The Vatican and 12 year olds?

"however the age of consent for sexual relations in the Vatican is 12."
This is written in "adult" in wikipedia.
Is this true? The Vatican concents 12 year olds for sex? WTF?
Religious reform needed!

reply to post by JJay55

---

Maybe they did a study and found that was the age at which those alter boys stopped objecting to have sex with priests???

Just wait until the next pope comes. He won't be very fun at all and will look VERY VERY familiar. UGH. That makes me sick.

Because Wikipedia is a credible source to reference?

It's an old status. As in, back then you were considered an adult at the age of 12 according to the Vatican- for legal purposes, too. Like in Jewish tradition the age is 13. That doesn't mean you're forced into marriage or sexual relations at the age of 12 or 13. It just means that was the age adulthood was recognized at the time. Please note the stress on consensual. As in you chose to be married- you were not forced or sold into it.

Show me otherwise.

You should look at what raids the fbi have been doing in your own country over last few days, before going on about the church and paedos.

Consensual? A 12 year old can't understand those terms.
In Islam girls age 12 are forced into marriage so it's important to have laws that are specific.

the best referance i could find for it so far i a BBC blog, the BBC are usually fairly reliable, but then it is just a blog.



link

i'ld say they just haven't bothered updating the law, technically they're all supposed to be celibate, but it doesn't look good does it.

"There is an equal age of consent set at 12 years of age since 1929, when the Vatican City introduce the same law as the Codic Penal from Italy".

Maybe they should step up and change this lawsince times have changed.

Maybe the pope should just let his priests marry, its just not natural for a man/woman to not have a bonding experience, And on the other side is it not self defeating having the brains of your outfit not reproducing their stock , so to speak IMO...

Stop making minimal posts? Find a existing thread and post a comment... new threads are supposed to bring something new to the table, not some less than one paragraph response to a unreferenced wiki article. K thanks

So people can perhaps better understand this Ashley D prior to the advent of modern medicine the average life expectancy was 35 years of age.

Things like refrigeration and grocery stores did not exist. People often were malnourished, and especially the poor lived very hard hand to mouth existences exposed constantly to the elements in conditions where even an abscessed and infected tooth might very easily claim your life as might a minor infected wound.

The rich and nobles often lived to what we would consider old age due to better insulated dwellings, less exposure to the elements and better steady nutritional diets that their wealth and power afforded them.

The poor peasants and serfs though led altogether brief, deprived, harsh lives and few made it past the age of 40.

It was considered vital in those times for the average person to marry, and produce offspring while still in their teens, in order to raise them successfully to adulthood before they themselves perished.

This is why the common ages of consent were 12 or 13 dependent upon the religious system of the society you lived in.

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

---

Yeah we understand that, but the past is past. No reason to have an old law on the books in this day and age when the Vatican should represent something higher than pedophilia. The Vatican should be pressed to change this policy immediately and they should offer an apology for not changing it sooner.

Well, wikipedia is a nice start. Is it relyable? Depends, on the internet anytime you give users the ability to edit such encyclopedia entries, the point about relieability becomes moot. In praxis, usually it levels out in that the voices of reason and science prevails. Anyways, the legal status is that it does not matter what the legal age of consent is inside the Vatican, because 80 years long now Italian national law applies inside the Vatican above Vatican own law.

Dam'n double post, sorry. Please, delete!

[edit on 28-10-2009 by WalterRatlos]

Who though by the way sets the age of consent where you live? The Vatican or your State?

Do you also understand that not everyone in the world lives as you do?

When I say that I mean do you understand that there are many poor Catholics who still live in very poor third world nations where many of them live still very short, hard lives devoid of nutritional diets and quality medicine very much like our own European Ancestors and early American settlers did.

Do they no longer deserve to have their unions between a man and a woman sanctified by the church because you are fortunate enough to live a much higher standard of life?

Do the nations that they live in who allow their citizens to be Catholics and who also allow by their own laws unions at an earlier age than most States in America supposed to outlaw this because it offends your sensibilities even though your sensibilities are based on life as you know it in a world that they themselves don't live in and don't know?

Please tell me my friend that you are not so bent upon some moral crusade that you are not aware that billions of people around the world earn less than 1.00 dollar a month and our lucky to eat one small handful of rice a day?

Please tell my my friend that you are not so bent upon some moral crusade that you are not aware that the Vatican and the Holy See adminsters to the spirituality of it's faithful in those very same countries as well as ours.

Does it offend you some nations have no oil, or much tillable land, no significant natural resources and are poor nations as a result and their citizens poor by extension too?

Are they supposed to rob our banks or abandon their homes and families to get jobs at 7-Elevens here in America to eliminate what offends your sensibilities?

Have you ever thought that maybe there are legitimate reasons that are valid to millions of human beings why this law might still stand on the Vatican's books or were your knees jerking to hard and to often and kept striking you in the head to first ask why before you started to cry and decry.

Congradulations you have a narrow world view. Now why don't you open your eyes and try to understand it better, as in why it is how it is, instead of telling us all how it should be, without one significant notion of not only how the world really is, but how you could truly change it to become a better place.

Anger and indignity is not conducive to rational thought. Rather it is just conducive to anger and indignity.

I mean no disrespect but I don't believe you have pondered this situation in depth or asked any critical questions.

You are simply making critical statements based on your own limited environment life experiences and narrow world view.

Thanks!



[edit on 28/10/09 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]

Vatican City is a landlocked sovereign city-state whose territory consists of a walled enclave within the city of Rome, the capital city of Italy.

Maybe you can show me another source that shows otherwise... still waiting.

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

---

You can rationalize pedophlia anyway you want to, it's still pedophlia.

Here you go: some conservative New Zealand blogger (?), I reckon.

nzconservative.blogspot.com...