Welcome to CreateDebate!

CreateDebate is a social tool that democratizes the decision-making process through online debate. Join Now!
  • Find a debate you care about.
  • Read arguments and vote the best up and the worst down.
  • Earn points and become a thought leader!

To learn more, check out the FAQ or Tour.

Be Yourself

Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.

Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.

Twitter addict? Follow us and be the first to find out when debates become popular!

Identify Ally
Declare Enemy
Challenge to a Debate
Report This User

View All

View All

View All

RSS Ruxify

Reward Points:1
Efficiency: Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive).

Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high.
Efficiency Monitor

7 most recent arguments.
1 point

Yes. They are human beings too, and, sex being one of the most natural things one could participate in, they should be allowed. Not that they really give a damn about what people say anyway.

2 points

It should definitely be legal. There is literally no reason why two or more people shouldn't be able to love each other and participate in a consenting relationship. The only remotely plausible argument against incest is "inbreeding causing deformed children", which, in itself, isn't a very strong argument, and it only covers heterosexual incest, as of course, homosexuals cannot create children. There are plenty worse situations that have a higher risk for this to happen: the woman being over 40, having genetic disorders in either parent's genetic code, being a teen, using drugs/alcohol etc. With just plain incest, the risk only raises a few measly percentages from a non-incestuous childbirth, a change so small, it just doesn't even matter. There is only one, extremely rare case where there can be problems, and that is having a long line of incestuous children, spanning several generations, which is highly unlikely to happen in this day and age. Plus, we have several methods of contraception that can help reduce the chance of pregnancy any further, and if the incestuous couple wants children, they could just always adopt. We have way too many people on this planet anyway.

1 point

LOL YOU'RE A SICK PERSON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


3 points

Of course! They are human beings too, but some people think they (we) are objects, and don't have the right to consent and/or have opinions. A sure sign of this is when that person says "You're/they/he/she is too young." To those people, I say, Fuck off.

2 points

No he does not.

Many others here have already stated my views:

-There is no evidence.

-Bible contradicts itself.

-God sounds like a pretty messed up person if he existed.

2 points

If it supports the idea that homosexuality isn't wrong, then I am for it 100%. It makes me extremely sad to see some people would disapprove of this.

1 point

They should definitely leave us alone.

Some people think we are not old enough to make these "important decisions". We young people are human beings with working brains. The reason why there are so many std cases and teen pregnancies out there is because the very people against this are either too lazy, ignorant, and/or selfish to actually sit down, educate us about it, and make sex protection easily available in locations where we wouldn't find too embarrassing to visit. (Like a vending machine if you needed to sell them).

And if they decide to not protect themselves, and they get pregnant or get STD it's their fault, and they should have to suffer the consequences.

Some of them also don't realize that this "nobody under 18 (or 16) can have sex law" can contribute to depression, or low self esteem, like if the cops actually do arrest the male in the relationship for sex, and it was not rape and they both love each other.

However, in my opinion, the current age of consent laws should be replaced, with a more, anti-ageist approach:

1. The base of this law would be section based. There is a lower age section (13 - 17) and a higher age section(18 +). There also is a small combination in the middle for cases like a couple where the male is 17 and the female is 16 and the male turns 18 while the female remains 16 (16-19).

2.Nobody will be able to legally have sex with people in different age groups. (This prevents adult on minor abuse, which will still be illegal.)(EX. A 13 year old can have sex with a 17 year old, but can't have sex with anyone older.)

3.Because of either undetailed sex education or biased education("No sex until marriage." Done.) There should be a license for the minor group to have sex, to show that they have basic knowledge about it, and getting assurance that they really want to risk all the risks. These could be taken at schools, doctor's offices, or special sex clinics.

I believe that there are similar age of consent laws like this in Japan(minus the license) (The only place I know of) and they have some of the LOWEST teen pregnancy rates in the world. (SOURCE:,) ) of course they may also have other moral values that contribute to this, but still, lowest.

Ruxify has not yet created any debates.

About Me

Biographical Information
Name: Justin 
Gender: Male
Age: 23
Marital Status: Single
Political Party: Independent
Country: United States
Religion: Atheist
Via IM: im[email protected]

Want an easy way to create new debates about cool web pages? Click Here