Low age of consent luring pedophiles to Canada: report

[jdobbin]

That's not what I would consider abuse. I've had people attack my motives for even posting here.

I haven't seen every thread. Has someone been calling you names or using profanity? There are certainly some rude people on the forums. Rather than respond to them, I've put them on ignore.

I've certainly argued with you from time to time but if you've felt I didn't feel you posts were worthwhile, forgive me. I might disagree a lot with you but I certainly don't wish you ill in any way. I read most of your posts without comment because I feel they are making a point that should be considered.

[jbg]

That's not what I would consider abuse. I've had people attack my motives for even posting here.

I haven't seen every thread. Has someone been calling you names or using profanity? There are certainly some rude people on the forums. Rather than respond to them, I've put them on ignore.

I've certainly argued with you from time to time but if you've felt I didn't feel you posts were worthwhile, forgive me. I might disagree a lot with you but I certainly don't wish you ill in any way. I read most of your posts without comment because I feel they are making a point that should be considered.

I appreciate the compliment. While WestViking is new here, he seems to have some novel and interesting views. He seems to write well.

And as for me, I'm taking some pretty heavy below the belt hits on a few threads. I'll PM you the offending names.

[jdobbin]

I appreciate the compliment. While WestViking is new here, he seems to have some novel and interesting views. He seems to write well.

And as for me, I'm taking some pretty heavy below the belt hits on a few threads. I'll PM you the offending names.

I too was reading the thread without comment initially but it seems to have fallen off the rails a bit. Perhaps it will get back on track.

I'd be interested to know who has been personalizing too much with you. I might tease occasionally or get a little up in your grill a bit but I would just as likely buy you a beer and actually try to work out solutions to things. Real life rarely goes tit for tat. And not just in politics but everywhere else too.

[jbg]

I too was reading the thread without comment initially but it seems to have fallen off the rails a bit. Perhaps it will get back on track.

Check your PM.

[Slavik44]

Teens engaged is sex with peers do not ask permission from parents. Got it, or are you too thick to read the obvious?

You originally said anyone. If you do not mean anyone, plese refrain from stating anyone.

Focusing on an improbable situation as justification for sticking your head in the sand and ignoring teens who need guidance in dealing with intimate relationships is reprehensible. Casual sex is neither rewarding nor fulfilling. The notion that all teens spend their high school years screwing one another over is a fantasy you have obviously bought into.

I never said all teens in high school are having sex with each other. Your accusation that I believe all teens are having sex is not only reprehensible it is blatantly false, and you have no evidence to back it up. Do a good number of teens have sex. Yes. But I never said all of them. Furthermore, the case I outlined about an 11 year sentence (10 years Jail time, + 1 year probation) Is an actual case that has happened.

I am a father and a grandfather with some darn fine children and grandchildren. I have no fear of laws that set out community standards that my peers adhere to. You have made no case for opposing laws that protect teens from predators. Why? Bleating about the plight of some 17 year old getting it on with a 15 year old does not cut any ice with me. A great deal of social angst is rooted in people who refuse to keep their zippers done up when they know better.

Again, I think it is very important that you understand that the discussion we are having pertains to your proposed criminlization of teen sex. Sexual predation, exploitation, and abuse are a far different category then Teen sex. They likewise require different actions then criminalizing Teen Sex.

Tell that to the pedophiles. My point is that teens who cannot or will not try to control their sexual urges are unlikely to improve over time and will continue to abuse partners in adult life. Spousal (partner) abuse is not spontaneous; it is a learned behaviour

Again...you brought the topic of criminalizing teen sex up. I have never once proposed that we allow sexual harrasment or abuse...that is absolutely un-acceptable behavoir.

Your fixation on this 17 year old, draconian application of law and improbable prison sentence suggests that you have a very guilty conscience. Even if your scenario could come to pass, you miss the obvious benefit of having his peers much more aware of the value of keeping their peckers in their pants.

You are aware that, I am citing an actual case? And your guilty conscience line is a blatant and unfounded attack on me and my charachter and it is not welcome on this forums, or in Canadian society. Just because you havee a computer does not give you the right to slander me.

No, you don't 'get it' in any way shape or form and won't until you mature yourself.

So the mature thing to do, is to throw almost half of Teens in Jail and insult posters on internet forums?

No problem - which arm?

I am going to make this very clear

I DO NOT COME TO THESE FORUMS TO HAVE THREATS MADE TO MY PERSONAL HEALTH.

[Slavik44]

CON'T

You're the idiot

opposing age of consent law to avoid having randy teens called up on the carpet and thus giving pedophiles and predators wide open access to Canadian teens.

Teen Sex and Pedophilia are two different things.

Do you know anything about human trafficking or are you just spouting off without a clue?

Human trafficing and Sex between two teenagers are two different things.

Hundreds of Canadian girls are dragged into the sex trade every year through promises of 'modeling careers' and big money.

The sex trade and sex between two teenagers are two different things.

Once they are shipped away from home and family, they are assaulted, raped, possible hooked on drugs and turned out to service customers in a bawdy house.

Consensual sex between two teenagers and assault/rape are two different things.

Each year a number of them turn up dead in a ditch somewhere

Sex between two teenagers, is not murder.

Others are lured into the pornography trade and get to 'do it' in front of video cameras - their 'pay' is not getting killed by the operators.

You are aware that underage pornography is illegal? And that the Age of consent for that is 18?

Check out the newspapers in any major urban centre and see how may times young children are enticed into a passing car or van so that some youngsters can 'follow their urges'. When the gang is done, they toss out what is left of a young girl with a ruined life and no self-esteem or feeling of security ever again.

Again, I cannot stress this enough, I was exclusively discussing your desire to criminlize teen sex. I am not talking about sexual exploitation, assault, abuse, rape, etc....

Your useless pantywaist sniveling

...

about age of consent and teen sex allows this crap to continue unabated. You bleat about laws to catch the "bad guys" but offer nothing whatever as to what laws to do so would be effective.

First off, I was strictly discussing your desire to criminlize teen sex. I am not interested in throwing almost half of teens in Jail. I am more interested in throwing pedophiles, rapists, yes the real criminals in Jail. Throwing teens in Jail for having sex with each other is not dealing with the real criminals. That is what I am responding to, your desire to create laws that would result in hundreds of thousands of Canadian Teens to be thrown in Jail. Yes lets focus on the real criminals when you want to start talking about the real criminals right now. Right now you are talking about criminalising teen sex. You are the one who is refusing to talk about the real criminals.

If you don't have solutions, have the decency to STFU and stand aside as the grownups are going to solve these problems.

First off, befor eI talk about solutions, I would rahter narrow the definition of what we find criminal. I am willing to talk solutions to activites that I see as criminal. But right now your primary concern is to extend the definition of what a criminal is, to inculde anyone who has had sex under the age of 18. On Mapleleafweb I am free to come in to threads and challange concepts and ideas of the original poster in a civil manner. I have chosen to challange your position that we should be throwing nearly half of teens in Jail.

[WestViking]

I am going to make this very clear

I DO NOT COME TO THESE FORUMS TO HAVE THREATS MADE TO MY PERSONAL HEALTH.

No, you come aboard hurling insults, ask to "GIVE ME A BREAK" and take umbrage when I verbally take up your offer. Good day, and good riddance.

[Slavik44]

I am going to make this very clear

I DO NOT COME TO THESE FORUMS TO HAVE THREATS MADE TO MY PERSONAL HEALTH.

No, you come aboard hurling insults, ask to "GIVE ME A BREAK" and take umbrage when I verbally take up your offer. Good day, and good riddance.

I hurled no insults your way, certainly I might have been a little abrasive, but I hurled no insults at your personally, the same can not be said to you...Good Ridance to you.

[jbg]

I hurled no insults your way, certainly I might have been a little abrasive, but I hurled no insults at your personally, the same can not be said to you...Good Ridance to you.

WestViking is a new poster here, and I don't know much about his posting style. It seems a lot more temperate than yours, Sir.

[Slavik44]

I hurled no insults your way, certainly I might have been a little abrasive, but I hurled no insults at your personally, the same can not be said to you...Good Ridance to you.

WestViking is a new poster here, and I don't know much about his posting style. It seems a lot more temperate than yours, Sir.

I do not deny and have never denied that I have an intense posting style.

But I do nto attack the person who makes the arguement, but I will attack the arguement.

If you make an arguement that peadophilia arises from two teens having sex with each other...I will call that ignorant and I may ask that poster to give me a break, you cannot honestly expect any sane person to believe such crap. But I will not call the poster ignorant. On the other hand WV...went straight out and called me an idiot and told me to Shut the fuck up, which is far different then give me a break. He further took that to attribute to me positions that were not mine and then imply through the mention of a guilty conscience that I was taking part in sexually immoral activities. My posting style, though intense, does not cross that line.

As you have said yourself, WV is a new poster, it should be telling that he is already running around here calling people idiots. I have been around longer then any active poster on this forum and have yet to call someone an idiot. I will be blunt in my attacks on a persons arguement, but not on that person themselves. Certainly not to the point where I threaten physical violence against another person.

[betsy]

[ As you have said yourself, WV is a new poster, it should be telling that he is already running around here calling people idiots.

But you've fired the first shot, Slavik44. And it is a personal attack. Here's where it started (post #13)...

What a complete display of Ignorance. You are comparing a blow job between a 15 and 17 year old to stealing a car? Honestly I don't know what to say other then you have some really screwed up morals.

Furthermore, at 17 you should theoretically be attracted to people your own age...and that is a trend to continue. As an example, I picked up my old elementary school year books and looked at a picture of a girl I was attracted to in grade 7. Do I find that picture at all attractive now? Absolutely not. It is a completely un-scientific view you are espousing to suggest that being attracted to young children when you are young means that you will be attracted to young children when you are old. It shows your absolute ignorance on these topic. Please give your head a shake.

It might be a posting style to be intense...or abrasive, but then some people will react in equally abrasive or intense manner, when they are the ones at the receiving end of it.

Especially with new posters, who have not familiarized themselves with the regulars' individual persona or style of posting.

And although I do not think seniority has anything to do with memberships here, being a "senior" should at least entail a certain responsibility in keeping the civility in this forum....by being a positive example to new-comers.

You two have started on the wrong footing. C'mon...reach out to each other and make peace.

[Slavik44]

[ As you have said yourself, WV is a new poster, it should be telling that he is already running around here calling people idiots.

But you've fired the first shot, Slavik44. And it is a personal attack. Here's where it started (post #13)...

What a complete display of Ignorance. You are comparing a blow job between a 15 and 17 year old to stealing a car? Honestly I don't know what to say other then you have some really screwed up morals.

Furthermore, at 17 you should theoretically be attracted to people your own age...and that is a trend to continue. As an example, I picked up my old elementary school year books and looked at a picture of a girl I was attracted to in grade 7. Do I find that picture at all attractive now? Absolutely not. It is a completely un-scientific view you are espousing to suggest that being attracted to young children when you are young means that you will be attracted to young children when you are old. It shows your absolute ignorance on these topic. Please give your head a shake.

It might be a posting style to be intense...or abrasive, but then some people will react in equally abrasive or intense manner, when they are the ones at the receiving end of it.

Especially with new posters, who have not familiarized themselves with the regulars' individual persona or style of posting.

And although I do not think seniority has anything to do with memberships here, being a "senior" should at least entail a certain responsibility in keeping the civility in this forum....by being a positive example to new-comers.

You two have started on the wrong footing. C'mon...reach out to each other and make peace.

Obviously this is a touchy subject, and it will be a heated disscussion, and if I crossed the line or WV thinks I crossed the line I do appologize...it certainly was not my intention. If it was percieved as such I appologize for my actions and hope the discussion can get back on track, in a civil manner.

[jdobbin]

Obviously this is a touchy subject, and it will be a heated disscussion, and if I crossed the line or WV thinks I crossed the line I do appologize...it certainly was not my intention. If it was percieved as such I appologize for my actions and hope the discussion can get back on track, in a civil manner.

Bravo. I was reading along without commenting and saw things getting a little heated. I look forward to reading ahead.

[betsy]

Obviously this is a touchy subject, and it will be a heated disscussion, and if I crossed the line or WV thinks I crossed the line I do appologize...it certainly was not my intention. If it was percieved as such I appologize for my actions and hope the discussion can get back on track, in a civil manner.

Bravo. I look forward to reading.

Ditto.

Cheers everyone!

[guyser]

West Viking, age of consent does not have anything to do with predators and pedophiles. We have laws on the books that deal with those criminals as it is.

As for imparting "morals" that peers have to deal with, who's morals are we talking about? Yours? Mine? someone elses? You see morals are a funny conundrum. They can change depending on where you go and who you are. That is why morals are not enshrined.

You are a father and a grandfather. Cool, I hope Grandpa is a cool gramps for his G-children. But Sir you come from a decidedly different viewpoint as other may have. You seem to want to protect your kids and Gkids as much as possible, and while thats fine, those viewpoints should not be at the cost of injury to a teenager and his consent giving sexual partner ! Two 16 or 15 year olds wanting to have sex is nothing new. What is new is that at least one of them (Women/girls) have developed much earlier than ever before. Girls of 12 are not uncommon to start menstruating. It can be seen earlier. Conditions have rapidly escalated the maturity of girls. So they are now longer in the women mode and sex is inviting to many of them. We curse/bless their bodies with womenhood, and yet tell them , well you have 6 more years before you can think of or act on sex. Never worked that way when you were young, why would it now?

Your notion that children are whisked away to prostitution and life as an indentured servant ...by the hundreds is skeptical at best. Does it happen? Undoubtedly it does, but on the scale you suggest does not make sense. Since perhaps 800-1600 people (read adults) are smuggled into canada , it does not seem that that many "teenagers" are smuggled out. Unless everyone of the smuggled has no family to question the whereabouts of them.

I know for a fact it does happen, although she was 19, beyond any legal age limit you propose, and she was asked to be a model in Hong Kong. She was a daughter of a friend , she went , she had gainful employment as a model and as a hostess at a high end nightclub. She went missing many years ago and has never been seen since. Her family now feels she is swimming in some river over there.

But instead of parents doing what parents should do, safeguarding thier kids and teaching them the way of life, they would rather resort to amending laws that have nothing to do with the problem at hand.You state that abusers and rapists are out there and that is learned behaviour. Fair enough, but learned from whom? Thats right, parents themselves. Alcohol is probably the best example. Children of drunks are highly likely to be drunks later in life. Same can be applied to spousal abuse.

It just seems with your passion for this topic you would best be served to remember what it was like when you were young. You likely had a girlfriend as a teenager, or at worse a crush on one, and it would be reasonable to assume a sexual interest with the same. No harm was intended by you was it? It really is no different today.

Oh, and I can assure you that casual sex can be fulfilling, although I am not so smug to disagree on the rewarding aspect.

[DarkAngel_]

Obviously this is a touchy subject, and it will be a heated disscussion, and if I crossed the line or WV thinks I crossed the line I do appologize...it certainly was not my intention. If it was percieved as such I appologize for my actions and hope the discussion can get back on track, in a civil manner.

sorry to just pounce in here but, i agree with slavik44, teens will 'do it,' no matter what, life tends to 'break' past walls, it is the uncerinty of chaos in masses.

i say we open up a civillian orginization, that works with the police as a 'state guard.' control boarder trafic on all sides and put 'undercover' men at work, or bribe people in the illegal system to work for us, 3X what there being paid (we got to play dirty some time) it seems our problem is not the number of police, its the inisutave to get intell and make a bust, i say give every kid on this side of the world a cell phone or pocket pager with a tracker, all for a one time payment of like: $20, i'm sure the parents could buy the phone, but the service wouldn't put a big dent in the corperations, also make it cheap, a home dial, a 911 dial, and 3 freind dials that are programmable for better access and saftey, also put a tracker in their with an ID # the cops could track down, it would help, no? as well, put black box trackers in cars, so we can pinpoint the exact person or persons holding the child, and pull his pretend life in canada, the states, or even mexico into shambles!

the trick to catching a criminal, is to make their nessesities spies.

what else does a criminal use we can taint to catch them?

[jbg]

West Viking, age of consent does not have anything to do with predators and pedophiles. We have laws on the books that deal with those criminals as it is.

As for imparting "morals" that peers have to deal with, who's morals are we talking about? Yours? Mine? someone elses? You see morals are a funny conundrum. They can change depending on where you go and who you are. That is why morals are not enshrined.

*snip*

Oh, and I can assure you that casual sex can be fulfilling, although I am not so smug to disagree on the rewarding aspect.

Aren't there more constructive things teens can be doing? Don't say society has no interest or right to interfere; I, as a property tax payer, am funding their education (and my own childrens). I do not want my children considered "laggards" by their peers because they will be concentrating on learning, not sexual exploits.

[GostHacked]

Obviously this is a touchy subject, and it will be a heated disscussion, and if I crossed the line or WV thinks I crossed the line I do appologize...it certainly was not my intention. If it was percieved as such I appologize for my actions and hope the discussion can get back on track, in a civil manner.

sorry to just pounce in here but, i agree with slavik44, teens will 'do it,' no matter what, life tends to 'break' past walls, it is the uncerinty of chaos in masses.

i say we open up a civillian orginization, that works with the police as a 'state guard.' control boarder trafic on all sides and put 'undercover' men at work, or bribe people in the illegal system to work for us, 3X what there being paid (we got to play dirty some time) it seems our problem is not the number of police, its the inisutave to get intell and make a bust, i say give every kid on this side of the world a cell phone or pocket pager with a tracker, all for a one time payment of like: $20, i'm sure the parents could buy the phone, but the service wouldn't put a big dent in the corperations, also make it cheap, a home dial, a 911 dial, and 3 freind dials that are programmable for better access and saftey, also put a tracker in their with an ID # the cops could track down, it would help, no? as well, put black box trackers in cars, so we can pinpoint the exact person or persons holding the child, and pull his pretend life in canada, the states, or even mexico into shambles!

the trick to catching a criminal, is to make their nessesities spies.

what else does a criminal use we can taint to catch them?

Why not just 'chip' your kid? Put a RDIF chip in them and track them? Rediculous. Cell phones and pagers can be tossed out the window, or even thrown in another vehicle to throw the cops off. The criminals are always one step ahead of Law and technology.

Parents just need to teach their children the old thing, do not talk to strangers. Many of the kids that are abducted are by someone they know.

I am not sure how one would fix this problem. If people are getting smuggled out of this country for sexual exploitation in other countries, then regular local law enforcement is not really going to help.

[guyser]

Aren't there more constructive things teens can be doing?

Oh absolutely there are. But they are teenagers. I know many who have jobs after school, some in school clubs, organized sports and all are generally great kids who do well in grades and jobs.......and they are all experiencing sex in one form or another. This is why I advocate honest straightforward sexual ed , the whole truth , not the half truths that have been bandied about. And yes, I include abstinence in the truth. Doesn't work all that well, but it works.

[jbg]

Aren't there more constructive things teens can be doing?

Oh absolutely there are. But they are teenagers. I know many who have jobs after school, some in school clubs, organized sports and all are generally great kids who do well in grades and jobs.......and they are all experiencing sex in one form or another. This is why I advocate honest straightforward sexual ed , the whole truth , not the half truths that have been bandied about. And yes, I include abstinence in the truth. Doesn't work all that well, but it works.

How many of those constructive ones say they're involved in sex to seem "cool" and how many really are?

[guyser]

How many of those constructive ones say they're involved in sex to seem "cool" and how many really are?

I wish I could tell with absolute certainty. But I cannot as they are not exactly going to tell me they did it to be cool. Some of them I am sure were pressured into it for the cool factor, and while sad , they learned the hard way I suppose. Welcome to life. As for the rest of them , curiosity probably got the better of them as it did me at a young age.

They are all well adjusted from my perspective.

The ones that make me laugh are the ones "most" people are assuming are not engaging. The Baptist Camp at the end of my lake is notorious for having kids get the beer and a boat and go to this small island and get drunk and have sex. I would not have known either, except when I went to get gas for my boat, the marina guy and I witnessed it. Goes on all the time, then mom and dad come in their boats with the same johnnie or susie , all angelic , and I sit there and shake my head. If only their parents knew!

I want what the majority wants, and that is for kids to have a healthy safe curiosity for their bodies , the ability to be able to ask questions pertaining to sex, and the knowledge as supplied is accurate with respect to sex. I can preach abstinence , but come 14-15 , I am really not going to put too much of a dent in some daughter or sons wish to experiment. So, I supply info no matter and condoms (if asked) and rely on the fact that I have done a good job instilling reasonable morals and values.

In fact I see no upside to harping about abstinence after awhile. Be that for a girl or boy. I see no relevance in telling a daughter to "save herself" for marriage. I do not believe marriage is enough of a sanctity to preserve virginity, not when divorce is rampant like it is.

IN a relationship. it is my experience that sex , when good , makes up a small portion of the relationship. However , should the sex be lousy or non-existent , then it occupies a huge portion of that marriage.

The kids I know usually open up to me about things they never can talk to the parents about. I always stress to them that they can in fact talk to their parents. The parents of these kids know that I am asked certain things, and I have talked to the parents about what I can and cannot answer. Some put restrictions on me, some dont since they have known me all their lives and can trust me. I have been asked some eyebrow raising questions, stuff that might freak out a parent. But I answer them succinctly and as honestly as I can. They deserve nothing more.

The level of sexual knowledge among parents can be pretty pathetic. I have witnessed some strange notions pertaining to sex come from the adults mouths, and frankly I tell them just how wrong they are. Some of it is basic highschool sex ed stuff , some of it a bit kinkier.

Either way, the truth is what kids need. We do a lousy job giving it to them.

Kids today are subject to "rainbow" parties and "necklace" parties. These kids are 10-11-12 and up. Do you know what these are? Neither did many of the parents I talked to. Once informed, they could then have a talk about these things to their kids with the express hope that none of them partake. What about girls who ok anal sex so that they can still maintain "virginity" ? What sort of nonsense are we giving these kids.

They need the truth , not scare tactics , same with soft drugs .

[jbg]

The ones that make me laugh are the ones "most" people are assuming are not engaging. The Baptist Camp at the end of my lake is notorious for having kids get the beer and a boat and go to this small island and get drunk and have sex. I would not have known either, except when I went to get gas for my boat, the marina guy and I witnessed it. Goes on all the time, then mom and dad come in their boats with the same johnnie or susie , all angelic , and I sit there and shake my head. If only their parents knew!

I want what the majority wants, and that is for kids to have a healthy safe curiosity for their bodies , the ability to be able to ask questions pertaining to sex, and the knowledge as supplied is accurate with respect to sex. I can preach abstinence , but come 14-15 , I am really not going to put too much of a dent in some daughter or sons wish to experiment. So, I supply info no matter and condoms (if asked) and rely on the fact that I have done a good job instilling reasonable morals and values.

In fact I see no upside to harping about abstinence after awhile. Be that for a girl or boy.

I did not lose virginity until adulthood. It simply was not a high priority for me. This had a substantial social cost, in terms of ridicule.

Is this kind of peer pressure for teens to do something many don't want to, are scared to (for good reasons), or just don't consider a priority worthwhile?

[guyser]

Is this kind of peer pressure for teens to do something many don't want to, are scared to (for good reasons), or just don't consider a priority worthwhile?

I imagine all three apply in some form or another. No doubt some of them experimented due to peer pressure, and I do know of one who did not consider it a priority. The only one I am certain about is one who did it to keep a boyfriend. An older bf to boot. The advice I gave her was to dump this cad as fast as possible . I have told her all about what boys/men can be like,the BS they will feed her to get into her pants and the heartbreak she will endure once he gets what he wants.

The majority of the kids I know ( the ones that I know "something" about ) that have had sex were at the right time secure enough to try. Has it worked out ok for all of them. No it hasn't , but I suspect that eevn if I could have shown them a "scrooge like " future , they still would have gone ahead.

[Black Dog]

The age of consent should be raised to 18 which is the age of majority in most provinces. Teens who engage in sex with peers are not known to ask permission from anyone.

And how would this law be enforced?

The 'teenagers will engage in sex' argument is a non-starter. Teenagers will also drink alcohol, use drugs and steal cars. That does not make these actions right or mean that society has to tacitly condone such behaviour.

Good laws are one's that can be enforced. It's highly unlikely that laws prohibiting sex between consenting teens under the age of majority will be enforced with any degree of success, which make it a bad law.

The argument that we will be jailing teens for experimenting is sex is also a non-starter. If a 17 year old cannot maintain enough self-control to avoid sex with a 15 year old minor, what stops him from the same engaging in the same behaviour at 24 or 44? Part of maturing is to learn self-control. Why should teen sex be exempt? Please explain how this improves our society.

Many, many people have sex at 17. Very few continue to have sex with 17 year olds when they are 24 or 44. Get real.

Raising the age of consent will not stamp out teen sex. That is not the idea. However, intimate relationships are involved and can be devastating to some. There is no reason society cannot send a signal to teens that intimate relationships go a bit deeper than scratching an itch and require caution and prudence.

By making sex a criminal offence? Ridiculous.

Pretending that teen sex is an insolvable problem is nonsense. Claiming that teens should be free to do whatever their hormones leads them to is irresponsible. Some teens will engage in actions that will bring harm to themselves. That is a fact of life.

And no law in the world can prevent it. Far better to educate kids about sex and not engage in wrongheaded scaremongering trhat won't address the problem.

However we must do what we can to minimize the instances and allow as many of our teens as possible to live long, happy and healthy lives. Taking a cautious approach to sex will not result in long-term harm to our teens. Pregnancy, STDs, HIV and AIDS can result in permanent damage or premature death.

Again, education, not useless nanny state laws, is the answer here.

Why would we not encourage teens to be very careful in choosing a partner to engage in sex with? Why would we not warn teens of the potential psychological and health risks?

Which would be part of any compreghensive sex education campaign. Also, I'm not clear how a law prohbiting sex between consenting minors would send any of the messages you say it would.