NationStates Jolt Archive

what do you think should be the age of consent to sex?
the poll assumes no discrimination for different types of intercourse, if you want to make distinctions for male/female/homo/hetero/group/vaginal/anal, enter your choice for normal hetero vaginal intercourse in the poll and state anything else in a post if you like.

the numbers in the poll mean the person has experienced its respective anniversary of his birthday, so n means, the person has been born between n years and n+1 years - 1 day ago.

later you may check if there is a country, that accomodates your opinion on this issue in its legislation: http://www.ageofconsent.com/ageofconsent.htm

About fifteen sounds about right.

Hard to say, but I'd say 16 on the basis of that is the usual age to allow marriage.

I'd say 16. Seems logical to me. There's no significant mental difference between a 16 and an 18 year old.

13 to 14 sounds about right.

That is with other 13-14 year olds, not with adults.

That being said, I don't think the government should legislate a minimum age for sex anyways.

At the very least 16. Kids just don't have the foresight to prevent pregnancy and the spread of STD's, so the older the better. I'd prefer 18 to be the minimum age, it's 18 here in VA and 17 in Ireland. Reasonable ages in my opinion

I would say 16, mostly because even though that's not the age of majority, that you do have some adult responsibilities at that age (you can have a job, drive a car, ect.)

I personally think that 16 is too young to consent to the various possible consequences of sex, but I try not to let my personal feelings interfere with things like this.

Kids just don't have the foresight to prevent pregnancy and the spread of STD's, so the older the better.
Sure they do. It's a matter of how you approach the topic with them - having "a talk" at somepoint when they are 14 years old is dumb.
It would have to be made clear to them what happens, what can happen and so on way before they even get interested in that sort of thing.

Even the best educated kids can make mistakes. I know a girl, fully versed in sex ed from the tender age of 9, who fell pregnant at 13 because some boy told her he'd pull out before he came. It's a pretty big mistake to make, one you'll regret for the rest of your life.

Lost my virginity at 14, but I regret waiting even just a little longer.
However, I believe anywhere from 14 to 16 is a good age. However, in such cases it should be provided that people of these ages be educated about STDs, Pregnancy and Contraceptives, as I was a good while before I lost my virginity.

Edit: And my few times having sex, I've always used a condom.

Even the best educated kids can make mistakes. I know a girl, fully versed in sex ed from the tender age of 9, who fell pregnant at 13 because some boy told her he'd pull out before he came. It's a pretty big mistake to make, one you'll regret for the rest of your life.
In that case I'd recommend an abortion.

But ultimately, it's not like 18 year olds don't make the same mistake. In a case like that, you shouldn't trust your partner with these things. You shouldn't even trust yourself.

In that case I'd recommend an abortion.

But ultimately, it's not like 18 year olds don't make the same mistake. In a case like that, you shouldn't trust your partner with these things. You shouldn't even trust yourself.


Alas, in Ireland, abortion is illegal, and she managed to keep it secret for 8 months, mainly by wearing bagy jumpers, even at the height of summer.

I agree, 18 year olds do make the same mistake, but at least their finished school, or have come pretty close to it, so at least they've got something under their belt before being lumped with a kid. Plus, you're more likely to be in a long term relationship at 18 than you are at 14. There's very few kids make it through their teens with the same partner, mainly because kids get bored with the same person all the time. Not saying it doesn't happen, just not as common as when you're a bit older

Alas, in Ireland, abortion is illegal, and she managed to keep it secret for 8 months, mainly by wearing bagy jumpers, even at the height of summer.


I find that hard to believe. Pregnant people are very easy to spot, jumpers or not.

(Off topic: Why do you keep on talking about Ireland when your location says Arlington? Just curious.)

The way I see it by the time you're 16 you -should- be mature enough to handle the consequences of your actions. You can work, you can drive, and you have a number of other responsibilities. So I don't see any problem at all with kids having sex at 16, even if their partner is older.

I find that hard to believe. Pregnant people are very easy to spot, jumpers or not.

(Off topic: Why do you keep on talking about Ireland when your location says Arlington? Just curious.)

Depends on where and how you carry your baby, low down it's easier to hide, and she was a heavy girl too. She just told people that she was gaining weight again, and people put it down to the stresses of an exam year.

(And I'm Irish, living in VA for a couple of years, miss home so badly though...)

Alas, in Ireland, abortion is illegal, and she managed to keep it secret for 8 months, mainly by wearing bagy jumpers, even at the height of summer.
Well, good on Ireland for ruining two people's lives (maybe three) because of archaic people's wishes regarding something that shouldn't concern them in the least, hey?

Plus, you're more likely to be in a long term relationship at 18 than you are at 14.
So?
Having to bring up a child with 18 is no better than having to do it with 14. The guy might not stay with you either way (I know I'd have my objections, and I'm 20).
Your life is put onto a set of tracks either way, and getting off those tracks is very difficult.

I want to know what sick puppies voted lower than eight. :eek:

The age of consent should be 18. Period.

Well, good on Ireland for ruining two people's lives (maybe three) because of archaic people's wishes regarding something that shouldn't concern them in the least, hey?

We are trying, you know. (http://www.indymedia.ie/newswire.php?story_id=71837)

We are trying, you know. (http://www.indymedia.ie/newswire.php?story_id=71837)
Of course, but it annoys me that there are still bastards who think they can decide these things for others.

Slovakia too. F*cking Pope.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4588450.stm

Well, good on Ireland for ruining two people's lives (maybe three) because of archaic people's wishes regarding something that shouldn't concern them in the least, hey?



Agree to a point, but I personally don't agree with abortion. I don't know about her, I know she was too young to even think about that at the time.


Having to bring up a child with 18 is no better than having to do it with 14. The guy might not stay with you either way (I know I'd have my objections, and I'm 20).
Your life is put onto a set of tracks either way, and getting off those tracks is very difficult.


Agree, totally. I probably would have slit my wrists if I'd fallen pregnant at 18. However, I knew a whole bunch of kids at my school (I was nicknamed Pregnant nation - Presentation - for a reason). The older they were when they got pregnant, the more likely they were to end up having the father of their child involved in some way at least. A couple of them, having gotten pregnant around the 17 - 18 mark, or just after school, have even married the fathers of their kids. I don't know a single girl, under the age of 16 who managed to maintain their relationships with the fathers once they'd gotten pregnant. Lets face it, men aren't ready for kids until they're in their 30's, and even then it's sometimes a touchy subject. A 16 year old boy would run for the hills if he knocked up her girlfriend

I want to know what sick puppies voted lower than eight. :eek:

The age of consent should be 18. Period.

I want to know why you feel the need to call them sick puppies? Whether or not they think the age of consent lower than eight doesn't make them sick, it just means they have a different view on things.
In some cultures girls are pregnant when they're 11 or 12, sometimes earlier. Just because you think it should be 18 doesn't mean it should be, it depends largely on the culture you grew up with.
In Canada the age of consent was lowered to 14 (pretty sure it was 14) awhile back, I have no problem with that, and I think if kids ruin their lives then they can get them back on track again. How they do it is up to them without wasteing tax payers money on abortions *gov't pays for 'em here if you meet certain criteria), or government subsidies such as welfare.
I do beleive though, that if they decide to keep the child, they should have fully paid (or average income for that age) maternity leave and help setting up a stable and healthy environment for the child. This is for the CHILD's sake, not the parents'.

We are trying, you know. (http://www.indymedia.ie/newswire.php?story_id=71837)the women on the right in the picture has the right idea, but she is wrong, she does not have to travel to england for an abortion, she could just as well travel to germany or the us or belgium or dozzens of other countries. that is unless leaving the country is illegal like in cuba or the democratic peoples republic of korea.

Of course, but it annoys me that there are still bastards who think they can decide these things for others.


Its the older generations that are still reluctant to sway that far from orthodoxy. Can't say I really blame them really when the issue is mushed into the ground across the Atlantic.

People are afraid to even make a compromise...yet. That will change soon.

the women on the right in the picture has the right idea, but she is wrong, she does not have to travel to england for an abortion, she could just as well travel to germany or the us or belgium or dozzens of other countries. that is unless leaving the country is illegal like in cuba or the democratic peoples republic of korea.

Yes, but Britian is considerably closer than any of those.

We are trying, you know. (http://www.indymedia.ie/newswire.php?story_id=71837)

Ah yes, the abortionists and anti abortionists rallying side by side outside the GPO on O'Connell St every Saturday, both showing horrific pictures...
It's obvious Irish people was abortion legalised, but the Church still has a tight enough grip to stop it from becoming legal. Give it another couple of years before we're ready...

the women on the right in the picture has the right idea, but she is wrong, she does not have to travel to england for an abortion, she could just as well travel to germany or the us or belgium or dozzens of other countries. that is unless leaving the country is illegal like in cuba or the democratic peoples republic of korea.
Way to ignore the point.

Of course, but it annoys me that there are still bastards who think they can decide these things for others.

Slovakia too. F*cking Pope.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4588450.stm


Have to agree, hate that Pope, so backwards...

Who the hell voted for >8?

the women on the right in the picture has the right idea, but she is wrong, she does not have to travel to england for an abortion, she could just as well travel to germany or the us or belgium or dozzens of other countries. that is unless leaving the country is illegal like in cuba or the democratic peoples republic of korea.

Or, if abortion was legal in Ireland, she wouldn't have to travel at all!

Yes, but Britian is considerably closer than any of those.so she gets to see something of the world, experiences new cultures, gets an open mind. in the age of jetplanes a little distance really isnt that much of a problem and isnt the most famous budget airline irish?

Or, if abortion was legal in Ireland, she wouldn't have to travel at all!

Ahhh.... the X Case... fond memories...

Hmm. I voted for 17-18, but now after mulling it over I think I want to change that to 15-16, although it should be determined whether there was mutual consent on a case-by-case basis with people this young.

I want to know why you feel the need to call them sick puppies? Whether or not they think the age of consent lower than eight doesn't make them sick, it just means they have a different view on things.Because anyone who is sexually attracted to someone who's just a few years out of diapers has something wrong with them. Paedophiles are perverted, plain and simple. That, and no six year old is going to be able to make a mature decision on whether or not to have sex with anyone.

so she gets to see something of the world, experiences new cultures, gets an open mind. in the age of jetplanes a little distance really isnt that much of a problem and isnt the most famous budget airline irish?

OUr most famous budget airline was fined a few years ago because it over booked and sat it's cabin crew on the toilet on a flight to Germany. And really, do you honestly believe that any woman would want to go on a little holiday, soak up the culture, buy some souvenirs, and go kill their unborn baby?!?:eek: :eek: :eek:

I don't know if this has been mentioned on here, but matter of fact age of consent does not prevent rape or child-abuse, to battle those we have anti-rape and anti-child abuse laws, so actually the AOC is just some nonsense for moralists. :sniper:

Who the hell voted "<8" ?! :confused:

Ahhh.... the X Case... fond memories...

Truly. I did pity that poor kid though...

Even the best educated kids can make mistakes. I know a girl, fully versed in sex ed from the tender age of 9, who fell pregnant at 13 because some boy told her he'd pull out before he came. It's a pretty big mistake to make, one you'll regret for the rest of your life.

In any sex ed class ive had, they have taught that "pulling out" is not a method of birth control or protection, and you shouldn't allow that as a choice.

That being said, I don't think the government should legislate a minimum age for sex anyways.

But isn't that exactly what the AOC is ?

Because anyone who is sexually attracted to someone who's just a few years out of diapers has something wrong with them. Paedophiles are perverted, plain and simple. That, and no six year old is going to be able to make a mature decision on whether or not to have sex with anyone.

Who said it was someone older than them that was the partner? And if the kid is just a few years out of diapers at 8 then something is wrong, either physically or mentally. But again I point out that it's your culture that makes the biggest difference here.

Who the hell voted "<8" ?! :confused:
3 whole people... ew

as much as i'd like to say 15, i think 16 is more appropriate as a general rule.
i mean, you can have 15 year olds who are sexually 'clued up', aware and safety-informed who really ought to be allowed to have sex, just as much as you can have 16 year olds who are ill-informed and naive about safe sex etc.
so in some ways perhaps it should be judged on a per case basis... who's up for a sex exam, anyone? ;)

(i kid, its too much for the state to have the power to grant licences and tell people who can and cannot have sex imo)

I voted "13-14" I was 14 when I had sex for the first time. I was fully able to understand what I was doing and what was happening. So i feel as though it is a respectable age. ALSO, if you lower the AOC, then it will be less of a "taboo" topic for people that age, and maybe less will be afraid to ask for contraception and help.

thats my opinion.

At the very least 16. Kids just don't have the foresight to prevent pregnancy and the spread of STD's, so the older the better. I'd prefer 18 to be the minimum age, it's 18 here in VA and 17 in Ireland. Reasonable ages in my opinion

That's why they should be given sex-ed earlier on in life, to learn them of the dangers involved so any young teen is well informed before they go experimenting or any such. I even believe something like that is allready being thought on schools here (The Netherlands).
Educate people and prevent a lot of trouble,ay.

In any sex ed class ive had, they have taught that "pulling out" is not a method of birth control or protection, and you shouldn't allow that as a choice.

Oh yeah, they also teach you that condoms don't protect against STD's, that you CAN get pregnant the first time, that taking it up the ass doesn't get you pregnant, but does increase your risk of catching STD's a little, but a 14 year old horny teenager isn't going to stop and think about all that, just that he wants to stick his bits somewhere warm and wet...

It should be 18. To be really honest, it is a lot harder to raise a child at 14, 15, even 16 than at 18. Mainly because by 18 most people have finished school and can get a job. They have a lot more support that doesn't necessarily come from the parents. It's legal for them to move out of home if they need to.

Furthermore, I do not believe that you 'magically' mature at age 18. But by the time a large majority of people have reached the age of 18, they are mentally capable of dealing with the consequences of sex.

I do not however believe that 2 fourteen year olds who get caught doing the deed should be punished by anyone except their parents. But no 14 year old child can deal with the consequences of having sex with a 40 year old person. No 16 year old or 18 year old really can for that matter. But an 18 year old is usually at a point in time where they are able to recognise at least some of the potential future pitfalls of entering into such a relationship.

I want to know why you feel the need to call them sick puppies? Whether or not they think the age of consent lower than eight doesn't make them sick, it just means they have a different view on things.
In some cultures girls are pregnant when they're 11 or 12, sometimes earlier. Just because you think it should be 18 doesn't mean it should be, it depends largely on the culture you grew up with.

Because eight is pre-pubescent for most people and there is no way in hell an eight-year-old is psychologically capable of consenting to sex. I don't care what culture it is, that's child abuse. You could make a case for twelve and up because at least that's the average age when females begin menstruating, and thus the average age that nature considers them ready, but below that I can't see any reasonable argument. Just because some culture somewhere finds child sex tolerable doesn't mean it actually *is*; let's not go too crazy with tolerance.

so in some ways perhaps it should be judged on a per case basis... who's up for a sex exam, anyone? ;)

(i kid, its too much for the state to have the power to grant licences and tell people who can and cannot have sex imo)

I disagree with the kidding think. With a little tweaking it could become a very attractive option.
Say at the age of 13-14 you can take a course through different ways, (school, library, health offices etc) that at the end of you take a test. If you pass, you get a license to have sex, this license is good until the gov'ts set age of consent which with this should be about 18. After you're at the AoC you don't need the license and can do whatever you want.
If you don't get a license to begin with same rules apply at AoE, do whatever you want. If you're caught having intercourse without a license (not on your person, but in file or producable within 48 hours) you get a fine.

The course is free and you can take it as many times as you want. It'd cover everything from protection to STI's (Sexual Transmitted Infection, same as an STD but apparently it's a better term) and anything else people should know.

I lost my virginity at 14 (just a few days after my birthday) on a lovely carribean isle. So since this did not harm me appreciably I voted 13-14.

Because eight is pre-pubescent for most people and there is no way in hell an eight-year-old is psychologically capable of consenting to sex. I don't care what culture it is, that's child abuse. You could make a case for twelve and up because at least that's the average age when females begin menstruating, and thus the average age that nature considers them ready, but below that I can't see any reasonable argument. Just because some culture somewhere finds child sex tolerable doesn't mean it actually *is*; let's not go too crazy with tolerance.
Ok, eight is prebuscent, no one said there weren't limits on it. If two eight year olds want to have sex, why not? Hell, they probably wouldn't ever think about it, so what's the worry?

Oh yeah, they also teach you that condoms don't protect against STD's, that you CAN get pregnant the first time, that taking it up the ass doesn't get you pregnant, but does increase your risk of catching STD's a little, but a 14 year old horny teenager isn't going to stop and think about all that, just that he wants to stick his bits somewhere warm and wet...

well it was anal sex, i am gay. we were both 14. we used an anal condom to help prevent the spreading of any stds such as HIV. And both of us have been tested many times since. I am 18 now.

ALSO. Horny teenagers are horny teenagers. Whether they are 13 or 19. So starting talking about it at an earlier age and approval helps people to actually stop things like pregnancy.

If your parents were to come up to you when you were 14 and say "Son (or daughter) here are some condoms, these will help prevent pregnancy/STDS via sex. I approve of any choices you make, but I want to talk to you about the risks, whats acceptable and so on...." then people might actually be better off. I know my mom did, and it helped me a lot.

my opinion, maybe not yours.

I disagree with the kidding think. With a little tweaking it could become a very attractive option.
Say at the age of 13-14 you can take a course through different ways, (school, library, health offices etc) that at the end of you take a test. If you pass, you get a license to have sex, this license is good until the gov'ts set age of consent which with this should be about 18. After you're at the AoC you don't need the license and can do whatever you want.
If you don't get a license to begin with same rules apply at AoE, do whatever you want. If you're caught having intercourse without a license (not on your person, but in file or producable within 48 hours) you get a fine.

The course is free and you can take it as many times as you want. It'd cover everything from protection to STI's (Sexual Transmitted Infection, same as an STD but apparently it's a better term) and anything else people should know.
I agree that this is a great idea in theory, but I don't think the government should have the power to license sex, and just because you can pass a test about STDs etc. doesn't mean you're actually ready for sex. It means you know the consequences intellectually, but it doesn't show that you've internalized that information. In the end, I don't think this is practicable because it is not possible to qualify on a piece of paper when one is "ready" for sex.

It should be 18. To be really honest, it is a lot harder to raise a child at 14, 15, even 16 than at 18. Mainly because by 18 most people have finished school and can get a job. They have a lot more support that doesn't necessarily come from the parents. It's legal for them to move out of home if they need to.

Furthermore, I do not believe that you 'magically' mature at age 18. But by the time a large majority of people have reached the age of 18, they are mentally capable of dealing with the consequences of sex.



Glad to hear someone else has the same reasoning as me!

I'm going with seventeen or eighteen. My thinking is that once a person graduates from high school, he or she should be of age to give consent. If a person doesn't graduate from high school then the age of consent should be 21. If a person gets a G.E.D. then they should be considered at the age of consent at whatever age they get their G.E.D.

I figure if a person is at the age to decide on going to college, starting a career or having a family they might as well be able to give legal consent. This is not a fool proof plan and I welcome anyone to point out the flaws in my thinking.

well it was anal sex, i am gay. we were both 14. we used an anal condom to help prevent the spreading of any stds such as HIV. And both of us have been tested many times since. I am 18 now.

ALSO. Horny teenagers are horny teenagers. Whether they are 13 or 19. So starting talking about it at an earlier age and approval helps people to actually stop things like pregnancy.

If your parents were to come up to you when you were 14 and say "Son (or daughter) here are some condoms, these will help prevent pregnancy/STDS via sex. I approve of any choices you make, but I want to talk to you about the risks, whats acceptable and so on...." then people might actually be better off. I know my mom did, and it helped me a lot.

my opinion, maybe not yours.


You have a point, unfortunately, not very many parents are as open about sex as your parents were. I was told about my periods at the age of 10 by my mother, who kept the light in the room off while she talked to me about it. I didn't lose my virginity until I was 19, glad I waited, even though I'm not with him any more...

Ok, eight is prebuscent, no one said there weren't limits on it. If two eight year olds want to have sex, why not? Hell, they probably wouldn't ever think about it, so what's the worry?
Because I do not believe that the vast, vast majority of eight-year-olds are physically or psychologically ready for sex. It's that simple. And I am not "worried" about two eight-year-olds having sex, but that doesn't mean the act should be condoned by society.

[QUOTE=Saint Jade]Originally Posted by Saint Jade
It should be 18. To be really honest, it is a lot harder to raise a child at 14, 15, even 16 than at 18. Mainly because by 18 most people have finished school and can get a job. They have a lot more support that doesn't necessarily come from the parents. It's legal for them to move out of home if they need to.

Furthermore, I do not believe that you 'magically' mature at age 18. But by the time a large majority of people have reached the age of 18, they are mentally capable of dealing with the consequences of sex.QUOTE]


There's a part of the brain in the front of the head, that isn't actually fully developed until around the age of 24 in most people. This is important because it's effectively your maturity level. It allows you to make good decisions and think about the consequences before acting. I bring this up because most people don't "magically mature" at eighteen, if anything they get even less mature and more likely to get into deeper trouble.

I disagree with the kidding think. With a little tweaking it could become a very attractive option.
Say at the age of 13-14 you can take a course through different ways, (school, library, health offices etc) that at the end of you take a test. If you pass, you get a license to have sex, this license is good until the gov'ts set age of consent which with this should be about 18. After you're at the AoC you don't need the license and can do whatever you want.
If you don't get a license to begin with same rules apply at AoE, do whatever you want. If you're caught having intercourse without a license (not on your person, but in file or producable within 48 hours) you get a fine.

The course is free and you can take it as many times as you want. It'd cover everything from protection to STI's (Sexual Transmitted Infection, same as an STD but apparently it's a better term) and anything else people should know.


And then you'll just have kids bonking while their parents are out, in the bushes at the back of the park, in the quiet alleyway on the way home while no one's looking.

Oh wait....;)

Because I do not believe that the vast, vast majority of eight-year-olds are physically or psychologically ready for sex. It's that simple. And I am not "worried" about two eight-year-olds having sex, but that doesn't mean the act should be condoned by society.

But neither should it condem it, which is what you're saying should be done.

Um, maybe the guys here can answer a question for me. Is it possible for a prepubescent boy (ie under the age of 8) to have an erection and to ejaculate for the purposes of sexual intercourse? I know girls can have orgasms at any age, apparently very common in babies, and well, all the equipment is still there, underdeveloped at that age, but still functional...

16 if in a relationship with an adult (18+ year old).

Under that, it's not really in anyone's business to legislate. I would say as soon as they enter teenage years. Just give them sex-ed at a young age so they are advised of the risks.

I don't think I would go with a plain minimum age of consent. If it was up to me, it would be more like this:

minimum: 13
13-18 years: +/- 2 years

19 years: 17+

Teenagers are going to have sex, there's no getting around it, but I don't see any point in prosecuting them, since they both could be considered perpetrators and victims in the same act. The main thing is to avoid adults taking advantage of teenagers.

But neither should it condem it, which is what you're saying should be done.
Yes, it should. I guess that's pretty much where we differ. I say eight-year-olds aren't ready for sex, period, end of discussion. They are not capable of giving their consent because they don't understand what they are consenting to. Any society that does not frown upon such action is condoning child abuse.

I don't think I would go with a plain minimum age of consent. If it was up to me, it would be more like this:

minimum: 13
13-18 years: +/- 2 years

19 years: 17+

Teenagers are going to have sex, there's no getting around it, but I don't see any point in prosecuting them, since they both could be considered perpetrators and victims in the same act. The main thing is to avoid adults taking advantage of teenagers.

I'm 16 and use that as a general rule, although I go +/- 1 year with a little room for cheating if we're talking a couple months difference. I use that for relationships period. It's a great idea.

Yes, it should. I guess that's pretty much where we differ. I say eight-year-olds aren't ready for sex, period, end of discussion. They are not capable of giving their consent because they don't understand what they are consenting to. Any society that does not frown upon such action is condoning child abuse.

As so many people have been saying... EDUCATE THEM EARLIER. Simple, there a/were quite a few societies were children grew up as an everyday thing, not having sex themselves, but it was still there. If we educated children at an earlier age, then eight year olds would know what they were doing and I think they would be able to make the decision. Most of them anyways. Not saying I want to do this, only that you're not necissarily right.

As so many people have been saying... EDUCATE THEM EARLIER. Simple, there a/were quite a few societies were children grew up as an everyday thing, not having sex themselves, but it was still there. If we educated children at an earlier age, then eight year olds would know what they were doing and I think they would be able to make the decision. Most of them anyways. Not saying I want to do this, only that you're not necissarily right.

Education /= understanding. Knowledge doesn't either. Eight year olds, no matter who they fuck, are not physically or psychologically capable of comprehending the implications of the sex act. Not to say that children at this age should be banned from doing exploratory things like "I'll show you mine if you show me yours" but actually allowing them to have sex is a despicable thought which only allows them to be groomed more easily for paedophiles.

I firmly believe however, that education should happen in the home. It is not up to society to remove a parent's right to teach their child about sex etc. It is not up to society to legislate and indoctrinate morality. I was excused from sex ed classes, which I was thankful for when I learned about the content. If I wanted to know how to give a blow job correctly, I could ask my mother. the things I wanted to know, such as what are the risks associated with teen pregnancy, teen sex, what are the emotional implications for girls and boys, how is it different for them etc., were not discussed on the grounds that the classroom was a "judgment free zone" and "such talk may lead to students feeling judged about their personal lifestyle choices". The other students were all fed the same "there's nothing wrong with having sex with anyone you like, at any age you like" propaganda.

Not that I am a right-wing conservative idiot who wants all homosexuals to be burned at the stake or believes that women should wear titanium chastity belts until they get married and their father hands over the key, but I think such crap certainly sends the wrong message about sex in our society.

[QUOTE=Saint Jade]Originally Posted by Saint Jade
It should be 18. To be really honest, it is a lot harder to raise a child at 14, 15, even 16 than at 18. Mainly because by 18 most people have finished school and can get a job. They have a lot more support that doesn't necessarily come from the parents. It's legal for them to move out of home if they need to.

Furthermore, I do not believe that you 'magically' mature at age 18. But by the time a large majority of people have reached the age of 18, they are mentally capable of dealing with the consequences of sex.QUOTE]


There's a part of the brain in the front of the head, that isn't actually fully developed until around the age of 24 in most people. This is important because it's effectively your maturity level. It allows you to make good decisions and think about the consequences before acting. I bring this up because most people don't "magically mature" at eighteen, if anything they get even less mature and more likely to get into deeper trouble.

Next time you quote me, read the whole post you're going to quote. I do make that point, and having studied human development as part of my Teacher Education course at uni, I am well aware of this fact. In a perfect world, I would definitely suggest people wait until this time. But that is impossible. I also point out that in my view, AOC laws should be used to protect minors from exploitation by adults, not to protect minors from each other.

As so many people have been saying... EDUCATE THEM EARLIER. Simple, there a/were quite a few societies were children grew up as an everyday thing, not having sex themselves, but it was still there. If we educated children at an earlier age, then eight year olds would know what they were doing and I think they would be able to make the decision. Most of them anyways. Not saying I want to do this, only that you're not necissarily right.
I don't care what sex ed class you give them, eight-year-olds are not developed enough mentally to comprehend it.

P.S. I don't know what "there a/were quite a few societies were children grew up as an everyday thing" means, so if you could translate that into something more closely resembling the English language I might be able to address whatever the hell you were trying to say.

[QUOTE=Celtic Races]

Next time you quote me, read the whole post you're going to quote. I do make that point, and having studied human development as part of my Teacher Education course at uni, I am well aware of this fact. In a perfect world, I would definitely suggest people wait until this time. But that is impossible. I also point out that in my view, AOC laws should be used to protect minors from exploitation by adults, not to protect minors from each other.

My point was that people don't magically mature at 18. I did read the whole thing as well, and I don't see where your problem is?

I also point out that in my view, AOC laws should be used to protect minors from exploitation by adults, not to protect minors from each other.

Yes, exactly. Isn't that pretty much what age of consent laws are for? I mean, what are you going to do to a pair of five-year-olds caught having sex anyway, give them time out?

[QUOTE=Saint Jade]

My point was that people don't magically mature at 18. I did read the whole thing as well, and I don't see where your problem is?

Sorry, I'm just getting the impression that you seem to think that I am saying that people magically mature at 18. Which I am most decidedly not. I am saying that an 18 year old, due to their probable position in life aas a high school graduate, is far more likely to be in a position to cope with say, a baby, or an STD than a 14 year old child.

Yes, exactly. Isn't that pretty much what age of consent laws are for? I mean, what are you going to do to a pair of five-year-olds caught having sex anyway, give them time out?

Punishment is for the parent's to decide at that point, or if they punish them at all. If a time out keeps them from doing it again and that's what the parent's want, then give them a time out.

[QUOTE=Celtic Races]

Sorry, I'm just getting the impression that you seem to think that I am saying that people magically mature at 18. Which I am most decidedly not. I am saying that an 18 year old, due to their probable position in life aas a high school graduate, is far more likely to be in a position to cope with say, a baby, or an STD than a 14 year old child.

Granted. They probably would be able to. But that's not always the case. I believe that they're in less of a position of a 16 year old though. Someone who's sixteen has restraints, school, parent's, etc. Someone who's eighteen has none. A person who's eighteen has access to liquor (atleast here, not in some places) and is more likely, I find anyways, to do binge drinking and other such things than someone who's sixteen and doesn't have access as easily. My logic has many holes, and I admit that, but to explain what I really think, you'd have to be inside my head. This is more or less a simplified version.

[QUOTE=Saint Jade]

Granted. They probably would be able to. But that's not always the case. I believe that they're in less of a position of a 16 year old though. Someone who's sixteen has restraints, school, parent's, etc. Someone who's eighteen has none. A person who's eighteen has access to liquor (atleast here, not in some places) and is more likely, I find anyways, to do binge drinking and other such things than someone who's sixteen and doesn't have access as easily. My logic has many holes, and I admit that, but to explain what I really think, you'd have to be inside my head. This is more or less a simplified version.

Yeah here's one big flaw; most of the 16 year olds who get pregnant aren't the ones obsessed with school and college. They're those ones going out and binge-drinking, partying, etc. This is not all, this is a significant majority though.

[QUOTE=Celtic Races]

Yeah here's one big flaw; most of the 16 year olds who get pregnant aren't the ones obsessed with school and college. They're those ones going out and binge-drinking, partying, etc. This is not all, this is a significant majority though.

I told you it was full of holes ;) The hope is that when they get hit with the responsibilities of a kid, their parent's realise they need to catch up with their own children. Again, full of holes, but I've always had trouble putting my thoughts to words and this is one of those times.

The age of consent should be 18. Period.

So.. how exactly are you going to stop those two 17 year olds from sleeping with eachother ?

If would say the following:
12 to 16: able to consent with people up to 18 years old.
16 to 18: able to consent with people between 12 and 30.
18 to 30 : able to consent with people who are over 16. No upper limit. Allowed to prostitute yourself.
30+ : able to consent with people who are over 18. No upper limit. Still allowed to prostitute yourself.

edit: upped the limit from 25 to 30.

So.. how exactly are you going to stop those two 17 year olds from sleeping with eachother ?

If would say the following:
12 to 16: able to consent with people up to 18 years old.
.


So, you think its ok for my hypothetical 18 year old son, to have sex with your 12 year old hypothetical daughter?

You dont think an 19 year old could talk a 12 year old into it?

I disagree with the kidding think. With a little tweaking it could become a very attractive option.
Say at the age of 13-14 you can take a course through different ways, (school, library, health offices etc) that at the end of you take a test. If you pass, you get a license to have sex, this license is good until the gov'ts set age of consent which with this should be about 18. After you're at the AoC you don't need the license and can do whatever you want.
If you don't get a license to begin with same rules apply at AoE, do whatever you want. If you're caught having intercourse without a license (not on your person, but in file or producable within 48 hours) you get a fine.

The course is free and you can take it as many times as you want. It'd cover everything from protection to STI's (Sexual Transmitted Infection, same as an STD but apparently it's a better term) and anything else people should know.
actually that makes sense. to be allowed to have sex between 16 and 18 you have to sit a small exam at school regarding sexual safety... sounds good to me. after 18, no licence needed *nods* :)

I agree that this is a great idea in theory, but I don't think the government should have the power to license sex, and just because you can pass a test about STDs etc. doesn't mean you're actually ready for sex. It means you know the consequences intellectually, but it doesn't show that you've internalized that information. In the end, I don't think this is practicable because it is not possible to qualify on a piece of paper when one is "ready" for sex.
of course the government shouldn't have the power to licence who has sex... only between the ages of 16 and 18. a fair trade for when a large number of people are having their first sexual experiences.

however you're quite right its not perfect: but it is better than nothing.

So, you think its ok for my hypothetical 18 year old son, to have sex with your 12 year old hypothetical daughter?

*Possibly* - yes. I would probably not be happy, but I do not think it should be criminalised.
My "able" should perhaps have been put down as "being legally allowed to".

*Possibly* - yes. I would probably not be happy, but I do not think it should be criminalised.
My "able" should perhaps have been put down as "being legally allowed to".


I personally dont believe that one age, can adequately determine the age where a person is ready and able to cope with a sexual relationship.
People develop earlier than others, and some are more mature than others.

My hypothetical son, may not be emotionally ready to handle the responsibility of what can happen as a result of a sexual encounter.
While the chances of your hypthetical daughter being fully aware of those consequences and emotionally ready for sex, are probably even less.

Im relatively sure that somewhere, out there are minors who are mentally equipped to properly handle such relationships with other minors, or even adults, but, we cant make laws for the many, on the basis of a few.

15. This does not mean a 14-year-old or younger couldn't consent to sex, but such a thing would be decided on a case-by-case basis in such an event.

So, you think its ok for my hypothetical 18 year old son, to have sex with your 12 year old hypothetical daughter?

You dont think an 19 year old could talk a 12 year old into it?
I didn't like his idea either.

It may be that I used to work with teenagers (my husband was a youth minister) but, I think there is too much of a maturity difference between 12 and 18, it would be too easy for the 12 year old to get taken advantage of. Heck, there is a huge difference between 13 and 15, two years makes a big difference. That's why I said 16, there isn't a whole lot of difference between a 16 year old and an 18 year old, but maybe I should have put a limitation on it, because 16 is still a little young (in general) to be with say someone who is 40, you are still naive to some point at 16.

15-16

I didn't like his idea either.

It may be that I used to work with teenagers (my husband was a youth minister) but, I think there is too much of a maturity difference between 12 and 18, it would be too easy for the 12 year old to get taken advantage of. Heck, there is a huge difference between 13 and 15, two years makes a big difference. That's why I said 16, there isn't a whole lot of difference between a 16 year old and an 18 year old, but maybe I should have put a limitation on it, because 16 is still a little young (in general) to be with say someone who is 40, you are still naive to some point at 16.
how about 15 and 20? *cough*

If I were Supreme Queen of the Universe, I would demand that the medical community produce an accurate way of measuring puberty. When it starts, when it stops, etc. I want to know the point at which a person's physical body stops maturing sexually, and have a doctor pronounce them officially grown up at that point. Once you've been pronounced an adult, you're free to "consent," to drink, and to enlist. It would vary from person to person.

Voting is different, IMO, because it's a cognitive thing. As an aside, I think that the voting age in the US should be lowered to 16.

What good is it going to do OR doing ?

A) Kids of under a certain age are not allowed to have sexual contacts according to age of consent laws. Is this going to stop them from doing so ?
No, it isn't, they just do it in secret and run into lots of trouble because of this.

B) An adult is not allowed to have sexual contact with a minor under the age of consent. Well yes, okay, sexual intercourse with minors can indeed be very harmful and often lead to lots of trouble. But has the existance of age of consent laws ever stopped child-abusers from sexually abusing children ?
No, it hasn't.

That's how I think about it ! :sniper:

how about 15 and 20? *cough*
it depends on the 20 year old and the 15 year old I suppose. I can't really say "no" since my husband is 7 years older than me, but I grew up super quick so there are still times when people don't realize how young I am.

I think it could work, but I can also see situations where it wouldn't, case by case I guess. 15 should be old enough to handle a 5 year difference, but younger I would worry, like a 12 year old with a 17 year old, bothers me a lot.

I want to know what sick puppies voted lower than eight. :eek:

The age of consent should be 18. Period.
The age of consent should be equal to the age at which a person can sign a contract stating - "No, I wasn't Raped, no matter how bad I feel about it afterward". :rolleyes:

The age of consent should be equal to the age at which a person can sign a contract stating - "No, I wasn't Raped, no matter how bad I feel about it afterward". :rolleyes:
how would you ensure that she wasn't forced or coerced into signing it? I mean if someone is sick enough to rape a woman, I doubt he would have a problem making her sign a paper.

15 should be old enough to handle a 5 year difference, but younger I would worry, like a 12 year old with a 17 year old, bothers me a lot.
quite. even 14 and 19 doesn't work in my head.
but 15 suddenly makes it better somehow, and 16 is just fine.

but as you say, it depends on a per-case basis. if the particular 15 year-old in question is really rather mature, mentally, physically and with their attitude towards relationships and sex, then that - bar the actual age - could well equate them with many 'of age' 18 year olds (or, of course 16 year-olds, also legally of age. they may also be more mature than those same 18 year olds :p)
and if the 20 year-old in question is really rather immature (mentally at least ;)), then that makes for good things :)

how would you ensure that she wasn't forced or coerced into signing it? I mean if someone is sick enough to rape a woman, I doubt he would have a problem making her sign a paper.
The point is, Sex is an implicit, biological contract. "If it Bleeds, it Breeds". No one unable to sign a contract to, say, get a perscription, go to war, get non-essential medical treatment, etc should have the legal right to "consent" to what could be a binding proposition.

Therefore, anyone of age who takes advantage of this is engaging in contractual fraud.

Since neither of 2 minors could legally make a contract, contact between minors would not be "criminal" in the same sense.