If you could change the law

Faith:

† Nine_Inch_Nails †:

In Englan you have to be 16 to have sex. Apparently anyway, everyone justs seems to ignore it.

Man, that's fucked, I think it's everyone's own business when they start having sex. That's a total disrespect of privacy, IMHO

Exactly. It's not the government's business when someone feels ready for sex and if someone of 14 or 15 or whatever is too stupid to have sex safely then that's their own problem.

*Like Light To The Flies*:

Faith:

† Nine_Inch_Nails †:

In Englan you have to be 16 to have sex. Apparently anyway, everyone justs seems to ignore it.

Man, that's fucked, I think it's everyone's own business when they start having sex. That's a total disrespect of privacy, IMHO

Exactly. It's not the government's business when someone feels ready for sex and if someone of 14 or 15 or whatever is too stupid to have sex safely then that's their own problem.

it's a safety issue, if you can't stop kids from having sex at the age of 11, you can't stop them from having relationships with someone who is thirty, which leads to all sorts of problems. you have to have a limit

NeoSteph:

*Like Light To The Flies*:

Faith:

† Nine_Inch_Nails †:

In Englan you have to be 16 to have sex. Apparently anyway, everyone justs seems to ignore it.

Man, that's fucked, I think it's everyone's own business when they start having sex. That's a total disrespect of privacy, IMHO

Exactly. It's not the government's business when someone feels ready for sex and if someone of 14 or 15 or whatever is too stupid to have sex safely then that's their own problem.

it's a safety issue, if you can't stop kids from having sex at the age of 11, you can't stop them from having relationships with someone who is thirty, which leads to all sorts of problems. you have to have a limit

It's the parents job to make sure that their kid is at least with someone roughly their own age (for example, between 1 and 3 years age difference is fine in my opinion) and not someone, like you say, about 20 years older. As long as the kid feels ready for sex and knows what responsibilities and consequences might come of it, then let them.

NeoSteph:

it's a safety issue, if you can't stop kids from having sex at the age of 11, you can't stop them from having relationships with someone who is thirty, which leads to all sorts of problems. you have to have a limit

Most laws are a safety issue, but let's not take it to far..I mean, seriously, if there is a possibility of your kid going out for a walk, meeting bad people and becoming a gang member - would you want to have a law that says that kids under 16 can't walk outside alone??
Come on, some things are personal and it's the decision of people themselves, or parents in case the kids are too young. It's like that law that made sodomy illegal - that's serously none of anybody's business what I'm doing in my bedroom..

I mean, I'm not British and I won't tell you guys what to do, but I still think that's a little too much.

Rules are made to be broken anyway!

Faith:

NeoSteph:

it's a safety issue, if you can't stop kids from having sex at the age of 11, you can't stop them from having relationships with someone who is thirty, which leads to all sorts of problems. you have to have a limit

Most laws are a safety issue, but let's not take it to far..I mean, seriously, if there is a possibility of your kid going out for a walk, meeting bad people and becoming a gang member - would you want to have a law that says that kids under 16 can't walk outside alone??
Come on, some things are personal and it's the decision of people themselves, or parents in case the kids are too young. It's like that law that made sodomy illegal - that's serously none of anybody's business what I'm doing in my bedroom..

I mean, I'm not British and I won't tell you guys what to do, but I still think that's a little too much.

There is a law in some city's that prevents under 18 year olds out after 10 pm, laws like that i can disagree with because it's a breach of human rights. But if a thirty year old man was having sex with a 13 year old and that was ok with the law, then something is wrong. Kids and young teenagers can still be easily manipulated into doing something they don't necessarily want to do, such as having sex. Obviously not every under 16 is stupid enough to get them self caught in bad situation, but it does happen. You have to be able to make a cut off point and they chose 16.

Faith:

† Nine_Inch_Nails †:

In Englan you have to be 16 to have sex. Apparently anyway, everyone justs seems to ignore it.

Man, that's fucked, I think it's everyone's own business when they start having sex. That's a total disrespect of privacy, IMHO

But, if the Government was to lower the legal age, it would receive a hell of a lot more criticism than it gets already. How would you feel if your twelve year old son/daughter was having sex? call me old fashioned, controlling, whatever, but i dont think i'd like it.
Although many young people are mature enough to know how to deal with it if someone tries to get them to have sex, some teens are not grown up enough to know what to do. Age of consent laws are there to stop young people from being exploited by adults.

NeoSteph:

There is a law in some city's that prevents under 18 year olds out after 10 pm, laws like that i can disagree with because it's a breach of human rights. But if a thirty year old man was having sex with a 13 year old and that was ok with the law, then something is wrong. Kids and young teenagers can still be easily manipulated into doing something they don't necessarily want to do, such as having sex. Obviously not every under 16 is stupid enough to get them self caught in bad situation, but it does happen. You have to be able to make a cut off point and they chose 16.

Do you really think that law will prevent a 30-year from seducing that girl?
Besides, isn't there a law that says that it's illegal for an udult to have sex with a very young person? I mean, that's a whole different issue - if a 13-year old has sex with a 13-year old, I see nothing wrong about it. For some reason you're saying this law is only supposed to prevent older people from seducing kids, but it also outlaws sex between kids of the same age.
If a 30-year old has sex with a person 15 years younger than them, there're already in trouble. Especially if one night that kid decides they didn't actually want it. But what does that have to do with the 16 limit?

Faith:

NeoSteph:

There is a law in some city's that prevents under 18 year olds out after 10 pm, laws like that i can disagree with because it's a breach of human rights. But if a thirty year old man was having sex with a 13 year old and that was ok with the law, then something is wrong. Kids and young teenagers can still be easily manipulated into doing something they don't necessarily want to do, such as having sex. Obviously not every under 16 is stupid enough to get them self caught in bad situation, but it does happen. You have to be able to make a cut off point and they chose 16.

Do you really think that law will prevent a 30-year from seducing that girl?
Besides, isn't there a law that says that it's illegal for an udult to have sex with a very young person? I mean, that's a whole different issue - if a 13-year old has sex with a 13-year old, I see nothing wrong about it. For some reason you're saying this law is only supposed to prevent older people from seducing kids, but it also outlaws sex between kids of the same age.
If a 30-year old has sex with a person 15 years younger than them, there're already in trouble. Especially if one night that kid decides they didn't actually want it. But what does that have to do with the 16 limit?

because the '16' limit can act as a warning, and if a 13 year old has sex with another 13 year old and gets pregnant, can you see nothing wrong with that?

NeoSteph:

Faith:

NeoSteph:

There is a law in some city's that prevents under 18 year olds out after 10 pm, laws like that i can disagree with because it's a breach of human rights. But if a thirty year old man was having sex with a 13 year old and that was ok with the law, then something is wrong. Kids and young teenagers can still be easily manipulated into doing something they don't necessarily want to do, such as having sex. Obviously not every under 16 is stupid enough to get them self caught in bad situation, but it does happen. You have to be able to make a cut off point and they chose 16.

Do you really think that law will prevent a 30-year from seducing that girl?
Besides, isn't there a law that says that it's illegal for an udult to have sex with a very young person? I mean, that's a whole different issue - if a 13-year old has sex with a 13-year old, I see nothing wrong about it. For some reason you're saying this law is only supposed to prevent older people from seducing kids, but it also outlaws sex between kids of the same age.
If a 30-year old has sex with a person 15 years younger than them, there're already in trouble. Especially if one night that kid decides they didn't actually want it. But what does that have to do with the 16 limit?

because the '16' limit can act as a warning, and if a 13 year old has sex with another 13 year old and gets pregnant, can you see nothing wrong with that?

What I see wrong with it doesn't have much to do with what the law has to do with it. It's the parents' responsibility to keep tabs on their kids.

I saw a freshman in high school today who was preggers...guess the parents need to pay more attention!

off-topicness!

i agree with SPS, its all a load of crap, and the sex-age limit, everyones horny. they're going to have sex anyways, we've all seen it in school.

personally i think that sex offenders should be held in jail longer, i mean, theres a reason a lot of them are repeated sex offenders

NeoSteph:

Faith:

NeoSteph:

There is a law in some city's that prevents under 18 year olds out after 10 pm, laws like that i can disagree with because it's a breach of human rights. But if a thirty year old man was having sex with a 13 year old and that was ok with the law, then something is wrong. Kids and young teenagers can still be easily manipulated into doing something they don't necessarily want to do, such as having sex. Obviously not every under 16 is stupid enough to get them self caught in bad situation, but it does happen. You have to be able to make a cut off point and they chose 16.

Do you really think that law will prevent a 30-year from seducing that girl?
Besides, isn't there a law that says that it's illegal for an udult to have sex with a very young person? I mean, that's a whole different issue - if a 13-year old has sex with a 13-year old, I see nothing wrong about it. For some reason you're saying this law is only supposed to prevent older people from seducing kids, but it also outlaws sex between kids of the same age.
If a 30-year old has sex with a person 15 years younger than them, there're already in trouble. Especially if one night that kid decides they didn't actually want it. But what does that have to do with the 16 limit?

because the '16' limit can act as a warning, and if a 13 year old has sex with another 13 year old and gets pregnant, can you see nothing wrong with that?

And what does the limit have to do with that? That is lack of sexual education in schools, lack of attention towards the problem. I mean seriously, you can't just tell the kids not to go to the pool, you need to teach them to swim. If you tell kids they can't have sex, it will only make it more interesting for them. You just need to teach them what to do to protect themselves.
I don't meant to sound like someone who can't accept an opinion, I just really think this is a wrong way to solve the stated problems.

ok, but protection doesnt always work. so which is better, convincing kids not to, or giving the tools to do it "safely".

i still dont know. ive thought about this forever.

Faith:

NeoSteph:

Faith:

NeoSteph:

There is a law in some city's that prevents under 18 year olds out after 10 pm, laws like that i can disagree with because it's a breach of human rights. But if a thirty year old man was having sex with a 13 year old and that was ok with the law, then something is wrong. Kids and young teenagers can still be easily manipulated into doing something they don't necessarily want to do, such as having sex. Obviously not every under 16 is stupid enough to get them self caught in bad situation, but it does happen. You have to be able to make a cut off point and they chose 16.

Do you really think that law will prevent a 30-year from seducing that girl?
Besides, isn't there a law that says that it's illegal for an udult to have sex with a very young person? I mean, that's a whole different issue - if a 13-year old has sex with a 13-year old, I see nothing wrong about it. For some reason you're saying this law is only supposed to prevent older people from seducing kids, but it also outlaws sex between kids of the same age.
If a 30-year old has sex with a person 15 years younger than them, there're already in trouble. Especially if one night that kid decides they didn't actually want it. But what does that have to do with the 16 limit?

because the '16' limit can act as a warning, and if a 13 year old has sex with another 13 year old and gets pregnant, can you see nothing wrong with that?

And what does the limit have to do with that? That is lack of sexual education in schools, lack of attention towards the problem. I mean seriously, you can't just tell the kids not to go to the pool, you need to teach them to swim. If you tell kids they can't have sex, it will only make it more interesting for them. You just need to teach them what to do to protect themselves.
I don't meant to sound like someone who can't accept an opinion, I just really think this is a wrong way to solve the stated problems.

English sex education, is probably rammed down our throats as soon as we reached the age of 11, personally given people awareness is half the problem. Granted you need to have sex education, but the way it's taught in our country is that it's an evil thing and we should stay clear, yet at the same time the government will give a teenage mother their own house and benefits, which has meant that our underage birth rate had doubled in the last ten years, which is alarming. Removing the underage law would only damage it further as it would look like we are encouraging young kids to have sex.

"English sex education, is probably rammed down our throats as soon as we reached the age of 11, personally given people awareness is half the problem. Granted you need to have sex education, but the way it's taught in our country is that it's an evil thing and we should stay clear, yet at the same time the government will give a teenage mother their own house and benefits, which has meant that our underage birth rate had doubled in the last ten years, which is alarming. Removing the underage law would only damage it further as it would look like we are encouraging young kids to have sex."


totally brilliant, hear hear

NeoSteph:

English sex education, is probably rammed down our throats as soon as we reached the age of 11, personally given people awareness is half the problem. Granted you need to have sex education, but the way it's taught in our country is that it's an evil thing and we should stay clear, yet at the same time the government will give a teenage mother their own house and benefits, which has meant that our underage birth rate had doubled in the last ten years, which is alarming. Removing the underage law would only damage it further as it would look like we are encouraging young kids to have sex.

Well, I personally always thought that saying "under age birth" is discriminational. What if I want to become a mother at 15? Most people reach puberty at the age of 12 or 13, so why can't I use what I have? But that's a different story.
You know, I've been to many shitty places in my life. I've lived in a country where contraception was illegal and abortions were only allowed without anesthesia, so it would teach women a lesson. In comparison to that, your sex law is very democratic. After all, I don't know the social attitude towards the law, or whether anyone gives a damn it even exists. It's your country, your laws, your lives, do what you concider appropriate.

Faith:

NeoSteph:

English sex education, is probably rammed down our throats as soon as we reached the age of 11, personally given people awareness is half the problem. Granted you need to have sex education, but the way it's taught in our country is that it's an evil thing and we should stay clear, yet at the same time the government will give a teenage mother their own house and benefits, which has meant that our underage birth rate had doubled in the last ten years, which is alarming. Removing the underage law would only damage it further as it would look like we are encouraging young kids to have sex.

Well, I personally always thought that saying "under age birth" is discriminational. What if I want to become a mother at 15? Most people reach puberty at the age of 12 or 13, so why can't I use what I have? But that's a different story.
You know, I've been to many shitty places in my life. I've lived in a country where contraception was illegal and abortions were only allowed without anesthesia, so it would teach women a lesson. In comparison to that, your sex law is very democratic. After all, I don't know the social attitude towards the law, or whether anyone gives a damn it even exists. It's your country, your laws, your lives, do what you concider appropriate.

teach women a lesson? Hey it takes two to tango! 0_o they should kick the guy in the thinger thinger U_U

um..if i could change the law....eveyrone who has murderd or nearly killed someone would be in the slammer for 20 years...but those who did that by accident only 5 years. for drugs....it would epend on the amount of the drugs and how many times the person owning them has been cought.

Sheepo@_@:

Faith:

NeoSteph:

English sex education, is probably rammed down our throats as soon as we reached the age of 11, personally given people awareness is half the problem. Granted you need to have sex education, but the way it's taught in our country is that it's an evil thing and we should stay clear, yet at the same time the government will give a teenage mother their own house and benefits, which has meant that our underage birth rate had doubled in the last ten years, which is alarming. Removing the underage law would only damage it further as it would look like we are encouraging young kids to have sex.

Well, I personally always thought that saying "under age birth" is discriminational. What if I want to become a mother at 15? Most people reach puberty at the age of 12 or 13, so why can't I use what I have? But that's a different story.
You know, I've been to many shitty places in my life. I've lived in a country where contraception was illegal and abortions were only allowed without anesthesia, so it would teach women a lesson. In comparison to that, your sex law is very democratic. After all, I don't know the social attitude towards the law, or whether anyone gives a damn it even exists. It's your country, your laws, your lives, do what you concider appropriate.

teach women a lesson? Hey it takes two to tango! 0_o they should kick the guy in the thinger thinger U_U

Isn't it always like that? You get pregnant, it's your own problem! It often happens that "the father" doesn't want anything to do with the kid. As if he wasn't there...

Faith:

Sheepo@_@:

Faith:

NeoSteph:

English sex education, is probably rammed down our throats as soon as we reached the age of 11, personally given people awareness is half the problem. Granted you need to have sex education, but the way it's taught in our country is that it's an evil thing and we should stay clear, yet at the same time the government will give a teenage mother their own house and benefits, which has meant that our underage birth rate had doubled in the last ten years, which is alarming. Removing the underage law would only damage it further as it would look like we are encouraging young kids to have sex.

Well, I personally always thought that saying "under age birth" is discriminational. What if I want to become a mother at 15? Most people reach puberty at the age of 12 or 13, so why can't I use what I have? But that's a different story.
You know, I've been to many shitty places in my life. I've lived in a country where contraception was illegal and abortions were only allowed without anesthesia, so it would teach women a lesson. In comparison to that, your sex law is very democratic. After all, I don't know the social attitude towards the law, or whether anyone gives a damn it even exists. It's your country, your laws, your lives, do what you concider appropriate.

teach women a lesson? Hey it takes two to tango! 0_o they should kick the guy in the thinger thinger U_U

Isn't it always like that? You get pregnant, it's your own problem! It often happens that "the father" doesn't want anything to do with the kid. As if he wasn't there...

and so we delve into the age-old womens rights/who's at fault debate...