hope this doesnt end up to controvertial

[its Leslie]

Been thinking a lot of thoughts lately

And to be sure I think outside of the lines more than most of the people in my life.

A number of comments have been made inside of posts from threads I have participated in recently. Not always in connection with my own comments though.

One issue that has been of some interest to me lately has been the subject of "legal age issues". Not the least because it has hampered my capacity in a few story notions that I might have otherwise indulged.

And in a more general line of thinking, is just the notion of sex in the broadest sense of the word.

Now just to make it clear, I am Canadian, so quoting laws outside of Canada has little interest to me personally. US laws for instance might have relevance to others though.

What I find vexing is how society has so completely convinced itself that sex is somehow special. It is portrayed in the harshest light possible for reasons that don't bear up under scrutiny.

Just so we all know though, I am not now, nor will I ever be interested in having sex with anyone's teen age daughter. I have gotten way to fond of the skill of a woman my own age.

But here we are living in what is quoted so often as "the information age", and yet we are governed by notions totally bankrupt of any justification. We are ruled by dogma that exists for its own sake.

I myself am a bit disgusted in how society teaches that two 13 year old youths engaged in sex are doing something wrong. There is no miraculous change that occurs at the age of 18.
Sure the girl might possess a nicer appearing pair of more fully developed breasts, the boy might have a bit more size to his cock at 18.
But I have seen enough over the years to know that a person isn't fully mentally developed till they are 21. I have lost count of all the marriages initiated by teenagers that fell apart for the simple fact they were not finished becoming who they would be.

None of that mental development prevents a person from learning what it is to be sexually mature. And that phrase is important. When a person enters puberty they achieve "sexual maturity". If the boy can make the girl pregnant, they are "functional".

But the part that so angers me is this. We teach all those confused inexperienced youths, that their waking desires are something to shun, something to fear, something to hide and be ashamed of. And for what reason.

It's all because our culture is ruled by people that preach the moment you exit the womb you are a default sinner. You were born in sin and are rightly up shit creek with no way out.
An incredible guilt trip. A no win scenario.
And all because two incestuous, popped-out-of-thin-air parents called Adam and Eve ruined it for humanity (no I do NOT believe in Adam and Eve, God gave me more than two brain cells when I was born unfortunately).
It doesn't really have to be the Judeo Christian or even Muslem view for that matter. Every religion I have studied has taught "you are not perfect just because".

And saying "well buddy in this part of the world that makes you a criminal" is just a cop out. Those laws are a reflection of our sexually repressed culture.
I have no trouble prohibiting crimes such as rape (rape is a horrible attack).
I have no trouble with prohibiting people taking advantage of persons that have not even achieved sexual maturity (no I am not remotely friendly with pediphiles). But it's not based on the same justifications in my case as is likely the case with most people.
I object to daycare on the grounds it is reprehensible to produce children we won't raise ourselves. I am also not overly fond of single parenting as a willing choice. Being a single parent is a tragedy not a choice. The mental development of a youth requires hard work. And you can't hire out "mom" and "dad" roles.

My son is considered by most that have encountered him to be the most agreeable child they have ever met. He has never seen the inside of a daycare though. And before anyone starts, yes I know they are skilled professionals. And yes I know that being raised at home is no assurance of a well raised child. but that is just an indication the parent is lousy in parenting skills.

But to return to the originating line of thinking here. I see absolutely none, and yes I mean absolutely none, zippo zero nadda, I see no problem in an older person engaging in sexual activities with a teen under the age of 18.
Although I am not interested at all in fucking young girls myself. This will alarm people I supose. But it's more alarming to me that society has invented the myth that it's wrong.

WHY..... I ask you is it wrong. And no I don't want quotes from a law book. Those are not reasons, that is just demonstrating you know the current repercussions.

Why is sex wrong for anyone?

Why is it suddenly permissable for two 18 year old teens to screw when its not for two 17 year olds?
How was this age arrived at I want to know.

I don't expect it to be an easy ride. It might even go no where with my son (he will make a lot of his own decisions I am sure).
I have no plans on curbing his sexual energies when he becomes a teen. He will grow up knowing his body has certain functions and nothing more. I won't be teaching him that sex is something to be embarrassed about that's for sure. If anything I will encourage him to jack off "before" he goes out on a date. Better that he leaves his sperm at home where it won't cause him any hassle.

Each unwanted pregnancy is the result of all the world's parents that refused to train their offspring in safe sex. Safe doesn't have to mean avoiding STD's
Safe sex is in my definition not ending up an undesired parent. I would rather get a fatal disease, than the slow death of a lousy life from a moments error in thinking. And every child that has a child has condemned themselves to a life time of missed opportunities.
I have seen the way people live when they were not given solid advice from parents, that ideally should already know all about sex.

Ok I assume I will be get an interesting response to all this (I am not expecting a positive response although it would be nice). I hope I have not overly bored people.

We wouldn't have an age restriction in place on Literotica if our culture possessed any manner of real sexual maturity.

 

[KillerMuffin]

US law is applicable here simply because the server is maintained in the US. No other reason.

Here's a thread that you may find interesting.

http://www.literotica.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=73183

I doubt you've heard of John Ashcroft, but if he prevails in the case again Children's Online Protection Act that's being challenged in the US Supreme Court right now, well, you can pretty much kiss free porn like Literotica goodbye.

We are a little paranoid south of the border. For good reason.

 

[its Leslie]

I have heard the name John Ashcroft myself although I am not sure how, don't think it was here on Literotica.

Thanks for the link and comments.

By and large I would rather live in a world with to much protection than to little I supose.

But when the people protecting me are slaves to fairy tales masquerading as religions I do get a bit upset understandably.

Although I would never wish any harm to the Literotica site people. And as such I would be annoyed if my overly aggressive comments caused them harm.

But thats me being me.

Although I don't expect the US to ever curb the internet. They did to good a job creating an environment they can't control effectively.

As we speak Bush is errecting a Missile defense against non existent enemies. He would do better to erect a barrier against nerds.

The single biggest threat to US security today is their wide open technology. Any doofus can compromise their electronic frontier. Think what would happen if a truely nasty person wanted to cause real harm.

The net isn't about kiddie porn troubles. Its about power grids, banking accounts, and communications.

Oh well they don't have to worry about me. All my skills are in conventional warfare (when not obsessed with the opposite sex, I am likely to be passing the time studying warfare or advanced sciences). I don't know all that much about this dumb computer as a rule heheh.

 

[Ray Dario]

Well Leslie, since I am one of the "cop outs" you quoted in your first post, I guess I should get in here and mix it up with you.

First off, your question of why shouldn't adults be allowed to fuck children. I respond the same way I did in the other thread, although you ignored my reason and chose instead to take a piece of my quote out of context.

Children are not universally mature enough emotionally (as opposed to sexually) to deal with an adult fucking them and then tossing them aside like a used toy. The same goes for children fucking children. It is their emotional maturity that is a real justification for early teen sex to be considered harmful.

It is true that children develop emotionally at different rates, however laws must be written to protect the innocent from preditors. Those laws, in order to be inforceable and as objective as possible, must make compromises and generalities. In Texas we have chosen the compromise of saying 18 is generally the age of consent. Is it fair to all teen's? No, but it is the compromise our society has chosen because we believe that, for us, it does the best possible job of protecting our emotionally immature children from would be sexual preditors while not overly imposing the lives of adults.

You give the appearance of believing that as soon as a child reaches sexual maturity they have also reached emotional maturity. I strongly disagree with this. Hell, I see a few adults who are not emotionally mature, but like I said the age limit is a compromise.

Beyond that, I try to obey laws, even when I don't necessarily agree with them. In Texas we have a law that says I can't kill a person no matter how badly they need killin'. I don't agree with that law, but I obey it. I suppose that since you are still animate Canada must have a similar law. (just kidding)

Okay, I've stated my opinion again and have probably offended someone with it so I'll shut up now.

Ray

 

[Quint]

Leslie, while I may not agree that sex should be legal for minors, the main message I got from your post was that sex is treated as a vice and it is not. With this, I wholeheartedly agree. I also agree that it's largely based upon the incredibly ridiculous notion of "original sin." I for one intend to raise my children with the belief that sex is healthy, precious, and not at all something to be regarded with disgust or shame. However, while I won't disown my child for having sex before they're legal, I'm going to strongly encourage them to wait until they are with a partner ther respect and could commit to, because that's what they might end up having to do. That takes maturity, and you bet I'm monitoring my kids like a hawk until I'm convinced they have it. But the bottom line is, sex is nothing to be ashamed of, and the most I can do is raise my next generation to have the same openminded, rational attitude.

 

[karmadog]

COPA was defeated, and rightly so. The Supreme Court realized that simulated anything is not the same as the thing.

Child abuse, and thinking about child abuse cannot be equated.

Leslie, I agree that "age of consent" laws are arbitrary, but I believe that a line must be drawn. The courts do not have the time to examine each case individually, sad but true, and the laws were not designed to protect kids from each other, but to protect kids from predators.

I thought it was funny that you said that maturity was reached at 21. I was a bartender for a long time, and I would argue that maturity isn't attained until at least 25 for most people. Or maybe it's just most drinkers.

Maybe there should be a license to fuck. Perhaps they should consider issuing it at puberty, the age would be flexible, contingent on an ability to answer questions on birth control, STDs, and emotional issues. Correct answers would result in a learner's permit. No sex in the car, no sex with multiple partners, no sex with others under 21.

I don't know what the answer is, but allowing adults to have sex with 14 year olds isn't it.

BTW, I don't think that this site would ever have been a target, but better safe than sorry.

 

[its Leslie]

Hello Ray sorry if it sounded like I was "ignoring" your last remarks (in truth I can't remember them).

Regarding emotional vs sexual maturity though. That is precisely why we as parents have to be in there training them (we aren't).

Society has by calling sex wrong taught, them that their confused feelings are their fault. We have used our antigue original sin notions (which are culturally socially and religiously immature), to explain (or in my opinion refused to explain) a basic human activity. And that is what sex is, a basic human activity.

Now sure I think a 35 year old man is the wrong choice to teach a 13 year old girl how to properly suck cock. Just like I think a 35 year old woman is the wrong choice to show a 13 year old boy how to get that additional cum shot in the shortest time possible.

But I don't think its wrong because they are "emotionally" immature. I would have to say it's wrong because it is one of the greatest parts of an individual's mental evolution, and they should enjoy that stage with their peers first (with an experienced person making sure they don't do anything to harm themselves).

I can still remember the first time I had an ejaculation. God I wish I could have enjoyed a girl's laughter though while doing it. My cock sprayed sperm aaaaaaall over the bathroom wall. I ruined a full roll of toilet paper as well as that dumb rug thingy in front of the toilet. I thought it would go on for ever.
But because "sex is wrong" I was condemned to find out everything my body was telling me alone, in private, nervous, and for a long time with guilt feelings.

I despise society for doing that to me. I am disgusted that society has made one of the greatest parts of being alive, into one that is avoided more than talking about death.
Hell I can discuss what mom and dad are planning to do when they die quite freely, but I can't ask them for advice on teaching my son about sex, because they didn't teach me shit themselves.

Sex education is not about plumbing and condums. Its not about what we teach them in school at all. The stuff in school is biology nothing more.
Fathers should be teaching sons how to properly administer pleasing foreplay, not just spread her legs and squirt. Mothers should be teaching their daughters, how far is to far, before "no" is no longer an option. But we don't. We just "assume" society's laws will do all our parenting for us. And it doesn't.

My son will grow up additionally with, "only idiots cruise in cars wasting gas to impress a girl". He will learn that not only is smoking a bad choice health wise, but its an indication he is A. not unique, and B. can't think for himself. He will learn from me that wearing trendy clothes surrenders his individuality and merely forces him to conform. He will learn that drinking to excess is a good way to end up with kids he didn't know he had, from women he couldn't remember having screwed.

I remember my teens as a time when I was not in control of my thoughts, entirely. But I was lucky. Luckier than most. I became obsessed with books.
By the time I discovered women at all (other than the ones in magazines which were only good for jacking off with), I was 25.
Might not have met them then either, but my sister was growing worried I didn't seem interested, and started to drag me out to the bar with her friends.
But I do recall with crystal clear clarity that no where was there any sign of informed opinion from my parents. None at all.

As for the 21 part. Maybe 21 is early but I think it's 21. I just know I have witnessed many if not all the persons I have ever known, fundementally shift in how they "think" between 20 and 21. Its not any one thing, I have just noticed that people can't be expected to be entirely who they are from 18 till after 21.
I consider this as just the normal way of human evolution (at least in our part of the world).

Emotional maturity doesn't come in any one form though. And damage can take many forms. A 15 year old girl turning tricks on the streets of Toronto is no better or worse off, than a 12 year old boy that is planting explosives in a road to kill "bad guys" in Cambodia. Both have been let down. And both have had their special years ruined.

It is therefore incorrect to think that I have declared a sexually mature person, emotionally mature. No they are not emotionally mature. Or intellectually mature. Or experienced. Or wise. And they won't get that way without a lot of trial and error.
But why should they have to get that way, in that manner at all.

Teens do NOT listen to their parents as it is. It is a great way to get them to do something by telling them they can't. And there isn't a teen out there, that cares one wit if it's "the law".

You put a boy in a place alone with a girl and you are just asking for it, if they have no one to guide them.
The boy gets an erection and his brain shuts off. He sees the girl as a target, nothing more. The girl sees that wonderful cock inflating inside his pants, and gets all flushed at how she is soooo much more attractive than her other girl friends (because here is the proof she has this boy all confused over her). The boy wants it, and the girl flirts with her "rights".

I have been there, I know this is true. I was a teen once. Fortunately I have learned a few things. I intend to let my son have access to all my years of learning though.
I plan on telling my son that his mind won't listen to him. I intend to show him ways to trick his own body (like jacking off before going on a date for instance).
Wouldn't it be nice if mothers told their daughters "look the poor boy will be helpless from your charms, so early on ask him if he would like to quickly lose his load in your hand so he can enjoy the rest of the evening in peace". Not a perfect plan, but given that is where society has stuck them.

I do not support the "save it for someone special" concept. Virginity is also part of the original sin picture. Just as sex out of wed lock is part of the original sin picture. Sex isn't a sin period.

Sex is just sex. Sperm meets girl and girl uses it to make baby. Thats it. There needs to be nothing more to it.
We wouldn't have 35 year old men interested in young girls, if all those young girls didn't grow up into sexually repressed older women.
We wouldn't have all the women out there living with "assholes" if the "assholes" had fathers that taught them how to properly treat a woman. But all those fathers were once young men that were not taught themselves.

Society is a reflection of itself. All of society's troubles mirror our own lack of maturity. I know this to be true.
I tell others if your kids piss you off, its because they do what you do , but you don't like it. Kids are a reflection of the parents. We get what we create.
Today's ignored child is tomorrows headache. If we teach them nothing about sex, they learn nothing about sex.

But we will likely see society continue to write laws, and refuse to accept that we would need a lot fewer laws if parents did a lot more parenting.

I don't hate the laws, I hate the people that wrote them.

 

[Closet Desire]

I will say it...

...again.

Industrialised ountries with the strictest laws and attitudes regarding young people and sex have the highest rates of teen pregnancy and abortion, the highest rates of STDs, and the lowest ages of first intercourse. Ie, Canada and the US have the worst statistics in these areas.

Holland has perhaps the most lenient attitudes toward sex and back it up with open, frank education about sex and children. It would be argued that as a result they have the lowest rates of teen pregnancy, abortion, and STD transmission as well as, surprisingly enough, the highest average age at which intercourse first takes place.

Making a law is easy but it doesn't make it so. High schoolers and younger have sex. Full stop. Age of consent is meaningless if it fails to recognise reality. It's the same thing as putting a 25mph speed limit on a four lane divided highway. Nobody will obey it because it is an absurd notion.

Sex is a game for two (or more) consenting lovers. It is a way of sharing intimacy and, yes, pleasure. The only real concern should be ensuring that leacherous adults don't prey on those whom they have power over.

As the high court said in its opinion. The COPA would have made Romeo and Juliet (13 years old) pornographic and illegal.

 

[Synnerman]

Legal age

Hi, new kid here. Just wandered in here and started reading about one of my pet peeves. (I have a few)

Leslie, I am sorry you had such a repressed upbringing as far as availability of sexual information is concerned and I think it may have colored you more than you know.

While I agree with some of what you say I find some to be out of range for me. True, there isn't a magic age. Eighteen is definately an arbritary age but it is based on a reasonably accurate average of maturity. Twenty one or twenty five, as has also been mentioned, means little more than eighteen. Yes, a few more birthdays and for some a little more mature. Others may not get there until thirty or more. Some never make it at all. I have known a few fourteen year olds who could tell us all a thing or three. Remember, I said a few.

My history is different than yours. I was a soldier at seventeen. I knew a dozen ways to kill a person before I was eighteen. I drank beer with other soldiers of all ages and in general continued to grow mentally.

Was I mature at seventeen? In some ways but not in others. I was no longer a virgin at 15. I married and started a family at 21. That marriage failed because both of us lacked the maturity to make it work.

As for legal age. I agree with Ray about the law and the need to draw a line somewhere and eighteen is as good a place as any. What is missing is justice. We have become a nation enslaved to the law with no justice at all.

The written law is a guide book and a pretty good one for the most part. Our courts, our whole legal system, serves the law without reguard to justice. They are man made laws and as such are not cast in stone. Look at each case as an individual. Try it accordingly, or set it free because it is just, not necessarly legal.

Sorry to get carried away. I said it was one of my pets.

Edit: Yes, my name and use of The Original Synner in my sig is a parody of the early religous training. I find it amusing.

 

[jon.hayworth]

Hi Leslie,

I do not take issue with a lot of what you said, except for your opening statement, which I think might be paraphrased as being, "I live in Canada so don't tell me about other countries laws."

Unfortunately this is the world wide web. But individual nations make their own laws, the USA, UK, Australia and I had presumed Canada (but I must be wrong) have broadly simular hastily drafted, badly thought out laws which were passed in paranoid haste. The Protection of Childrens Act in England and Wales and its equivelant in Scotland.

Under our CPA if I download material involving underage sex deliberately or accidentally I might be prosecuted. - Pop-ups scare the hell out of me. A boy of 13 got convicted under that law - it is a dangerous limit on civil liberties, which because of the present moral climate politicians are unwilling to challenge.

I think it is like this - in all ages of uncertainty there have been scapegoats in the 15th to 18th centuries in Europe and the Americas the scapegoat was Witchcraft - in the late 20thc and the 21st Century Pornography is going to be the scapegoat and depressingly we just have to live with it.

I know its wrong but we just have to live with it. And Ray when they have run out of Child Porn to persecute they will move on and on until all sex not in the missionary position is unlawfull.

jon

 

[its Leslie]

Just wanted to say no I didn't "feel" repressed as a teen, any more than we all were in my opinion.

Interestingly enough I was caring a gun when I was 17 as well. I left the service on multiple grounds.
Part was medical (I was then really suffering from classic type migraines, the sort that paralyses for a time half of nervous system).
Part was to be quite frank, my inability to regret, to feel remorse, to worry about killing. I am not now nor was I then, all that concerned about killing people. It doesn't make me feel comfortable now, and back then I wasn't to keen on it either.

As for my comment on Canadian law. Just want to further state that a lot of times a person might make passionate comments about legal limitations, before realising that those same limitations might not be relevant in another country.
I wasn't myself snubbing other countries, merely acknowledging in advance that a person might make that error.
In Canada, a rapist of pediphile, is generally speaking, as shit out of luck when caught, as in the US or Europe (generally speaking).
The exact manner in which we put that person up shit creek might differ though.

When I was 17 I was equipped to kill enemies of the state. But I could not vote on whether it was right to be killing those people. And I wasn't old enough to legally go around creating life (just ending it).
Wonderful world eh.

 

[Synnerman]

Leslie,

My fault for not stating clear. I meant the availability of information was not available to you. I, in no way, meant you were repressed.

And yes, in some ways we all were repressed. Hell, downright held down and hammered in some ways. But growing up is one of the ways we all experience a little BDSM. It hurts but we grow with the experience.

 

[KillerMuffin]

Interjection:

The Children's Online Protection Act (COPA) of 1998 is still sitting before the court.

The Child Pornography Prevention Act (CPPA) of 1996 was shot down by the court.

There is a tremendous difference.


http://www.cdt.org/speech/

 

[its Leslie]

I read a bit of the material by following the links, the trouble is "links" here I suppose.

No not that link. It merely made me think about links.

Take for instance JJJ's which is a link on Literotica's main page.

By placing that link on the page Literotica is supporting virtually "every" form of what we all refer to as "porn" (regardless of our personal feelings of the term "porn").

The reason I say they are supporting any and all is this. They have the link. I merely have to follow it. I go to JJJ's. He has many people that place submit many items to his page. Links upon links upon links.

Its all about links.

I am in no way blaming anyone for anything here. Just pointing out, that if JJJ's had never been there as a link, that would have been the end of the story.

Literotica though gets its revenue through ads. Each add is a link. So cutting off JJJ's is just arbitrarily slighting JJJ's and nothing more.

Say Literotica decided forget it, they will flip the bill and run the site devoid of any link to any person regardless of worth. This would not even be enough. If just one of us puts a link to Literotica on one of our own web pages, and that link is open to others, the chain is reborn.

There will only be one way to cut the link to child porn. Thats to shut down the WWW and all means of electronic intercommunication.

Thats not going to happen. But I didn't need to tell you that.

This simple fact is going to have the usual cases of innocent people dealing with accusations right along with people that are clearly guilty.

I have a web page. I use Tripod. I have no idea who may have linked themselves to my page. I am not going to lose sleep over it though. Through Tripod I get a web page service at no cost. But I have to let them insert banners on my pages. Seems fair to me. I get something they get something.

My web pages are basically a lot of text about me (assuming you have not seen it ever before). I have a modest gallery of anime images there as well. All of them are entirely family content. I am not overly concerned about people's opinions of my Sailormoon images etc.

But I know what its like to surf the web for images. And I am used to seeing more than half of my search responses having nothing to do with my search parameters. I know for a fact that the term Sailormoon will get just as many rude pages as it will get kid friendly ones.

I am not overly concerned about the rantings of people wanting to police the web. Sure they will write laws, and they will use those laws. But other the jailing the occasional individual, they will not have accomplished anything.

 

[KillerMuffin]

You lost me.

 

[karmadog]

I stand corrected KM.

Regarding search parameters I saw a TV show (20/20, I think), that talked about how many porn sites have added the names of popular toys to their metatags, they didn't list which toys they were, and I have no idea what toys are popular, but the point is that if a kid comes on and searches for his fave toy, a porn site may come up. That is a disgusting practice.

 

[KillerMuffin]

That is a disgusting practice.

I think that this is what should happen:

All adult sites should have the <!--ADULTSONLY--> tag in the head so most, if not all, childrens filter programs would block these and search engines, like google, would be able to filter them out no matter what gets stuck in the search tags.

The government isn't responsible for keeping my kid from seeing material that I don't think he should see. It's mine and I want to keep it that way.

 

[its Leslie]

KM you have the right idea (in principle),

Now if you can find a way to force them to use a tag that will make their site as obvious as hell to filter programs,
and make it so that it can't be disabled,
not unlike pollution controls on cars (which anyone knows can be disabled even if illegal),

Well I think you would stand to become filthy rich.

Of cooooooourse, providing a device that would usurp all that revenue from lost hits on porn sites (cause thats how they make cash, based on amount of hits site receives), hits that generate cash, cash that they won't be receiving......

Well I would assume you would also invest in some serious protection both in your online existence as well as the real world.

You sure would make as many parents happy as you would make adult site people angry.

But on the plus side. If you can produce that sort of thing, let me know, I will purchase a copy of it eh.

 

[TheEarl]

Couple of appropriate quotes here:

"The boy gets an erection and his brain shuts off."
There's an English TV show called Coupling, that Americans probably won't have heard of before, but that sentence reminds me of one favourite quote: "Poor Gary. You really don't have enough blood for both ends of your body, do you?"

Eminem: "But don't blame me, when little Eric jumps off of the terrace, you should've been watching him. Apparently you ain't parents."

Freedom of speech only occurs when it doesn't offend anyone else. Sad but true. This culture's obssession with political correctness means that someone somewhere will be offended by what you write. If they get offended then they shouldn't read it, simple as that. Pop-ups scare the shit out of me too as I live in the UK where it is illegal to look at anything which is "depraved or immoral," which could cover just about anything and probably will. Another outmoded law which can't move with the times.

I'm partially in agreement with Its Leslie here. In England the age of consent is 16 and I think it should be lowered to 14, with provisos (btw Although girls are technically women at 12, having sex before they are 13 can damage them. Hence the laws). However I think that under 18s shouldn't be allowed to have sex with anyone who's over 20. I don't think young girls are emotionally mature enough to deal with an adult relationship. This may sound contradictory, but if you think about the sheer amount of shit that an adult relationship has which a teenager couldn't deal with, then my proviso makes sense.

Most current laws are anachronisms that are only still in place for one simple reason - there hasn't been a consensus to get new ones, as everyone bickers among themselves. For example there are three things you can still be hanged for in England: Regicide, treason and blowing up Manchester docks. The first two are understandable, but the third is probably the only reason the IRA leave Manchester alone. Stupid laws, but no-one's got round to changing them yet.

At least that's what I think.

The Earl

 

[GoddessKaren]

"a person isn't fully mentally developed till they are 21"

Ummm...I'd have to say this is just as much of a generalization as you are arguing against in the rest of your post.

And to be perfectly honest, I don't think many 21 year olds are fully mentally developed either. Heck, I'm 32 and still not fully "mentally developed."

 

[its Leslie]

Well its true a good many 21 year olds don't have as much wisdom as a 31 year old, and a 31 year old isn't likely to have the worldliness of someone in their 40's. Some ages do in fact impart some distinct noticable qualities.

When I say a person isnt fully mature till they are 21, what I am saying is that immediately before 20-21, people tend to be considerable different (through no action of their own).

I am not saying that at 21 a person magically becomes a "better" person. But the person you married at 18, is not likely to be the same person 3 years later.

Just like a girl is not the same after her cycle kicks in, a boy isn't the same after his cock begins to fill out in size. A boy sees a great deal of change after he has to start shaving, and a girl isn't quite the same when their breasts are suddenly something that requires a bra.

Some stages in life do not require any input or permission from cultural notions.

I AM saying (through direct observation), that while 25 might be fine for driving insurance reductions, 18 might be fine if an arbitrary number is decided for voting, but in matters of emotion and personality, I have noticed people shift at 21. Its not done intentionally, and is often unnoticed by the person in question.

There has to be something about the age. Something directly linked to 20-21 that has some meaning that no one is noticing.

It doesn't have to be even remotely concerned with sex. But as we are talking about mental development, everything that concerns mental development is valid in being pointed out.

 

[Closet Desire]

A load of...

...twaddle.

Sorry.

 

[its Leslie]

"twaddle"

Hmmmm concise, although I fail to see what you are sorry about.

You said nothing, and as a result I have little to be offended about.

If someone said twaddle after any other of my comments, I might not even notice the speaker had spoken.

The word isn't even all that interesting.

Perhaps you would care to offer a complete sentence.

 

[Uther_Pendragon]

I hope everyone read the first post on this thread, 'cause
I'm not goinig to quote it.
In simplest terms, the author gave *NO* credentials; he
did, however, tell you what was right and wrong based on
totally unsupported opinions. It seems we should all
accept his theological opinions because he is so much
smarter than Karl Barth and Thomas Aquinas. We should
accept his moral judgements on some unstated basis.
Now, on the first issue of sex below a particular age:
Most of us who have seen small children have already
that the results affect the children badly.
That being the consensus, what age is the minimum?
There is absolutely *NO* consensus on that. Various
countries, various states in the USA for that matter,
have quite different rules.
Even when states have made those rules, the legislators
will admit that people have very different maturites at
any given age. (I've known immature people in their
fifties, for that matter.)

 

[its Leslie]

"Credentials"

Lets examine credientials. Yes I have credentials.

Hmmmm but lets step back a moment first.

If credentials were enough we would not know the word "malpractice". We might not know the word "impeach" either.

Hmmm has no one noticed that it's only the parishioners that haven't got a clue?. Theological knowledge must not be for the common person. A fat lot of good a theological BA is good for then.

I know a few people that actually have a BA's eh.

One plays a guitar on the street. He can carry all his worldly possessions in a back pack. I also have a friend that has post grad paperwork in geological surveying. She's a cashier.

Credentials are no garantee of anything. They are no assurance you will use them responsibly, or that anyone will give a damn.

I am 40 years old. I have been married 16 years and I am damn happy (and thats more than you can say for most of society).
I also have children.

Those that have not reached 40, and have not been married as long as me, and do not have children, could be said to be less qualified than me. But I have never attended any institution.

Hmmm let me stand corrected. I am in one now. My marriage is an institution. Hey I even have a nifty piece of paper for the wall too. That means I have 16 years worth of study and experience.

Ok now that we have that settled.

Now on "unsupported opinions" well thats inaccurate. I AM supporting them. I DO count ya know.

I am not expecting everyone to mirror my theological notions though. But I have good company.
Its not like I am saying the world is round and the universe doesn't actually revolve around earth. Go ahead say my ideas a full of it, won't harm me any.

With respects to small children. I have seen the effects too.
But the term children is being used a little freely here.
Children are persons below the age of 12. Youths are persons below the age of 18. To use a term to broadly is to accept erroneous generalisations.
I am not advocating sex with "children". I am not remotely interested in advocating sex with children. I am not even interested in supporting children having sex with children.
Youths is a different matter. But a youth is just an untrained adult to me.

When you look at the world's adults, it's plain they flunked whatever training they were given. Not surprising the world looks the way it does.

I have seen the kids on the street that blame their lousy parents for not teaching them anything useful.
I have heard the kids saying their parents never dicsiplined them, and as a result they are where they are (nowhere).
I have seen all the unwanted pregnancies for ill informed teens.

Our kids are a direct reflection of us. If they are messed up, its because they are acting like us. That means the adult world is messed up.

I have heard all the stories. After 40 years I have seen more than enough.

Given a choice of the opinions of adults that refuse to wake up, or teens that clearly would disagree, I might be inclined to say "phooey" to the adult opinions. I have the evidence to back me up.