2007-02-08 03:15:34 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
By the age of 16 (Ohio's age of consent), I think most people have a grasp on reality, and can make the decision. Why punish someone because they had sex, both consentual? Raising or lowering it isn't going to make a difference. Kids have sex when they please. The age of consent means nothing, and even if they are the age of consent, statutory rape is still a factor.
2007-02-08 03:25:42 · answer #1 · answered by princessn1984 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Really age of consent is supposed to be about whether the person is emotionally mature enough to be making decisions without being taken advantage of. This makes laws about it a little strange, as people mature at different rates.
I quite like the Dutch system. If I remember rightly the age of consent is 14, but only with someone within 5 years of your age.
Of course, in the UK it doesn't really matter. The law regarding age of consent is constantly ignored and generally without any precautions being taken - hence the stupidly high teen pregnancy rates.
2007-02-08 03:40:30 · answer #2 · answered by The Truth 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think it should be enforced properly. I couldn't get a license to drive before the proper time so why should this particular aspect of the law be flouted. The only ones that would put the age down are paeds anyway.
Sorry if this offends anyone but it is purely my opinion.
On certain people it should not only be made higher, but made compulsary that they do not breed at all. eg Jade Goody and her disfunctional family and other low lives.
If you think about it logically. If i steal something and am found out i cannot keep it, so why when these people end up with a child can they keep that, thus starting the whole teen parent cycle all over again. It is profiting from a crime.
It's time morals were put back into society before it turns to total degeneration. Bring back proper deterrents, ie hanging birching and the cane. Respect and self respect!
2007-02-08 03:35:02 · answer #3 · answered by tradcobdriver 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
You're obviously referring to the age for consenting to vote. I think people of 18 cannot be expected to choose which oilslick is the least offensive liar. It takes many years of experience and maturity to be able to do that, man.
2007-02-08 04:29:41 · answer #4 · answered by steveb9458 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
interior the united kingdom, the age of consent is sixteen, yet i do no longer think of it would rather rely if it replaced into raised or diminished. those that choose to have intercourse at a youthful age will in all probability have intercourse in spite of the age of consent, and those that don't desire to have intercourse yet heavily isn't confident to have intercourse merely because of the fact the age of consent has been diminished.
2016-11-02 21:33:25 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It should be lowered to 13, because that's roughly the age at which humans become fertile.
2007-02-08 05:04:10 · answer #6 · answered by bergab_hase 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It would be a problem in the UK where you can marry at 16.If they raised it would you have to stop what youre doing and wait two years to finish?
2007-02-08 04:23:30 · answer #7 · answered by frankturk50 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Neither. 18 is appropriate to start making your own decisions. Lowering it is definitely not a viable option.
2007-02-08 03:31:30 · answer #8 · answered by Goose&Tonic 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
age of consent for what??? if your talking about sex it should stay the same, in england it wont make a difference,
but in spain i heard that its twelve but britan still has a lot more teen pregnancies.
if your talking about cigerettes then they should be ban because they are full of ****.
2007-02-08 03:26:57 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
It should be kept the same but more people should follow it. It seems pretty pointless in changing it seeing as no one bothers to obey the law anyway.
2007-02-08 03:24:00 · answer #10 · answered by SR13 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋