Virginity Pledges are NOT effective (yes I know the sky is blue)

[HoreTore]

Consider this, what if one of them is mentally competant (in fact, not law) and the other isn't? What's the difference between a 14 year old boy coercing an imature 14 year old girl and a 40 year old man? I don't think the 14 year old boy is any less predatory. With that in mind, I would say that charges should be brought on a case-by-case basis.

The law is, that when two people are not of about the same level of maturity, the age of consent rules the day. If they are about the same, then it's free willy-time.

Note that the emphasis isn't on age, it's on level of maturity. That means that if one of them is mentally retarded, for example a 15-year old who is on the same level as a 7-year old, it would be criminal for another 15-year old to have sex with him/her.

2 13-year olds, a 13-year old and a 14-year old, 2 12-year olds, and so on is all good. Not a problem.

Anyway, how is it even possible to have the law differently? How on earth can the legal system punish kids for having sex? And which one of them gets the whip, which one is the "victim"? How can you tell, how can you be sure?

There is a thing called "free will". We encourage that thing here.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I meant that a 16 year old can be at the same level of maturity as a 15 year old, therefore they should not be lumped with the real paedophiles, but judged on a case by case basis. So I was agreeing with you, I think. Oh well, now we can disagree about whether or not we disagree.

Oh, ok, we agree.

Lokk everyone!

The law is, that when two people are not of about the same level of maturity, the age of consent rules the day. If they are about the same, then it's free willy-time.

Note that the emphasis isn't on age, it's on level of maturity. That means that if one of them is mentally retarded, for example a 15-year old who is on the same level as a 7-year old, it would be criminal for another 15-year old to have sex with him/her.

2 13-year olds, a 13-year old and a 14-year old, 2 12-year olds, and so on is all good. Not a problem.

Anyway, how is it even possible to have the law differently? How on earth can the legal system punish kids for having sex? And which one of them gets the whip, which one is the "victim"? How can you tell, how can you be sure?

There is a thing called "free will". We encourage that thing here.

How do you judge "level of maturaty"? If that's the law in Norway it is not the law here, or in America, or elsewhere. Though I think Canada has a similar system, they still have a legal threshold of 14, before which point you cannot consent.

[HoreTore]

How do you judge "level of maturaty"?

Common sense by the judges + psychiatrists. And anyway, how on earth can you punish 12-year olds for doing each other?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

We punish them for stealing, littering, defacing public property, causing a nuissence... Any time they break the law they are punished. At 12 you wouldn't go to jail, charges might not even be brought, but a 15 year old and a 12 year old is a different story, and it doesn't change the fact that we have a law.

If you break the law you are punished, that is the only fair legal system. If you believe a law is wrong you have it changed, you can't just go around breaking laws you don't like.

[HoreTore]

Of course not. But why on earth is there a law against having sex with each other?

Oh well. It's not that long ago that there were laws deciding what hole to put your willie in too, so....

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

We have laws to protect the vulnerable, I seriously doubt many teens suffer lasting trauma not having sex.

[HoreTore]

We have laws to protect the vulnerable, I seriously doubt many teens suffer lasting trauma not having sex.

I doubt they'll have any trauma from not getting coca-cola either. Does that mean we should limit kids to Pepsi?

You people are under the impression that sex is somehow something bad, and for it to be good, it will have to be performed under certain circumstances. Which truly is rubbish. Sex is good, healthy and safe. Why would you want our children to be unhealthy, Philipvs...?

[Mooks]

Of course not. But why on earth is there a law against having sex with each other?

Oh well. It's not that long ago that there were laws deciding what hole to put your willie in too, so....

Iv heard theres laws all over the U.S prohibiting sex between unmarried couples.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Utah, in Virginia you can only do it missionary with the lights off, in a bed, with the curtains drawn, after dark.

No that is truely unjust.

[Strike For The South]

If you would like to have sex then have sex. If you would not like to partake then don't.

[Papewaio]

It shouldn't be just maturity to deal with the action. But the maturity to deal with the logical consequences. How many 15 year olds lives will be fine if they have a child at that age?

[Strike For The South]

It shouldn't be just maturity to deal with the action. But the maturity to deal with the logical consequences. How many 15 year olds lives will be fine if they have a child at that age?

Not many, but how 15 year olds will care that the age of consent is 16 or 18 or 54? These kind of things fall under the families domain not the states.

[Watchman]

That's what sex ed, contrareception and - if need be - abortion is for...

[Strike For The South]

That's what sex ed, contrareception and - if need be - abortion is for...

I realize.

[Papewaio]

Not many, but how 15 year olds will care that the age of consent is 16 or 18 or 54? These kind of things fall under the families domain not the states.

Only if the state does not have to pick up the tab for the children's child.

[Strike For The South]

Only if the state does not have to pick up the tab for the children's child.

I fear I have lost something in translation. Are you saying that these laws should only be enforced when 1. A child comes about and 2. Parents can't pay for said child?

[Lord Winter]

Only if the state does not have to pick up the tab for the children's child.

So if there over eighteen then its fine for welfare to pay?

[Papewaio]

No, what I'm saying is that the idea that it is okay if they are mature is rubbish. Maturity is not the only thing to consider when playing at making babies.

One should also have the financial ability to look after the consequences of pregnancy. And the state gets a larger say nowadays because of welfare issues.