16 is the suitable Age of Consent for the US (Read)

I noticed that the US has done a complete 180 when comes to gender. Back in the day a girl became a woman when she had her first period, while boys became a men when he were able to grow a beard, and teen girls were allowed to marry much older guys. Some countries even have the age of consent and age of majority higher for males and lower for females.

 

Well that was before the feminist movement destroyed the patriarchy that allowed such rapes to legally exist. You should take this subject up with your closest NOW chapter, if you make it out with your penis, let us know.

 

I heard that in Mexico they still practice that, somewhat. At 15 a girl is allowed to date older guys just as long as they weren't old enough to be their daddy.

EDIT: And Mexicans are going to be a majority in the US in 20 years...

 

I was that way with my son even more strict than that actually. When he was young I still lived in the hood, kids were selling drugs and stealing cars before they were 12. I seen many a child be lost in my neighborhood. When he reached 6th grade he was going to have to go to the same middle school I went to, it was as bad or worse than any of those old 80's movies when I went. I moved to the country to protect him no jobs but it is peaceful. I agree a parent must be authoritarian to raise a child in today's society.

 

This discussion is often framed badly from the beginning. The question should not be "is it OK", but "is it a criminal act"? There is quite a difference. I wouldnt say adult having sex with 15-16 year old is always OK, however it is hardly a crime. The US is too puritan in this for no good reason, in Europe AoC is around 15 and no significantly bad effects stem from it.

It seems strange to me that people can drive cars from 14-15 in the US, yet consent to sex which requires less mental faculties, is from 16-18. We have it the other way around in Slovakia.

Anyway, close-age exception is a must no matter the AoC.

 

I would say lower than 16 if at all, but it can't be done on the Federal level.

Do people even care about boring old enumerated powers anymore? At least in the past the judiciary has maintained a guise of concern through constitutional interpretation, but now it seems you don't even have to defend your actions if you're in the Federal government. Not at all. They just ignore it.

A cookie for anyone who can give me a reason why this needs Federal interference to override state law.

 

My mother was an authoritarian towards me and we do not have a good relationship to say the least. I would also add that killing an older man for sleeping with your teenage daughter will result in her getting with an even older guys just to spite you. Only this time you won't be able to do anything about it because you'll be behind bars.

I made that pretty clear through out the thread.

 

I will just point out that it is called age of INFORMED consent. Strictly speaking, consent can be given or denied by everyone, even children or animals. But it is not informed consent as required by law, so it is invalidated. Thats why the excuse "but it was consentual" does not work. Ordinary rape laws are based on lack of consent, however statutory rape laws are actually based on power imbalance.

 

Well I am very libertarian politically so what I consider authoritarian and others consider it are possible very different. I attempt to have them ready to be a adult by the time they are 18. Sometimes tough love is called for I would rather them hate me yet learn respect and prevent them from learning the hard way if possible. My son was a extreme case because where we lived at the time you better not let your children be unsupervised around other children. I will admit some issues with him around 14-15 years old. He is however a good young man now(still my baby boy) we have a good relationship. I would trust him at 17 for most things firearms and driving still would
prefer to supervise those. He will be 18 before the end of the month so I will soon find out how I have done. He seems to be well prepared for college(32 on ACT) with one more chance to take it if he wishes.


I am aware that children rebel against their parents and they are even drawn to who their parents try to make them avoid. My little girl is 3 so my views will evolve by the time she reaches that age. I grew up in a very rough inner-city area, I now live as far
from civilization as you can get in the south US. If I had to sacrifice my freedom to defend her I would. I did not make it to my age from where I come from with no criminal record by being stupid. I will prevent that from happening by limiting her unsupervised time away from school and home. If a adult does take advantage of my little girl the law where I live would support me in defending her.

 

That's why you need effective sex education, as per the example of the Dutch system above. I'm not convinced age of consent laws actually make a huge difference in when young people start having sex - that's much more a cultural issue. Such laws should be focused on protecting the vulnerable, which is why there is a move away from simple age limits to more nuanced laws, such as exceptions for nominally consensual sex between two teenagers and stricter limitations for adults in positions of authority such as teachers.

 

so is a 14 y/o.

 

True and factors that would make giving informed consent impossible include:

• Mental retardation

• Emotional or intellectual immaturity

• Mental illness

• Severe sleep deprivation

• Intoxication

• Severe stress or post-traumatic stress disorder

• Coma

• Alzheimer’s disease

http://court.laws.com/informed-consent

 

Teenagers are going to have sex whatever the legislation allows or does not allow. It's what they do.

 

Why not let the states figure this out?

I happen to think we treat teenagers as children way too long.

None of us have to go far up the old family tree to find forebears starting families at 15.

A 14-year-old earned the Medal of Honor at the corn field in Antietam. No kid, there.

I would further say that if our educational system worked worth a hoot, all kids could be at least eligible to be fully emancipated by their sixteenth birthday.

 

---This was unpleasant to read.

 

I don't really care to be honest, but I'm against young people having kids which will likely be supported by taxpayer dollars. Teen pregancy is the reason we have so many HS dropout and welfare babies.

 

--I agree.

 

the point of age of consent laws is to stop predators from having sex with kids.

 

Early emancipation (including age of consent) tied to graduation could be a strong motivation for teenagers of both genders to do well in school.

If a person can pass the requirements of school (including standardized tests) at 16, why not emancipate them. K-12 education has nothing left to offer them. Any later is just wasting years off their adult lives.

 

Who doesnt, it is natural to find them teens sexy, if you know what I mean..

However plenty of people mistakenly believe that just because something is natural and normal, it must be moral or legal to act on it. Nope, thats just an example of an appeal to nature fallacy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature

 

I think people shouldn't have sex until they're mature enough to bring children into the world, and using that as the measure, the age of consent should be at least 21.

 

A "cute" 13 year old would be an extreme example. The simple fact is that there are basic physical characteristics humans generally find attractive on a member of the opposite sex, many of those characteristics develop in the teenage years and our instinct isn't going to be restricted by chronological age.

What we do about it obviously should be but that's no different to me finding your wife sexy but not raping her.