Your views on Underage Sex?

[xvbones]

I again stress that you inform your congressman that you are in favor of increased sexual education and distribution of contraceptives in schools.

I don't live i the U.S (and I'd never want to live in that crappy society either) so your solution is pretty much useless.

If that is the case, by your own logic, the validity of your opinions ends at the borders of your country. You don't, in fact, have any right to weigh in on the sex lives of anyone outside of your tax dollar.

You should probably preface your loudly inflammatory rote as such, that your opinions only matter if they are in the same country as you.

(As for living in this crappy society, nobody invited you.)

 

[dickywebster]

Depends on the person and the country, as for example Swedens age of consent is 15, while americas is 18

It varies from 16-18 depending on the state.

Thanks for saying as ive only heard a general 18 and something about state variation, but i wasnt sure enough to say. Mind you, doesnt that make things complicated in america?

Somewhat I live in Ohio and the age of consent law is 17. Indiana(Our neighboring State)has 16 as its age of consent. Say you(17) and your 16 year old girlfriend wanted to have sex. You both live in Ohio. SO the two of you drive to Indiana, and have sex and get caught, because you both legally live in Ohio you committed a crime and will be punished with pedophilia a minor form of it but still.

Ah ok then, so not as easy to get around as i thought, if its based upon where you live it might be harder to get around in theory, but how easy is it to enforce in reality? Ignoring actually catching them but say tracking them to where they live if they had skipped to a state with a lower age of consent?

Generally they buy hotel rooms(were you must be over 18 to rent a room) or have sex in a car, in a parking lot, usually police officers stroll by parking lots and if they catch you they have to arrest or call your parents.

Sounds kinda tricky/complicated, almost makes me glad i live somewhere with a low enoguh age of concent its not an issue really
heck most people i know didt feel ready even by 16, 17 was a different matter though

 

[Housebroken Lunatic]

If that is the case, by your own logic, the validity of your opinions ends at the borders of your country. You don't, in fact, have any right to weigh in on the sex lives of anyone outside of your tax dollar.

Who says I was referring to anyone outside my "tax dollar"?

And even if I was referring to someone outside of it, the point is still valid, since the very same problems that affects me in regards to underage sex affects others who share my views of the problems in the exact same way.

(As for living in this crappy society, nobody invited you.)

I was making sure no one would crack a silly suggestion that I should move somewhere like the U.S where I could get in touch with a congressman (which in itself is a pretty silly idea since congressmen, like all politicians rarely give a fuck about what other people than themselves want).

 

[xvbones]

If that is the case, by your own logic, the validity of your opinions ends at the borders of your country. You don't, in fact, have any right to weigh in on the sex lives of anyone outside of your tax dollar.

Who says I was referring to anyone outside my "tax dollar"?

And even if I was referring to someone outside of it, the point is still valid, since the very same problems that affects me in regards to underage sex affects others who share my views of the problems in the exact same way.

Yes, none of you remotely understand what you're talking about and all of you consistently stress placing blame over fixing anything.

You think you have a say in how wildly hormonal children ruin their lives because all of their mistakes combined may cost you as much as fifteen cents per year.

You want everyone to know that you disapprove of the personal cost these wildly hormonal children will take on your wallet, and that SOMETHING MUST BE DONE about these wildly hormonal children.

Education is never brought up or accepted as a reasonable solution.

No, no, first and foremost, BLAME must be placed.

Secondly, the offending wildly hormonal children must be dehumanized with a string of objectifying verse that blankets them all as stupid, incoherent messes that are a direct weight on your wallet and should be set adrift on an ice floe so you don't have to pay fractional amounts for their errors.

Thirdly, the outrage must manifest with a blast of self-righteous selfishness.
Your bankbook. Your taxes. You have to pay. Your money goes to them.

Dear, dear me, how you have suffered for their ruined lives.

There ought to be laws in place to protect you from this kind of suffering.

It's too bad you don't have a congressman you can write to.

(As for living in this crappy society, nobody invited you.)

I was making sure no one would crack a silly suggestion that I should move somewhere like the U.S where I could get in touch with a congressman (which in itself is a pretty silly idea since congressmen, like all politicians rarely give a fuck about what other people than themselves want).

In case I was ever unclear, blind and unfocused cynicism at the expense of everyone within spitting distance is not maturity, either.

 

[JaceArveduin]

My mom made sure I knew which parts did what and that I had some condoms, she also told me that if I had a kid I was shit out of luck.

Funny, she didn't care what I did, and I haven't smoked or had sex and I've only drank once. Guess I'm just a cynical bastard beyond my years.

 

[sumanoskae]

Snip

This is going to take a while.

Excuse me?

"That's just an arbitrary opinion on your part. It's my choice if I want to worry or care about whatever it is that my government spends my money on. And in this case I actually PAID for the right to have an opinion and views in regards to underage sex. You tried to argue the case that It's "none of my business", and when I called you out on it and illustrated what a bullshit argument that is, you put up a meek defense of "well there are more important things to care about".

It's still my choice what I care about or not, ESPECIALLY when it regards matters that im being obliged to finance with m7y own damn money"

That wasn't my primary argument, it was just something else that occurred

"Yeah, that's why there are truckloads of surveys and statistics showing that people IN GENERAL are fucking lousy at using contraception and STD's STILL run rampant"

No, the reason for that is that we still(I can't speak for wherever you live) have people who insist that abstinence is a valid solution.

As I said next, and this is from personal experience, the places I see teen pregnancy occurring is in houses where there's no talk of sex.

"Im not saying that we're supposed to tell them not to do it. Regulation is prefectly possible. There's mandatory sterilization that can be reversed when the person in question reaches a legal age to procreate (that way they can fuck around all they want without running the risk of pregnancy). There's restriction to how underage girls and boys are allowed to interact with eachother socially etc.

All you need is a bit of creativity and you could regulate it just fine."

The first option her I think might be a good idea(Although I don't think most people EVER reach a level of maturity needed to competently raise a child), the second option is elitist and flirts with fascism

"But that's beside the point since im not really interested in regulating it. What I am saying is that it's pretty fucking annoying that adult, hard-working taxpayers always have to pick up the cheque for what stupid teenagers do when they, in their naive little minds decide that they are "grown up enough" to drink themselves shitfaced and fuck around like little sluts (I use the term "slut" here in a gender neutral way, don't think for a second that you CAN'T be a slut just because you are male)."

Then I'm sorry you vehemently disagree with your government

"And earlier you claimed that it's silly of us to have an opinion or views of their sexlife and general misbehaviour that WE, the taxpayers have to pay for. How's that fair? Is it not enough that our money is being stolen to fund something we'd NEVER willingly pay for if we actually had a choice, but we're not even supposed to be allowed to have an opinion of it? Really?"

What I said was it's none of our business, think whatever you want about it, but it's not your choice to make

"I think you'll find that sometimes it actually helps to think one step further than 'whatever I do is my business and my business alone, and the rest of you aren't entitled to an opinion',"

Yes, it is useful, I'll tell you about it sometime

"I don't give a shit. Several hundred kids starve to death in certain ass-ends of the world as it is, but do you see me caring in the slightest? I don't have to care about them (luckily, because my government doesn't have jurisdiction in those countries), but im FORCED to care (at least financially speaking) about some teenage idiot mothers bastard offspring, and that irks me. ANd I see no reason as to why I should support it willingly or refrain from commenting and expressing my views and opinions of that particular phenomenon."

As I said, I'm playing devils advocate. I was illustrating a point, that by the logic of "All taxpayers should have their opinion taken into account, regardless of it's contents" that if there were enough people that disagreed with you, it wouldn't matter how much sense you were making, because apparently anyone who can fork over a tax payers sum has been gifted with the knowledge to run a country

"No it isn't my responsibility to aid anyone. Im being forced to take responsibility for the fuck-ups of teenagers by my government, and I have a right to have an opinion about that, that YOU certainly don't have the right to try and take away from me."

Again, you can think and say whatever you want, I never said you couldn't. What you can't do is dictate the decisions of other human beings, no matter how stupid they are, if you allow freedom to be surrendered then you undermine the very idea of human rights, and once you forgo that then there is absolutely nothing philosophically holding you back from a dictatorship. And before you say that you get to decide because you(And few thousand other people, many of whom disagree with you) spend 50 cents on it every now and again, let me make two things clear.

One: The reason I stand so firm on this, is that human rights are one of the few subjects where there is no room for compromise. Because once you sacrifice that ideal, all pretenses of morality go out the window.

Two: Fighting the teenagers for teen pregnancy is treating the symptom, but ignoring the fundamental problem. Where I come from, teen pregnancy is usually not the result of promiscuity, but the result of parents refusing to accept any form of sexual activity. Most of the pregnant teens I've met have been christian conservative would-be virgins, who's families refused to buy them birth control.

And the fact that you have to pay for it is a result of your government being unfair(In your opinion, anyways) and uncreative. There are lots of ways to resolve the issue without suppressing anyone's rights, and it's not very creative to bash teenagers for a situation that they played a, relatively speaking(The problem has it's roots in society's treatment of the issue), small part in creating.

This problem could be fixed without dehumanizing people, as if the only purpose of their existence is to not inconvenience you, regardless of the circumstances they can't control, like not having access to protection, or not even knowing what it is. How do you ever expect the irresponsible teens in question to mature if you never give them an opportunity to make their own decisions?.

It sucks that you have to pay for their mistakes, and it would still suck if they weren't allowed to make mistakes. Neither situation is a good one, and regulating their behavior won't fix that. And before you say that there's no other way to change things, is this helping?, is ranting on a forum to a foreigner going to change anything?. Is trying to control the teens, who have no more say in the law then you do, going to change anything?.

 

[Aerodyamic]

I think adultery is generally viewed as a bad thing, but Teen-agery is more consistently frowned upon.

 

[Housebroken Lunatic]

Snip

This is going to take a while.

Excuse me?

"That's just an arbitrary opinion on your part. It's my choice if I want to worry or care about whatever it is that my government spends my money on. And in this case I actually PAID for the right to have an opinion and views in regards to underage sex. You tried to argue the case that It's "none of my business", and when I called you out on it and illustrated what a bullshit argument that is, you put up a meek defense of "well there are more important things to care about".

It's still my choice what I care about or not, ESPECIALLY when it regards matters that im being obliged to finance with m7y own damn money"

That wasn't my primary argument, it was just something else that occurred

"Yeah, that's why there are truckloads of surveys and statistics showing that people IN GENERAL are fucking lousy at using contraception and STD's STILL run rampant"

No, the reason for that is that we still(I can't speak for wherever you live) have people who insist that abstinence is a valid solution.

As I said next, and this is from personal experience, the places I see teen pregnancy occurring is in houses where there's no talk of sex.

"Im not saying that we're supposed to tell them not to do it. Regulation is prefectly possible. There's mandatory sterilization that can be reversed when the person in question reaches a legal age to procreate (that way they can fuck around all they want without running the risk of pregnancy). There's restriction to how underage girls and boys are allowed to interact with eachother socially etc.

All you need is a bit of creativity and you could regulate it just fine."

The first option her I think might be a good idea(Although I don't think most people EVER reach a level of maturity needed to competently raise a child), the second option is elitist and flirts with fascism

"But that's beside the point since im not really interested in regulating it. What I am saying is that it's pretty fucking annoying that adult, hard-working taxpayers always have to pick up the cheque for what stupid teenagers do when they, in their naive little minds decide that they are "grown up enough" to drink themselves shitfaced and fuck around like little sluts (I use the term "slut" here in a gender neutral way, don't think for a second that you CAN'T be a slut just because you are male)."

Then I'm sorry you vehemently disagree with your government

"And earlier you claimed that it's silly of us to have an opinion or views of their sexlife and general misbehaviour that WE, the taxpayers have to pay for. How's that fair? Is it not enough that our money is being stolen to fund something we'd NEVER willingly pay for if we actually had a choice, but we're not even supposed to be allowed to have an opinion of it? Really?"

What I said was it's none of our business, think whatever you want about it, but it's not your choice to make

"I think you'll find that sometimes it actually helps to think one step further than 'whatever I do is my business and my business alone, and the rest of you aren't entitled to an opinion',"

Yes, it is useful, I'll tell you about it sometime

"I don't give a shit. Several hundred kids starve to death in certain ass-ends of the world as it is, but do you see me caring in the slightest? I don't have to care about them (luckily, because my government doesn't have jurisdiction in those countries), but im FORCED to care (at least financially speaking) about some teenage idiot mothers bastard offspring, and that irks me. ANd I see no reason as to why I should support it willingly or refrain from commenting and expressing my views and opinions of that particular phenomenon."

As I said, I'm playing devils advocate. I was illustrating a point, that by the logic of "All taxpayers should have their opinion taken into account, regardless of it's contents" that if there were enough people that disagreed with you, it wouldn't matter how much sense you were making, because apparently anyone who can fork over a tax payers sum has been gifted with the knowledge to run a country

"No it isn't my responsibility to aid anyone. Im being forced to take responsibility for the fuck-ups of teenagers by my government, and I have a right to have an opinion about that, that YOU certainly don't have the right to try and take away from me."

Again, you can think and say whatever you want, I never said you couldn't. What you can't do is dictate the decisions of other human beings, no matter how stupid they are, if you allow freedom to be surrendered then you undermine the very idea of human rights, and once you forgo that then there is absolutely nothing philosophically holding you back from a dictatorship. And before you say that you get to decide because you(And few thousand other people, many of whom disagree with you) spend 50 cents on it every now and again, let me make two things clear.

One: The reason I stand so firm on this, is that human rights are one of the few subjects where there is no room for compromise. Because once you sacrifice that ideal, all pretenses of morality go out the window.

Two: Fighting the teenagers for teen pregnancy is treating the symptom, but ignoring the fundamental problem. Where I come from, teen pregnancy is usually not the result of promiscuity, but the result of parents refusing to accept any form of sexual activity. Most of the pregnant teens I've met have been christian conservative would-be virgins, who's families refused to buy them birth control.

And the fact that you have to pay for it is a result of your government being unfair(In your opinion, anyways) and uncreative. There are lots of ways to resolve the issue without suppressing anyone's rights, and it's not very creative to bash teenagers for a situation that they played a, relatively speaking(The problem has it's roots in society's treatment of the issue), small part in creating.

This problem could be fixed without dehumanizing people, as if the only purpose of their existence is to not inconvenience you, regardless of the circumstances they can't control, like not having access to protection, or not even knowing what it is. How do you ever expect the irresponsible teens in question to mature if you never give them an opportunity to make their own decisions?.

It sucks that you have to pay for their mistakes, and it would still suck if they weren't allowed to make mistakes. Neither situation is a good one, and regulating their behavior won't fix that. And before you say that there's no other way to change things, is this helping?, is ranting on a forum to a foreigner going to change anything?. Is trying to control the teens, who have no more say in the law then you do, going to change anything?.

Here's a fact you might find somewhat entertaining:

Where I come from, sex-ed is mandatory. In fact parents don't even have any sort of right to restrict their children from sex-ed, since it is THE LAW that all children HAVE TO attend at least nine years of gradeschool before even having a choice of their own in the matter (if social services find out that parents are somehow trying to restrict their own children's education, they will be punished for it and if they persist they could even run the risk of losing custody over their own children).

So pretty much EVERY TEENAGER in the country is exposed to sex education in the school enviroment (because it is included in the grade school curriculum). So even if their parents are prude conservative christian fuckwads who don't even want to discuss the subject of how fucking works and the eventual consequences might be with their kids, the kids are going to be exposed to that information in school anyway.

So there's no running from sex-ed here, there are no exceptions and there aren't any teenager in the country who can reasonably blame their "conservative christian" family for their supposed ignorance of how sex works and where babies come from, because we've ALL been taught just that through mandatory education.

Also, there's been generously funded campaigns involved in even commersialising sex-education (although rather than just dealing with the pure biological facts, we have state-sponsored interest groups who pretty much provide informative tips to have lots of fun and carefree sex, suggestions for effective protection, lubrication along with some of the biology lessons).

Quite simply it's pretty much impossible to be able to miss how safe sex is performed. Heck sex is so heavily commercialized and "trendy" as opposed to having kids (which isn't nearly as popular), and with that trend comes A LOT of talk about how to insure that no kids get born.

You'd think that (according to your own arguments anyway) that STD's and teen pregnancies would be eliminated in that kind of climate, right? WRONG!

Teen pregnacnies still happen and surveys shows that people are STILL fucking useless when it comes to protect themselves so the STD's still run rampant (especially among teenagers).

The only logical concluscion to this is that teenagers as a collective are fucking morons (and NO, I don't care if you specifically happen to be a teenager who deviates from this, because statistics don't care about a few deviant individuals). So all your talk about how i'm "blaming the wrong people" and your arguments trying to support that stance come off as quite weak when faced with the facts of the situation at hand.

And in regards to your talk of the "horrors of borderline-facism" and elitism, bear in mind that your speaking to a person severely disillusioned by the hyped concept of "free democracy", and who don't see anything that has to be necessarily bad in either facism, elitism or even dictatorships.

 

[Psychedelic Spartan]

If both parties consent completely than I have no issue with it provided the age difference is within the bounds set up by that equation that I can't recall at the moment.

The thing is that the younger they get the harder it is to be sure that consent is really there, as they might not be in a position to make informed decisions. As a flat limit I'd have to say 14 is what I'd be ok with, 13's a little weird and anything lower leaves me feeling uneasy.

I agree, 13- is just weird. It's probably the girl taking off her pants and saying "lets have sex ___________" Until 15-16, you're just not ready for it and it's probably no fun. I'm 14 so I don't know at all but I don't feel the need yet.

 

[xvbones]

And in regards to your talk of the "horrors of borderline-facism" and elitism, bear in mind that your speaking to a person severely disillusioned by the hyped concept of "free democracy", and who don't see anything that has to be necessarily bad in either facism, elitism or even dictatorships.

Gentlemen; Godwin's law has been invoked.

This thread is over.

 

[sumanoskae]

Snip

This is going to take a while.

Excuse me?

"That's just an arbitrary opinion on your part. It's my choice if I want to worry or care about whatever it is that my government spends my money on. And in this case I actually PAID for the right to have an opinion and views in regards to underage sex. You tried to argue the case that It's "none of my business", and when I called you out on it and illustrated what a bullshit argument that is, you put up a meek defense of "well there are more important things to care about".

It's still my choice what I care about or not, ESPECIALLY when it regards matters that im being obliged to finance with m7y own damn money"

That wasn't my primary argument, it was just something else that occurred

"Yeah, that's why there are truckloads of surveys and statistics showing that people IN GENERAL are fucking lousy at using contraception and STD's STILL run rampant"

No, the reason for that is that we still(I can't speak for wherever you live) have people who insist that abstinence is a valid solution.

As I said next, and this is from personal experience, the places I see teen pregnancy occurring is in houses where there's no talk of sex.

"Im not saying that we're supposed to tell them not to do it. Regulation is prefectly possible. There's mandatory sterilization that can be reversed when the person in question reaches a legal age to procreate (that way they can fuck around all they want without running the risk of pregnancy). There's restriction to how underage girls and boys are allowed to interact with eachother socially etc.

All you need is a bit of creativity and you could regulate it just fine."

The first option her I think might be a good idea(Although I don't think most people EVER reach a level of maturity needed to competently raise a child), the second option is elitist and flirts with fascism

"But that's beside the point since im not really interested in regulating it. What I am saying is that it's pretty fucking annoying that adult, hard-working taxpayers always have to pick up the cheque for what stupid teenagers do when they, in their naive little minds decide that they are "grown up enough" to drink themselves shitfaced and fuck around like little sluts (I use the term "slut" here in a gender neutral way, don't think for a second that you CAN'T be a slut just because you are male)."

Then I'm sorry you vehemently disagree with your government

"And earlier you claimed that it's silly of us to have an opinion or views of their sexlife and general misbehaviour that WE, the taxpayers have to pay for. How's that fair? Is it not enough that our money is being stolen to fund something we'd NEVER willingly pay for if we actually had a choice, but we're not even supposed to be allowed to have an opinion of it? Really?"

What I said was it's none of our business, think whatever you want about it, but it's not your choice to make

"I think you'll find that sometimes it actually helps to think one step further than 'whatever I do is my business and my business alone, and the rest of you aren't entitled to an opinion',"

Yes, it is useful, I'll tell you about it sometime

"I don't give a shit. Several hundred kids starve to death in certain ass-ends of the world as it is, but do you see me caring in the slightest? I don't have to care about them (luckily, because my government doesn't have jurisdiction in those countries), but im FORCED to care (at least financially speaking) about some teenage idiot mothers bastard offspring, and that irks me. ANd I see no reason as to why I should support it willingly or refrain from commenting and expressing my views and opinions of that particular phenomenon."

As I said, I'm playing devils advocate. I was illustrating a point, that by the logic of "All taxpayers should have their opinion taken into account, regardless of it's contents" that if there were enough people that disagreed with you, it wouldn't matter how much sense you were making, because apparently anyone who can fork over a tax payers sum has been gifted with the knowledge to run a country

"No it isn't my responsibility to aid anyone. Im being forced to take responsibility for the fuck-ups of teenagers by my government, and I have a right to have an opinion about that, that YOU certainly don't have the right to try and take away from me."

Again, you can think and say whatever you want, I never said you couldn't. What you can't do is dictate the decisions of other human beings, no matter how stupid they are, if you allow freedom to be surrendered then you undermine the very idea of human rights, and once you forgo that then there is absolutely nothing philosophically holding you back from a dictatorship. And before you say that you get to decide because you(And few thousand other people, many of whom disagree with you) spend 50 cents on it every now and again, let me make two things clear.

One: The reason I stand so firm on this, is that human rights are one of the few subjects where there is no room for compromise. Because once you sacrifice that ideal, all pretenses of morality go out the window.

Two: Fighting the teenagers for teen pregnancy is treating the symptom, but ignoring the fundamental problem. Where I come from, teen pregnancy is usually not the result of promiscuity, but the result of parents refusing to accept any form of sexual activity. Most of the pregnant teens I've met have been christian conservative would-be virgins, who's families refused to buy them birth control.

And the fact that you have to pay for it is a result of your government being unfair(In your opinion, anyways) and uncreative. There are lots of ways to resolve the issue without suppressing anyone's rights, and it's not very creative to bash teenagers for a situation that they played a, relatively speaking(The problem has it's roots in society's treatment of the issue), small part in creating.

This problem could be fixed without dehumanizing people, as if the only purpose of their existence is to not inconvenience you, regardless of the circumstances they can't control, like not having access to protection, or not even knowing what it is. How do you ever expect the irresponsible teens in question to mature if you never give them an opportunity to make their own decisions?.

It sucks that you have to pay for their mistakes, and it would still suck if they weren't allowed to make mistakes. Neither situation is a good one, and regulating their behavior won't fix that. And before you say that there's no other way to change things, is this helping?, is ranting on a forum to a foreigner going to change anything?. Is trying to control the teens, who have no more say in the law then you do, going to change anything?.

Here's a fact you might find somewhat entertaining:

Where I come from, sex-ed is mandatory. In fact parents don't even have any sort of right to restrict their children from sex-ed, since it is THE LAW that all children HAVE TO attend at least nine years of gradeschool before even having a choice of their own in the matter (if social services find out that parents are somehow trying to restrict their own children's education, they will be punished for it and if they persist they could even run the risk of losing custody over their own children).

So pretty much EVERY TEENAGER in the country is exposed to sex education in the school enviroment (because it is included in the grade school curriculum). So even if their parents are prude conservative christian fuckwads who don't even want to discuss the subject of how fucking works and the eventual consequences might be with their kids, the kids are going to be exposed to that information in school anyway.

So there's no running from sex-ed here, there are no exceptions and there aren't any teenager in the country who can reasonably blame their "conservative christian" family for their supposed ignorance of how sex works and where babies come from, because we've ALL been taught just that through mandatory education.

Also, there's been generously funded campaigns involved in even commersialising sex-education (although rather than just dealing with the pure biological facts, we have state-sponsored interest groups who pretty much provide informative tips to have lots of fun and carefree sex, suggestions for effective protection, lubrication along with some of the biology lessons).

Quite simply it's pretty much impossible to be able to miss how safe sex is performed. Heck sex is so heavily commercialized and "trendy" as opposed to having kids (which isn't nearly as popular), and with that trend comes A LOT of talk about how to insure that no kids get born.

You'd think that (according to your own arguments anyway) that STD's and teen pregnancies would be eliminated in that kind of climate, right? WRONG!

Teen pregnacnies still happen and surveys shows that people are STILL fucking useless when it comes to protect themselves so the STD's still run rampant (especially among teenagers).

The only logical concluscion to this is that teenagers as a collective are fucking morons (and NO, I don't care if you specifically happen to be a teenager who deviates from this, because statistics don't care about a few deviant individuals). So all your talk about how i'm "blaming the wrong people" and your arguments trying to support that stance come off as quite weak when faced with the facts of the situation at hand.

And in regards to your talk of the "horrors of borderline-facism" and elitism, bear in mind that your speaking to a person severely disillusioned by the hyped concept of "free democracy", and who don't see anything that has to be necessarily bad in either facism, elitism or even dictatorships.

On the contrary, I have no illusion that this or any other problem will ever simply disappear, the situation may improve, but the problem will always exist. If in your country it is in fact true that teenagers have access to birth control and simply don't use it effectively, then I would agree. Yes, that is stupid, and you shouldn't be forced to pay for it.

But if you don't give a shit about them, then why even suggest that regulating their behavior is a viable solution when it's the government that forces you to pay for it?.

Regulation of behavior sure as hell doesn't work here.

And as far as the discussion on fascism goes, I have no illusion that my country is in any way "Free", but the only thing a dictatorship would solve would be that it might piss people off enough to get them to do something.

If you want to disregard any notion of liberty or freedom in order to support a system, then fine. I mean, it's inhumane, heartless and all around despicable, and I doubt you would ever support such a system if it didn't meet all your needs, but at least you wouldn't have to fork over 50 cents as a result of teenage stupidity every now and again.

And after all, you pay taxes, if you want to support genocide then fine, I mean it's the 50 cents that YOU so generously surrender that allows your nation to thrive. It's not like any others of the thousands of tax payers disagree with you.

You realize that, in a fascist government, you could be denied the free will to express your opinion you hold so dear?.

P.S: What country do you live in, anyways?

 

[Housebroken Lunatic]

Gentlemen; Godwin's law has been invoked.

This thread is over.

Godwins law: As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches.

I certainly haven't mentioned Hitler or any nazis in particular and neither has anyone else.

Are you sure you even know Godwins law and the fact that it's not a discussion-ender at all?

 

[Sethran]

10,975 and counting!

...

Waaaiiit...

 

[Tilted_Logic]

I was going to ramble along about my feelings on the subject, but thaluikhains' post summed my views to a T.

Anyways, I'm against it. Yes, the idea that there is a magical age at which point people are mature is patently false, but you have to draw the line somewhere. Yes, it means people that could have sex earlier will have to wait, and it is infringing on their freedoms or whatever, but that's the price you pay for the law protecting the people it's supposed to. It has to be fairly rigid and inflexible if it is to hold up.

At such a young age people are still likely to be naive/ignorant or presently going through maturity. I know that's a generalization but I think regardless of the benefits to the people involved in the encounter, there is little harm to come from waiting until they fully grasp the reality of the situation.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

If people want to fuck let them fuck, as long as both parties are underage. They're gonna do it in a couple of years anyway. Besides, the legal age limit is more of a guideline. Most kids these days have sex when they're 14.

 

[Saulkar]

I am perfectly OK with how Canada has it set up. Anybody 12 to 14 may have sex with someone up to two years older than them. 14-15 may have sex with someone up to five years older than them, and once you hit 16 you are in the clear. Personally I feel that while this is by no means perfect, it acknowledges that teens are going to have sex whether you want them to or not. This at the very least tries to give some guidelines as to set down age groups where it becomes harder to exploit someone younger.

 

[xvbones]

Gentlemen; Godwin's law has been invoked.

This thread is over.

Godwins law: As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches.

I certainly haven't mentioned Hitler or any nazis in particular and neither has anyone else.

Are you sure you even know Godwins law and the fact that it's not a discussion-ender at all?

And in regards to your talk of the "horrors of borderline-facism" and elitism, bear in mind that your speaking to a person severely disillusioned by the hyped concept of "free democracy", and who don't see anything that has to be necessarily bad in either facism, elitism or even dictatorships.

I repeat, Godwin's Law has been invoked.

Your opinion has been made clear, you are in favor of a fascist dictatorship.

I have nothing further to say to you or about you.

As of this moment, every person speaking to you should stop for a moment and consider carefully that you are in favor of a fascist dictatorship.

This thread is over.

(btw, you have been misspelling 'fascist.' Also 'you're', but that's neither here nor there.)

 

[idodo35]

13 and down absulutly not 14 also mostly not with very limited exeptions 15-16 it depends from the two examples that the OP mentioned its better for the sluts why you ask? because there is no real conection theyr doing it to feel good in their pants thats all (yea there are problems in that two but its nothing compared to...) the other situation is A LOT worse and more complecated because even being "in love" is temporary and later it can be a very hard thing to forget or live on with of corse it can go good a couple of 16 year olds can have sex and then go on with theyr life but in my opinion it just doesnt worth the risk... i have a friend who did it with her boyfriend (ex now) who was 4 years older then her this entire thing is now this huge black spot on her life but again i guess it depends on circumstances (misspelled)
anyway as an idea i have no problem with teens having sex but it REALY depends on the circumstances (misspelled again)

 

[InfiniteSingularity]

Age restrictions don't mean anything - they're just arbitrary figures that mean nothing. Personally people can do whatever the fuck they want, and I don't really care. And it's not up to the law to intervene in people's lives like that. It's up to the people themselves to take responsibility and sort their own sex life out.

 

[cakedcrusader]

Speaking as 15 year old girl who's head over heels for someone...i think it's okay. as long as everyones dtf and the people are mature enough, why not? But i'd say under the age of 15, 14 at youngest, it's just kinda eww.