There are absolute right and wrong, moral absolutes, and they don’t need any statistics or data.
It is morally wrong for an adult to have sex with a minor. If the adult is a man marrying a younger woman, in some cultures and at some time periods, then it is acceptable, depending on the age difference. Many people on FR have said that their grandparents were married as teenagers, or their grandmother was even 14 or 15 when she married a young man in his 20s.
But that is marriage, not illicit sex, and it makes a huge difference.
There is no need of “scientific method” to determine moral absolutes. It is wrong to murder, to kidnap, to slander or libel, to rape, to molest children, to commit incest or bestiality.
No need of studies, statistics or comparison charts.
“There is no need of “scientific method” to determine moral absolutes.”
I agree, completely, as you are correct, by definition. Science is a method of determining the validity of a hypothesis, morality a method of assigning values to human behavior, usually with a reference to Divine authority or scripture.
What was the original question was a request for hard data regarding the hypothesis that sex at age 12 damaged a male, and if so, in what way.
So far, all I have read are answers not responsive to the question, with the exception of a private mail about an ex who had been in such a relationship and he felt bad about it. It was noted, upon discussion, that the male was from a Liberal Jewish urban family.
Coming from a somewhat similar background, I can see why the anecdotal report was as it was. Guilt is, after all, something of a profession amongst some of my co-religionists.
As someone who occasionally plays the Devil’s Advocate role, or takes a contrarian position, what somewhat disturbs me is the general acceptance of the counter-intuitive., particularly in this subject area.
One last thought. In a culture that allows just about any form of sex, where even the perversions of members of “queer nation” now are a legally protected class), why are some FReepers so disturbed at a request for corroboration of a premise?