although their should be strict guidelines to make sure they aren't manipulated or anything(which would be illegal).
14 for male-male relationships of penetration
and for everything not penertration and just all around messing around the only consent with you really should need is their approval, although their should be strict guidelines to make sure they aren't manipulated or anything(which would be illegal).
Do you think a 10 year old girl is really able to take the mature and responsible decision to have sex with another person. I am saying girl here as fistly very few males are sexually matured at 10. Secondly, most girls aren't sexually mature, and if they are it is only the beginning of puberty. I am aware there are exceptions but for the most part girls will still be girls and not young women.
Lowering it to ten is like lowering it to 4. And in the same sense disturbing.
14 or 15
OR a similar age.
OR a similar age.
Actually the right time is when you know what sex is and what love is
for all nerds...: possibly 50s
for all nerds...: possibly 50s
QUOTE (Sagara @ Oct 1 2009, 12:20 PM)
Actually the right time is when you know what sex is and what love is
for all nerds...: possibly 50s
for all nerds...: possibly 50s
Sex doesn't and shouldn't have to mean love. So you've stuck your hoo hoo dilly in her cha cha. That's as far as it goes unless otherwise noted.
There are so many stories on 12 year olds getting pregnant, 12 year olds CANNOT handle a child, I see nothing wrong with the age limit.
You definitely are mature by age 16, I don't know anyone who isn't at that age.
QUOTE (Ph201 @ Oct 2 2009, 01:11 AM)
You definitely are mature by age 16, I don't know anyone who isn't at that age.
Physically. But not (necessarily) emotionally.
I was referring to emotionally.
QUOTE (Ph201 @ Oct 2 2009, 01:13 AM)
I was referring to emotionally.
Then, uh, fail.
Some people are but not all. I would not have.
QUOTE
You definitely are mature by age 16, I don't know anyone who isn't at that age
QUOTE
I was referring to emotionally.
Me.....Mature??? Riiiiiiiiight.
QUOTE (Ph201 @ Oct 1 2009, 11:11 PM)
You definitely are mature by age 16, I don't know anyone who isn't at that age.
You don't know a lot of people.
I think it's fine where it is. At least 16.
And this is one of very few but solid reasons why I regret not going to public school through my teen years.
QUOTE (iToast @ Sep 27 2009, 02:09 PM)
However, although the age of consent is a necessary law, ultimately I believe people should decide for themselves when they are ready to have sex. Sexual expression and exploration is an important part of the stage from adolescence to young adulthood and I believe these people should have the freedom they crave. Age of consent laws place artificial limits on this freedom. Sex is utterly natural and should be celebrated in the form of loving relationships.
And this is one of very few but solid reasons why I regret not going to public school through my teen years.
QUOTE (Jose0 @ Oct 2 2009, 07:32 PM)
QUOTE (Ph201 @ Oct 1 2009, 11:11 PM)
You definitely are mature by age 16, I don't know anyone who isn't at that age.
You don't know a lot of people.
I do indeed.
QUOTE (iToast @ Sep 27 2009, 03:09 PM)
It is difficult to come up with a blanket age as to when someone is emotionally ready to have sex. Therefore, I am a little tentative about forming a solid opinion on a particular age of consent. Due to this, we must think about the majority here. In the United Kingdom the age of consent is 16, which I think is fine personally. Almost all teenagers have started or are well into puberty by this age (it is very unusual for anyone to start puberty after the age of 16) and most 16 years olds are physically mature. I disagree with pre-pubescent sex, so I also disagree that the age of consent should be 12; many 12 year olds are pre-pubescent and not even physically mature enough to have sex, let alone emotionally.
However, although the age of consent is a necessary law, ultimately I believe people should decide for themselves when they are ready to have sex. Sexual expression and exploration is an important part of the stage from adolescence to young adulthood and I believe these people should have the freedom they crave. Age of consent laws place artificial limits on this freedom. Sex is utterly natural and should be celebrated in the form of loving relationships.
However, although the age of consent is a necessary law, ultimately I believe people should decide for themselves when they are ready to have sex. Sexual expression and exploration is an important part of the stage from adolescence to young adulthood and I believe these people should have the freedom they crave. Age of consent laws place artificial limits on this freedom. Sex is utterly natural and should be celebrated in the form of loving relationships.
...and here's the post that sums up my beliefs.
18, or 21 is when I think the minimum of age consent should be. Frontal lobes develop fully around age 21 (for humans, if I recall correctly).
You are not kidding, are you? No, and no. Ten is way, way too young. Fourteen, no, still too young.
For the last part, no, no, no, no. It is just wrong.
No, she is neither mature enough, nor informed enough, to be allowed to consent to sex at such a young age.
It is flatly disturbing. They are children; they cannot make informed decisions about sex. To say they can is, quite simply, wrong.
I hope you are joking. Otherwise, you are wrong.
They are not up to par emotionally, and not mentally.
I disagree. I am against two children agreeing to have sex, period. I do not care if they consent, it is wrong. No child can make an informed decision to have sex at a young age. It is impossible.
Sex should be celebrated between two consenting adults not children. Children lack the mental ability to give informed consent. Their frontal lobes are not fully developed (I also suspect other parts of their brains are not fully developed at this point in time, either).
If they are above the age of 18, or 21, I am fine with sex between two consenting adults. Between children, no. Consent or no consent, no.
Mentally, they are still children. Unable to give informed consent.
I personally feel sex between children to be wrong (children defined here as under 18). Would any of you, when you become parents, be okay with your 13 year old having sex? Your ten year old? I am not. Anyone who has lived with a child at that age, quickly comes to the realization that although they may think they know it all, they do not. They are still children, and they continue to be so even when they are teenagers. Those of you who have experienced this will probably have learned that just because a person becomes a teenager, they do not magically stop being a child, and suddenly turn into an adult. They are still children.
If you answered yes to any of the above questions. Are you okay with your child drinking (to the point of getting drunk), smoking, driving, or doing drugs (assume none of them are illegal)? Why not? After all, in your eyes, they are informed adults. Capable of making their own decisions.
~John
QUOTE (Zon70 @ Sep 27 2009, 09:20 PM)
10 for penetration between female and male
14 for male-male relationships of penetration
and for everything not penertration and just all around messing around the only consent with you really should need is their approval, although their should be strict guidelines to make sure they aren't manipulated or anything(which would be illegal).
14 for male-male relationships of penetration
and for everything not penertration and just all around messing around the only consent with you really should need is their approval, although their should be strict guidelines to make sure they aren't manipulated or anything(which would be illegal).
You are not kidding, are you? No, and no. Ten is way, way too young. Fourteen, no, still too young.
For the last part, no, no, no, no. It is just wrong.
QUOTE (Doddsy @ Sep 27 2009, 05:19 PM)
Do you think a 10 year old girl is really able to take the mature and responsible decision to have sex with another person. I am saying girl here as fistly very few males are sexually matured at 10. Secondly, most girls aren't sexually mature, and if they are it is only the beginning of puberty. I am aware there are exceptions but for the most part girls will still be girls and not young women.
Lowering it to ten is like lowering it to 4. And in the same sense disturbing.
Lowering it to ten is like lowering it to 4. And in the same sense disturbing.
No, she is neither mature enough, nor informed enough, to be allowed to consent to sex at such a young age.
It is flatly disturbing. They are children; they cannot make informed decisions about sex. To say they can is, quite simply, wrong.
QUOTE (Ph201 @ Oct 2 2009, 01:11 AM)
You definitely are mature by age 16, I don't know anyone who isn't at that age.
I hope you are joking. Otherwise, you are wrong.
QUOTE (Demon Jelly @ Oct 2 2009, 01:12 AM)
Physically. But not (necessarily) emotionally.
They are not up to par emotionally, and not mentally.
QUOTE (iToast @ Sep 27 2009, 02:09 PM)
However, although the age of consent is a necessary law, ultimately I believe people should decide for themselves when they are ready to have sex. Sexual expression and exploration is an important part of the stage from adolescence to young adulthood and I believe these people should have the freedom they crave. Age of consent laws place artificial limits on this freedom. Sex is utterly natural and should be celebrated in the form of loving relationships.
I disagree. I am against two children agreeing to have sex, period. I do not care if they consent, it is wrong. No child can make an informed decision to have sex at a young age. It is impossible.
Sex should be celebrated between two consenting adults not children. Children lack the mental ability to give informed consent. Their frontal lobes are not fully developed (I also suspect other parts of their brains are not fully developed at this point in time, either).
If they are above the age of 18, or 21, I am fine with sex between two consenting adults. Between children, no. Consent or no consent, no.
QUOTE (iToast @ Sep 27 2009, 03:09 PM)
It is difficult to come up with a blanket age as to when someone is emotionally ready to have sex. Therefore, I am a little tentative about forming a solid opinion on a particular age of consent. Due to this, we must think about the majority here. In the United Kingdom the age of consent is 16, which I think is fine personally. Almost all teenagers have started or are well into puberty by this age (it is very unusual for anyone to start puberty after the age of 16) and most 16 years olds are physically mature. I disagree with pre-pubescent sex, so I also disagree that the age of consent should be 12; many 12 year olds are pre-pubescent and not even physically mature enough to have sex, let alone emotionally.
Mentally, they are still children. Unable to give informed consent.
I personally feel sex between children to be wrong (children defined here as under 18). Would any of you, when you become parents, be okay with your 13 year old having sex? Your ten year old? I am not. Anyone who has lived with a child at that age, quickly comes to the realization that although they may think they know it all, they do not. They are still children, and they continue to be so even when they are teenagers. Those of you who have experienced this will probably have learned that just because a person becomes a teenager, they do not magically stop being a child, and suddenly turn into an adult. They are still children.
If you answered yes to any of the above questions. Are you okay with your child drinking (to the point of getting drunk), smoking, driving, or doing drugs (assume none of them are illegal)? Why not? After all, in your eyes, they are informed adults. Capable of making their own decisions.
~John
What John Adams said 
As long as society puts a high emotional value on Sex, it should stay higher. But the more widely no strings attached sex is accepted the lower it should be placed. Society is the root cause of most psychological effects adverse and eitherwise that Sex has on a person and child. The exception being sexual addiction.
I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but free sex tends to put a damper on this thing we call "half-decent society".
QUOTE (John Adams @ Oct 4 2009, 12:55 AM)
I disagree. I am against two children agreeing to have sex, period. I do not care if they consent, it is wrong. No child can make an informed decision to have sex at a young age. It is impossible.
Sex should be celebrated between two consenting adults not children. Children lack the mental ability to give informed consent. Their frontal lobes are not fully developed (I also suspect other parts of their brains are not fully developed at this point in time, either).
If they are above the age of 18, or 21, I am fine with sex between two consenting adults. Between children, no. Consent or no consent, no.
Mentally, they are still children. Unable to give informed consent.
I personally feel sex between children to be wrong (children defined here as under 18). Would any of you, when you become parents, be okay with your 13 year old having sex? Your ten year old? I am not. Anyone who has lived with a child at that age, quickly comes to the realization that although they may think they know it all, they do not. They are still children, and they continue to be so even when they are teenagers. Those of you who have experienced this will probably have learned that just because a person becomes a teenager, they do not magically stop being a child, and suddenly turn into an adult. They are still children.
If you answered yes to any of the above questions. Are you okay with your child drinking (to the point of getting drunk), smoking, driving, or doing drugs (assume none of them are illegal)? Why not? After all, in your eyes, they are informed adults. Capable of making their own decisions.
~John
Sex should be celebrated between two consenting adults not children. Children lack the mental ability to give informed consent. Their frontal lobes are not fully developed (I also suspect other parts of their brains are not fully developed at this point in time, either).
If they are above the age of 18, or 21, I am fine with sex between two consenting adults. Between children, no. Consent or no consent, no.
Mentally, they are still children. Unable to give informed consent.
I personally feel sex between children to be wrong (children defined here as under 18). Would any of you, when you become parents, be okay with your 13 year old having sex? Your ten year old? I am not. Anyone who has lived with a child at that age, quickly comes to the realization that although they may think they know it all, they do not. They are still children, and they continue to be so even when they are teenagers. Those of you who have experienced this will probably have learned that just because a person becomes a teenager, they do not magically stop being a child, and suddenly turn into an adult. They are still children.
If you answered yes to any of the above questions. Are you okay with your child drinking (to the point of getting drunk), smoking, driving, or doing drugs (assume none of them are illegal)? Why not? After all, in your eyes, they are informed adults. Capable of making their own decisions.
~John
Anyone under the age of 18 is only a child because that's how the law describes it. No one necessarily becomes more informed or mature the moment they turn 18 (or 21). It is entirely possible for a 16 year old to make an informed decision to have sex; how could age be such a playing factor on how informed someone is? You say sex should only be celebrated between consenting adults. If the law changed to state adulthood is reached at the age of 16, would you say the same? No age of consent can be suitable for every person, as of course we all mature at different ages. The age of consent is primarily there to stop people taking advantage of children. As I said before, there is no blanket age and an 18 year old could make a decision just an uninformed as a 16 or 17 year old. The age of consent is suitable as nothing more than a guideline and ultimately, it is a decision one needs to make for themselves.
QUOTE (John Adams @ Oct 4 2009, 12:55 AM)
Are you okay with your child drinking (to the point of getting drunk), smoking, driving, or doing drugs (assume none of them are illegal)?
If I believed my child was mature, informed and responsible enough to participate in such activities, I would be fine with it, regardless of their age.
QUOTE
I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but free sex tends to put a damper on this thing we call "half-decent society".
The definition of decent is defined by society. Its pretty much inevitable as people continue to strive for freedom to define themselves.
QUOTE (iToast @ Oct 4 2009, 04:01 AM)
Anyone under the age of 18 is only a child because that's how the law describes it. No one necessarily becomes more informed or mature the moment they turn 18 (or 21). It is entirely possible for a 16 year old to make an informed decision to have sex; how could age be such a playing factor on how informed someone is? You say sex should only be celebrated between consenting adults. If the law changed to state adulthood is reached at the age of 16, would you say the same? No age of consent can be suitable for every person, as of course we all mature at different ages. The age of consent is primarily there to stop people taking advantage of children. As I said before, there is no blanket age and an 18 year old could make a decision just an uninformed as a 16 or 17 year old. The age of consent is suitable as nothing more than a guideline and ultimately, it is a decision one needs to make for themselves.
yeah i just turned 18 today and i don't feel any different than yesterday. but still, i was a horny idiot at 16(still kinda am, lol). if i didn't feel obliged to follow laws arbitrarily who knows what would have happened.
QUOTE (John Adams @ Oct 3 2009, 11:55 PM)
Sex should be celebrated between two consenting adults not children. Children lack the mental ability to give informed consent. Their frontal lobes are not fully developed (I also suspect other parts of their brains are not fully developed at this point in time, either).
If they are above the age of 18, or 21, I am fine with sex between two consenting adults. Between children, no. Consent or no consent, no.
If they are above the age of 18, or 21, I am fine with sex between two consenting adults. Between children, no. Consent or no consent, no.
In my school year I am the second youngest, having my birthday in August 24th only a week before the cut off point. Does this mean people who I have spent over 11 years of education with a suddenly more mature than me the day they turn 18, which can be almost 12 months before. There are 18 year olds in my year already, even though I only turned 17 last month.
QUOTE (John Adams @ Oct 3 2009, 11:55 PM)
If you answered yes to any of the above questions. Are you okay with your child drinking (to the point of getting drunk), smoking, driving, or doing drugs (assume none of them are illegal)? Why not? After all, in your eyes, they are informed adults. Capable of making their own decisions.
~John
~John
If my child can prove they were going to do such safely and knew all the risks I would allow it.
I agree with 16 as the age of consent as it is more of a guideline anyway. If two people who are underage have sex and consent then no one gets in trouble, but if someone over 16 has sex with someone under 16 it can be charged as statutory rape. Britian has a grey area with 16-18 having sex with 15 year olds but in general it works.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.