Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
It's both. Is sex between two 16 year olds illegal? No, so the comparison doesn't work.
We have ages of consent to prevent children from being taken advantage of by adults.
|
I am not clear on your position on this subject. What would you have the schools teach the 16 year-old about the decision to have sex or not? In my view the answer should be 16 year old children should abstain from having sex. I do not have a problem with 16 year old's being taught how to avoid pregnancy or sexually transmitted disease. Perhaps there is a small distinction between your view and mine. But, in my view the emphasis is on abstaining until reaching the age of legal consent.
In my view there are legal ages of consent because, as a society, we do not believe people under that age have the capacity to make an informed choice. I always thought the age of consent was as it states, regardless of the age of the partner, under the age of consent the child can not have "legal" sex with anyone. I think statutory rape applies to adults have sex with people under the age of consent. I guess in some states the age of consent is actually 16, but I think that is too young.
---------- Post added at 05:53 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:45 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rekna
It looks like it might be because she is for sale!
|
Interesting choice of words. When Bill Clinton gets a million dollar book deal and makes $8 million a year on speaking engagements no one says he is "for sale"! when Michele Obama got a patronage job in Chicago at an inflated salary no one said she was for sale! When Al Gore make a movie full of hyperbole and invests in carbon off-sets, no one says he is "for sale"! So why would you use those words to describe Palin going out and making some money?