Replies

First of all, I have a problem with anyone who criticizes a book without having read it. I haven't read it either so I'm not prepared to comment on it's supposed content.

But on the subject of children having sex, I would first like someone to accurately define what a "child" is. Is a 12 year old the same as a 16 year old? Wasn't it commonplace for people in most of the world to marry as early as age 12 only a 150 years ago? It seems as though on the one hand we keep talking about personal responsibility, but on the other we keep pushing back the age at which we expect it.

Things have obviously changed over time. An important element is that girls are physically maturing far earlier than they used to. So even as the age of marriage has been rising the age of sexual maturity is dropping, are we just going to bury our heads in the sand and say things shouldn't change when they do anyway? I don't have any sure fire answers either, but prohibition is a contradiction to personal responsibility. You can't have it both ways.

I think you raise some interesting points, however I think the issue of contention is not over a 16 year old boy having sex with a 13 year old girl, but rather a 35-40 year old man having sex with a 13 year old girl (or boy).

Big difference in my book.

When children married in their teens years ago, the suitor courted them, there were chaperones, the parents knew the person and asked alot of questions. They weren't running off and making out in the back seat of the family Ford. Having sex wasn't an option before marriage. The culture of love and marriage was much different then.

Kids weren't pressured by outside forces to have sex and the community protected them.

Now we send our kids off to school and they learn all about all kinds of sex activities in taxpayer funded schools.

Yes, back in the good old days, some kids engaged in sex before married, and some gals got pregnant. But not at the rate we are seeing now.