[Jaygcn1]

I know the age of consent in America varies state to state. From 16 to 18. My question is, what SHOULD it be, if it were at a federal level across the board?

[rambus]

for what act? this could apply to marriage or....

wasn't there a state that had it at 14?

edit: this says there is 4 @14:

http://www.coolnurse.com/marriage_laws.htm
one state allows females to be 13 -.-

world for sex consent:

http://www.avert.org/age-of-consent.htm

so say parents of 18 year old and 13 year old girl say they can marry in New Hampshire, after being married the girl can can have the guy for "rape" just because consent is 16? -.-

so you can marry before you have sex but what is this thing about having sex after marriage? gogogo laws that make seance!

I thought this was for parental consent for marriage, what issue did you intend of doing?

[Villainous]

What a refreshing and original idea for a thread... NOT!! Another fine douchebag gem by jaygcn.
I see only two people voted (for 14 and 16? shit, well.. look what happens when you ask the internet) I give rambus crap but I don't think he's a pedo.. soooo I guess that just leaves you. Can I make a MJ joke or is it still too soon?

[Boldfinger]

Old enough to bleed, old enough to breed?

[treelo]

5.

You'd stop losing all your clergymen that way, they ain't hard to find you know.

[pathwriter]

Let's see...

Why do we give this topic credence, anyhow? Is no one slightly put off at the idea that our private lives should be regulated? It's really no different than drug law. As a collective, we tolerate it because we believe that it achieves something, but if the majority of people around here are not pot smokers (at bare minimum), they probably don't think that the law achieves much with regards to drug enforcement, anyhow, especially given how disproportionately minorities are punished through it.

In the early 80s, the age to legally drink alcohol outside of one's home was raised to 21. The reason for this was that it was an attempt to curb drunk driving. As it turns out, the federal mandate forcing all states to prosecute drunk driving according to a certain minimum requirement was more effective at curbing the problem than changing the legal drinking age (for those interested, the feds will withhold highway funding or something of that nature for any state that fails to comply). Drunk driving incidents and fatalities have dropped across the board since then. The effect of raising the drinking age, however, has been to encourage unsafe drinking practices among those underage. Binge drinking in particular has risen dramatically as a result of making alcohol taboo for 3 extra years.

I am able to drive an engine of death as of the age of 16. I know some states have been enacting provisional licenses in the years since I got licensed, though I have yet to see a justification as to why. If the state deems that I'm able to operate a device with which I can kill myself and others easily, the danger posed by my genitals pales in comparison.

At issue, however, is a reluctance to provide common sense education on the subject of sex. Sex is ubiquitous in human society, even in repressed hellholes like Afghanistan. In our lovely decadence here in the United States, it would be a strange kid that didn't learn something about sex (most likely inaccurate or misrepresented) before high school. Instead of giving common sense education, however, the trend has largely been, "Don't do it!" A frank discussion of why a girl shouldn't blow her boyfriend under the bleachers in 6th grade verifiably goes a lot farther than creating a taboo around the activity. This is especially true since teenagers are hard-wired to defy the mandates of authority figures, particularly when they appear arbitrary (such as when you know that the English teacher and math teacher are schtupping during fourth period).

I tend to prefer the Dutch approach. They have an age of consent and they have a grey area where any accusation by a minor will pretty much result in a conviction. If I recall correctly, their age of consent is 14, which seems entirely too low to my opinion, and the grey area is 12-14. As scandalous as those figures sound, especially since the American mind seems to immediately assume that 40-year-olds would be successfully preying on a 15-year-old, I have met scores of Dutch people who are 18-21 and still virgins. The Netherlands demystified sex and their education system (one of the best in the world) actually educates its customers rather than jailing them for 8 hours a day. The result has been a nation with saner attitudes towards sex, alcohol, and marijuana. The downside are all the idiot tourists who end up spending a week in Amsterdam and act like fools because they come from more repressive nations.

I'll say this, though. I hang around 18-year-olds all day as a result of my job. The only thing that makes them particularly tempting over a 20-something who might actually know what he's doing is that whole taboo surrounding their age. Kill the taboo and sane people will quickly remember how bad they were in bed at 18 and how much they'd rather take that hot 25-year-old home, especially since the latter probably has a real job and doesn't need to bum money from mummy and daddy to buy condoms.

[Vigilous]

I am able to drive an engine of death as of the age of 16.

You are also able to enlist into the armed forces - albeit with parental consent - at 16. Personally, I think if you are old enough to decide to get shot at in defense of your country, you're old enough to drink and fuck.

[Icerat]

Honestly why does it even matter? Since society refuses to allow the government to restrict the number of kids people can have or who can have kids based on the criminal background or the actual ability to care for children why do we care how old you are when having sex? If we allow people to get knocked up over and over again without regard for the welfare of the child or the financial drain on society then we are basically giving free reign to sex. If that is the case then, after puberty you should be allowed to have sex right? Personally, I don't think so. There are many issues involved beyond just the age of the person anyhow. 18 is a good age, you should be able to vote, join the military, drive and reproduce. Before then you are too immature and have too many other things to worry about, in my opinion. That is all true only if we look at sex as a reproductive tool. If we are just talking about sex for pleasure, then who really ever cares besides the parents of the slutty 16 yo girl? She clearly knows what she is doing and what she wants right? There are plenty of horny 16 yo boys ready to give it to her too. Now the other part of this is the creepy old men who take advantage of children and that is just plain sick. There is no reason for a 50yo to be having sex with an 18yo, ever, no matter what the age of consent is.

[treelo]

Why do we give this topic credence, anyhow? Is no one slightly put off at the idea that our private lives should be regulated? It's really no different than drug law.

While you raise some valid points, I have a problem with this. It's quite different from drug law. My smoking dope doesn't result in the rape of children, at least not that I'm aware of. I wonder how long it'll be before someone busts out the overly used idealistic claptrap about sacrificing liberty and freedom, or whatever the hell that quote is. When common sense is applied, the age of consent is fine. Two underage kids fucking each other out of curiousity may not be the most desirable thing, but when this results in criminal convictions and a spot on the sex offenders register, it becomes stupid.

The whole grey area idea is a good one. Leave the limit where it is, but perhaps have a two year boundary on either side. Anyone caught getting jiggy with it within these limits is given a stern talking down, a slap on the wrists, and a free pamphlet on how to deal with teenage pregnancies.

I'll agree with the whole sex-ed thing though, it was a bloody joke when I was at school. When they were allowed to teach us it that was. Sitting down a hundred and fifty teenage children to watch a video about the correct ways to masturbate, amongst other useless bits of information isn't going to help. It got even worse though, classes were then separated by gender and taken to different rooms and taught different things. Apparently because girls are too immature to hear the word penis, and guys are too immature not to giggle at the word vagina. This is the real problem here, not the age of consent. Though trying to say that lowering/increasing the age is an affront to liberty is a joke.

[Carynaira]

I suggest beating the information into kids during sex ed. Two birds with one stone amirite?

[pathwriter]

My smoking dope doesn't result in the rape of children, at least not that I'm aware of.

Nor does changing the age of consent. Is this a serious objection? Rape is rape. If you have to put modifiers in front of it like that sniveling word "statutory," then it wasn't rape. And you seem to agree with me, too, since you object to the idea of prosecuting teenagers for doing what hormones demand.

[rambus]

What a refreshing and original idea for a thread... NOT!! Another fine douchebag gem by jaygcn.
I see only two people voted (for 14 and 16? shit, well.. look what happens when you ask the internet) I give rambus crap but I don't think he's a pedo.. soooo I guess that just leaves you. Can I make a MJ joke or is it still too soon?

I have not voted because I do not know what the topic was for, was it consent to marriage ( younger people can marry with prenatal consent) or sex?

I'm also shocked no one took a point of view on my point yet, if a 13 and a 18 year old that are married brake the law for sex because you have to be 16 for that?

and the 18 year old would be seen as an adult in courts eye

and if this is only about sex how do you address 2 , 10 year olds that do it? both are underage but....

[treelo]

Nor does changing the age of consent. Is this a serious objection? Rape is rape. If you have to put modifiers in front of it like that sniveling word "statutory," then it wasn't rape. And you seem to agree with me, too, since you object to the idea of prosecuting teenagers for doing what hormones demand.

I do agree with you. Either I wasn't clear about my point or you missed it.

Let's say the limit was taken down to 14. This makes it technically legal for a 50 year old to sleep with a 14 year old. Most rapes go unreported, those that do rarely seem to stand up in court because the victim has already been broken and generally lacks the backbone to see things through to the end. We can all agree that old men (middle-aged men, whomever) sleeping with kids is wrong, lowering the age of consent would just make it easier for them. I'm not saying lowering it will make rape or pedophilia a bigger problem, just easier to get away with.

[1337NancYBoY]

I am able to drive an engine of death as of the age of 16. I know some states have been enacting provisional licenses in the years since I got licensed, though I have yet to see a justification as to why. If the state deems that I'm able to operate a device with which I can kill myself and others easily, the danger posed by my genitals pales in comparison.

Speak for yourself. Schwing!

I say 15. If you're going to have idiotic, pointless laws that get ignored by the majority of the people they apply to, you might as well have scandalous, idiot, pointless laws that get ignored by the majority of the people they apply to.

[pathwriter]

This makes it technically legal for a 50 year old to sleep with a 14 year old.

Is that technically very different from an 18-year-old banging a 50-year-old? Like I said, rape is rape. If the law or education need to be changed so that men and women accurately report non-consentual sexual acts, so be it. I've known girls in their teens that lusted after their 30-something teacher and when the age gap is that far, I have difficulty differentiating between 37 and 57. I've known teen boys with similar habits (and I'm just waiting for someone to say something along the lines of, "That doesn't count, he enjoyed it"). Similarly, I can find you developmentally normal people in their 20s (as opposed to those with retardation) who, by all rights, are incapable of deciding what color underwear to put on in the morning yet we do not question their ability to give consent to sex.

We have a cultural obsession with female virginity. It goes back a long way to property and inheritance rights and knowing who the baby's daddy is. A lot of that is still relevant today, but it's a little insulting to suggest that women are mindless cunts whose single most important purpose in life is to bear some man an heir so that his property can be inherited cleanly and without litigation. I know I pretend to misogyny a lot, but I like to think of women as something slightly more than a cum-dumpster who can identify who she's been fucked by.

If a 14-year-old wants to consent to sex with a 50-year-old, that's his/her problem. Based on experience, that 50-year-old would have to be either quite hot or quite loaded. There would be a distinct gender divide between which of those two factors would attract which gender, too, but reality is that it wouldn't happen often.

[CrosisReturns]

Pedobear would approve of any age

[rambus]

with the OP thingy, the people involved should be within 2 years of each other when one is under 18. how can these current laws address 2 kids that do such an act when both are 10 or something?

when you are doign something like 14 and 50 one can agure the 14 year old has little clue whats going on, but that varies person to person.

I also do not get these laws when you have a marrid couple that would violate the sexual consent laws.

[Agena]

I say about 17 their bodies are more developed. However mentally and emotionally (physically too) most people are too immature at that age. Also if they want STDs that young they better have their own insurance . . .

[Boldfinger]

...women are mindless cunts whose single most important purpose in life is to bear some man an heir so that his property can be inherited cleanly and without litigation... a cum-dumpster who can identify who she's been fucked by.

"Mindless" implies that they're not actually angling to get at your money. "Gold-Digging" would be a far better term. I'm in agreement with the rest of your 'women' description though. Speak on it, Son.

[Levian]

Old enough to bleed, old enough to breed?

If there's trees in the forest...I'm goin huntin!

Ok, on a more serious note the whole topic of minimum ages as it applies to...well damn near anything, assumes that by a certain age you've reached a certain maturity level. Take a sampling of people 18-21 and you can easily see how wrong that assumption is, because many are more likely to be acting their shoe size(US sizes 8-15, not the UK ones that range into the 40s) rather than their age. On the flip side you can take a sampling of people 15-18, and find that a (admittedly small) number of them are acting more mature than half the people in the previous group.

Personally I blame MTV for encouraging ADHD and mental retardation.

And why the fuck does it have to be the age of consent in the USA? Why can't it be the age of consent in Canada? Here's hopin they lower it to 13 so they can get a population boost and we can get reduce our pedo /inbred redneck population in one fell swoop.