Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How Young Is Too Young? (Teen Sex)
Agape Press ^ | 7/12/06 | Jane Jimenez

Posted on 07/18/2006 4:42:43 PM PDT by wagglebee

(AgapePress) - I think she still holds it against me. As a teen today, it's absolutely ludicrous to think that my niece Katie needs to hold my hand while crossing the street.

But way back when, when Katie was just three, our battle of wills produced fierce tears. On a shopping trip, I her aunt, was entrusted with her safety. All was going well ... until the moment I grabbed Katie's hand before we crossed the busy parking lot in front of the store.

Katie jerked her hand away from me. Hearing a car's motor on the left, I reached out to catch her hand again. It took us a full minute to establish that she was going to hold my hand as we crossed the street. And, if today she still holds it against me, I must confess ... I'm not sorry for insisting on winning the battle.

Life is like that. One minute we're too young to be entrusted with a task. And then we aren't.

Life is like that. One minute we're held back. And then, crossing the line in the sand, we are suddenly old enough to be trusted with new responsibilities. It's a simple principle. And yet, it's a principle some want us to ignore in the most significant area of life for American teens today.

Today, we are embroiled in a national debate about how to handle sexual behavior related to teens and adolescents. In a surprising upheaval of logic, there are "sexperts" who cannot find any line in the sand at all to dictate a time when sex is absolutely, unequivocally and irrevocably inappropriate for young people.

Instead, these "sexperts" have declared this the "Age of Consent." If you can get or give consent, then you are old enough to have sex.

Ignoring the health implications for teens who are sexually active, these "sexperts" wag their fingers in the face of abstinence educators, rejecting any attempt to set a line in the sand. Who is "ready" for sex, you ask? Anyone who "consents" to have sex, they answer.

Embracing the philosophy of Kinsey, all sex is good sex ... if you can dream it up, if you can manage to perform it, and if it is consensual ... then it is good sex.

Like all ideas, pushing to the extreme, we eventually must come to terms with the insanity of insane ideas. Consider the case of the North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA). According to Wikipedia, it is "a New York City- and San Francisco-based unincorporated organization that opposes the use of age as the sole criterion for deciding whether minors can legally engage in sexual relations."

Wikipedia continues: "NAMBLA defends what it asserts to be the right of minors to explore their sexuality on a much freer basis. It has resolved to 'end the oppression of men and boys who have freely chosen mutually consenting relationships.'"

Checking out the NAMBLA website, disturbing evidence exists of adults promoting sex between grown men and young boys. You can order a newly revised copy of Boys Speak Out on Man/Boy Love, promoted with a picture of a grown man dancing with a boy barely taller than his elbows. Chapters include "It Shouldn't Be a Crime to Make Love," written by Bryan, age twelve and a half. An interview with Thijs, age 11, declares "I'm Not Going To Be Kept Away from Him." How about it, "Sexperts?" Is consent considered justification for this type of adult/child sex?

Or what about a 2002 book written by Judith Levine, Harmful to Minors: The Perils of Protecting Children from Sex? Widely promoted as a book to challenge "widespread anxieties" about pedophilia, Ms. Levine was toasted by national media and given every opportunity to convince Americans that science supports positive benefits for sex between adults and children.

The book's publisher, University of Minnesota Press, called Levine's book "a radical, refreshing, and long overdue reassessment of how we think and act about children's and teens' sexuality." James Kincaid, author of Erotic Innocence: The Culture of Child Molesting, called it "a crusading book that is also kind, a very rare phenomenon, and it comes down always on the side of trusting not only our kids and their pleasures but our own."

Taking up the banner of "consensual sex," most recently the Journal of Adolescent Health stated that "... there are no scientific data suggesting that consensual sex between adolescents is harmful." Seeking to justify their assertion, they pointed to the "many positive mental health consequences" of adolescent sex.

Finally, and most sadly, the Centers of Disease Control has now joined in the chorus of "sexperts" protecting sex for adolescents. At their 2006 National STD Prevention Conference in Jacksonville, Florida, the CDC had a chance to draw a line in the sand. And they failed.

At the CDC conference, standing before a crowd of national experts on STDs, Dr. Patricia Sulak sought to find common ground between the "sexperts" and abstinence educators. Surely, she challenged them, we can agree on this one thing. Can't we agree on an age too young for sex?

NO! the room erupted in unison. After all, this is the age of consent. If sex is consensual, that's good enough for them. If you are wondering what the CDC has to say about this ... so am I.

How about it, CDC? How young is too young when it comes to children and sex?



TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abstinence; ageofconsent; boys; cdc; celebrateperversity; clintonlegacy; consent; corruptingminors; culturewar; doasthouwill; girlies; girls; hedonism; hedonists; homosexualagenda; homosexuals; ifitfeelsgooddoit; jailbait; kinsey; libertines; moralabsolutes; moralcharge; nambla; pedophilia; perverts; publichospitals; publicschools; sex; sexualizingchildren; taxdollarsatwork; teensex; youngblood; youngboys; younggirls; youngstuff; youpayforthis
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-70 next last
At the CDC conference, standing before a crowd of national experts on STDs, Dr. Patricia Sulak sought to find common ground between the "sexperts" and abstinence educators. Surely, she challenged them, we can agree on this one thing. Can't we agree on an age too young for sex?

NO! the room erupted in unison. After all, this is the age of consent. If sex is consensual, that's good enough for them. If you are wondering what the CDC has to say about this ... so am I.

This is just sickeining!

1 posted on 07/18/2006 4:42:47 PM PDT by wagglebee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: DBeers; DirtyHarryY2K

HA Ping.


2 posted on 07/18/2006 4:43:15 PM PDT by wagglebee ("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alexander Rubin; An American In Dairyland; Antoninus; Aquinasfan; BIRDS; BlackElk; BlessedBeGod; ...
MORAL ABSOLUTES PING

DISCUSSION ABOUT:

How Young Is Too Young? (Teen Sex)

It saddens me when I see what society is turning into.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To be included in or removed from the MORAL ABSOLUTES PINGLIST, please FReepMail wagglebee.

3 posted on 07/18/2006 4:44:49 PM PDT by wagglebee ("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #4 Removed by Moderator

To: wagglebee
NO! the room erupted in unison. After all, this is the age of consent.

Wow a whole room full of child molesters and thay all have government jobs ?!

Who'd a thunk it ?

5 posted on 07/18/2006 4:48:57 PM PDT by ATOMIC_PUNK ( have long feared that my sins would return to visit me and the cost would be more than I could bear)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

I didn't even realize NAMBLA really existed. I thought South Park made it up.


6 posted on 07/18/2006 4:49:28 PM PDT by BackInBlack ("The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cancun
In Mexico the legal limit is 12 years old or 30 kilos, Is that right or wrong?

Are you actually being serious?

7 posted on 07/18/2006 4:52:52 PM PDT by wagglebee ("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BackInBlack
NAMBLA really existed
No my FRiend, it is an organized group of pedophiles who actually lobby to be able to legally rape young boys.
8 posted on 07/18/2006 4:53:50 PM PDT by GrandEagle (God bless the USA! May God grant our forces safety and victory on the battlefield!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
Are you actually being serious?

It's raining noobs today.

9 posted on 07/18/2006 4:54:19 PM PDT by Graybeard58 (Remember and pray for Sgt. Matt Maupin - MIA/POW- Iraq since 04/09/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

He signed up today. hmmmm, me thinks something stinks.


10 posted on 07/18/2006 4:54:44 PM PDT by dmw (Aren't you glad you use common sense, don't you wish everybody did?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

"I think she still holds it against me."

Rim shot please.


11 posted on 07/18/2006 4:55:16 PM PDT by toddlintown
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
It seems to me people with out children or(those with that don't give a sh*t] are making the rules.
12 posted on 07/18/2006 4:56:06 PM PDT by oyez (The way to punish a providence is to allow it to be governed by philosophers. --Frederick the Great)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cancun
Well, if you don't mind your 12 year old daughter gettin it on at that age, then I guess it's just fine and dandy.
13 posted on 07/18/2006 4:56:16 PM PDT by dmw (Aren't you glad you use common sense, don't you wish everybody did?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

I've got an easy answer for those experts... Too young is when you are not able to be personally responsible for the possible consequences of your actions (Physically, Financially, Emotionally, or otherwise). This is regardless of one's spiritual or faith-based views on the subject.

I mean isn't this a basic moral value that has nothing to do with sex at all? It's called PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY, for gosh sakes!!! No wonder they are having such problems with this idea, the majority of these people most likely support socialistic economic policies so they would see nothing wrong with these future teen parents ending up on the public dole -- all the better to control them, I guess...

As for some of the other concerns - like NAMBLA, that kind of stuff enrages me as it seems like some of this is a push on the part of abusers to take away the stigma of child abuse and such. THAT is where this just gets absolutely reprehensible. Don't these "sexperts" get educated in the very real effects of sexual abuse, or do they believe it's a myth or something crazy like that? Age differences for example when dealing with adults and teens -- there is a huge opportunity there for the adults to manipulate and control the teens. Anyone who doesn't see that should have their head examined, IMHO...


14 posted on 07/18/2006 4:56:36 PM PDT by LibertyRocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibertyRocks

Well said!


15 posted on 07/18/2006 4:59:07 PM PDT by dmw (Aren't you glad you use common sense, don't you wish everybody did?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: LibertyRocks

The problem with that answer is that it excludes heterosexual sex (the responsibility being the resulting human life) but gives full rein to homos, including NAMBLA.

The age of consent should be 18 for everyone. What is the problem with that? We no longer live in an agrarian society where you need 20 kids so you have to start at 15. We live considerably longer as well, so lovers can enjoy each other's company for a lot longer, notwithstanding the wait. Of course over 1/2 of them will be divorced at some point, so maybe that's wrong.


16 posted on 07/18/2006 4:59:55 PM PDT by GatorGirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: LibertyRocks
I've got an easy answer for those experts... Too young is when you are not able to be personally responsible for the possible consequences of your actions ....

That's it, in a nutshell.

17 posted on 07/18/2006 5:01:29 PM PDT by Mr Ramsbotham (Laws against sodomy are honored in the breech.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: BackInBlack
I didn't even realize NAMBLA really existed. I thought South Park made it up.
They did make up the North American Marlon Brando Look-a-like Association, but not the pervert club.
18 posted on 07/18/2006 5:02:43 PM PDT by digitalbrownshirt (http://digitalbrownshirt.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

If they aren't old enough to raise and provide for children they concieve, they aren't old enough to have sexual relations.


19 posted on 07/18/2006 5:03:53 PM PDT by MrEdd (Bad spellers of the world - UNTIE!,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibertyRocks; wagglebee
Too young is when you are not able to be personally responsible for the possible consequences of your actions (Physically, Financially, Emotionally, or otherwise).

Good summary. My version is that you're old enough for sex when you are ready to be married, self-supporting parents to a baby.

20 posted on 07/18/2006 5:04:28 PM PDT by Tax-chick (Whiskey for my men, hyperbolic rodomontade for my horses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
I can tell you how young is too young FOR MY CHILDREN!

I am the decider, not the CDC or any other organization.
21 posted on 07/18/2006 5:05:10 PM PDT by msnimje (There is no way we can lose if we stay in Iraq and no way we can win if we cut and run.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BackInBlack

Nope. Sadly, it's real. Sick, isn't it?


22 posted on 07/18/2006 5:09:53 PM PDT by RockinRight (She rocks my world, and I rock her world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: LibertyRocks
Too young is when you are not able to be personally responsible for the possible consequences of your actions (Physically, Financially, Emotionally, or otherwise)

That would mean never for some people.

23 posted on 07/18/2006 5:15:49 PM PDT by Graybeard58 (Remember and pray for Sgt. Matt Maupin - MIA/POW- Iraq since 04/09/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
I don't know what in the Hell is up with liberals and sex. If it's not enabling preteens to screw, it's instruction them on how to be gay, making sure a 12 year old can have an abortion without having to tell her parents, supporting pedophiles, or legalizing prostitution. It's beginning to look evil. Just sickening they lead such poor lives leading them to support these issues.
24 posted on 07/18/2006 5:16:49 PM PDT by Vision ("...cause those liberal freaks go to farrrrrr")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GatorGirl

How about this wonderful idea: the complete prohibition of any sexual intercourse outside a monogamous relationship between two persons, exactly one with a Y chromosome, sanctified through holy matrimony before Almighty God. No person should enter into such a relationship without having attained the age of twenty-one years or obtaining a high-school education (diploma, GED, or foreign equivalent). Any extramarital sex shall be punished as cohabitation, fornication, [oral or anal] sodomy, adultery, polygamy, sexual assault, child molestation, rape, or some other felony (in increasing order of severity).

Now enforce it. Excluding the age or education provision, that once served as the law of the land. Then came the Sexual Revolution, then a certain unnamed impeached, disgraced ex-President, who repeatedly sodomized and sexually harassed his own inferiors while committing constant adultery. It almost makes you feel sorry for Hillary.


25 posted on 07/18/2006 5:19:19 PM PDT by dufekin (The New York Times: an enemy espionage agency with a newsletter of enemy propaganda)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
I know the CDC crowd. Leftists, PC Leftists, out to "save the world" by spreading the Gospel of Public Health (basically, whatever the New England Journal of Medicine is pushing this week). These are the people who will decide what constitutes "health care" for the rest of us when and if the Dems retake Congress.
26 posted on 07/18/2006 5:22:57 PM PDT by madprof98
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RockinRight
I say 40.

Seriously, I would say that most people are not able to actually understand and appreciate the consequences of sex until their mid-20s, at least for women. Men, maybe older.

The reason I postulate this is that prior to the mid-20s, hormones usually trump everything else. That combined with the natural thought process (I'm young and bullet-proof, nothing can hurt me) makes really realizing what you are doing, that children and/or disease and death can be the consequences, next to impossible.

The age of consent should be high enough that kids can be protected from predators. 18 places everbody pretty much off limits.

27 posted on 07/18/2006 5:24:16 PM PDT by WarEagle (Karl Rove did it....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

You oughta know.


28 posted on 07/18/2006 5:29:29 PM PDT by wolfpat (To connect the dots, you have to collect the dots.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: dmw
He signed up today. hmmmm, me thinks something stinks.

Short stay, too.

29 posted on 07/18/2006 5:30:05 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: dmw

Jerry Lee Lewis thinks it's OK, (even if she's his cousin).

Myra Gale Brown

30 posted on 07/18/2006 5:30:37 PM PDT by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

Yeah, but when are YOU going to stop? :-)


31 posted on 07/18/2006 5:31:02 PM PDT by wagglebee ("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

If they can't even agree on "If there's grass on the field, play ball" then they are truely pedophiles.


32 posted on 07/18/2006 5:41:43 PM PDT by Rodney King (No, we can't all just get along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GrandEagle
NAMBLA really existed
No my FRiend, it is an organized group of pedophiles who actually lobby to be able to legally rape young boys.

The North American Marlo Brandon Lookalike Association lobbied for THAT?

33 posted on 07/18/2006 5:43:41 PM PDT by Smedley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: LibertyRocks; Graybeard58; Tax-chick; Mr Ramsbotham
The real answer is the parents decide. until you are 18 years old, you are a minor and you really don't have much rights. It is the parents responsibility to both set the rules, and enforce them. Any parent that claims they can't control their teens is either an imbecile, or they aren't really trying.

As a parent, you always have one last ditch resort to fall back on. You can let your kid know that it is your legal right to get rid of any kid whenever you so wish it. No questions asked. Sign them over to the state and they become a ward of the state. Anything your kid thinks he/she owns is technically not his/her property. It is your property. And in many ways, that kid is also your property. If you choose to send the kid away to become a ward of the state, guess how much of that stuff the kid thinks is his/hers goes with him/her? The answer is none of it. They never see their room again. they never see you again, they never see any of their stuff again. Thats the way it is. Some kids should probably be made aware of it.
34 posted on 07/18/2006 5:45:57 PM PDT by mamelukesabre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
Mary Eberstadt wrote a great article in the Weekly Standard a few years ago called "Pedophile Chic". Showed alot of the subtle ways tolerance for sexualizing children is creeping into the culture.

She followed up with "Pedophile Chic Reconsidered"

Unfortunately I can't find the 1st one on the Internet; I'd have to subscribe to Weekly Standard to read it.

35 posted on 07/18/2006 5:53:44 PM PDT by 3catsanadog (When anything goes, everything does.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mamelukesabre

I have to disagree. I think telling your kids something like that -- that you would abandon them -- is worse than any emotional consequences pre-marital sex could bring. A teen put in that position will most likely rebel by saying, "So what, you don't love me and don't care what I do anyway" at least that would've been my answer to you.

If you could honestly follow through on that threat -- especially knowing what foster children go through in this country -- you have more problems, IMHO than worrying about your kids being into sex at a young age.

The answer is to teach your kids WHY having sex at a young age is wrong, and letting them then be responsible if they choose to ignore your wisdom. BUT, you don't ABANDON them!


36 posted on 07/18/2006 5:56:21 PM PDT by LibertyRocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: RockinRight

Sweet Lord. Hard to imagine.


37 posted on 07/18/2006 6:01:26 PM PDT by BackInBlack ("The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
Ick!!! I feel like I need to take a shower after reading this.

These people need to be locked up for the rest of their lives.

38 posted on 07/18/2006 6:03:37 PM PDT by Ouderkirk (Don't you think it's interesting how death and destruction seems to happen wherever Muslims gather?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibertyRocks
You can certainly let them know exactly where they stand legally, regardless what the lefty sickos want them to believe. And where they stand legally is on very thin ice. Not only do you have the legal authority to take away anything they think they own, you have the legal authority to kick them outa the house. I see no prob with telling the truth.
39 posted on 07/18/2006 6:04:47 PM PDT by mamelukesabre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

That's not entirely my decision!


40 posted on 07/18/2006 6:18:11 PM PDT by Tax-chick (Whiskey for my men, hyperbolic rodomontade for my horses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: wolfpat

I do.


41 posted on 07/18/2006 6:18:34 PM PDT by Tax-chick (Whiskey for my men, hyperbolic rodomontade for my horses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: dufekin
How about this wonderful idea: the complete prohibition of any sexual intercourse outside a monogamous relationship between two persons, exactly one with a Y chromosome, sanctified through holy matrimony before Almighty God.

So much for Abraham, Jacob, and King David....

42 posted on 07/18/2006 6:25:53 PM PDT by Celtjew Libertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Vision

Liberals will do anything to tear down the existing social order and replace it with their hedonistic dream.


43 posted on 07/18/2006 6:34:04 PM PDT by Farmer Dean (Every time a toilet flushes,another liberal gets his brains.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Abstinence until they are married!


44 posted on 07/18/2006 6:38:55 PM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Unmarried is too young.

And marriage is between only a man and a woman.


45 posted on 07/18/2006 6:41:10 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Supporting the troops means praying for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Farmer Dean
Apparently...they're sick in the head and soul.
46 posted on 07/18/2006 6:53:20 PM PDT by Vision ("...cause those liberal freaks go to farrrrrr")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

I don't see the word "marriage" anywhere. Not even the responses.

There is nothing wrong with any willing sex in marriage regardless of ages.
So the question REALLY being asked is when is it too young for sex outside of marriage.
But all sex outside of marriage is wrong at any age.
Society in each jurisdiction has simply decided that above a certain age it will look the other way.

So the questions should have been:

1. At what age should marriage be allowed?

An analysis based on "legal consent" seems illogical if one can consent to marriage,
even if parental and/or court permission is required, at a lower age than for sex without marriage.
It was recently held in Colorado that only old British common law was in force, i.e. marriage at 10.
Until the last few decades, first marriage in the late teens to early 20s was near universal.
It was the complexity of modern society that tended to lengthen education and postpone marriage.
But then young people had sex anyway and got out of the habit of getting married.
Why buy the cow when the milk is free?
Late marriage has created a large pool of unmarried adults whose voting power has tended
to remove sanctions for sex outside of marriage creating the issue in the first place.

2. Who should be allowed to marry?

The long-standing practice of marriage between one man and one woman has been questioned.
Therefore homosexual sex covered by marriage has been impossible.
When there was less sex outside of marriage because of younger age at first marriage,
there was no constituency for recognition of other forms of sex.
Interestingly, the Judeo-Christian texts define sex between persons of the same sex or
too close relation as wrong, but says nothing at all about what age one should be.
(The Jewish Talmud sets a minimum age of 3 for marriage.
Islamic tradition specifies that girls must have their first menses.
Muhammad in fact consumated marriage with a 9-year-old, setting the traditional limit for Islam.
The first age of consent laws in Europe set 10 as the minimum age.
But British King Richard II 1367-1400 married Princess Isabella of Valois a few days before her
8th birthday in 1396. Reportedly she remained loyal to Richard after his ouster in 1399 and his death.
And everybody knows about Jerry Lee Lewis and his 13-year-old cousin-bride.)

3. At what age and in what situations should society look the other way for sex outside of marriage?

It is hard to make the argument that a free society should enforce a moral code on people
other than to uphold the contracts that they make.
Even the most religious in the Christian tradition should recognise that it is not for one
person to condemn others until they themselves are perfect.
So morality and religion hold no guidance other than don't do it.

In earlier society, girls especially were under the "protection" of their fathers until marriage.
Later marriage has produced a majority of people who reach adulthood and "emancipation" before
marriage which has broken down the paternal system and blurred lines.
Also, mobility has weakened paternal oversight when teens either drive or know someone who will drive them.

It is no coincidence that the prevalent view in the United States that the usual age of "consent"
and the voting age of 18 are closely aligned.
However that is not an argument why it should be so, only a demonstration that one can vote
one's self the license one wants.

My conclusion is that the advancing age of first marriage has created a situation rife with
moral relativism and arbitrary rules.
The rules will always be arbitrary unless people are encouraged to marry younger and have sex later.
It then becomes defensible and practical again to sanction all sex outside marriage as a civil issue,
and to prohibit sex before emancipation and with persons who are unemancipated and have
earlier emancipation through marriage.


47 posted on 07/18/2006 6:55:24 PM PDT by UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide (Give Them Liberty Or Give Them Death! - IT'S ISLAM, STUPID! - Islam Delenda Est! - Rumble thee forth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls
Jerry Lee Lewis thinks it's OK, (even if she's his cousin).

In fairness, the State of Tennessee had no problem with it either.
48 posted on 07/18/2006 7:10:26 PM PDT by UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide (Give Them Liberty Or Give Them Death! - IT'S ISLAM, STUPID! - Islam Delenda Est! - Rumble thee forth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee; All

The only age when it is okay to have sex is when you are married. If you are married at 15, fine. It is okay.

It is NOT easy to overcome the temptation when you are not married (it is tough!!!)

But, it is something that can be done.


49 posted on 07/18/2006 7:34:26 PM PDT by rwfromkansas (http://xanga.com/rwfromkansas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: oyez
...It seems to me people with out children or(those with that don't give a sh*t] are making the rules.

I think you may have a point there.

50 posted on 07/18/2006 8:15:13 PM PDT by Kramster (" You can't confuse me ... that's my job.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-70 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson