reply to post by Methuselah
As a disclaimer: I am bringing this thread back to life, and the first choch to say something like "this thread has been dead for years" should talk
to the nearest Forum Moderater about the "use the search function!!!!!" statement they give when someone has the audacity to start a thread similar
to someone elses.
Also, me and the OP are at odds with eachother. I am not here to start a flame war, just to try and talk with him/her and ask some questions.
Not trying to be rude or trying to bait anyone into anything....
anyone younger than 18 should not be having sex at all... period... no sex with people older than 18, no persons younger than 18. its something they
arent mentally mature enough for yet.
This is what is hard to measure. Why does someone have to travel 18 times around the sun to b suitable for sex? It just seems arbitrary, as some
people are more than capable of making this decision in an earlier time in thier life.
Also, who says? Can we truly rely on human-run institutions to decide what age, exactly, is suitable for child rearing and/or sex? The Bible, as the
de facto moral compass of most americans, says nothing to this effect as an exact age, but an exact state of mind. This varies from person to person.
Making a certain age the cutoof point, and using a system of force to uphld this point seems more detrimental than not.
As my very wise father said to me when I was young and acting out. Rules without relationship leads to rebellion. Our relationship is very well now,
and in hindsight, the rules make sense. I do not resent him. If we make rules and provide no physical reason and no positive relationship to all
people, rebellion and violence will ensue.
Also, many theological scholars believe Mary gave birth to Jesus at a young (much yonger than 18) age as it was customary in those days.
if all minors abide by this
If my aunt had a penis and testicles, she would be my uncle.
Just a kind of humorous thing I heard growing up when my if/then statements seemed a little too streching.
I think initiating violence against another human being is wrong.
This is where I most wanted to reply because I want to see what the OP thinks about this idea.
I think marriage should not be a function of the state. I think it is a covenant between two people and does not need to involve violence of any sort.
Joseph did not rely on the Romans to marry Mary. Why do we rely on a state that's foundation is treating our neighbors like cattle?
I think marriage should be between two people, not between two people and the state. I believe in more of a common-law marriage because if you ask me
why marriages are failing, you need look no further than the usual suspect, tyranny.
The reason young people have sex is because our bodies give us the inclination to do so. This, I believe, goes back to the fact that babies that are
born of younger parents have a lower mortality rate.
If the only way to stop people from having sex in times that seem immoral or impractical involved a gun and pointing it at someones head, how does an
act of coercion make us better as a society?
I am all for voluntary virginity, an all that. I think people need to be responsible when dealing with sexual matters. I do not think that violence or
involuntary conditioning is necessary (pr preferable) for this end to be met.
The ends do not justify the means. Remember, Hitler wanted a perfect world..... now, who doesn't want that? The trouble is with how to get there, as
we all know so well.