Originally posted by Benjamin:
I have a brain with reasonable intelligence and understand the maturity level and morality of a CHILD is still DEVELOPING!
Then use those gifts to realize that there is no magical translation from childhood to adulthood that occurs on the 16th, 18th, or 21st birth days. There are 16 year olds who are more mature than 21 year olds.
My 16 year old daughter is very immature. She is less mature than most 13 year olds I know concerning boys. My 12 year old son often exhibits more maturity than she does. That's the way she is... good, bad, or indifferent. We're thankful that she has no interest in boys but often frustrated by other aspects of her immaturity.
My point isn't that these girls should be engaging in sex but rather that the term "minor" is relative and arbitrary. It has no direct correspondance to the apparent objective of the law- to protect "children". To me a 15 year old is a child. To many 20 year olds, a 15 year old is a peer maturity wise.
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> I know many 13-17 year old girls who know exactly what they are consenting to.
How do you know that?</font>[/QUOTE][/quote]Because I have listened to them when they speak and observed their actions... and I used to be that age and knew several girls who dated guys much older. Even 20 years ago, some girls weren't innocent victims... they pursued these older men with purpose.
[qb]And what is your motivation for declaring they know “EXACTLY what they are consenting to”
Because a) they are morally and legally responsible if they have the maturity and understanding to make a genuine choice and b) because I don't like seeing people punished for arbitrary rules.
The young guy I mentioned earlier has spent 7 years in prison because two girls plotted and seduced him. Neither girl was innocent or inexperienced. How they reached that level of depravity by 14 or 15 I don't know... but it does not seem right to punish the young guy when they deceived him.
if so concerned about the “DECADENCE of our society” why would you justify this behavior from a CHILD?
I don't... any more than I justify it from an "ADULT". The question is what constitutes an "adult". An arbitrary age? A level of knowledge, experience, or maturity?
There was a time when girls married as teens as a rule. Some as early as 13 or 14. Most 16 to 18... and fewer after 20. Most married established men who were older. Were these girls "minors"- too immature to make their own decisions?
Well, what were the results? Crime, divorce, and adultery were all less than now. Marriages were commitments that lasted.
After 60-80 years of feminism, even Christians assume that a "minor" that gets married or enters a serious relationship is "ruining" her life.
The problem isn't the age difference. Relationships between older men and teenage girls are very common historically. I have read that if Joseph and Mary were common for their time and culture, she was probably in her mid-teens and he in his late 20's or early 30's.
Sex should not occur outside of marriage. But a romance what many states consider a legal "minor" and legal "adult" is not necessarily wrong. In fact, the common paradigm that a girl should not marry until she is in her twenties, "an adult", graduated college, experienced, or other things contributes to promiscuity. The same feminism that convinced society that girls were oppressed if they were married and committed to a lifelong relationship before 20 also convinced most that the girl shouldn't be responsible as the "gate keeper" but rather should explore and experience her sexuality.
I have a brain with reasonable intelligence and understand that humans go through a process called “puberty” and this doesn’t justify a license for “open game” for the IDIOTS who claim “If they’re old enough to bleed they’re old enough to breed”
Most girls are beyond puberty well before 18.
Those are idiots. Not only are these young girls worthy of protection, men should see it as their responsibility to protect the honor and virtue of women. It wasn't that long ago that this was the norm. Women who slept around were whores and men who treated women shamefully or kept company with such women were considered classless and low brow.
Now women are expected to sleep around and men are heroic for promiscuity. That has little to do with age differences and everything to do with widespread decadance. It is ridiculous and hypocritical to throw a 19 year old in jail for having sex with a 15 year old while exalting the relationship between 40 year old men and women 18-21.
Wrong, at that age they are making immature morality decisions and it is the responsibility of Christian parents, and mature adults to help them determine “right form wrong” not to justify their actions as REASONABLE and having FULL knowledge of EACTLY what they’re consenting to.
Parents are responsible for the children God gives them. The children are also responsible for their own moral decisions. I knew right from wrong regarding sex at 14... didn't you?
Same with my grandmother, but we’re not talking about natural blessings inside of a marriage here, we’re talking about immature children of today being feed, “everybody does it”, “try it before you buy it” morality compared to the value of, “He won’t buy the cow if he can get the milk for free.” of that day.
I agree that those attitudes toward sex are wrong... as are the modern attitudes about commitment and marriage. But by your own testimony, that is independent of any age difference. Would you agree or disagree that a loving, non-physical romance between a mature 15 year old and a 21 year old is moral while a sexual relationship between two 21 year olds is immoral?
