chem1st Posted May 8, 2010 Share Posted May 8, 2010 utter nonsence, he has no idea. 2 consenting adults is nothing in comparison to a vulger adult raping an innocent child What if there was consent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KellieB Posted May 8, 2010 Share Posted May 8, 2010 Does it not just come down to the fact that people use religion for their own ends? If you were atheist there could be no justification for what you already know is wrong. No-one should need a book to tell them right from wrong or use it for subversive measures. A good set of parents is what people need these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KellieB Posted May 8, 2010 Share Posted May 8, 2010 What if there was consent? Its easy to trick a weakling youngster into something they may well regret later. Your argument holds as much water as a bucket without a bottom. I hope you are not in charge of any children for their sake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dozy Posted May 8, 2010 Share Posted May 8, 2010 It is only a crime because of the law, homosexuality once was, now it is not. What's that got to do with the price of fish???? All crimes are crimes because of the law! Why don't you answer happyhippy's question??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted May 8, 2010 Share Posted May 8, 2010 What's that got to do with the price of fish???? All crimes are crimes because of the law! Why don't you answer happyhippy's question??? I did. I said most probably not, I didn't say 'NO' for a reason. Some would say, people have 'NO' right to have homosexual sex you see. Much like the majority would say a child (defined by? age? development? nationality?) has NO right to have sex with.. - An adult, -a child. The law changes, and it often changes with public opinion. Wrt to sex, the law has become more relaxed of recent times. Homosexuality allowed. From 18 to 16. Hence the priest has a point. Regardless of the law, and the people's opinions which form it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted May 8, 2010 Share Posted May 8, 2010 The changing views of homosexuality, for example. The changing views of 1. The public, 2. The law, 3. The public in response to the law, 4. The law in response to the public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happyhippy Posted May 8, 2010 Share Posted May 8, 2010 Most probably not. What about a 16 year old, a 15 year old, a 17 year old? 13? Many people can reproduce at this age, we have laws in place for 13-16 year olds to have sex without punishment with each other as long as they are consenting. Being able to reproduce is very different from being able to handle the responsibility of doing so, and also handling sexual pressure from a comsiderably older person. 10? The age of criminal responsibility. If you are supposed to know the difference from right or wrong, surely you can make a choice about sex? Absolutely not, and the two aren't even related as you know full well. Knowing that stealing a chocolate bar is wrong is one thing, but how could a ten year old make a considered choice about having sex with a forty year old, say? Even a thirteen year old? Stealing something, or hitting someone, etc, are personal matters to an individual: sexual relations are to do with two people. Would you consider a forty year old woman who had sex with a ten year old boy a child abuser, or someone who simply saw someone who was around the age of puberty and also above the age of criminal responsibility and so fair game? 21? A lot of people under this age are what some may say, immature, maybe they should be classed as children up until this point. You mean above? Lay off the chemicals fella. The age of puberty? The traditional age for child to adult transition. At what age do you make that then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happyhippy Posted May 8, 2010 Share Posted May 8, 2010 Why is it wrong to have sex underage? Because of an arbitrary law? Surely it should be ok if they are consenting? Do you want to get rid of the laws regarding the age of consent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dozy Posted May 8, 2010 Share Posted May 8, 2010 I did. I said most probably not, I didn't say 'NO' for a reason. Some would say, people have 'NO' right to have homosexual sex you see. Much like the majority would say a child (defined by? age? development? nationality?) has NO right to have sex with.. - An adult, -a child. The law changes, and it often changes with public opinion. Wrt to sex, the law has become more relaxed of recent times. Homosexuality allowed. From 18 to 16. Hence the priest has a point. Regardless of the law, and the people's opinions which form it. My bold Just like I'd have a point if I said the Brinks Mat bullion robbery would never have taken place if we hadn't stopped hanging people for stealing sheep a couple of hundred years ago!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted May 8, 2010 Share Posted May 8, 2010 Do you want to get rid of the laws regarding the age of consent? No. But I will say this, I've seen older adults try to pressure 16 year olds into sex, and quite a few of them 16 year olds I do not think are able to make rational consent. Two 13 year olds having consensual sex with each, fair enough ok. Two 16 " ", ok. Two 18 " ", ok. A 40 year old and a 16 year old, NO! (Even though it is completely legal) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.