The right not to be offended?

[White Doors]

She is a dependant right up to age 21 (if in school). SO?

The legislation should follow the facts. Girls have sex at avg age of 14.5 , boys 14.1 Do we really want to charge these kids w a crime , a crime that most of us committed when we were young?

And your 'facts' should follow the legislation. There is a 2 year window. ie: if the boy is 16 and the girl is 14 there is no problem.

legally not a dependant as soon as they turn 18, age of majority. for tax reasons, can still be filed as a dependant if still living at home and going to school.

big difference there.

[White Doors]

You might want to check the law if you have any children.

At the age of 14, children are legally independent from their parents. In any legal actions against them they are entitled to their own legal representation and are not obligated to comply with their parents' wishes.

And yes at 14 they have the right to make that decision. Neither the courts nor their parents have a right to interfere.

Sorry that is over YOUR head.

Sorry, you are wrong.

Please play again.

[White Doors]

Girls have sex at avg age of 14.5 , boys 14.1 Do we really want to charge these kids w a crime , a crime that most of us committed when we were young?

Also, you should get your facts straight. Those WHO REPORTED being sexually active, averaged out to their first encounter at those ages. That study could have been done on 15 year olds of whom, 90% said they didn't have sex yet. You really need to read what you quote more carefully.

The Canadian Youth, Sexual Health and HIV/AIDS Study 2003 report by the Canadian Council of Ministers of Education reported that, for youth who reported being sexually active , the average age of first sexual intercourse was 14.1 years for boys and 14.5 years for girls

[M.Dancer]

She is a dependant right up to age 21 (if in school). SO?

The legislation should follow the facts. Girls have sex at avg age of 14.5 , boys 14.1 Do we really want to charge these kids w a crime , a crime that most of us committed when we were young?

That young eh?

According to this survey, the average age is 17....

That being said, I am c=more concerned about 14 years olds with 19 or 20 years old. At some point a father should have the right to kick the fellows arse around town with an option to use his balls for book ends.

[charter.rights]

Sorry, you are wrong.

Please play again.

"if the boy is 16 and the girl is 14 there is no problem."

YOU need to insert another quarter. You just proved me right.

[White Doors]

That young eh?

According to this survey, the average age is 17....

That being said, I am c=more concerned about 14 years olds with 19 or 20 years old. At some point a father should have the right to kick the fellows arse around town with an option to use his balls for book ends.

No, not that young. He is pulling stats out of his arse without looking at them closely.

[White Doors]

"if the boy is 16 and the girl is 14 there is no problem."

YOU need to insert another quarter. You just proved me right.

I did, did I?

you need to brush up on your reading skills.

You also might want to brush up on the definition of adult and child.

Next you will be demanding that 8 year olds be given their 'right' to vote?

lol

Edited December 19, 2007 by White Doors

[DrGreenthumb]

I think age of consent should be raised, but the indignation of the right is a little funny, you are only proposing to raise the age of consent to 16, so by your own twisted logic YOU are saying that it is ok for a 40 year old to have sex with a 16 year old. Not quite heroic. Thanks anyways, I have 3 young daughters and good parenting will go a lot further to convince them to keep their jeans on than any law that is practically uninforceable. Do you think the 14 year old girl is going to report to the cops/testify aginst the 19 year old she CHOSE to have sex with? That's the problem with you conservatives, you live in some fantasy land where the earth is only 6000 years old and everything is black and white.

Murderers are just sick????? Dude what planet are you on?

[charter.rights]

I think age of consent should be raised, but the indignation of the right is a little funny, you are only proposing to raise the age of consent to 16, so by your own twisted logic YOU are saying that it is ok for a 40 year old to have sex with a 16 year old. Not quite heroic. Thanks anyways, I have 3 young daughters and good parenting will go a lot further to convince them to keep their jeans on than any law that is practically uninforceable. Do you think the 14 year old girl is going to report to the cops/testify aginst the 19 year old she CHOSE to have sex with? That's the problem with you conservatives, you live in some fantasy land where the earth is only 6000 years old and everything is black and white.

Murderers are just sick????? Dude what planet are you on?

In a moral and civil society regardless of the laws, one does not kill another human being. If they do, then something has gone awry in their thinking. That off-thinking is an illness, to believe that they can benefit from murder.

The recidivism rate of criminals is about 75%. The justice system and the punishment jail time doesn't work and neither do laws as a deterrent. However, those who have been "treated" to restore their minds to sanity, have a much better rate of coming out of the system clean. So the real trick would be to recognize, diagnose and treat people before they resort to crimes or murder.

[White Doors]

I think age of consent should be raised, but the indignation of the right is a little funny, you are only proposing to raise the age of consent to 16, so by your own twisted logic YOU are saying that it is ok for a 40 year old to have sex with a 16 year old. Not quite heroic. Thanks anyways, I have 3 young daughters and good parenting will go a lot further to convince them to keep their jeans on than any law that is practically uninforceable. Do you think the 14 year old girl is going to report to the cops/testify aginst the 19 year old she CHOSE to have sex with? That's the problem with you conservatives, you live in some fantasy land where the earth is only 6000 years old and everything is black and white.

Murderers are just sick????? Dude what planet are you on?

You should really stop painting people all with the same brush.

Currently if a 14 year old has intercourse with a 40 year old and tells her parents that the 40 year old pressured her to do it, there is NOTHING the law can do. With the new law - they can.

Police have been calling for this law.

Do you think the 14 year old girl is going to report to the cops/testify aginst the 19 year old she CHOSE to have sex with

Maybe you should READ the legislation before you go on one of your rants. That is not criminal.

so you know.

Also, you should really stop projecting your parents as being representative of all conservatives.

That is a bigoted way to 'peg' the 'other side' you know.

everyone is an individual. You should try to get to know more people and perhaps an anger management class would help.

Merry Christmas.

[Moxie]

In a moral and civil society regardless of the laws, one does not kill another human being. If they do, then something has gone awry in their thinking. That off-thinking is an illness, to believe that they can benefit from murder.

The recidivism rate of criminals is about 75%. The justice system and the punishment jail time doesn't work and neither do laws as a deterrent. However, those who have been "treated" to restore their minds to sanity, have a much better rate of coming out of the system clean. So the real trick would be to recognize, diagnose and treat people before they resort to crimes or murder.

That is the most absurb assertion I've ever read, for gawds sake people commit crimes for money, for greed, because they are scum bags who want power, for revenge etc. It has nothing to do with "Mental illness". As for reconizing greed, envy, jealousy and rage dah they are emotions not "Mental illnesses" how can you diagnose an Emotion prior to a crime?

How do you know punishment and retribution don't work, we have never tried it in Canada. The leftards scream for rehabilation and they are the ones the politicians listen to. If I had my way the little scum bags would be putting sand on the highways with their lips. We coddle criminals in Canada, people like you are the problem and your solutions are assinine and boarderline retarded.

[White Doors]

In a moral and civil society regardless of the laws, one does not kill another human being. If they do, then something has gone awry in their thinking. That off-thinking is an illness, to believe that they can benefit from murder.

The recidivism rate of criminals is about 75%. The justice system and the punishment jail time doesn't work and neither do laws as a deterrent. However, those who have been "treated" to restore their minds to sanity, have a much better rate of coming out of the system clean. So the real trick would be to recognize, diagnose and treat people before they resort to crimes or murder.

you don't think prisoners are treated now? If the recidivism rate is 75% do you think treatment is the answer?

No, the answer is to leave them in there to protect society.

We have a civilized society if these people are locked up.

You are living in a fantasy world.

[Black Dog]

Hate to contribute to the thread rift, but the whole age of consent debate puzzles me. Well, not so much the debate itself as the examples used. For instance:

It's not outrageous to legislate an end to 40 year olds being able to have 'consensual sex' with 14 year olds.

But it's okay for 40 year olds to have sex with 16 year olds (who are still children by just about every other the legal definition)?

It's just so arbitrary.

[White Doors]

Hate to contribute to the thread rift, but the whole age of consent debate puzzles me. Well, not so much the debate itself as the examples used. For instance:

But it's okay for 40 year olds to have sex with 16 year olds (who are still children by just about every other the legal definition)?

It's just so arbitrary.

it's a law, it has to be arbitrary.

There has to be an age that is clear and indentifiable.

you must agree that 16 is better than 14 no?

[M.Dancer]

I am reminded of the old CCCP where criminals were considered insane, where those opposing the communist system were consodered nuts because, well, you would have to be nuts not to love communism. So after 20 years in a mental institution the lobotomized would wander....

People kill for many reasons. Some for rage, some for fun and others for profit.

[White Doors]

I am reminded of the old CCCP where criminals were considered insane, where those opposing the communist system were consodered nuts because, well, you would have to be nuts not to love communism. So after 20 years in a mental institution the lobotomized would wander....

People kill for many reasons. Some for rage, some for fun and others for profit.

No Dancer, they are ill and must be treated before they kill.

This reminds me of a movie.

are there really this many wackos out there in society or does the internet bring them out?

[Michael Bluth]

Hate to contribute to the thread rift, but the whole age of consent debate puzzles me. Well, not so much the debate itself as the examples used. For instance:

But it's okay for 40 year olds to have sex with 16 year olds (who are still children by just about every other the legal definition)?

It's just so arbitrary.

You pick a line.

[Moxie]

it's a law, it has to be arbitrary.

There has to be an age that is clear and indentifiable.

you must agree that 16 is better than 14 no?

I agree, 14 is better than 16. Frankly I'm at a loss as to why so many forty year old men want to have sex with a female child. The internet is crawling with creeps looking to pry on young girls, it's not much but it's better than nothing.

[Black Dog]

it's a law, it has to be arbitrary.

There has to be an age that is clear and indentifiable.

you must agree that 16 is better than 14 no?

My point is that IMO sex between a 40 year old and a 16 year old is just as icky as sex between a 40 year old and a 14 year old. Yeah, one must draw a line somewhere, but let's not pretend one is a Great Moral Outrage while sanctioning the other when the difference is negligible.

Frankly I'm at a loss as to why so many forty year old men want to have sex with a female child

How many? That's the other thing: I just don't think there's all that many 40 years olds actually itching for some 14 year old action.

Edited December 19, 2007 by Black Dog

[DrGreenthumb]

You should really stop painting people all with the same brush.

Currently if a 14 year old has intercourse with a 40 year old and tells her parents that the 40 year old pressured her to do it, there is NOTHING the law can do. With the new law - they can.

Police have been calling for this law.

Maybe you should READ the legislation before you go on one of your rants. That is not criminal.

so you know.

Also, you should really stop projecting your parents as being representative of all conservatives.

That is a bigoted way to 'peg' the 'other side' you know.

everyone is an individual. You should try to get to know more people and perhaps an anger management class would help.

Merry Christmas.

My parents aren't conservative anyways, I long ago brought them enlightenment , lol. They have voted NDP for at least the last 2 elections. It is the posters on forum boards like this that i take as being representative of conservatives. Also people like the Harpersaur and the Randy Whiteosaur have shaped my views on conservatism.

I don't ned anger management, Anyone who knows me will tell you they have never seen me lose my temper. I'm a pot smoker, remember? We are way too relaxed and at peace with ourselves to ever get angry enough to act out aggressively. We leave that kind of behavior to alcoholics and conservatives.

[White Doors]

My point is that IMO sex between a 40 year old and a 16 year old is just as icky as sex between a 40 year old and a 14 year old. Yeah, one must draw a line somewhere, but let's not pretend one is a Great Moral Outrage while sanctioning the other when the difference is negligible.

So you won't agree. haha

Just kills you to agree with anything that the Harper gov't is doing eh?

unreal.

Your point is MOOT.

there is alot of difference between a 14 year old and a 16 year old.

[Black Dog]

So you won't agree. haha

Just kills you to agree with anything that the Harper gov't is doing eh?

unreal.

Oh brother.

Your point is MOOT.

Why?

there is alot of difference between a 14 year old and a 16 year old.

Like?

[DrGreenthumb]

Here's what I think. I think the law should simply state that no adult may have sex with a child. 18 is the age where we consider people adults. In my opinion children from the ages of 14-17 are in fact at most risk for exploitation because of the confusion that puberty brings them.

As for the "sick" murderers, the solution that comes to my mind may be proven not to be a deterent to others but it damn sure puts an end to re-offenders.

[DrGreenthumb]

I'd also like to be enlightened as to the vast differences between a 14 year old and a sixteen year old. Keep in mind I have 3 teenage daughters so don't try to bullshit me.

[Michael Bluth]

My point is that IMO sex between a 40 year old and a 16 year old is just as icky as sex between a 40 year old and a 14 year old. Yeah, one must draw a line somewhere, but let's not pretend one is a Great Moral Outrage while sanctioning the other when the difference is negligible

A line has to be drawn somewhere.

18 has to be the upper age limit.

It's easy to aruge that age is arbitary. Everyone knows that it is. But more importantly, who cares?

Move the age of consent from 14 to 16 was a positive thing.

We trust 16 year olds with a drivers licence, but not 14 year olds. Why? Who knows? But not having a valid argument isn't proof that we should lower the age for driving.