PDA

View Full Version : Age of consent laws



Primeval
Jul 27, 2004, 11:17 PM
First off, just as a warning (to prevent against getting yelled at) some of this stuff may be disturbing, and or un-appropriate for young eyes... so.... don't get mad at me if something here scars you for life.








http://www.ageofconsent.com/ageofconsent.htm
I didn't know there was a separate law for gays as well. Geez, everysingle gay one, that isn't illegial, or the same age as the one for lesbian's, are higher than the age for lesbians. Geez...
Anyway, yeah..meh. Some of those ages are quite low.

Solstis
Jul 27, 2004, 11:28 PM
USA Florida Rev 06/2001
16/18 M/F
Illegal M/M
Illegal F/F

Yay! Same for a lot of states.

What a bunch of conservative motherfuckers!

Not like they'll ever use the laws, but fuckin' still...

[Edit]: Arr! Cranky Solstis!

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Solstis on 2004-07-27 21:29 ]</font>

Ness
Jul 27, 2004, 11:32 PM
I think that guide is pretty old. The supreme court ruled sodomy to be legal nationwide in 2003. (or was it 2002?)

Solstis
Jul 27, 2004, 11:33 PM
On 2004-07-27 21:32, Ness wrote:
I think that guide is pretty old. The supreme court ruled sodomy to be legal nationwide in 2003. (or was it 2002?)



Eh?

The point is: It's still called "sodomy"

Midnight
Jul 27, 2004, 11:44 PM
here: 18/law never passed/law never passed

hmm, i didnt know we was 1 of only a few states that had consent of 18...oh well, at leats a law wasnt passed against me...

but then again, i live in the same state that had a county try to have every gay person arrested for crimes against nature...thats just ridiculous....

Primeval
Jul 28, 2004, 12:15 AM
On 2004-07-27 21:44, Midnight wrote:
here: 18/law never passed/law never passed

hmm, i didnt know we was 1 of only a few states that had consent of 18...oh well, at leats a law wasnt passed against me...

but then again, i live in the same state that had a county try to have every gay person arrested for crimes against nature...thats just ridiculous....



How in the hell is being gay a crime against nature?

Madzozs
Jul 28, 2004, 06:48 AM
Primeval, don't you know that gays hurt trees and stuff. That's a crime against nature.....or something.

Note: The above is a joke.

Midnight
Jul 28, 2004, 11:52 AM
On 2004-07-27 22:15, Primeval wrote:


On 2004-07-27 21:44, Midnight wrote:
here: 18/law never passed/law never passed

hmm, i didnt know we was 1 of only a few states that had consent of 18...oh well, at leats a law wasnt passed against me...

but then again, i live in the same state that had a county try to have every gay person arrested for crimes against nature...thats just ridiculous....



How in the hell is being gay a crime against nature?



beats me

the law didnt get passed, but most everyone that lived there thought it was a good idea. damned hillbilly areas.

navci
Jul 28, 2004, 12:01 PM
http://www.pso-world.com/psoworld/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_eek.gif

Ya. It is ..... weird. To say the least.
I would say something useful, but I honestly don't know what to say past the fact that it is funny to see how gays and lesbians are treated unequally that way. And we have all heard the reasons before.

Nai_Calus
Jul 28, 2004, 01:24 PM
I notice that on that list most states listed as having homosexual sex illegal are Southern...

Of course, the whole gays vs lesbians thing can be summed up with the following two reactions:

Conservative bible-banging white Southern hick: Guys doing each other up the ass? God Almighty! How disgusting! Them ******* is destroying tradtional values and sinning against God and nature!

Conservative bible-banging white Southern hick: Girls eatin' each other out? Yee-haw! Now ah'd PAY tuh see that!

...I rest my case.

DruidMettool
Jul 28, 2004, 01:49 PM
You Koreans are lucky... sooooo lucky.

I'm gonna move in with Nazo. http://www.pso-world.com/psoworld/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_wacko.gif

Primeval
Jul 28, 2004, 01:57 PM
On 2004-07-28 11:49, DruidMettool wrote:
You Koreans are lucky... sooooo lucky.

I'm gonna move in with Nazo. http://www.pso-world.com/psoworld/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_wacko.gif


These Koreans do stuff that you would never know of... unless you looked that is...

Hillbillies? Bah.

agenevil
Jul 28, 2004, 03:29 PM
Like anyoone in the USA would follow these rules anyways.

My mom says gays go to hell.

HOW the FUCK is that true. sHe has no idea. It just makes me mad how people can think that way.

Now where in the bible does it say it is a sin? From what I read, even in suggested verses on the topic, it was a crime... IN THAT CERTAIN VILLAGE/GROUP. The ten commandment has no say on it.

And really, most people I know and me really dont care if someone has sex... thats their business. Just dont bring it on us.

[/complaint]

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: agenevil on 2004-07-28 13:29 ]</font>

Madzozs
Jul 28, 2004, 04:55 PM
As far as going to Hell. One would have to believe in God and in hell as well. The trick to sinning, is don't believe there is an infinite punishment for it. http://www.pso-world.com/psoworld/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_wink.gif

DeciBal
Jul 28, 2004, 05:01 PM
o_0 ... 12!?!!??


that's not right...

Primeval
Jul 28, 2004, 06:54 PM
On 2004-07-28 13:29, agenevil wrote:
Like anyoone in the USA would follow these rules anyways.

My mom says gays go to hell.

HOW the FUCK is that true. sHe has no idea. It just makes me mad how people can think that way.

Now where in the bible does it say it is a sin? From what I read, even in suggested verses on the topic, it was a crime... IN THAT CERTAIN VILLAGE/GROUP. The ten commandment has no say on it.

And really, most people I know and me really dont care if someone has sex... thats their business. Just dont bring it on us.

[/complaint]

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: agenevil on 2004-07-28 13:29 ]</font>


I think that there's something in there about not having sex 'till you're married

Graptakular83
Jul 30, 2004, 04:17 AM
Hehe, laws. Its funny and true that a lot of the time, peoople dont follow those laws. Though i do know people here in cali (age consent is 18) that are really against even looking at a girl if she looks too young. But then again, isnt "pretty" a lot of times also "young-looking"? After all, is there much diff in a guy pursuing a 5'2" 18 yr old and a similar looking 14 yr old if he went after her cuz she "looked hot"? Either way, i also know plenty of people in which age has no bearing. Though sadly, this leads to the 13 yr old girl getting an abortion cuz of the pizza guy. Dont mind me, im just mini ranting here.

I agree with the previous post about gays as well. Its sad how obsessed some people are over gay marriage and the like. Isnt legal marriage just a leftover idea that came from women being considered property and thus being needed to be "registered" like a house or car? Either way, watever works for u, works for u, just dont hurt anyone else and u can go happy-go-lucky in my book.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Graptakular83 on 2004-07-30 02:21 ]</font>

Primeval
Jul 30, 2004, 11:25 AM
I do not think there should be an age of consent, primarily because I do not think that the length of time since a person emerged from the womb is a useful indicator of anything. Having an age of consent is too often seen as to be saying 'people under this age should not have sex'. Which makes sex a forbidden area for those under the age. Which denies them the right to learn about this important area of life as they learn other things. In these enlightened days of safer sex, when we realise that 'sex' means lots of fun and games together with another person(s), not merely 'penetrative intercourse'; we need to let very young people explore their bodies, explore the feelings of attraction to another, explore each others' bodies - in short, to explore sex. An age of 'consent' implies that those younger than this age cannot consent to sex with each other, and thus I disagree with the concept.

Sexual maturity is both physical and mental. For me, puberty would be a good defining point, and the nearest I might come to agreeing to an age of anything is to say that people past puberty should have sex with each other, not with those who have not yet reached puberty (allowing for the indefinability of the process!). But even this is challenged by those who define themselves as paedophiles, in the true meaning of the word ('child-lover', not child abuser). And if I self-define as bisexual without hurting anyone, who am I to judge those who self-define as paedophiles and don't hurt anyone?

A legal age of consent is presumably there as a protection, because adults have greater power in this world, and can force children to do thing they don't necessarily want to, or persuade them that they do when they don't, so children need protection. But the incidence of rape and sexual abuse by one adult to another shows that this power imbalance is not unique to the adult/child relationship. For instance, men have for quite a while tended to have power over women, and bosses have power over their employees. Thus we need laws to protect against abuses of power hierarchies, and we do - sexual harassment laws.

In both the cases I mentioned at the start, the abuser was caught, found guilty of a crime, and sentenced. And even though the age of consent was brought into the proceedings, I maintain that the laws against non-consensual acts and harassment would have sufficed.

The age of consent law seems to me to fall into a family of unneeded laws which criminalise victimless acts. Other examples are the laws used against the Spanner defendants, who were criminalised for consensual SM sex, and the laws against cannabis use, which criminalises users of a natural substance with no anti-social effects.

It is an unspecific law which should be replaced by better laws protecting us all from those who may abuse us.




<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Primeval on 2004-07-30 09:27 ]</font>

Primeval
Jul 30, 2004, 11:31 AM
I had to post this just for all of you who don't know what sodomy is:

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sodomy

Bradicus
Jul 30, 2004, 12:36 PM
As for homosexuality being a crime against nature, some claim to feel that, since it is not what our bodies were designed to do, it is wrong. It's obvious that they are just predjudiced against anything "different".

As humans, we are infesting/destroying the world. Hell, heterosexual intercourse is more harmful to nature than the alternative... Just living as most North Americans do is more a crime to the world than anything else.

Aredhel
Jul 31, 2004, 01:16 PM
I believe that sodomy comes from the biblical town of Sodom, a twin city with Gamorra. Both towns were, In the Bible (Christian one, that is), destroyed by God because the people there were great sinners: examples were given such as gay relations among other things such as raping angels, etc... So there you have it.

If you believe that homosexuality is a sin against God, there is your "proof" - but keep in mind how many times the bible has been edited through the years: Who can you trust but yourself when it comes to these other-worldly manners???

Many people have aversions to Christ because of what he has publicly stood for in the minds of so many extremists - take what he taught about life in general and leave the rest. I believe you were put here to find your own truth, but that, in itself, is a belief all its own. If you can't accept Christ as a prophet, a messiah or even a philosopher, then consider this: Peace has been proven to lead to happiness, War is Hell... of the two which would you choose? Love or hate? which has more power? Does one exist without the other? How has hate ever benefitted you? Doesn't the path of peace and love may you feel like you just belong?

From a physical standpoint, the universe is inherently cold and dark - you can't add cold and dark, you can only subtract heat and light. Be the light of the universe and you will enjoy the heaven you create for yourself. This means accepting others for what they ARE - not for what they stand for.

Aredhel
Jul 31, 2004, 01:17 PM
I believe that sodomy comes from the biblical town of Sodom, a twin city with Gamorra. Both towns were, In the Bible (Christian one, that is), destroyed by God because the people there were great sinners: examples were given such as gay relations among other things such as raping angels, etc... So there you have it.

If you believe that homosexuality is a sin against God, there is your "proof" - but keep in mind how many times the bible has been edited through the years: Who can you trust but yourself when it comes to these other-worldly manners???

Many people have aversions to Christ because of what he has publicly stood for in the minds of so many extremists - take what he taught about life in general and leave the rest. I believe you were put here to find your own truth, but that, in itself, is a belief all its own. If you can't accept Christ as a prophet, a messiah or even a philosopher, then consider this: Peace has been proven to lead to happiness, War is Hell... of the two which would you choose? Love or hate? which has more power? Does one exist without the other? How has hate ever benefitted you? Doesn't the path of peace and love may you feel like you just belong?

From a physical standpoint, the universe is inherently cold and dark - you can't add cold and dark, you can only subtract heat and light. Be the light of the universe and you will enjoy the heaven you create for yourself. This means accepting others for what they ARE - not for what they stand for.

Primeval
Jul 31, 2004, 02:56 PM
On 2004-07-31 11:17, Aredhel wrote:
I believe that sodomy comes from the biblical town of Sodom, a twin city with Gamorra. Both towns were, In the Bible (Christian one, that is), destroyed by God because the people there were great sinners: examples were given such as gay relations among other things such as raping angels, etc... So there you have it.

If you believe that homosexuality is a sin against God, there is your "proof" - but keep in mind how many times the bible has been edited through the years: Who can you trust but yourself when it comes to these other-worldly manners???

Many people have aversions to Christ because of what he has publicly stood for in the minds of so many extremists - take what he taught about life in general and leave the rest. I believe you were put here to find your own truth, but that, in itself, is a belief all its own. If you can't accept Christ as a prophet, a messiah or even a philosopher, then consider this: Peace has been proven to lead to happiness, War is Hell... of the two which would you choose? Love or hate? which has more power? Does one exist without the other? How has hate ever benefitted you? Doesn't the path of peace and love may you feel like you just belong?

From a physical standpoint, the universe is inherently cold and dark - you can't add cold and dark, you can only subtract heat and light. Be the light of the universe and you will enjoy the heaven you create for yourself. This means accepting others for what they ARE - not for what they stand for.



No... accept others for WHO they are. but other than that, I like that

Azbats
Jul 31, 2004, 04:54 PM
Do bare in mind Primeval that the age of consent is there to protect people from others that might take advantage.

I am certainly a beliver in the age of consent being the same for all sexual orientations. Even though it does say in the Bible that man should not sleep with man or lay down with an animal, etc always remember that the Bible was written by MAN, and MAN is full of shit flawed

Also according to the bible masterbation is a sin too. Look at poor Ohnan, God struck him down for spilling his seed

And I've just seen half the teenage audienece gulp with that one. lol.

Primeval
Jul 31, 2004, 05:49 PM
Yes they are there to protect, but these laws aren't enforced and serve no purpose; and there is no way that the government can root out every single person who has broken one of these laws.

For example, at my school, nearly 1/4 of the students have broken one of these laws (my school has 2813 students, do the math) and nearly the whole school knows about this, including teachers. But no one cares to report anything; because no one cares. So in short, one of the main purposes that these laws were creted for is to protect against statutory rape.

Eihwaz
Jul 31, 2004, 06:47 PM
How the fuck does someone rape an angel? If they really existed, I doubt they would go around acting promiscuous around humans. o_O And who says angels have the same structure as humans?

Er, anyway. I do believe sodomy is refered to as such becuase of Sodom and Gommorah, Aredhel, but not specificially for gay sex. For the longest time, sodomy meant like unatural, sinful acts...I think.

I could be wrong, of course. >_>

Primeval
Jul 31, 2004, 07:08 PM
On 2004-07-31 16:47, Eihwaz wrote:
How the fuck does someone rape an angel? If they really existed, I doubt they would go around acting promiscuous around humans. o_O And who says angels have the same structure as humans?

Er, anyway. I do believe sodomy is refered to as such becuase of Sodom and Gommorah, Aredhel, but not specificially for gay sex. For the longest time, sodomy meant like unatural, sinful acts...I think.

I could be wrong, of course. >_>



I wouldn't say un-natural, it's more under the category of weirdness... depending on who you are though...

Aredhel
Jul 31, 2004, 07:41 PM
On 2004-07-31 12:56, Primeval wrote:

No... accept others for WHO they are.



Accepting others for WHO they are will only lead to moral selection. It would be far more constituent upon people to accept others for what they are - fellow human beings. Love the man, hate the sin, right?

And I'm never 100% sure on anything in this multiverse - sodomy is just a word, one that happens to be associated with something that people do (whatever it is). At the very root of things, should we be truly fearful of words or even what they imply? Decisions guide violence and prejudice, not intentions or societal considerations or even the meaning of a word.

Primeval
Aug 1, 2004, 02:33 AM
On 2004-07-31 17:41, Aredhel wrote:


On 2004-07-31 12:56, Primeval wrote:

No... accept others for WHO they are.



Accepting others for WHO they are will only lead to moral selection. It would be far more constituent upon people to accept others for what they are - fellow human beings. Love the man, hate the sin, right?

And I'm never 100% sure on anything in this multiverse - sodomy is just a word, one that happens to be associated with something that people do (whatever it is). At the very root of things, should we be truly fearful of words or even what they imply? Decisions guide violence and prejudice, not intentions or societal considerations or even the meaning of a word.



Personally, People who judge books by their covers I find really rather annoying. But the few people that I choose to keep as physical (not over the internet) friends, well, I know them really well.

Anywho back to the subject. Sodomy is a word, and different words mean different things, but thoretically these words were created somehow, some way, and some of them might be quite random, so we could have different words that have the same meaning. So we should be more afraid of what the words are implying, rather than the words themselves.