Skip to comments.
Should We Lower the Age of Consent to Protect Teenagers? (Nov. 18 2013)
Slate ^
| Nov. 18 2013
| Amanda Hess
Posted on 06/28/2015 4:54:39 AM PDT by Erik Latranyi
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-78 next last
The other shoe is dropping.....and we will do this "for the children"
To: Erik Latranyi
take these enormous pressures off children and young people
Not to mention the pressure it takes off pedophiles.
2
posted on
06/28/2015 4:55:59 AM PDT
by
cripplecreek
(Sad fact, most people just want a candidate to tell them what they want to hear)
To: Erik Latranyi
Gotta protect those pedophiles. They are by and large liberals, don’tcha know!
3
posted on
06/28/2015 4:56:28 AM PDT
by
Redleg Duke
("Madison, Wisconsin is 30 square miles surrounded by reality.", L. S. Dreyfus)
To: Erik Latranyi
Libs are so smart! And helpful, too! /S!
4
posted on
06/28/2015 4:59:43 AM PDT
by
Flag_This
(You can't spell "treason" without the "O".)
To: Erik Latranyi
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.
5
posted on
06/28/2015 5:01:07 AM PDT
by
VTenigma
(The Democratic party is the party of the mathematically challenged)
To: Erik Latranyi
NAMBLA making it’s move.
6
posted on
06/28/2015 5:02:57 AM PDT
by
central_va
(I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
To: Erik Latranyi
No, No, No, No!
7
posted on
06/28/2015 5:04:04 AM PDT
by
moose07
(Islam and the New Stone age: A book i've not yet written.)
To: Erik Latranyi
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.
8
posted on
06/28/2015 5:05:53 AM PDT
by
stockpirate
(A corrupt government is the real enemy of the people.)
To: Erik Latranyi; GeronL; wagglebee
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).
9
posted on
06/28/2015 5:11:38 AM PDT
by
a fool in paradise
("Psychopathia Sexualis, I'm in love with a horse that comes from Dallas" - Lenny Bruce (1958))
To: VTenigma
No. It's the internet. All the insane people are able to talk to each other now. It was only a matter of time.
10
posted on
06/28/2015 5:12:22 AM PDT
by
demshateGod
(The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.)
To: Erik Latranyi
“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.
11
posted on
06/28/2015 5:13:06 AM PDT
by
MNDude
(God is not a Republican, but Satan is certainly a Democrat.)
To: Erik Latranyi
In this country there is a
de facto three year rule, if the yutes engaging in sex are within three years of age of each other, the police can't be bothered.
This decriminalizes teen on teen sex, while still protecting them from adult predators.
Perhaps that rule could be codified into an actual law?
12
posted on
06/28/2015 5:17:07 AM PDT
by
null and void
(I wish we lived in less interesting times, but at least we have front-row seats.)
To: MNDude
13
posted on
06/28/2015 5:17:58 AM PDT
by
null and void
(I wish we lived in less interesting times, but at least we have front-row seats.)
To: Erik Latranyi
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.
14
posted on
06/28/2015 5:18:04 AM PDT
by
VRW Conspirator
(American Jobs for American Workers)
To: null and void
Perhaps that rule could be codified into an actual law? 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.
15
posted on
06/28/2015 5:24:34 AM PDT
by
Tax-chick
(You know I don't find this stuff amusing anymore.)
To: Erik Latranyi
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.
16
posted on
06/28/2015 5:24:38 AM PDT
by
Paulie
(America without Christianity is like a Chemistry book without the periodic table.)
To: Tax-chick
17
posted on
06/28/2015 5:26:18 AM PDT
by
null and void
(I wish we lived in less interesting times, but at least we have front-row seats.)
To: Erik Latranyi
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.
18
posted on
06/28/2015 5:30:09 AM PDT
by
rbg81
To: Erik Latranyi
In 16th-century England, the age of consent was set at 10 years Because their life expectancy was age 30. (10-15 years less than Rome).
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.
19
posted on
06/28/2015 5:33:30 AM PDT
by
DCBryan1
(No realli, moose bytes can be quite nasti!!)
To: rbg81
An 18 year old should not get into trouble for having relations with a 16 year old. 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.
20
posted on
06/28/2015 5:37:10 AM PDT
by
Tax-chick
(You know I don't find this stuff amusing anymore.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-78 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson