Posted on 08/27/2010 2:12:14 PM PDT by markomalley
Now here’s a good idea. (Heavy sarcasm)
A high profile British homosexual activist wants the age of sexual consent lowered to 14, on the basis that currently underage sex “is mostly consenting, safe and fun”.
Peter Tatchell plugged for this change in America in one of a series of articles on “dangerous ideas” on the website Big Think recently.
Dangerous, certainly, but also just a little bit surprising in view of this year of paedophilia scandals and his campaign against Pope Benedict’s visit to the UK — one of the reasons being the Pope’s alleged “cover up” of clerical sexual abuse of children?
By a tortured logic Tatchell claims that a lower age of consent is “the best way” to protect young people from abuse. His arguments boil down to three:
* The kids are doing it anyway.
* Current laws criminalise teenagers.
* Young people under 16 have the right to decide when to have sex.
Actually, in making the last claim Tatchell puts no lower age limit. This fits with his recipe for protecting kids from peer pressure and paedophiles: “giving them frank, high quality sex and relationship education from an early age”. As we have noted elsewhere on this site recently, for some people that means nursery school.
In the end, his case seems to rest on a view of sex as the driving force and highest achievement of human life — from “an early age”. It is a view that some adults may find convenient but which common sense rejects as contrary to the good of children and society. Thus the editors of Big Think conclude:
Why We Should Reject This
Of course there will always be underage people who have sex, but that doesn’t mean the law should condone it. Sex is a very complicated part of human behavior that is too nuanced for young people to understand. In fact, studies have shown that people, especially girls, who have sex at a young age often regret it. One study in New Zealand found that 70% of girls who had sex before the age of 16 wished they hadn’t done so. In a column for Telegraph, writer David Lindsay argues, “sex is for people who can cope with the consequences, physical and otherwise. In a word, adults.”
Oh but you will find no end of Freepers using any pretext - even the word of God - to attack age of consent laws.
Witness the debate on this thread.
Shatering the age of consent obstacle is a common goal among the libertarian crowd since Ayn Rand gave the movement it's hippie hedonist makeover.
Now they’re called “Safe School Czars”.
>:-[
Yes. I’ve seen the idiocy. While the denial crowd claims that if homosexuals get “special rights” there’s no chance that NAMBLA will petition to lower the age of consent. I don’t know if they’re stupid or lib trolls.
Well that too.
One word: Pedophile
We are going back to pagan times when everything sexual was permitted. Many Christian churches are losing the strength of their convictions in liberal society. They are easing up on their moral codes and, for all their new found liberal tolerance, they`re being attacked at every quarter. Secularism and atheism are on the rise as we move closer to the European model of socialism. And this socialism is not so much a godless state but a state that becomes god is the final blueprint.
That’s shocking.
The second law of homosexuality:
To the mentally healthy (heterosexual); sex is something you do.
To the mentally diseased ('homosexual'); sex is everything you are.
It was before she was appointed.
When she was being confirmed I posted that and the rats came out of the wood work attacking me until I posted the google link, them mumms the word.
Soory my post on FR was way after whe was confirmed.
England-where a father finds out that a 50 yr old queen is “dating” his 14 yr old son and he can’t buy a gun to kill the SOB.
“Would a gay priest rape a young teenage boy? Some have.
Would a straight priest rape a young teenage boy? NEVER”
EXACTLY. Well put!
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda or moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
These miscreants just can’t wait to get their hands on our children. Hell no!
Talk about not vetting!
Honestly, these pedophiles should be strung up in the public square.
They want them YOUNG and UNTOUCHED.
Why do you think liberals want sex education to start in kindergarten? Or why when they are taught about sex, it's gender blender style. Family is being redefined. So why not lower the age of “consent” to minimize any punishment for molesting a child?
Shhhh ... You're supposed to believe that homosexuals have boundaries on AGE. LOL! They DO NOT! That is why"gay" peole want the age of consent to be LOWER!
Shame, shame, shame on you!
You’re supposed to believe that homosexuals have BOUNDARIES on AGE. But for some ODD reason, “gays” want the age LOWER and LOWER and LOWER! How can that be? We’re told homosexuals respect little kids and wouldn’t touch them.
LOL!!!!
They want them as young as possible and untouched.
Oh my!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.