NationStates Jolt Archive

how old should the youngest kid should be to have sex

how old should the youngest kid should be to have sex

15 but only with a person who is under 18. No one under 15 should be allowed to have sex. 12-15 would be considered statutory rape. under 12 would be considered child molestation.

how old should the youngest kid should be to have sex

80

21 years of age.

21 years of age.

Yeah right!!!! and what will all those horny teenage boys do? :wink: Mutual auto-erotica? I'm sure some dads still take their sons to "Ladies of the night" to have their fist experience.

Its a natural part of human exsistance and body from the day wae are born.It cant be removed and Its not even some thing that even needs to be taught and impossible to regulate,People have their own minds.. Its not all that hard to figure out any way.. You cant fight nature..

how about---when they get married like it is supposed to be???

how about---when they get married like it is supposed to be???

Sure lower the marriage age to 15 and allow gays and lesbians to marry!!!! Honestly most marriages today don't work. Hell you can get married by Elvis in Vegas. It's rather silly to believe that most people wait until they get married.

It's rather silly to believe that most people wait until they get married.

Silly or not, that's what the question asked.

It's rather silly to believe that most people wait until they get married.

Silly or not, that's what the question asked.

Then no..People shouldn't have to wait until they married. It's just a stupid old puritanical law. We are more advanced in sexuality to go back to that.

It's rather silly to believe that most people wait until they get married.

Silly or not, that's what the question asked.

Then no..People shouldn't have to wait until they married. It's just a stupid old puritanical law. We are more advanced in sexuality to go back to that.

So you're saying everyone should sleep around with everyone else?

It's rather silly to believe that most people wait until they get married.

Silly or not, that's what the question asked.

Then no..People shouldn't have to wait until they married. It's just a stupid old puritanical law. We are more advanced in sexuality to go back to that.

So you're saying everyone should sleep around with everyone else?

If they want to yes. Sexual freedom is still alive despite what some people want and despite what secret government scientists have created people will always be free to have sex. After all of this shit has passed there will be a second sexual revolution.

sex is honest wholesome good clean fun for children of all ages.

or would be in a world that wasn't already overpopulated for one thing.

i din't think chronological age (beyond puberty that is) logicly or moraly has that much to do with it in and of itself

in the mundane world there are of course real caveats

different cultures have handled this differently in different times and places

dominant beliefs, right or wrong, and my personal feeling is that the're mostly wrong, are none the less a thing that exists, or more to the point their tyrannical influence on civil law, even in nations that supposedly seperate 'church' and state.

carlemnaria's unique approach may have been to some degree detailed elsewhere, but to sumarize, all measures to lower feritility are encouraged as well as spay (hisorectomy) and neuter (vasectomy) being free.

sex is after all one of the aspects of life young carlemnarians are generaly expected to explore during their intereducational pujzush, the two years between completion of lower school and begining of upper.

generaly this is between the ages of 12/13 and 15 or so.

of course carlemnarian advances in medicine of completely concerd sexualy transmitted diseases.

most districts have a card system to keep sexual demands from interfering with other activities the individual might wish or commit to enguaging in, but well, in nearly all it is pretty much ah all but virtualy required that SOME time be set aside for sexual gratification as well.

not that anyone of that age generaly has to be told.

if anything ... but you see, beliefs or not, nature made us that way, to be sexualy active in EARLY adolescence.

now the mundane world and places in the mind are two differnt things

the mundane world does have these several little problems, but here on nation states, or at least in the happy little land of carlemnaria these matters seldom intrude.

and carlemnaria's major beliefs, the nalanuthu and nalanutho, are generaly supportive of early adolescence exploration of innocent sexuality

=^^=
.../\...

15 i think, im 14, but i would love to have sex right now, and i probably could wit my g/f, but then my mom would find out or sumthin, i can jus tell lol

I believe the age of consent should be 16, but if you are younger and have sex with a person of the same age then it is allowable.

I'm a 20 yr old virgin woman and damn proud of it! I think saving yourself for marriage and/or true love is very important and that your body isn't meant to be used as a simple means of self gratification. What would that be saying to those with low self-esteem? They would end up giving themselves to as many others as they possibly could just to make themselves feel more desirable. Everyone knows that kind of behavior leads to psychological disorders later in life.

In my opinion, sexual nature is inherit and God did create us as sexual beings. But that doesn't mean we should go out and bury our insecurities by giving away the sanctity of our bodies. I'm sure there are people who don't have insecurities and just have sex because it's fun and kills time, and I'm not saying that's wholly wrong. But you have to understand. There are so many people out there that take sex so seriously in a relationship, feels it's a merging of souls and an unbreakable bond greater than marriage, that when the other decides it's time to move on to the next sex toy, the first is shattered for life.

Sex is definitely not something to take lightly. I'm sure it's enjoyable, and I'm not saying having it before marriage is a bad thing. But having it just for the sake of saying you've had sex with someone or to gratify yourself (as many people do) is just destructive. That's why I think no one under 16 should be allowed to have sex. People of that age and younger just aren't mature enough psychologically to handle the vectors involved. And I'm not saying that in a patronizing manner. It's a fact.

Oh, and we were not created to be sexually active at the beginning of puberty. People in the early first century and before were married young because their expected lifespan was not much longer than thirty years. Not to mention how thousands of women died giving birth because of the inadequate medical advances of the time. Women married young, had children young, and they died young. It had nothing to do with how we were created or weren't created. It was a question of lifespan.

How does it go..? Old enough to bleed, old enough to breed...or maybe it's "if their is grass on the field, play ball".
Not sure which one it is, but that should explain how old a girl should be before having sex.
Thank you,
-The Armed Republic of Fallian
Telegrams should be sent C/O: FAQ NationStates

I won't even grace that insult with my own, Fallian. If you don't care about people's emotional and psychological wellbeing but care enough about physical gratification to give insult to injury, well that's your problem now isn't it.

Thank You.

When they bleed they´re old enough.

I believe that any person over 12 years of age should be allowed to have consetual sex. However, there needs to be strict, clear definitions of consent.
Childeren are "sexually active" from an earlier age than many people realise, and as long as childeren are educated from an appropriate age to ensure they fully understand about sex and what it means to have sex, children should be able to make their own choices about when they are ready.

how old should the youngest kid should be to have sex

15 but only with a person who is under 18. No one under 15 should be allowed to have sex. 12-15 would be considered statutory rape. under 12 would be considered child molestation.

CHILDREN NEED TO BE PROTECTED AND THEIR INNOCENCE PRESERVED.

how about---when they get married like it is supposed to be???

And I suppose you expected Skinhead to get married to both girls before that threesome you suggested? Be consistant.

Honestly. All that 'gays should die' crap too... can't you just make sense?

- Jordan, Monarch of Archaeus

I believe the age of consent should be 16, but if you are younger and have sex with a person of the same age then it is allowable.

Something like this sounds sensible - or, perhaps, people within 20 percent of one's age, above (say) 12.

At least, we'd be cutting out most paedophiles from claiming it was 'consensual'.

- Jordan, Monarch of Archaeus

Romeo and Juliet laws make real-life sense. If people want to remain chaste that's great but it shouldn't be mandatory if the couple is of an age.

Here is one example:

[This jurisdiction's] law prohibits various sexual scenarios, and has a special category
for sex with a person between 14 and 16. Adults breaching this criminal sodomy
section face harsh penalties, but [the] lawmakers carved out some breathing
space for youthful miscreants, provided they are 18 or under, and within four
years of age of their consensual partner. Called the "Romeo and Juliet" law,
the provision limits the penalty for teen sex to 15 months in jail, and does
not require the perpetrator to register as a sex offender. But the "Romeo and
Juliet" law only applies to heterosexual teen-agers.

............................................................................

Under these circumstances we would abolish penalities entirely for concenting teen couples.

Romeo and Juliet laws make real-life sense. If people want to remain chaste that's great but it shouldn't be mandatory if the couple is of an age.

Here is one example:

[This jurisdiction's] law prohibits various sexual scenarios, and has a special category
for sex with a person between 14 and 16. Adults breaching this criminal sodomy
section face harsh penalties, but [the] lawmakers carved out some breathing
space for youthful miscreants, provided they are 18 or under, and within four
years of age of their consensual partner. Called the "Romeo and Juliet" law,
the provision limits the penalty for teen sex to 15 months in jail, and does
not require the perpetrator to register as a sex offender. But the "Romeo and
Juliet" law only applies to heterosexual teen-agers.

............................................................................

Under these circumstances we would abolish penalities entirely for concenting teen couples.

I am aware of Kansas' illogical and discriminatory law, and do not support it in the least - in fact, I carefully researched the much-publicised case of its abuse, and I am in violent opposition to it. If the couple is consensual, it should not matter if they engage in heterosexual or homosexual copulation.

Sexual expression should be restricted by the capacity for informed consent, not nature of sexual expression.

- Jordan, Monarch of Archaeus

Oh, and we were not created to be sexually active at the beginning of puberty. People in the early first century and before were married young because their expected lifespan was not much longer than thirty years. Not to mention how thousands of women died giving birth because of the inadequate medical advances of the time. Women married young, had children young, and they died young. It had nothing to do with how we were created or weren't created. It was a question of lifespan.

Your reasoning here does imply that we were created to be sexually active at a young age. Your argument is, simply, that our current social structure has adapted to our longer lifespans and now it is not accepted for us to be sexually active under a certain age--a point that I do not contend.

That said, having engaged in extra-marital sex (indeed, living with my girlfriend) and having engaged in plenty of sexual encounters that had no illusion of true love (at separate times, and certainly before aforesaid extra-marital sex), I can see no ill effects to my body or mind--facts that are corroborated by my recent physical for my career as a (real-life) diplomat (for which they do extensive psychological screening). In fact, I would go so far to say that the regular sex I've engaged in has kept me well-grounded and much happier than I was in my late-teen abstinence days. But, to each her own, I should say.

I think that there should be no legal age, but unfortunately not everyone seems to know from themselves when they're ready for it. I myself, a lad from 16, have had some sexual experience with a girl I really loved last summer, but the both of us felt we weren't yet up for the "real stuff" so we never went farther.
Though, I know some people (don't ask me why but they're all 3 girls - but that doesn't change the case) who dived straight into it, went to bed like 2 times each day with their first boyfriends and those after that (the relationships didn't survive very well :roll: ), but not because of the sex itself but because they are unhappy of themselves, and need attention. I could never do such I think! (And you don't solve the problem that you have at all, by the way)
Now they're so addicted that if they can't find a boyfriend and when they haven't had sex for a week or two, they just hook up (on parties,...) with someone for that night even without loving him.

P.S. Here in Belgium the legal age for having sexual interaction is 16 for people with a different gender, 18 for people with the same gender.
BUT: gay marriage is now legal too.

I believe that any person over 12 years of age should be allowed to have consetual sex. However, there needs to be strict, clear definitions of consent.
Childeren are "sexually active" from an earlier age than many people realise, and as long as childeren are educated from an appropriate age to ensure they fully understand about sex and what it means to have sex, children should be able to make their own choices about when they are ready.Now isn't this a nicer way to insult me? ^_^ I think Nibbleton has a valid point. As long as children are educated about it properly, they should be able to make their own decisions. Though twelve is a little young ... >.> ... the age isn't really an issue ... it's psychological age that matters.

Your reasoning here does imply that we were created to be sexually active at a young age. Your argument is, simply, that our current social structure has adapted to our longer lifespans and now it is not accepted for us to be sexually active under a certain age--a point that I do not contend.

That said, having engaged in extra-marital sex (indeed, living with my girlfriend) and having engaged in plenty of sexual encounters that had no illusion of true love (at separate times, and certainly before aforesaid extra-marital sex), I can see no ill effects to my body or mind--facts that are corroborated by my recent physical for my career as a (real-life) diplomat (for which they do extensive psychological screening). In fact, I would go so far to say that the regular sex I've engaged in has kept me well-grounded and much happier than I was in my late-teen abstinence days. But, to each her own, I should say.

I was speaking on the behalf of the female side of the equation, mostly. I know very well that men become sexually frustrated easily, though most women don't ever or not as strongly. Very little of our [female] psychological health has to do with having sex, though having it before we're mentally ready causes great damage.

I think I can explain this with another dive into history. In Roman, Greek, and Spartan cultures, boys from as early as age twelve were taken and trained as soldiers, not marrying until they were about twenty five or so (and every man DID marry, gay or not ... it was law and tradition). This being said, there was plenty of same-sex goings on during these ten or so years of 'no women allowed.' This quenched the male's need for sexual gratification. Women, on the other hand, didn't need this sexual gratification half as badly and were content to wait till they were married off by their parents. (Plus, by law ... if a woman had sex before marriage she was stoned to death or some other means of death)

I guess what I'm saying is, men need sex more than women need it ... so why not go have it with other men? xD ... just kidding.

I guess what I'm saying is, men need sex more than women need it ... so why not go have it with other men? xD ... just kidding.

In best Homer Simpson voice (while snatching donut or Duff), "Don't mind if I do."

EDIT: oops, forgot to quote

Romeo and Juliet laws make real-life sense. If people want to remain chaste that's great but it shouldn't be mandatory if the couple is of an age.

Here is one example:

[This jurisdiction's] law prohibits various sexual scenarios, and has a special category
for sex with a person between 14 and 16. Adults breaching this criminal sodomy
section face harsh penalties, but [the] lawmakers carved out some breathing
space for youthful miscreants, provided they are 18 or under, and within four
years of age of their consensual partner. Called the "Romeo and Juliet" law,
the provision limits the penalty for teen sex to 15 months in jail, and does
not require the perpetrator to register as a sex offender. But the "Romeo and
Juliet" law only applies to heterosexual teen-agers.

............................................................................

Under these circumstances we would abolish penalities entirely for concenting teen couples.

Why is it called the "Romeo & Juliet" law if Romeo was 14 and Juliet was 13? lol

I agree that as long as it is there is proper education, and they are at least 13, people should make up their own minds, becuase a new study shows that over 30% of teens have had sex under the legal age in the US.

Romeo and Juliet laws make real-life sense. If people want to remain chaste that's great but it shouldn't be mandatory if the couple is of an age.

Here is one example:

[This jurisdiction's] law prohibits various sexual scenarios, and has a special category
for sex with a person between 14 and 16. Adults breaching this criminal sodomy
section face harsh penalties, but [the] lawmakers carved out some breathing
space for youthful miscreants, provided they are 18 or under, and within four
years of age of their consensual partner. Called the "Romeo and Juliet" law,
the provision limits the penalty for teen sex to 15 months in jail, and does
not require the perpetrator to register as a sex offender. But the "Romeo and
Juliet" law only applies to heterosexual teen-agers.

............................................................................

Under these circumstances we would abolish penalities entirely for concenting teen couples.

Why is it called the "Romeo & Juliet" law if Romeo was 14 and Juliet was 13? lol

I agree that as long as it is there is proper education, and they are at least 13, people should make up their own minds, becuase a new study shows that over 30% of teens have had sex under the legal age in the US.

how old should the youngest kid should be to have sex

Biological puberty. Anything under that should be statutory rape. Anything above that should be perfectly legal.

Rationale: Age is arbitrary. It's hard enough to tell a 14-year-old from a 16-year-old, and often impossible to tell a 16-year-old from an 18-year-old. Whereas it should be easy to tell a pre-pubescent from a post-.

In addition, puberty allows the body to have sex. It IS sexual maturity, and for that reason, should also be the age of consent.

The world isn't overpopulated at all. We'd all fit comfortably in Texas with enough resources, blah blah blah... the problem is concentration. Too many people in one place... Spread out, you idiots... But this is a different topic.

a new study shows that over 30% of teens have had sex under the legal age in the US.

However, international studies have shown that there is no correlation between the legal age of consent and the actual age the most people lose their virginity. Furthermore, there is often quite a gap between the first time people have sex and their first long-term sexual relationship. *he said knowingly*

CHILDREN NEED TO BE PROTECTED AND THEIR INNOCENCE PRESERVED.
Everyone classifies "chidren" differently, hence the creation of this topic.
By "Innocence" I assume you mean "virginity." Most people will have sex at some time in their life, surely it is the person's own choice when they do it.
Try backing your argument up some more rather than just shouting it; it makes for better conversation :)

How does it go..? Old enough to bleed, old enough to breed...or maybe it's "if their is grass on the field, play ball".
Not sure which one it is, but that should explain how old a girl should be before having sex.
Thank you,
-The Armed Republic of Fallian
Telegrams should be sent C/O: FAQ NationStates

So you are all for an eleven year old getting pregnant? Or how about death from an STD? Having a child? Her body may be beginning to change, but that does not mean her mind is ready to accept it. How is she going to support the child, if she and the baby live through the birth?

I see the point all of you are making. Whether or not they are biologically ready or willing. But you missed an important point. If they are around their pre-teens or their teenage years, they don't have the mental maturity to handle the decisions that they are making. Oh, and for the guy who made the comment about Romeo being fourteen and Juliet being thirteen, what did they do? They had no clue what they were doing and commited suicide. Why? Because of their infatuation with one another. Infatuation is what all of you want to have sex for. Bakas. Anyway, they are fictional characters, so you really can't reference them.

Now, for the real post. About the mental maturity of the people in question. They may be able to make a decision to have sex or something along those lines, but they don't really realize what they are doing. Sex is a commitment. There is a very serious risk in what sex is, and if you aren't willing to take it, then don't do it in the first place. A pre-teen or teenager usually (at least at the ages you people are talking about) cannot distinguish that risk. If they are one of the few who get pregnant or get an STD, what are they going to do about it. They're still in grade school. Their parents or their guardian will have to take care of the child instead of the mother or the father. And for an STD. Their immune systems aren't as powerful as an adult's. Have you seen pictures of kids with AIDS in Africa? They look absolutely horrible. It scares me to see that kind of illness sweeping the world. As I said earlier, they can't comprehend that kind of thing. There shouldn't be a set age, but a set maturity. And when they get there, they should realize that sex for no reason is idoicy.

I'm a 20 yr old virgin woman and damn proud of it! I think saving yourself for marriage and/or true love is very important and that your body isn't meant to be used as a simple means of self gratification. What would that be saying to those with low self-esteem? They would end up giving themselves to as many others as they possibly could just to make themselves feel more desirable. Everyone knows that kind of behavior leads to psychological disorders later in life.

In my opinion, sexual nature is inherit and God did create us as sexual beings. But that doesn't mean we should go out and bury our insecurities by giving away the sanctity of our bodies. I'm sure there are people who don't have insecurities and just have sex because it's fun and kills time, and I'm not saying that's wholly wrong. But you have to understand. There are so many people out there that take sex so seriously in a relationship, feels it's a merging of souls and an unbreakable bond greater than marriage, that when the other decides it's time to move on to the next sex toy, the first is shattered for life.

Sex is definitely not something to take lightly. I'm sure it's enjoyable, and I'm not saying having it before marriage is a bad thing. But having it just for the sake of saying you've had sex with someone or to gratify yourself (as many people do) is just destructive. That's why I think no one under 16 should be allowed to have sex. People of that age and younger just aren't mature enough psychologically to handle the vectors involved. And I'm not saying that in a patronizing manner. It's a fact.

Oh, and we were not created to be sexually active at the beginning of puberty. People in the early first century and before were married young because their expected lifespan was not much longer than thirty years. Not to mention how thousands of women died giving birth because of the inadequate medical advances of the time. Women married young, had children young, and they died young. It had nothing to do with how we were created or weren't created. It was a question of lifespan.

I don't mean to be rude, and don't take this the wrong way...but if you have enough time to write an expanation of why you are a virgin then...you need to get a relationship with some nice person.

-----

-Dr.Ivan Yuri Ulrich, Chairman of the Communist Party of Paradiszia

21 years of age.

Agreed! Infact, we should outlaw pre-marital sex.

I really don't understand why people would want to have pre-marital sex anyway. Masterbation is a far better alternative to sex.

Ahem...
Masterbation won't get you or your girlfriend pregnant.
Masterbation won't contract an STD for you.
Masterbation can take place whenever you feel in the mood. Thus you don't have to wait around if she has a "head ache"
Nudie magazines and lotion are available from many sources.
AND, you don't have to show your date a nice evening costing somewhere in the $50-100 region.

Masterbating untill you're married isn't a bad way to go, especially since you know that you'll never get your girlfreind pregnant and you'll never contract an STD.

If a sexual partner is ever obtained, both people can masterbate togeather.

If you're feeling particularly romantic, light a candle.

As far as all you fourteen year olds already sleeping around...
Having sex with other people will not gain their respect for you.
Use a condom. Don't "double condom" it, otherwise they'll break.
It is never too late to stop having sex with a partner, and if the partner leaves you because of it, they were not worth your time in the first place.

As far as age goes, anyone willing should be able to participate in sex. However, there are alot of sick adults out there who would take advantage of such a loose law and say that the children they raped "wanted it." Thus the basis for such a law is needed. However, if the copulation of two fourteen year olds results in a child, the law should not punish them because God has punished them enough already. The real punishment deosn't begin until 9 months later. Thus it should be illegal for adults to sleep with children younger than 17-18 years old. In order to make this statement, the term "adult" must be defined. In most cultures it is defined as 18 years of age or older. This means that you had better dump your 6th grade girlfreind when you turn 18.

A normal adult will not want to sleep with anyone younger than 17-18 years old. Biology and soceity dictate that adults have certain charachteristsics that make them sexually attractive to the opposite sex, which are not present in early teenagers. There is also a level of maturity that most people lack untill they reach their early twenties. This is another sexual repellant that many people experience. Mistakes happen every once in a while. Usually the adult is drunk... very drunk... However, the law must bind all equally, thus the adult will be held to the same rules as everyone else.

As far as homosexual relationships with both parties underage: There should be no way that a partner can become pregnant, thus there is no evidence that intercourse ever happend. Thus there should be no reason for anyone to ever go to court over consenting homosexual sexual intercourse when both parties are underage.

As to all of you who remain virgins, I applaude you, it is alot harder than it sounds.
Say it loud, say it proud: I'm a chronic masterbat... uhh... virgin!

I really don't understand why people would want to have pre-marital sex anyway. Masterbation is a far better alternative to sex.

Ahem...
Masterbation won't get you or your girlfriend pregnant.
Masterbation won't contract an STD for you.
Masterbation can take place whenever you feel in the mood. Thus you don't have to wait around if she has a "head ache"
Nudie magazines and lotion are available from many sources.
AND, you don't have to show your date a nice evening costing somewhere in the $50-100 region.

Masterbating untill you're married isn't a bad way to go, especially since you know that you'll never get your girlfreind pregnant and you'll never contract an STD.

If a sexual partner is ever obtained, both people can masterbate togeather.

If you're feeling particularly romantic, light a candle.

As far as all you fourteen year olds already sleeping around...
Having sex with other people will not gain their respect for you.
Use a condom. Don't "double condom" it, otherwise they'll break.
It is never too late to stop having sex with a partner, and if the partner leaves you because of it, they were not worth your time in the first place.

As far as age goes, anyone willing should be able to participate in sex. However, there are alot of sick adults out there who would take advantage of such a loose law and say that the children they raped "wanted it." Thus the basis for such a law is needed. However, if the copulation of two fourteen year olds results in a child, the law should not punish them because God has punished them enough already. The real punishment deosn't begin until 9 months later. Thus it should be illegal for adults to sleep with children younger than 17-18 years old. In order to make this statement, the term "adult" must be defined. In most cultures it is defined as 18 years of age or older. This means that you had better dump your 6th grade girlfreind when you turn 18.

A normal adult will not want to sleep with anyone younger than 17-18 years old. Biology and soceity dictate that adults have certain charachteristsics that make them sexually attractive to the opposite sex, which are not present in early teenagers. There is also a level of maturity that most people lack untill they reach their early twenties. This is another sexual repellant that many people experience. Mistakes happen every once in a while. Usually the adult is drunk... very drunk... However, the law must bind all equally, thus the adult will be held to the same rules as everyone else.

As far as homosexual relationships with both parties underage: There should be no way that a partner can become pregnant, thus there is no evidence that intercourse ever happend. Thus there should be no reason for anyone to ever go to court over consenting homosexual sexual intercourse when both parties are underage.

As to all of you who remain virgins, I applaude you, it is alot harder than it sounds.
Say it loud, say it proud: I'm a chronic masterbat... uhh... virgin!

2-3 years of age why do you ask

It's rather silly to believe that most people wait until they get married.

Silly or not, that's what the question asked.

Then no..People shouldn't have to wait until they married. It's just a stupid old puritanical law. We are more advanced in sexuality to go back to that.

So you're saying everyone should sleep around with everyone else?

If they want to yes. Sexual freedom is still alive despite what some people want and despite what secret government scientists have created people will always be free to have sex. After all of this shit has passed there will be a second sexual revolution.

This is a very interesting view, but some people and nations still abide by what has been called a "stupid puritanical law". Some nations choose to abide by these laws. We respect your choices regarding your domestic affairs, please respect ours.

The States of Stephenson

I really don't understand why people would want to have pre-marital sex anyway. Masterbation is a far better alternative to sex.

Ahem...
Masterbation won't get you or your girlfriend pregnant.
Masterbation won't contract an STD for you.
Masterbation can take place whenever you feel in the mood. Thus you don't have to wait around if she has a "head ache"
Nudie magazines and lotion are available from many sources.
AND, you don't have to show your date a nice evening costing somewhere in the $50-100 region.

Masterbating untill you're married isn't a bad way to go, especially since you know that you'll never get your girlfreind pregnant and you'll never contract an STD.

If a sexual partner is ever obtained, both people can masterbate togeather.

If you're feeling particularly romantic, light a candle.

As far as all you fourteen year olds already sleeping around...
Having sex with other people will not gain their respect for you.
Use a condom. Don't "double condom" it, otherwise they'll break.
It is never too late to stop having sex with a partner, and if the partner leaves you because of it, they were not worth your time in the first place.

As far as age goes, anyone willing should be able to participate in sex. However, there are alot of sick adults out there who would take advantage of such a loose law and say that the children they raped "wanted it." Thus the basis for such a law is needed. However, if the copulation of two fourteen year olds results in a child, the law should not punish them because God has punished them enough already. The real punishment deosn't begin until 9 months later. Thus it should be illegal for adults to sleep with children younger than 17-18 years old. In order to make this statement, the term "adult" must be defined. In most cultures it is defined as 18 years of age or older. This means that you had better dump your 6th grade girlfreind when you turn 18.

A normal adult will not want to sleep with anyone younger than 17-18 years old. Biology and soceity dictate that adults have certain charachteristsics that make them sexually attractive to the opposite sex, which are not present in early teenagers. There is also a level of maturity that most people lack untill they reach their early twenties. This is another sexual repellant that many people experience. Mistakes happen every once in a while. Usually the adult is drunk... very drunk... However, the law must bind all equally, thus the adult will be held to the same rules as everyone else.

As far as homosexual relationships with both parties underage: There should be no way that a partner can become pregnant, thus there is no evidence that intercourse ever happend. Thus there should be no reason for anyone to ever go to court over consenting homosexual sexual intercourse when both parties are underage.

As to all of you who remain virgins, I applaude you, it is alot harder than it sounds.
Say it loud, say it proud: I'm a chronic masterbat... uhh... virgin!



Ok. personally, I think that two people have sex to explore eachother, and to feel an intimacy with one another. Masturbating is not very intimate, even with a candle lit. Think about, although I suppose that is your viewpoint.

As for the other person that said, "I think we should outlaw premarital sex!" Are you serious? Getting jailed for having sex with your partner? I mean, its not as if all relationships are going to last. Sometimes, the person just might not be as nice as you expected. If everyone was married, there would be a HELL of a lot of divorces. And I know that your point is about premarital sex alone. So if two people, aged in their late 20s, had sex, they would be arrested? Give me a fucking break! I don't know if you are being completely serious or not, but that is one of the dumbest things I've seen posted up here.

It's rather silly to believe that most people wait until they get married.

Silly or not, that's what the question asked.

Then no..People shouldn't have to wait until they married. It's just a stupid old puritanical law. We are more advanced in sexuality to go back to that.

So you're saying everyone should sleep around with everyone else?

If they want to yes. Sexual freedom is still alive despite what some people want and despite what secret government scientists have created people will always be free to have sex. After all of this shit has passed there will be a second sexual revolution.

This is a very interesting view, but some people and nations still abide by what has been called a "stupid puritanical law". Some nations choose to abide by these laws. We respect your choices regarding your domestic affairs, please respect ours.

The States of Stephenson

Hmm.... Has anyone seen Shakespeare's "Measure for Measure" It tells a story of what happens in a nation when puritanical draconian laws are renected. ( I mention this because someone refrenced "Romeo & Juliet" In the story Claudio is to excuted for seducing Juliet after Angelo tries to reform the city of vienna but Angelo has a secret of his own.

I will respect you laws but......You will have to change the laws some time in the future. The sexual revolution is part of our evolution. Humans are sexual beings and desire sex. It souldn't matter if its premarital or gay or etc...

Only because you think it is. You can always force people to comply with anything. If it must be so, then so be it.

how come my choice is last! bah!

I say 14 cause it sounds like 13 is too young and 15 is too old. 14 is a good middle ground. And anyone under 18 can't have sex with anyone who is 2 years older then them. that is "legal" rape i guess.