Children are easily intimidated by adults when they tell them to do something.
They canot make cosenting choices especially about sex.
If Mr.2001 thinks so, he doesn’t know childre very well or thinks everyoe means exactly what they say when they say yes or no.
NAMBLA is there to coerce children into sex, which is a okay with Mr.2001.
Thankfully, this is a minority opinion and rejected by most thinking adults.
the only damage this kid might suffer is that he’ll never have pussy that good again for the rest of his life…
he may have been spoiled.
By the way, does anyone know anything about the kid? Not to put too fine a point on it, I suspect that Lebron James at 14 presented as a mature man, so to speak.
Yeah, he seemed to find much to agree with on NAMBLA’s site. I wonder if he’ll start pulling cites and quotes from them in the future, to back up his arguments? 
I asked this in the other thread.
If children (in Mr. 2001’s case as young as 12) are capable of making sexual decisions, what other decisions can they make?
What scares the crap out of me is little girls wanting to be mommies. :-p
I don’t want to confuse my argument, (which I realize is kind of a tangent to the rest of the thread) with the facts of real life.
In real life I agree that sex is seen as a big deal, and teens may not be mature enough to handle the societal factors. The teacher showed intensely poor judgement and at minimum should no longer be teaching. (Not sure I agree with serving more jail time than a bank robber though.)
In my ideal world, you would not have to worry about a gradual maturity towards sex. Do you worry about kids maturing towards getting a hug? But yes, my position is conjecture and idle complaining about our puritanical society.
Actually, I remember being a teenager, and being able to decide what I wanted or did not want.
No, coercing anyone into sex is not “a okay” with me. What a vile thing to say! I hope you’ll have the class to retract it.
They should not be prevented from making any decisions solely because of their age.
You haven’t read much on child psychology, have you?
Nope, but I do know age restrictions are never appropriate. Age is always a surrogate for something else, and to avoid needless discrimination, it’s best to test that “something else” directly.
Do you remember all your decisions being good?
I wil not. Any adult is in a position of coercion over a child, and their mere say-so can lead a child to say yes when they should say no.
Let’s see.
You know bupkis about sex psychology.
You know nothing about child psychology.
Yet you somehow magically know that children having sex with adults is perfectly OK.
On what, sir, do you make your basis for this decision, other than “age discrimination is bad”?
And a more frightening question… you don’t have any kids, do you?
Of course not. No one’s decisions are always good, no matter how old they are. The point is that I was able to make up my own mind and decide for myself whether I wanted to do something.
You can’t anyway, because vanilla is the one who said it. 
I assume by “child” you mean very young children, since most teenagers are not obedient little drones. In that case, even if they are physically ready for sex, which is unlikely, then since coercion is involved, it’s rape, right? Age doesn’t even enter into it.
The scientific evidence that minors are not harmed by consensual sex, my own recollections of that age, and the common sense idea that everyone matures at different rates, which means age is not a useful measure of a person’s abilities.
And your expertise in child psychology makes you qualified to state when a person is capable of making a rational decision starts… where?
No, by “child” I mean minor. The little girl of 12 you want people to pork, which she wants because she wants to be popular. Then the little kid she’s going to have by the time she is 14. Those children.
You think the altar boys were capable of saying no? Were they coerced? Proving that line is awfully hard, isn’t it?
The study where they are not harmed by “consensual sex” does not mean “coerced into consent by adults in positions of power.”
Did you miss the obvious point or just having fun with your argument?
Age is a surrogate measure in all age restrictions. Every person is different, and different people have different abilities at different ages. Some 18 year olds are quite capable drinkers who know and respect their limits. Some 40 year olds get drunk and drive regularly. You cannot easily test for the knowledge and willingness to drink responsibly, so society magically came up with 21 as the drinking age. It is meaningless, but people figured that we needed something.
Same with age of consent. Some 14 year olds are more mature than some 18 year olds. Society came up with an average number that sounded good. In todays society, some percentage of 14 year old children having sex with 23 year old adults will likely be just fine. Some 18 year olds will be devastated. So his post that you are responding to does not read to me "…magically know that children having sex with adults is perfectly OK. " It reads to me “There is some percentage of 14 year olds who will be perfectly OK with sex with an adult, but that is too hard for society to determine, so we have determined an age limit that is a surrogate for the factors we cannot measure. And I don’t like that.”
However, Mr2011 does fail to mention a way to test for the ability to handle such a relationship.
Face it. Children and young adults are not capable of making responsible decisions about life-changing events, including sex. Removing the legal protections that guard them from adult predators, abusers, and molesters is simply asinine and outrageous.
I agree that a kid around the age of 15 can figure out how to get his penis into his girlfriend, and many of them will seek out anyone who will let them. This isn’t damaging in most cases. What is damaging is when an adult abuses a minor.
Do me, yourself, your kids, and your neightbors kids a favor and learn something about sexual abuse before you begin preaching NAMBLA’s world.
[QUOTE=BoringDadSociety came up with an average number that sounded good.[/QUOTE]
That’s not quite true. Most humans reach physical maturity between 18 and 21. Their brain finishes solidifying, and other physiological changes of childhood stop. Their growing slows. Socially, they finish school and other childhood activities.
That is why they become adults at 18. It isn’t some average number that sounded good.
Frankly, most 14 year olds are in the middle of puberty. Their hormones are raging, and they are just discovering sexuality, like a kid with a new toy. Also like a kid with a new toy, they want to play with it, explore it, and discover the wonders of it. Again like a kid with a toy, they’ll screw up half the time and break something. Unfortunately, there is no way to return your unwanted child or STD to the store, and no way to undo the damage from a physically abusive relationship.
Kids at that age attatch to the stupidest things. If you let most kids get a tattoo at the age of 13, by the time they were 21 they would cover it in shame - but you (general you) think that they are developed enough to make decisions on who to start a sexual relationship with?
I don’t need a degree in child psychology to share an anecdote about my own youth, do I?
So you think an adult’s mere say-so can convince any minor to say yes? What is it that magically happens at age 18 that gives people the ability to say no?
I think they probably were coerced. If they were, there’s probably some testimony or evidence to back it up.
Putting people in jail isn’t supposed to be easy, and if there’s no evidence to prove that someone was raped, setting the alleged rapist free is part of the price we pay for having a fair justice system.
Of course. Coerced sex is not consensual, by definition. I support consensual sex, but I do not support coerced sex, or any other nonconsensual sex. Is that so hard to understand?
That’s the tough part. First we’d need to decide what the criteria are for that ability - what do you need to know, and what mental faculties do you need to have, in order to say you can handle a sexual relationship?
As Zagadka points out, I’m not a psychologist, so perhaps I’m not the best one to answer the second part. As for the first part, I’d say you need to know about fertility and pregnancy, contraception, STDs, and have some idea of how sex is perceived differently by men and women and the effects it can have on a previously nonsexual relationship.
Hell, if I got a tattoo now, I can’t be sure I’d still like it in 8 years. What does that prove?
As we like to say around the SDMB… ancedotes aren’t evidence.
In many cases, yes.
You really don’t know much about child abuse, do you?
Nothing, but as BoringDad points out above, it is a happy number that we agree on that people are responsible enough to make decisions for themselves.
How do you prove coersion if the kid says yes? Is the adult to know the kid means no but is being coerced? How do you present this in a court of law? We’re already in sticky enough situations with date rape cases that no one can rule on accurately. Now, kids are supposed to grow up having been abused and magically always know to go to the courts and magically have their strong word against any adult? Sounds like a South Park episode.
We differ in that I know that 13 year olds aren’t capable of responsible decision making. You don’t.
You think you are responsible now as you were at 13?