United States Sex Laws

[Cole436]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Where is the kid's responsibility? You're laying the blame on an uptight parent. Why is the kid not responsible for his actions? He's the one making the choice here.

They're both making a choice
It takes two to have consensual sex
I don't understand how this can be blamed on the kids.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Cole436

They're both making a choice
It takes two to have consensual sex
I don't understand how this can be blamed on the kids.

You think they are responsible enough to have sex, but shouldn't be blamed for the consequences that come their way as a result?

[Cole436]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

This sentence really sounds like it was built by a recent visit to "Introduction to Sociology". What do you mean it's a "social construct"? It's biology. We didn't make it up.



Does it really derail a lot of kid's futures? This whole thread seems kind of weird to me. It's like you've dug up a bunch of arcane rules that nobody pays attention to and are saying it's a terrible problem. Is it?

Well considering I'm a 4th year soci major, you're on the right track.
Sex in the reproduction as gender is to sex (biological).
Reproduction is nothing more then that, an act which is used for biological advantage. Sex is the byproduct used from that act which elites have used to mold society into what they perceive is correct and a way which power relations can used to stratify groups and sexes. I don't want to go into an overly historical explanation here, but if you see all the differing sexual laws in the world even today, that has to tell you that there is no defined grasp on what sex truly is.

And it is a problem because these laws do exist and they are enforced. People can and have had their lives ruined by having sex with their future wives.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Cole436

Well considering I'm a 4th year soci major, you're on the right track.
Sex in the reproduction as gender is to sex (biological).
Reproduction is nothing more then that, an act which is used for biological advantage. Sex is the byproduct used from that act which elites have used to mold society into what they perceive is correct and a way which power relations can used to stratify groups and sexes. I don't want to go into an overly historical explanation here, but if you see all the differing sexual laws in the world even today, that has to tell you that there is no defined grasp on what sex truly is.

And it is a problem because these laws do exist and they are enforced. People can and have had their lives ruined by having sex with their future wives.

What a complete load of garbage.

[Cole436]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

You think they are responsible enough to have sex, but shouldn't be blamed for the consequences that come their way as a result?

You're reasoning is circular.
I believe that the consequences are archaic and oppressive to liberty and freedom, and that no one should have the power to ruin an innocent young man/woman's life over two young adults having consensual sex.
I am stating my belief that the law is wrong.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Cole436

You're reasoning is circular.
I believe that the consequences are archaic and oppressive to liberty and freedom, and that no one should have the power to ruin an innocent young man/woman's life over two young adults having consensual sex.
I am stating my belief that the law is wrong.

Like I said, your mind will change when you have kids.

Do you like Canada's system better? Where your 15 year old daughter can be manipulated into having sex with a 20 year old man and there's nothing you can do about it?

[Cole436]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

What a complete load of garbage.

Absolutely not.
I'll use gender as the easy parallel to sex/reproduction.
Sex is biological, we are either a man or a woman. Gender on the other hand is social, the way a person or society defines a group or person. Gender is what rules fashion, the way a person is supposed to act, presupposed norms and expectations of a person.
The same is true of sex. Sex is what society has made it out to be, wrong, secretive, sacred, shameful, popular, revolting ect al.. Sex has been defined in the last 2000 years by Christian teachings which describe it as a dirty, secretive act, as reflected by all laws from the 18th-20th century.
These laws have become systemic in society to the point that they are now the "truth" and not solely a manifestation of a certain groups beliefs.
Sex is what we believe it is, nothing more. Any stigma we have in relationships, and sacredness between us through sex is social norms.
The fact that we are even able to disagree on this point proves my own that these are nothing more then systemic norms

[Cole436]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Like I said, your mind will change when you have kids.

Do you like Canada's system better? Where your 15 year old daughter can be manipulated into having sex with a 20 year old man and there's nothing you can do about it?

There are legal alternatives from protecting your kids that don't throw people in jail or give them criminal records.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Cole436

Absolutely not.
I'll use gender as the easy parallel to sex/reproduction.
Sex is biological, we are either a man or a woman. Gender on the other hand is social, the way a person or society defines a group or person. Gender is what rules fashion, the way a person is supposed to act, presupposed norms and expectations of a person.
The same is true of sex. Sex is what society has made it out to be, wrong, secretive, sacred, shameful, popular, revolting ect al.. Sex has been defined in the last 2000 years by Christian teachings which describe it as a dirty, secretive act, as reflected by all laws from the 18th-20th century.
These laws have become systemic in society to the point that they are now the "truth" and not solely a manifestation of a certain groups beliefs.
Sex is what we believe it is, nothing more. Any stigma we have in relationships, and sacredness between us through sex is social norms.

Explain to me how society has determined how I define sex please. According to you , I could be missing out on some great beastiality because elitists have told me its wrong. I wouldn't have negative thoughts regarding copulating with a dog without society defining it as wrong. Correct?

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Cole436

There are legal alternatives from protecting your kids that don't throw people in jail or give them criminal records.

Such as?

Heaven forbid a predator like a 20 year old who wants to have sex with a 15 year old have consequences.

[Cole436]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Explain to me how society has determined how I define sex please.

Obviously through your defense of my argument you show that you have a very different opinion on what is acceptable for sex between minors, and even your belief that 15 year old's shouldn't have sex with 20 year olds. That's a systemic belief that didn't exist 100 years ago and if you were born at that time you most likely would not have.

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Such as?

Heaven forbid a predator like a 20 year old who wants to have sex with a 15 year old have consequences.

First let's absolve the statement that all 20 year old's who have sex with 15 year old's are predators and could also be committing an act of love, as I know quite a few people who have dated in a 5 year interval (not at that age though). There are restraining orders the parents can place if they feel their child is not safe or there are peace bonds which are essentially the same thing, until the child is 16 and able to legally consent to any age.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Cole436

Obviously through your defense of my argument you show that you have a very different opinion on what is acceptable for sex between minors, and even your belief that 15 year old's shouldn't have sex with 20 year olds. That's a systemic belief that didn't exist 100 years ago and if you were born at that time you most likely would not have.


.

The only reason that sentiment ddin't exist 100 years ago was because marriage occurred at much younger ages. So really, society has redefined marriage not sex.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Do you like Canada's system better? Where your 15 year old daughter can be manipulated into having sex with a 20 year old man and there's nothing you can do about it?

What if your 15 year old daughter borrowed some ID, went to a bar, and had sex with a 20 year old? Now that 15 year old can hold the "statutory rape" charge over the 20 year old's head.

I guess I look at that "5 year" rule as partially being there to protect the 20 year olds of the world. No- it sure isn't perfect. But it's better than the way the rules worked up until a couple of years ago. Remember that; where a 40 year old was allowed to have sex with a 15 year old; or even a 14 year old.

[Cole436]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

The only reason that sentiment ddin't exist 100 years ago was because marriage occurred at much younger ages. So really, society has redefined marriage not sex.

True, society redefined marriage but nothing is mutually exclusive in a society. The role of sex has changed just as much as class and race and it is all related. Not so much in Canada, but more so in the states where strong centralized non secular governments has been in control from nearly the revolution, religious ideas and laws have been in effect. It wasn't until 2003 that Sodomy was finally legalized in all the states if that doesn't say something.
Sex has been a malleable aspect of society for as long as civilized history has been recorded.

[Cole436]

Originally Posted by ken0042

What if your 15 year old daughter borrowed some ID, went to a bar, and had sex with a 20 year old? Now that 15 year old can hold the "statutory rape" charge over the 20 year old's head.

I guess I look at that "5 year" rule as partially being there to protect the 20 year olds of the world. No- it sure isn't perfect. But it's better than the way the rules worked up until a couple of years ago. Remember that; where a 40 year old was allowed to have sex with a 15 year old; or even a 14 year old.

Completely agree, too many times in these cases it's viewed as a black and white issue and the laws have improved leaps and bounds from where they were just 3 years ago.

[icecube]

Spoken like a true critical thinker Cole. I agree with everything you said in this thread 110 percent.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by Cole436

That's exactly what these laws constitute!
Of course a parent should have input and have a strong presence, but I wasn't 17 too long ago and I know that my thought process hasn't changed drastically since, which is probably the same for most of you in your early to mid twenties. You don't suddenly grow up at 18. And I know there are always exceptions, but for the most part a person is pretty well together by the time they hit that age.

Ok, then forget the laws, I am taking your interpretation of the laws and commenting on it.

Originally Posted by Cole436

The fact that a disproving parent can legally charge a 16-18 year old kid with having sex with their kid of the same age and register him/her as a sex offender is something I have a real problem with.

If a parent thinks their kid is mature enough to have sex, then they are allowed to. If they don't they can't legally have sex.

Who else should be making that decision if not the parents? The only other choice is the government and legal system, and you and I both agree that is a bad choice.

[Rutuu]

You can really tell who has girls and who has boys...haha...classic offence vs defence battle.

[Cole436]

Originally Posted by Rathji

Ok, then forget the laws, I am taking your interpretation of the laws and commenting on it.



If a parent thinks their kid is mature enough to have sex, then they are allowed to. If they don't they can't legally have sex.

Who else should be making that decision if not the parents? The only other choice is the government and legal system, and you and I both agree that is a bad choice.

You're misinterpreting my statement, I'm not saying parents shouldn't have a say and if they think their child is in danger there are non-criminal legal options to deal with it. My issue, as it's been through this entire thread, is that innocent kids are being charged as sex offenders, not 30 year olds, underage kids. I disagree with the laws in the states which I posted, I agree with the Canadian legal system and believe it's take well measured objective steps, and there are many options to protect our kids. I believe the actions in these states are beyond unnecessary.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Cole436

Obviously through your defense of my argument you show that you have a very different opinion on what is acceptable for sex between minors, and even your belief that 15 year old's shouldn't have sex with 20 year olds. That's a systemic belief that didn't exist 100 years ago and if you were born at that time you most likely would not have.

And if you were around at that time you probably wouldn't believe that women should be allowed to vote. So what?

A dude who is 20 years old sleeping with a girl who is in grade 10 is a loser. Who cares if he gets pinched for sleeping with her? Do you?

Is it even a problem? Is this an epidemic or something? What made you post this today?