CreateDebate


Debate Info

28
15
YES!! Na
Debate Score:43
Arguments:33
Total Votes:46
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 YES!! (19)
 
 Na (14)

Debate Creator

kmjnhh123(278) pic



Should the age to have sex be lowerd?

Should it be lowerd, i think yes as long as they were protection!

YES!!

Side Score: 28
VS.

Na

Side Score: 15
3 points

Who's going to stop them from having sex anyway? The government can't monitor people in their homes.

Side: YES!!
2 points

I say that at 13 anything should go. It will then be up to the parents to protect their own children. I don't believe in a nanny state where the government has to do the parenting work for everyone. People need more personal responsibility.

Besides, it was only 7 years ago when I was this age. I remember vividly knowing right from wrong, how to conduct myself, and the potential consequences of sex. There's no reason why other kids can't be educated the same way I was: by parents who took the time to explain it.

Side: YES!!
zproach(252) Disputed
0 points

13 is way too young. Nobody knows what they are doing at 13. The problem with having such a low age is that you open up the possibility that young girls (I know this is a bit sexist, but honestly, it's how the world works) of being emotionally pressured into sex with older men.

Side: na
1 point

i think you said exactly what i was thinking but there still isnt any way to stop two kids that want to have sex.

Side: na
2 points

i think that it should be, partly because you know that most teenagers are going to have sex at a young age and when they are together, the boy might be a year older then the girl or vice versa and either party could get in trouble, so i really do think that would be best.

Side: YES!!
1 point

Yes, right away my parents dont allow it and im bloody anoyed, ive gt a girfreind and want to do it now, its been longer enough and were gettin anoyed that we cant!!!

Side: YES!!
2 points

"Yes, right away my parents dont allow it and im bloody anoyed, ive gt a girfreind and want to do it now, its been longer enough and were gettin anoyed that we cant!!!"

This should be documented as the first time in history that a teenager obeyed his parents' wishes.

Side: YES!!
iamdavidh(4856) Disputed
1 point

Well, as long as the other person isn't over 18, it's legal in every state I believe. So I'm not sure what the problem is. There's nothing illegal about two people both under the age of consent having sex with eachother I dont' think.

If they are over the age of consent, and you are under the age of consent, in your State, then you are probably making a mistake of one sort or another anyway. Unless you're a dude underage, then it's more like a score, but the other person could still be arrested.

Unless you are both in High School, and one of you happens to be over 18 and you live in a State where age of consent is 18.

One of you could go to jail anyway and be labeled a sex offender for life, which is actually kind of retarded if you are both in High School.

Side: na
usps(365) Disputed
3 points

The age of consent is just that, the minimum age in which a person can consent to sex. If both participants are 14 they can both be charged with statutory rape neither was old enough to consent to sex. they would never be charged but!

Side: YES!!

I thought that it was like 2 or 3 years apart that the couple could be, even if one was above 18.

Side: na

The way I see it, people will naturally want to have sex as soon as they are physically capable of having it. I think 15 should be the minimum age, as that is the time when most teenagers become sexually capable. The greater concern should be promoting the use of prophylactics, not preventing something that is, by nature, irresistible.

Side: YES!!
1 point

I have been with the same guy for almost 8 months, next year i will be 18 and he will be 16. He is very mature for his age because of some things he has been through in his life. It's ridiculous for the age to be 18, im still in high school. I think it should be 15.

Side: YES!!
1 point

yes so know i can bed this sexy 3 year old that i have been seeing for three years

Side: YES!!

This is a tricky one, how is a person supposed to know that someone is underage or not. There has been cases where teenagers that look older than they are get into nightclubs where you would expect everyone to be above 18 where I am from and 21 in America I think. If a person is to take one of these people home and has sex with them they are guilty of statutory rape, which is a bit unfair.

Side: YES!!
1 point

i mean you could say yes and you could say no at the same time. yes it should be lowered because even though there is a certain age that's legal for someone to have sex the majority of the youth in this century are having sex any way. Teen pregnancies have been raising higher and higher each year ccausing some teens to even drop out and get nowhere unless they really work hard for it which rarely happens. Ans the no bc if the age was lowered the number of teen preganacies would more than likely double and plus the spread of disease and poor choices younger kids make we'd be looking at a complete mess. So you could say no and you could say yes

Side: YES!!

Does it really make a difference? Teens are gonna have sex whenever they feel like it regardless of the law. So yes, lower it already.

Side: YES!!
1 point

Yes because people who are ready and know about the advantages and disadvantages of having sex without a condom, should be able to, if they know what it takes to be a mum. People who use condoms should be allowed because they won't become a mum or dad, but it shouldnt be lowered very much, u could have 2 year old mums.

Side: YES!!
1 point

umm yea they do it anyways get over it asshole governers just because its a law doesnt mean kids would follow it. What are you going to do next? install cameras in our bedrooms and cars?

Side: YES!!

Teens are more promiscuous today and the abstinence pledge is not working, so, the age of consent should be lowered.

Side: YES!!

No age of consent laws should exist, or at least make it the onset of puberty. The focus should be on accepting sexuality as normal (because it is). Spreading STD's should be criminalized and victims should get financial compensation from the person responsible.

Side: YES!!
0 points

even if the age is not lowered, people will still have underage sex. so, by lowering it, they wont be having underage sex!

Side: YES!!
2 points

The age of consent is necessary to prevent adults from taking sexual advantage of children. A well-known form of ephebophilia is the 'Teacher-student' romance. Either the teacher or the student seduces the other - which results in a sexual relationship that has been known to evolve into marriage. An example from popular culture would be the critically acclaimed film 'Notes on a Scandal'.

Side: na
aveskde(1935) Disputed
2 points

"The age of consent is necessary to prevent adults from taking sexual advantage of children."

I believe this is why concepts like statutory rape exist, however. Age of consent is hardly necessary between two people of the same or similar ages however.

In truth I believe that age limits on sex exist because most parents, indeed many adults seem to have a uncomfortable feeling when discussing or contemplating the subject of teenagers having sex with each other.

Side: YES!!
TERMINATOR(6778) Disputed
1 point

That is not what the age of consent is. The age of consent is for a person under 18 and a person over 18 - the law allows two people under 18 to engage in intercourse, +/- about 3 years.

Side: na

What the age of consent is depends on where you live. There are different age limits in different places, and in some places the age of consent is different for boys and for girls. To find out about the age of consent in your country or state, please see age of consent chart.[1]

Canada is 16 and all US states set their limits between 16 and 18.

HOWEVER,

If one is under the age of consent and s/he choose to have sex with someone who is over the age of consent, then they can be charged with the crime of 'statutory rape'.

So, 16 may seem a little young, yet 18 seems a little old. Nothing lower than 16.

Supporting Evidence: Consent [1] (en.wikipedia.org)
Side: na
1 point

I cant remember asking permission, so I dont care.

.............................................................................................

Side: na

The age to have sex should be raised and a test should be given. Dumb people should not be allowed to have sex and reproduce. At the very minimum they should be forced to pass a spelling test first ;)

Side: na
1 point

In the U.S. the age of consent is 16 (for the most part). I would bump it up to 18 not that it matters we are animals and we do what comes natural.

http://www.avert.org/age-of-consent.htm

Side: na
1 point

Waste of time, how many people have actually been charged for rape because they had mutual sex with someone + or - a few years of their age.

Side: na
1 point

Studies show that adolescents go trough an immense amount of emotional growth and that their judgment does not match that of an adult. I think that by allowing people to have sex at a lower age you increase the chances of adolescents making questionable decisions. Remember, rampant sexual intercourse amongst teens has several negative societal ramifications such as increases in teenage pregnancy and STDs. There is a reason behind the limits; I think that these reasons are valid and thus the limits should be kept where they are.

Side: na
1 point

No because it is very painful in labour and younger people shoulnd't have to go through with the pain and morning sickness

Side: na