Posted on 04/25/2002 10:15:12 AM PDT by Starmaker
Would you mind pointing me in the direction of those facts you're talking about? I could really use some now as I've got a little fire storm brewing with my daughter's school and the fact that the Madam (school principal) seems more intent on running a whore house than an insitution of learning.
i n s t i t u t i o n
it's getting to late
I predict a shortened lifespan for you.
It used to be that a child's parents would be the 'gatekeepers' of that person's marriage prospects and therefore sexual prospects. While it would not have been terribly uncommon for children of 14 to be having sex within a marriage, children that age were not considered to be of sound judgement in such matters. Rather, it would be the parent's judgement that was responsible for protecting the child.
There is, perhaps, an interesting irony in the fact that it is generally liberals rather than conservatives who want to 'child-proof the world' rather than 'world-proofing the child', but on sexual matters it would seem the reverse is true. The irony, though, is lessened when one considers: (1) conservatives seek to 'world proof' children by teaching them to say 'no'; liberals, though avoiding child-proofing the world, are doing nothing to world-proof the children; (2) most items which could be dangerous to children (sharp objects, power tools, matches, firearms, etc.) do not have any evil volition of their own. A child who is taught to avoid such things will not be harmed by them. By contrast, those who would molest children deliberately seek them out; a child's attempts to avoid them may not be sufficient.
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.