 |
| |
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by lord of the mark
Yup
'In Virginia during 1999 and 2000, 219 births to girls age 13 and 14 were fathered by men over the age of 18, according to the 2002 Virginia Department of Health report “Estimating the Incidence of Statutory Rape in Virginia.” '
Blame McPaper for the ambiguity. |
The population of Virginia is about 6.5 million, which is a little less than 2.5% of the total US population. Extrapolating to the total US population would give an estimate of about 9000 births/ year for the US as a whole. I'd also like to point out that a sizeable portion of the young teens getting pregnant get abortions. Some girls get just palin lucky and don't get pregnant.
I see at least one of them in my clinic almost every year. By and large they make truely horrible parents. In the end most of their children wind up being raised by the mom's parents.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Whaleboy
|
 |
Please make all cheques payable to Whaleboy
Jan 2003
time: 05:36
|
|
quote:
You have failed to analyse the situation like a real human being. I'm sure if you are ever in a situation like this that you will be so quick to do the time to do the legal research and analysis.
|
If you consider a "real human being" to act upon his testicles as opposed to his consideration, then perhaps you are correct. I think that if we are talking about justice, what constitutes a crime, what is consistent or inconsistent in a philosophical or legal sense, then we have to use consideration and attempt to suppress our primal urges to destroy those who trample on our virginal territory. I don't think that people with a hymen obsession should be involved with child law since their obsessiveness and "protective" urges have more in common with paedophiles anyway.
quote:
But those lines have to be drawn, because it's impossible for multiple reasons to psychologically classify everyone as "ready" or "unready" for sexual intercourse. It's that same reason there's a line before which you cannot vote, or drive.
|
But driving or voting is dependant more or less on other people. With consenting sex, it is dependant upon only two parties, who choose to use a perfectly natural function of their bodies. Two conclusions are that one is ready when one says one is ready, and thus the age of consent should be reduced to a reasonable figure for the start of puberty, say between 10 and 12, or it is decided on an individual basis, like a driving licence, though that is far too totalitarian for my taste.
quote:
That's West Virginia
|
The beauty of relativism 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Whaleboy
Two conclusions are that one is ready when one says one is ready, and thus the age of consent should be reduced to a reasonable figure for the start of puberty, say between 10 and 12, or it is decided on an individual basis, like a driving licence, though that is far too totalitarian for my taste.
|
Why would you lower the age to the point of the start of puberty. Puberty is not an instantaneous process, but instead involves a fairly predictable pattern of growth over a period of 5 to 7 years. At age 10 most girls may exhibit the very beginning of breast development and a few early stage, downy pubic hairs, but the internal organs and genetalia are little more developed than a younger girls. Even early developers, unless they have a hormonal condition have little internal development at this age. It is exceedingly rare for a girl to become fertile at 10. You can really hurt a girl by attempting to get your rocks off with her at this age.
By age 12 most girls will have some significant breast development, modest curly pubic hair, and the beginnings of vaginal, labial, clitoral and internal development, but most are far from physically mature. Menstruation often begins at this age, but actual fertility often occurs 6 to 12 months later. For most girls at this age intercourse with an adult or older teen would be painful. A few girls at 12 are indeed further along in development and are fertile and developed enough to accomodate a man, but with discomfort. As I said earlier, throughout my career I've known girls who got pregnant at age 12. None of them enjoyed the experience, many were emotionally scarred whether or not the act was consensual. Some go right back to being sexually active after giving birth even though it's not pleasent for them because it's the only role they know. I wish that some of you could sit down and talk to one of these kids talk about their premature sexual experience and their lifestyle choices. The emptiness within them would haunt you. It is very sad to meet a child-prisoner, even one who can't express the desire to be freed.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dis
|
 |
Las Vegas, Nevada
Feb 2000
time: 21:36
|
|
exactly what I was going to say kucinich.
Actually I have said it way early in this thread.
Kids today are not mature. They never have any responsibility. They never have to do any work. This was not the case in the 19th century for example. Kids matured mentally much faster. They were required to work, take responsibility and think of how their actions affect their future life together. ie- if she gets pregnant, then they will have to marry and he will have to support her.
Kids today don't even have to take out the trash. I've seen 20 year olds that still act like kids. You would never see this back in the day.
Kids just are not capable of consenting to an adult. Period. If anything, the age of consent should be raised to 21. Just because kids are smart and can run computers, doesn't mean they understand consequences of their actions. I see this all the time, adults think kids grow up real fast just because they can operate a computer 
Now we come to the crux of the matter.
Attraction. Because girls are maturing faster physically (some have theorized that growth hormones in cattle is causing this), the attraction will always be there. I admit to seeing some girls who I think were underage that were damn hot. But I would never act on these urges. I see actresses who are under 18 who I know I'm attracted to. But I would never have sex with them, even if offered (not likely  )
Now there is some new science that says the part of the brain that controls impulse is not as strong in some humans as others. Some people literally cannot control themselves. They have no impulse control. New age liberalism want to set these people free from jail because of their "disability". While I do believe they do lack impulse control, letting them loose in society seems irresponsible. The fact is, you could make a case nearly all criminals lack impulse control. Only a small percentage are truelly evil.
Should we let these people loose in society to do as they please?
The fact is, society is set up in such a way to seperate the unwanteds from what we consider normal. We simply do not want people like this in our society. This is what prison is for. It has nothing to do with deterrence or rehabilitation. It is simply a means to isolate an unwanted portion of the population from the rest of society. And I support this. I do not want these people in normal society, even if they do technically have a disability. We simply cannot have anarchy with a population the size it is today.
Last edited by Dis on 20-06-2004 at 20:34
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jon Miller
|
|
I agree with diss
Jon Miler
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Whaleboy
|
|
Please make all cheques payable to Whaleboy
Jan 2003
time: 05:36
|
|
quote:
Puberty is not an instantaneous process, but instead involves a fairly predictable pattern of growth over a period of 5 to 7 years
|
 And here's me thinking it involves witchcraft...
quote:
By age 12 most girls will have some significant breast development, modest curly pubic hair, and the beginnings of vaginal, labial, clitoral and internal development, but most are far from physically mature. Menstruation often begins at this age, but actual fertility often occurs 6 to 12 months later.
|
Well I'll concede on that, I was plucking a figure out of the air about when one becomes fertile.
My argument is a question of legality, which has to involve the capacity of the individual to decide. The emotional consequences of sex are given but that can only form part of an argument as to why people should rather not have sex until older, but thats not a necessarily tenable position hence my apparent ambiguity. To clarify, if we create a law solely upon the basis of the persons ability to decide, then it will be dependent upon the individual, and one is criminalising a lot of people for sex with, for example, 15 year olds. And before people launch into the ad hominems, I'm 19 and prefer older women  .
quote:
Physical maturity is different from mental maturity.
|
My argument is that a reasonable figure for physical maturity should be used as something of a baseline, with coersion not to have sex until one is mentally mature.
It may seem like a weak argument to the point of untenable but I tend to go for consistency. Existentialism and sex usually work well together   
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Flubber
|
|
With a view of the Rockies
Aug 2000
time: 22:36
|
|
Voting, entering contracts or consenting to sex.
The one thing I think everyone can agree with is that for each of these there is a time when people are too young and it is legitimate that the law disqualifies the young .
I think everyone would also agree that individuals mature at very different rates such that a 13 year old may be more aware, knowledgeable and sophisticated than a 16 year old. BUT since we it is impossible to do individualized testing/assessments, the best we can do is have an arbitrary cut-off age.
What should that age be ?? In Canada its 14 unless both parties are within 2years of each other and the age is 18 if one of the parties is in a position of authority over the other ( catches teachers, police, counsellor etc)
I don't know that 14 is old enough but thats where the law is . I can't even imagine what the legislatore in jurisdictions with lower ages were thinking.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:36.
Apolyton Time is 00:36. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
20-06-2004 04:32
. An assessment to qualify for the vote would be almost as good as abolishing democracy! If we base it on public safety, we wouldnt vote at all and install a libertarian, benevolent dictatorship (in my opinion) 
|