English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I do! 21, same as drinking. I mean really, if you're not responsible yet to control yourself with alcohol (as far as the law sees it) then why are you mature enough to raise another human life? Doesn't make ANY sense to me!

please don't go on about HOW they would control my new theory on "underage mothers", we could argue forever.

Please just say your oppinion on trying to set an age limit. And why you think someone is responsible enough to raise a kid and not have a beer. (don't bring up military soldiers can die for their country and not drink. Unlike young mothers, we get training to do our jobs and to be responsible)

2006-11-17 09:18:39 · 15 answers · asked by ur a Dee Dee Dee 5 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

not sex dipshit! having kids. and I have another question posted in a different area if you want to see how I'd do it

2006-11-17 09:37:58 · update #1

15 answers

Yep, yep, yep. In theory that would be great. There's no reason to rush into having a baby at 18 cuz really, come on, at 18 who the hell is really ready to be a parent? Of course a law like that would never be passed but there are roundabout ways of deterring young motherhood. They need to have better sex ed and offer free birth control to all women, free abortions to low-income women (yeah, I just opened that can of worms) then make it mandatory for all kids to graduate high school. It'll keep 'em out of trouble and less likely to bear children if they aren't allowed to sit on their butt and collect food stamps.

I think 20 or 21 is a good limit, it gives you time after high school to consider what path you want to take.

2006-11-17 09:43:52 · answer #1 · answered by Sandy Sandals 7 · 1 0

She's proper... A co-worker of mine's daughter-in-regulation has already had 3 children and is not contained in the perfect monetary state to keep having children, she will't take birth control as a results of some diverse subject matters, and planned parenthood gained't help her to get a tubal ligation because she is less than 21. in spite of the actual shown actuality that this age would only practice to Kentucky, your section will be diverse. also, sure, it would nicely be reversed. yet, the reversal is really severe priced and infrequently isn't powerful because of the quantity of the technique to commence with. And, through how, a known practitioner can deny every person treatment, fantastically if it is optional (which this can be). the really time that you're certain treatment is in case you bypass to an emergency branch and also you're both in exertions or are plagued by coronary heart attack or stroke indicators (granted, another subject matters practice).

2016-11-25 01:14:19 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

I think it should be 18. Since you are legally an adult at that age.

I got pregnant at 19 yrs old. And thinking back on it I wouldn't have done anything different.

At 19, I had a alright job, an associates degree, and I was renting a 2 bedroom house with my then boyfriend (Now hubby).

2006-11-17 09:25:11 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

def. should set an age on something like that. some people should also be cut off from having kids, or having more kids. theres just too many who are not responsible enough to care for themselves let alone a child.

2006-11-17 09:25:09 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

not so much in age should the decision be made as in a maturity level, there are many 17-18 y/o who are more mature than some 20something or other college students i go to school with

2006-11-17 09:23:02 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

You planning to start the regulation of sex? How would you insure regulation? What punishment would those who ignore regulations receive and how would you catch them? Where would that end? Who would get to decide qualification to have sex? Some think if you are over a certain age you should stop having sex. This question smells of Big Brother government support. The right to copulate cannot be regulated.

2006-11-17 09:35:07 · answer #6 · answered by Caffeinated 4 · 0 2

I am not sure about the age but you should have to take a test to show you have enough common sense to raise a child.

2006-11-17 09:22:24 · answer #7 · answered by region50 6 · 1 0

so if you get pregnant at 20 but not due until after you turn 21 are you allowed to keep the baby?

2006-11-17 10:41:57 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

My thought is this. If you a mature person in a mature relationship, then have them. Now the problem i always run into is how do we determine maturity?

2006-11-17 09:26:58 · answer #9 · answered by raiderking69 5 · 1 0

I agree! That would make so many young girls lives easier!!!! Besides, most underage people get pregnant by accident anyway...

2006-11-17 09:21:56 · answer #10 · answered by me 6 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers