Skip to comments.Should We Lower the Age of Consent to Protect Teenagers? (Nov. 18 2013)
Posted on 06/28/2015 4:54:39 AM PDT by Erik Latranyi
In 16th-century England, the age of consent was set at 10 years old in an effort to protect young girls from sexual abuse by adult men. In 1875, parliament raised the age of consent to 13; in 1885, it upped it to 16. Now, a leading public health advocate has proposed that the United Kingdom bring the age down again in light of the high proportion of British adolescents who are having sexwith one anotherbefore theyre legally capable of granting consent.
Lowering the age of consent to 15 (where it stands in Sweden) or 14 (where its set in Germany and Italy) would take these enormous pressures off children and young people who feel they need to hide their sexual activity, said John Ashton, president of the UK Faculty of Public Health. Concern over running afoul of the law prevents sexually active teenagers from seeking help from adults when they need it, Ashton said. The policy shift would better empower teachers and other supervising adults to provide sexual health education and contraception access to 14- and 15-year-old students. Said Ashton: "They are doing it, and we need to be able to support them and protect them.
(Excerpt) Read more at slate.com ...
Gotta protect those pedophiles. They are by and large liberals, don’tcha know!
Libs are so smart! And helpful, too! /S!
Hard to believe how insane we’ve become, or maybe it’s just me. When you think you’re the only rational one, maybe you’re irrational.
NAMBLA making it’s move.
No, No, No, No!
Clinton’s appointee to the USSC Ruth Bader Ginsburg once wrote a paper supporting lowering the age of consent to 11 or 12 if memory serves me correct.
The homosexual agenda has always served as the battering ram to society’s laws and mores to open the floodgates for the whole pornicopia. The sex positive agenda seeks to end all moral judgments over sexual pairings of ANY kind regardless of sex, age, relation, marital status, number, or species of partner(s).
“Conversely, having sex with a 12-year-old, when you’re 20, is scummy. But it doesn’t necessarily make you the kind of predator who has to be locked up” said the liberal.
This decriminalizes teen on teen sex, while still protecting them from adult predators.
Perhaps that rule could be codified into an actual law?
Yes it does!
Well Amanda Hess, it did not take long for you and Slate too long. There are some who saw you and your filth coming a mile away. As I stated on this board before, “there coming for the children”.
And right after the unconstitutional legislation-from-the-bench, Poof, you show up and start talking about your crotch desires.
In some states, that or a similar policy is part of the statute.
If there's a goal of discouraging teenagers from screwing around, producing babies and spreading disease, there should be some meaningful legal consequences, perhaps of the "fine and mandated counseling" sort. I think many parents would appreciate this, and those who don't care might at least take an interest in avoiding fines.
This paves the way for homosexuals to more effectively ‘groom’ their young and vulnerable prey.
Hey, if a six year-old was good enough for mohammid, it should be good enough for us here in the States!
With affirmative action, anti-discrimination laws, and political correctness, the public schools will be hiring more and more of the homos. Just a thought for Mom and Dad.
There age of consent should remain 18, but also an age “window” (4 year?) that prevents stupid prosecutions. An 18 year old should not get into trouble for having relations with a 16 year old. However, a 21 year old having sex with a 16 year old is a problem.
In 1875, parliament raised the age of consent to 13; Life expectancy was about 40 as in in 1885.
Given our life expectancy, we should be RAISING the age of consent. Either that or my wife's cooking magazines are right and the hormone/antibotitic/genetic crap we are eating are making our kids mature earlier.
Why not? Do you think it's good for unmarried 18- and 16-year-olds to be having sex, making babies, and spreading disease? What about 15- and 14-year-olds? 13?
We're talking about something that's wrong and has significant bad consequences, both for the participants and for society. Some kind of "get in trouble" - a fine, community service - might make some of them think a little.
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.