No, I think you should try to be less dense and acknowledge that my opinion is that decency should not be regulated by law, regardless of what my own level of tolerance may be.
PK,
You have just committed a self goal. It is not merely an interesting topic but your whole argument is going to fail at this issue. Though, there are many others that you cannot think of.
Let me ask you a very simple question.
Who made you authority to decide that 18 is mature age and not 17, and not 16, and not 15? and not 12?
When a 12 year girl will become ready to give her virginity to a wealthy 60 year old man in the exchange of some dresses, what argument would you give to her to stop from doing that?
She will give all your arguments that you used here and in your other thread and call you biased and consevative like you call others. she will say that you are imposing your opinion on her and curbing her freedom.
Do you not think that we should allow her to have her liberty too?
K: as I said, in the U.S 18, is the legal age of consent and of being an adult. I simply took
that age because it seemed to me that is a reasonable age of being an adult. It is simply
a good age to have for consent.
Kropotkin
K-here are some currentages of worldwide sexual consent figures
US/UK-16 years
France,check rpbl, denmark, Greece-15
Chile,Germany,Italy-14
Spain-13
original US colonies 10-12
I do not hate you - or anyone for that matter. I think you must be rather self-obsessed to think so.
But one thing I do not like about you is your constant self-contradictions, which make arguing with you difficult.
Item One:" the fact i am not pushing my opinion to anyone".
Item Two:“PK is more leftist or liberal than you but he does not cross the line of civility. You should learn from him.”
Item two demonstrates two things. The first is that you think you are capable of pushing your views, contradicting item one, and think you have the right to tell others how to behave - which is the whole underlying point of your (ahem!) neutral thread, as we shall see, no doubt. The second is the implication that being “left-wing” is tantamount to a lack of civility. Which is absurd.
What is meant by 'currentages"?
Oh you forgot the Vatican’s age of consent, which is currently 12.
Right!Would You consider, likewise a rather hypocritical position for the Vatican to take? Oh i forgot Saudi Arabia,there is no age of consent ever, sex is outlawed outside of marriage.
current ages (of consent) typo, sorry
Okay!
obe: K-here are some currentages of worldwide sexual consent figures
US/UK-16 years
France,check rpbl, denmark, Greece-15
Chile,Germany,Italy-14
Spain-13
original US colonies 10-12
[/quote]
K: ok and? I still don’t think that changes the argument any. I still think the age of consent
should be 18. Recall I am a parent, I have a daughter whose birthday is today in fact, she turns
30. So after her, I can safely say, I believe it should be 18.
But I also believe sex education should begin early and often, so with the two combined
I think 18 is the right age. BTW the fact is was 10-12 in the original colonies and has changed
dramatically in years, also shows us how morality changes, not fixed or static.
Kropotkin
Happy birthday to her. I have children too, and i do agree with You, that 18 would be proper, but the way things are going, with nearly all kids having computers and tablets or iphones, they view pornography You better believe it. There is no way to hold them back.Parental control is a joke.
K: thank you. The first few years of her owning a computer, she knew more about it than we did.
We couldn’t have set the parental control if our lives depended on it because we had no idea how.
I am still not sure how to set it on a computer or iPhone, but fortunately I don’t have to worry about
that anymore.
Kropotkin
But i do. In spite of my worries, however, there will come a time, sorrily, when they will look me into the eye, and call me old fashioned or even a kill joy hypocrat. That has always been the generational gap’s effect, what else is new? What they learn from their friends at school, through sex education and from their friends trumps anything i may wish to say.
18 is somewhat too late I think.
Most people I knew were ready at 15 and couldn’t way till their 16th birthday, if they bothered. (its 16 in the UK)
Setting 16 as an age seems wiser to me, reducing the incidence of “statutory rape”, and clandestine sex.
I think that may be too late as well.14 and 15 most places in Europe, with a few at 13 although that is too early barely out of the womb and already thinking and doing sex.
Let’s face it some people of 21 are not ready for sex, But the Vatican’s age of 12 is far too low, and the proportion of individuals of that age who would succumb to abuse is too high. I’m sure the clergy relish the opportunity to avoid prosecution, but there has to be some limit.
Personally I would have been more than happy for an experienced woman to have taken me in hand when I was 12, but i know that could have gone terribly wrong.
I don’t think that is true.
i do not wish to get graphic or anything here, but for me there was a twenty something girl who tried to take me at 11, but it did end in humiliation though, was surely too quick on the gun. after that nothing until fifteen or sixteen , embarassingly with a girl of the night. So i guess it was more a matter of vanity and pride, not the actual mechanics. Thereof.
But the irony is here, the shame subsisted on virginity per se, as not being a ‘man’ as I was instructed by my Pa, a sort of self indulgent proof.
I am writing this only to illuminate the sad sexualization of society, where shame progresses to inadequacy and not to questions of consent.
errata: instead of ‘consent’ should be ‘age of consent’
Although I would not want to argue for a lowering of the age of consent, I would argue against the obsessive attention the media tends to give “abuse”. The attitude society has to abuse can do more harm to an abusee, especially where that person has coped and dealt with what is most usually nothing more than a physical intrusion.
It is the emotional and mental aspects of the abuse that is damaging, and the media attention creates a focus that can do more harm than good.
As to the age of consent - that provides a protection for the vulnerable. It is not a restriction on an underage person, but a duty of the older person to comply. If they think that the relationship is not abusive then they ought to be able to trust the under-age person to not offer them up to the forces of justice. In such rare cases let it be.
But anyone who feels they have been abused ought to be able to seek the protection of society.
Such ‘duty’ is more de jure, then de facto, unfortunately.