Age of Consent

[xeronix]

This has boggled me for the longest time; here in the united states the age of consent is 18. Yet more & more you find that younger teens, are having sex. I would think the government would really do something about it seeing as the rate of teens getting pregnant is rather high. Yeah its not really anyones business aside from their own to make a conscious decision. But ive been in that position before as well though, many a times me and my girlfriend would do the usual, makeout this & that & even while we were still young (back in like sophomore year) we talked about sex ... a lot. Needless to say we havent done it yet, she moved away, but we still talk & are still in a steady relationship.

But do tell what do you think of the subject- should the government do something about it, is it beyond repair; i would like to hear your opinion.

[epigone]

The age of consent is set by individual states, not by the government. Most states have the consent age at 16. A few are at 17 or 18, even 19. Hawaii lets you have consenting sex at the age of 14 if you're within 5 years of your consenting partner (but not younger than 14).

[xeronix]

Ah, didn't see that. Up in North Carolina its 18. Seems like 14 is a little young though doesnt it?

[otters]

To your conscience it does.

[xeronix]

I really dont see why they would consent to doing that at such a young age. A majority of the time thats the only way they consider loving someone. & its not common for some one to even be with the same person from that young of an age. I know there are exceptions, me being one of them (i was just about to turn 15 when i started going with the girlfriend i still have 4~5 years later) ... Wouldnt you think of the possibility of what were to happen if they got pregnant, or a disease of some sort? We both consciously decided not to, for the time being at least...

[otters]

I was kind of being ironic (referring to libido, actually).

[xeronix]

ehh, its just a question. Its all good though.

[otters]

But yes: I do think that unsafe sex before marriage is beyond one of the stupidest things you can possibly do.

[blackson]

If it's consensual in the first place, I don't see why there needs to be governmental standards on it.

[otters]

If it's consensual in the first place

Ahaha.

Yeah, I'm not saying that the government should interfere with what goes on in bedrooms (although it doesn't really seem that intelligent to me), but the people participating should at least be smart enough to know what they're getting into and whether they're ready. (and, in many cases, what preventive measures they will take.)

[blackson]

If it's consensual in the first place

Ahaha.

Yeah, I'm not saying that the government should interfere with what goes on in bedrooms (although it doesn't really seem that intelligent to me), but the people participating should at least be smart enough to know what they're getting into and whether they're ready. (and, in many cases, what preventive measures they will take.)

Well, yes.

[DemonzLunchBreak]

I think the acceptability of consensual sex depends more on the age difference than how old the people involved are. I don't think that people should have sex before they understand the emotional implications and they understand how to do so safely.

[Kablizzy]

If people weren't stupid as lamp-posts, we'd never need a single rule or law. Same thing with the forums. If people weren't unfathomable jackasses, we'd never need rules ever.

[Zora_S_Kenneth]

The problem with the Age of Consent is that is the one law that can't be enforced. Not to say that one should do it, since just because a tree fell in a forest and nobody heard it doesn't mean it didn't make a noise. (Just because you broke the law and nobody knows doesn't mean you're not a criminal). We can at least hope that the people who disagree with me in the most direct way possible know exactly what they are getting into.

@Blizzy: No. We need rules so that people like the moderating team can break them just for fun. (Dave used to spam, used to multi-account, and used to swear outside the B&T when it existed. Same with Suki, except for the multi-accounting part). Everyone else needs laws so that they can aspire to become policemen and break a few of them, while making the rest suffer.

[xeronix]

Well, unfortunately thats where society stands. & yes for the most part age difference is a big part... But still doesnt seem to stop pedophiles form doing that they do, knowing full well that ist illegal... & then there are others (my STEP grand father [65] how happends to do a 20 year old woman... Creepy no... But still, i know the government wont really do that much about it, what can you really expect them to do. But i understand full well what you mean. But still in these places that have the age of consent at like 14; dont you think there a problem with it?

[TribulatioN]

I think that consent is more important in these kind of things. And people being responsible for their actions, then rules and laws won't matter, if there isn't anything bad going on. (As Kablizzy said) It depends on how the situation is dealt with, and whether or not people are taking the initiative to do something about it.

[Zora_S_Kenneth]

As long as both ALL sides are aware of what they are getting into, then I have no problem with lowered to no age limits. Then again, considering the f***ed up education in this country, they probably don't.




...in fact, I despise age limits on just about everything.

[xeronix]

I guess i can understand where your coming from, but the age limit is there for the mere though on "the older the more mature" .. If they were mature for their age mentally as well as physically i could understand it slightly, but the limit must be somewhere.

[Zora_S_Kenneth]

Some adults are less mature then your average 7 year old. So that's not the limit.

[KinGAleX]

Age limits are mostly pointless. Education is the main thing. I've got no problem with two consenting fourteen year olds having sex. They're going to do it anyway, laws or not, so let's not make it taboo and uneducatable. Plus, I think it's a good idea to be sexually mature before you get into a long-term relationship. No sex before marriage can lead to many complications down the line.

[Atilla]

The problem with the Age of Consent is that is the one law that can't be enforced.

That's not entirely true. I can think of several cases in which an adult has been convicted for having intercourse with a minor. I think the law is mostly there for cases where one party is much older than the other, or where someone is in a profession such as teaching or medicine, where they shouldn't have sexual relations with those under their authority.

(Note: in Australia, it's legal for a minor to sleep with someone as long as both parties are at least 14, and the age difference is two years or less. So, y'know, nothing illegal about your common-or-garden variety teen romance.)

[kkstrong]

16, by that time you are old enough to know the implications of having sex, and that's all that really matters.

I know I've seent his exact thread on the old forums.

[Kablizzy]

@Blizzy: No. We need rules so that people like the moderating team can break them just for fun. (Dave used to spam, used to multi-account, and used to swear outside the B&T when it existed. Same with Suki, except for the multi-accounting part). Everyone else needs laws so that they can aspire to become policemen and break a few of them, while making the rest suffer.

I do all of those same things. The difference is that Dave, Suki, myself, and others know when to post sixteen times in a topic and when to post once in a topic. We know when to throw a "Fuck" or "Shitdamn" down, and when a simple "Aw, shuckleberries" will suffice. Dudes who post sixteen times *in a row* with "lolfag" simply do not. I think you might be confusing the ability to break a law with the willingness to break a law and the knowledge of what laws are with ignorance of what laws are and why they are actually - at a base, primordial level - needed.

For instance, there are those who want marijuana legalized. It's a valiant cause, but it operates under the premise that there are people who don't abuse it. Same thing with those who support communism. These things are based upon ideologies that operate within a certain subset of required conditions - None of which exist in reality. Same with this very cause - If indeed people were responsible enough to moderate and police their own actions, there would never be a need for a law or rule. However, by that same token - in reality - that can't happen. As such, rules and laws are needed.

To tie this in, the age of consent is a needed - albeit a heavily debatable - law. I don't believe anyone under the age of eighteen can indeed make a decision of that social gravity. Were we all apes, and were the only implication of sex very naturalistic, then sure - We reach the age of physical capability around 12-14. But what the age of consent polices is the societal ramifications of sex. We - as sentient, sapient, social beings - have an entirely different subset of requirements for acceptability than any other animal.

As KinGAleX said, it's all about education - If we educate people on these things instead of shoving it under the carpet, things will eventually get better. In this case, a law prohibiting sex isn't really the best answer - What two people do behind closed doors can't ever really be policed with too much accuracy.

In response to some of Z_S_K's later posts, I think the things that he said about despising all (Or most) age limits only strengthens the idea that those who are uneducated and uninformed (i.e. less experienced [i.e. younger]) should indeed have certain restrictions placed upon them. Ask Z_S_K in fifteen years what his stance on this issue is, and I'll eat my hat if it isn't entirely turned around, because he will have had that much more experience and knowledge under his belt - And will have had that much more time to contemplate all the things that he's saying. Wisdom is a rarely-recognized trait these days, but we used to respect our elders for a very distinct reason - They had more life experience. Now whether that is currently true or not is debatable, but that goes off on another tangent entirely.

[xeronix]

@Blizzy: Wow, youve pretty much summed up all the words i couldnt... thank you much....

[ska]

No sex before marriage can lead to many complications down the line.

Had you said this some 400 years ago, you would have been burnt at the stake.

BTW, I decided to beat your 6-1 run. Very satisfying!