Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Should the Age Of Consent Be Lowered?

Age of consent sex Different States Law

  • Please log in to reply
151 replies to this topic

#141 Rockhound

Rockhound

    I've seen so much "spin" I'm getting drunk!

  • Islander
  • 201 posts

Posted 12 November 2004 - 10:24 PM

Handmaiden07, on Nov 12 2004, 06:32 PM, said:

Sure.  Now compare the likely consequences.

Ok.The chlorine is in that water for a reason.  You wear shower shoes in a public shower for a reason. You don't put your mouth on the fountain for a reason, etc.  All safeguards, and yet people still catch diseases in these ways.  Occasionally...not often but it happens.  Like pregnancy or STD transferal.

Quote

And again - I mentioned pregnancy & stds in my last post, but I'd much more like to remove those from the table - by the time those are issues, there are issues we've skipped right over without even caring - we haven't paid any attention to the emotional issues inherent in sexual relationships, and we've apparently decided to ignore any moral thought.

Morals?  As an objectivist, my claim to morals is what is pleasurable and exalts the human being is good...what holds us back without real reason is bad.  Besides, I refuse to address the moral implications of AoC in a nation with over a billion dollars made per year in the sex industry.  And that's the legal stuff.  AoC is an antiquated idea stemming from the idea that children cannot make decisions about their own bodies until they're properly educated...then we fight over what to teach them.  Jocelyn Elders got fired for teaching masturbation.  Masturbation...the only absolutely safe form of sexual expression there is.  In truth, is America ready to lower the AoC?  Hell no.  But doing it might bring on a generation that's not afraid of the subject.

Quote

NOW add back in the consequence of pregnancy - which, by the way, for some teenagers is in fact the goal - they aren't trying to avoid pregnancy - they are actively seeking it, or disease.  Let's ask some real questions here.  Why shouldn't a 15 year old girl who wants a baby have one? Why shouldn't a 15 year old boy who wants a son have one?  Why shouldn't a 14 year old who is in love with a 18 year old who has herpes not have willingly have sex with that person in spite of that?  Why shouldn't a 14 year old who wants to marry a 15 year old do that?

Let's play another scenario: 15 year old healthy boy and...oh...a 35 year old woman.  Both want to have sex with each other.  The woman has had a hysterectomy...so no babies.  Neither have STDs.  IF they want to have sex, should they?  The boy just wants to get laid.  The woman likes young boys.  There's not going to be physical ramifications, and any psychological ones will be the boy bragging to his friends he laid a grown woman.  What's to stop them?  A law saying he has to wait a year (or whatever based upon state laws)?

In the scenario(s) you mentioned: in each case, why not?  You're automatically assuming faulty thinking, I think, simply because of age.  Why not be positive and assume they can make it?

Quote

We talk about this stuff as if kids only view the world the way we view it for them  - teen pregnancy is a problem.  They don't always see it that way.  WE see it that way because we are adults - we know that they aren't responsible yet, nor can they be sufficiently responsible nor produce sufficient resources to take care of this responsibility that they have taken on.  WE see it that way because WE are the adults responsible for these kids.

Then would it not be better to be educated by someone older?  Other cultures have done it and gotten away with it, until the good ol' White man came in and told them they were sinful...and brought those STDs too, btw.

If I follow your thinking, you're essentially saying "No we shouldn't do this because of potential problems."  Ok, when has that ever stopped America?  Our motto in human rights has always been  "Full Speed Ahead! And damn the consequences!" We freed the blacks and gave them the vote despite the fact that few blacks were educated enough to even remotely make an intelligent choice at the polls (a fact the Republican party took full advantage of).  If we follow your thinking:

Everyone should be able to vote: no can't do that, because lot of people can't make reasonable choices at the polls due to lack of education.

Everyone should be able to own property: no, the financial conditions of many families could cost them that home or preclude many from ever owning, therefore it's not fair

Everyone should have freedom of speech: no, then that would include those who are hell bent on destroying our way of life, like Nazis and Communists.

You have to weigh the pros and cons, and personal freedom is always a big pro with me.

Edited by Rockhound, 12 November 2004 - 10:26 PM.

"Wow. This is a ga'damn greek tragedy." ---Rockhound

#142 QueenTiye

QueenTiye

    Behavior is not reproducible over multiple trials.

  • Islander
  • 24,302 posts

Posted 13 November 2004 - 02:30 AM

You are misrepresenting me entirely.  I am in agreement with the idea of personal freedom - for people who can take full responsibility for their personal freedom.  You keep ignoring my main point.  It is possible to restructure society to make people into responsible adults at younger ages, in which case, they will make their own moral choices. same as adults in today's society do.

HM07

Een Draght Mackt Maght


#143 Vapor Trails

Vapor Trails

    In a world where I feel so small, I can't stop thinking big.

  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 16,523 posts

Posted 13 November 2004 - 02:46 AM

HM,

A question...

What do you think of sex education in schools? Would you allow your chldren to take sex ed? Why or why not?

Saul
Posted Image

Politicians are like bananas; they hang together, they're all yellow, and there's not a straight one among them.

"We're relevant for $ and a vote once every two years. Beyond that, we're completely irrelevant, except of course to consume, and preach the gospel according to [insert political demigod here]."--Cait

#144 QueenTiye

QueenTiye

    Behavior is not reproducible over multiple trials.

  • Islander
  • 24,302 posts

Posted 13 November 2004 - 02:55 AM

Digital Man, on Nov 13 2004, 02:46 AM, said:

HM,

A question...

What do you think of sex education in schools? Would you allow your chldren to take sex ed? Why or why not?

Saul

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


I would.  I would also be very involved in my son's understanding of what he was learning in school. In fact, I took sex education in school - you and I aren't that far off in age and I went to school in Brooklyn - sex ed was part of guidance counselling in the 6th, 7th or 8th grades (I think it was 7th).  I'm not against education - but I'm against any kind of education that promotes the idea that its alright for kids to be sexually active.  Its not.

HM07

Een Draght Mackt Maght


#145 QueenTiye

QueenTiye

    Behavior is not reproducible over multiple trials.

  • Islander
  • 24,302 posts

Posted 13 November 2004 - 03:02 AM

Rockhound, on Nov 12 2004, 10:24 PM, said:

In the scenario(s) you mentioned: in each case, why not?  You're automatically assuming faulty thinking, I think, simply because of age.  Why not be positive and assume they can make it?

...


Then would it not be better to be educated by someone older?  Other cultures have done it and gotten away with it, until the good ol' White man came in and told them they were sinful...and brought those STDs too, btw.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Two points.  In the scenarios I mentioned - I am not assuming faulty thinking.  I'm stating unequivocably that the thinking is faulty, because the children have NO way in this society to successfully carry out the full burden of their choices.  Only in a sufficiently restructured society do these choices become potentially rational.

Second - this point about older people teaching them is beyond disgusting.  We don't live in the culture you reference - and pulling out one cultural artifact in isolation from all the other social structures within a culture as proof of something in our own culture is at best, interesting to think about - but essentially non-applicable.  I'll keep saying it.  If they are old enough, then they are.  No need for any older people to teach them a darned thing.  If they aren't old enough, they aren't.

HM07

Een Draght Mackt Maght


#146 Vapor Trails

Vapor Trails

    In a world where I feel so small, I can't stop thinking big.

  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 16,523 posts

Posted 13 November 2004 - 03:03 AM

Handmaiden07, on Nov 13 2004, 02:55 AM, said:

Digital Man, on Nov 13 2004, 02:46 AM, said:

HM,

A question...

What do you think of sex education in schools? Would you allow your children to take sex ed? Why or why not?

Saul

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


I would.  I would also be very involved in my son's understanding of what he was learning in school. In fact, I took sex education in school - you and I aren't that far off in age and I went to school in Brooklyn - sex ed was part of guidance counselling in the 6th, 7th or 8th grades (I think it was 7th).  I'm not against education - but I'm against any kind of education that promotes the idea that its alright for kids to be sexually active.  Its not.

HM07

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Your last sentence reminds me of my school bus run from last year. The school I went to had kids with severe disiplinary problems. Some of these kids sometimes were sent to Zero Tolerance if they got really out of hand. Most of my kids were boys.

One afternoon, they came onto my bus, laughing. They were all carrying what I at first thought were balloons-but on closer inspection, they were condoms. They had taken a sex ed class, and the teacher handed out condoms to them at the end of it.

I've gotta tell you-I was rather un-nerved at this, and there was a part of me that was really angry at the teacher. And this is because I agree with your last sentence.  Part of me couldn't help but feel that this teacher was being irresponsible.  :glare:

Edited by Digital Man, 13 November 2004 - 03:06 AM.

Posted Image

Politicians are like bananas; they hang together, they're all yellow, and there's not a straight one among them.

"We're relevant for $ and a vote once every two years. Beyond that, we're completely irrelevant, except of course to consume, and preach the gospel according to [insert political demigod here]."--Cait

#147 Nikcara

Nikcara

    confused little imp

  • Islander
  • 3,500 posts

Posted 13 November 2004 - 12:43 PM

I just wanted to ask a slightly different...there are male birth control pills in delevopement (I don't believe they have hit the market yet).  They work by making it so that while the man is on the pill, his sperm is made with the flagellem that allows them to swim, thus making it impossible (well...much harder at the least, I'm not going to say anything is 'impossible') to get a girl pregnant.

If this came out and became widely availble, would Rockhound (or anyone who argees with him) be for forcing teenage boys to do the same thing?

What happens when a teen refuses to take their drug?  I can see any number of teenage boys screaming that they won't take anything that interfers with their sperm.  I can also see lots of girls afraid that there may be some sort of complication to BC and refuse to take it because they're afraid of permanent sterilization (which does happen).  What do you do then?
We have fourty million reasons for failure, but not a single excuse  -- Rudyard Kipling

Develop compassion for your enemies, that is genuine compassion.  Limited compassion cannot produce this altruism.  -- H. H. the Dalai Lama

#148 Chakotay

Chakotay

    For gosh sakes let me out of here!

  • Islander
  • 6,657 posts

Posted 13 November 2004 - 01:21 PM

Digital Man, on Nov 13 2004, 07:46 AM, said:

What do you think of sex education in schools? Would you allow your chldren to take sex ed? Why or why not?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


If I had kids, I'd make sure they knew all the facts once they were physically capable of sex, legal age or not.
The biology, the potential diseases, the emotional consequences from my own experiences.
Learning theory is fine. I'd dissuade them from trying the practical until they were as old as possible tho. At least age 18 and legally adult.
Schools teach theory all the time, in chemistry and physics too, but I doubt many students then go straight out to put it into practice....
  No plan survives first contact with the enemy - military axiom.

#149 Tricia

Tricia

    To err on the side of kindness is seldom an error.

  • Islander
  • 10,245 posts

Posted 13 November 2004 - 02:38 PM

I do believe that all parents should be talking to their kids about sex...that's where they should hear about the emotions etc involved in  sex and the decision to actually do the deed...

Yes, sex ed in school is good but the responsibilty starts at home. They can't  delve into all the emotional complexities of the issue in a classroom especially a mixed gender one.  Plus who wants to put their hand up to ask a question that might get them mocked outside of the class if not right there in the room?

My parents did not talk about sex....ever.  The knowledge and ideas I had I got from reading and talking to friends who made their choices and either did or did not regret the circumstances of their first time.  My ideas were formed from their experiences good and bad.

I would rather my children come to me for that information and get the true facts than the rumors and misinformation that I heard.  And that they are able to talk to me about the emotional issues. I would have been as scared to talk to my mom about sex as she was that I would ask.  And that's just wrong.

As to an older man or woman teaching a younger one how to make love...that's not love, just sex.

In true dialogue, both sides are willing to change. --Thich Nhat Hanh


You don't need to attend every argument you are invited to


Do not ask that your kids live up to your expectations.  Let your kids be who they are, and your expectations will be in breathless pursuit.


#150 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 9,215 posts

Posted 13 November 2004 - 03:42 PM

Rockhound:

Quote

I thought I explained that reasoning some posts above, but here it is again: it is the female that carries the child...last time I checked...and therefore in the female that the pregnancy will occur. Follow me so far? Good. Therefore it is more effective for the female to be under some form of BC. Tell me...which is easier to control: one ovum or millions of sperm cells? It only takes one sperm cell to get through.

I see your point, but I still don't think its the best way to go about it (neither would be giving some male birth control pill).

Imagine that we give all Girls BC as soon as they get their first period and they them the all right go ahead, you on BC now.

First of all, it tells them its an acceptable thing to have sex (just liking giving them cigarettes would imply approval of smoking, or any other drug).

Second of all if you only force the BC on one gender it is like telling the other gender its not their problem/fault if a pregnacy results. Granted either way the girl is stuck w/ it at least 9 months... but I could see it now.... "They're on BC, its not *my* fault it failed". Knowing for sure that the other person is suppose to take BC makes it easier for the other side to try to wipe their hands clean if the BC is not 100 % effective.

And you still haven't addressed preventing the spread of STDs. You've talked about STDs but if we are going to give them BC to prevent pregnancy certainly, if we can we should do something about STDs should we not? and

Quote

That's respectable. As to the STDs, that's always the stickler, isn't it? Even someone you go down the aisle with might have one.

Don't most people have to do blood tests before marriage? Even if wasn't required I'd probably ask my SO to go through one.

Quote

The consequences of sex aren't necessarily adult in nature. Heck, there's consequences in interacting in public, period. There are consequences in swimming in a public swimming pool...drinking from a public fountain...using the gym showers...going to a party...etc.

Consequences of interacting in public period are not just consider adult consequences its the risk everyone, adults, children, parents, take when they leave their house :p (or heck, stay inside, how many people get injured/sick in their own homes?). A lot of consequences come from just living, everyone takes that chance whether they like it or not, when they're born.

Quote

Let's play another scenario: 15 year old healthy boy and...oh...a 35 year old woman. Both want to have sex with each other. The woman has had a hysterectomy...so no babies. Neither have STDs. IF they want to have sex, should they? The boy just wants to get laid. The woman likes young boys. There's not going to be physical ramifications, and any psychological ones will be the boy bragging to his friends he laid a grown woman. What's to stop them? A law saying he has to wait a year (or whatever based upon state laws)?

Thats an exception to the rule, how often is that the case?
Why can't they wait until he's reached the AOC? If its true love, they can wait :p If not, well they can either wait or it will fizzle out before then. Is it going to kill them to choose one of these options? I doubt it.

Quote

Then would it not be better to be educated by someone older? Other cultures have done it and gotten away with it, until the good ol' White man came in and told them they were sinful...and brought those STDs too, btw.

Again, why can't they get "educated" when they are 14/16/18? (whatever the age is where they are). Will it do harm to get "educated" then?

As HM said:

Quote

children have NO way in this society to successfully carry out the full burden of their choices.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#151 Peridot

Peridot

    Elf Lynx

  • Islander
  • 2,916 posts

Posted 14 November 2004 - 01:55 AM

Well..... I think the idea of lowering the age of consent is something for which one could make arguments both pro and con.  Personally I'd be opposed to it,  but I can see some valid points from the other side, too.

However....

Rockhound, on Nov 10 2004, 05:10 AM, said:

Now let's be honest, with today's kids and their intense knowledge and practice of sex, they're having sex with each other.  What's the difference between having sex with someone their age or someone older?

.....the above is an overgeneralization.  Many adolescents are having sexual activity with peers, but also many are not.


What was more astonishing by far than the basic topic of the thread was this suggestion:

Quote

In fact, all girls, once they reach puberty, should be put on birth control.  C'mon, we innoculate them for crap they will probably never be exposed to, but it's out of the question to protect them from pregnancy?  One pill a day, that's it. 

Suggesting something like this shows an apparently massive unawareness of the various medical problems that have been associated over time with birth control pills, including, in rare cases, death.  Problems such as depression and depletion of vitamin B6 are more likely, and would have the potential for even greater impact on adolescents who were still developing physically and mentally, than on adults.    :eh:

Given that Rockhound declared he wasn't trying to suggest anything illegal, I find it somewhat interesting to contemplate the fact that such a suggestion was even made.... :Oo:

Peridot

#152 QueenTiye

QueenTiye

    Behavior is not reproducible over multiple trials.

  • Islander
  • 24,302 posts

Posted 14 November 2004 - 03:33 AM

Una Salus Lillius, on Nov 10 2004, 06:35 PM, said:

My main problem with statutory rape laws is that they are a result of some men getting together and deciding that they know best when a woman is old enough to have the "capacity" to consent to sex.  I'm not a big fan of these statutes.

...
The latter are imo yet another function of a patriarchal society trying to decide what is right for women. 

Lil

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


I meant to comment on this... while this may be the original intent of the law - I am very glad that the law covers my son just as much as it would cover a daughter if I had one.  I'm very glad that that teacher who got pregnant by her teenaged student went to jail for statuatory rape.

Rockhound, on Nov 10 2004, 11:22 PM, said:

Quote

And her parents, who are legally responsible for her? Going to likely be paying her medical bills/etc if it comes to that?

Yes, they are, after all, responsible for her actions.

I am trying to think of an adequate comment.  But I really can't.  I just find it amazing that this discussion could be happening - all the while acknowledging that these are children, who are not, and cannot be responsible for themselves.  But the attitude has given me the idea for a spin-off thread...

HM07

Een Draght Mackt Maght




Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Age of consent, sex, Different States, Law

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users