Unified Federal Territories Sex Crimes Bill

[jerusalemcar5]

I will not support this bill unless the age of consent and the age to access pornography is raised to 18.

You like sending teenagers to prison and slapping them with large fines?  The pornography age is questionable as it stands in this bill, but 18 is ridiculous.  So we deny sexuality until 18.  That is not natural.  How does this help society? Sexual repression causes bad things to happen. Personally, I'd suggest pornography at 14, and consent should stay at 16.  We don't want to pull a crazy Santorum because soon we'll start only allowing sex between married couples who write and video tape consent and are both above the age of 21 with pornography illegal.

[jerusalemcar5]

What? How does putting an age on consent make something unnatural?

By denying one's nature... Care to clarify?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I was speaking about the age of consent on viewing pornography, not sure if you were talking about the age of sexual consent.  For sexual consent, it isn't repression because this bill allows sex between minors.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Haha.  I love the burning hatred that seeths from your posts.  I wonder how it's immature?  I'd love to debate this if you had anything substantial I could debate.

Btw, thank you, I thought it was a good line.

[jerusalemcar5]

Don't get smart with me. We're denying nature by setting an age on sexual consent? Wouldn't the ages you proposed be unnatural, too?

Isn't setting an age on viewing pornography "unnatural?"

I'm not getting smart, I actually wanted you to clarify the question.  I was using puberty as my guidelines for the urge to have sexual relations.  It is unnatural for prepubescent children to have sexual urges.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

As if calling me "completely stupid" is not immature name calling.  Do you have a need to be a hypocrite? What do you think we are doing right now as we talk about this bill?  Are we not debating? And I was simply mentioning Santorum's notable record for being rather conservative on sex issues.

[jerusalemcar5]

So you have 14 for porn access, correct? Isn't that repressive since many people experience puberty before that age?

You have to draw the line somewhere, and 14 is a hell of a lot better than 18.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It would be nearly impossible to debate in Atlasia if you couldn't debate the basis of Atlasia, which is the United States.  Atlasia has been around for about two years so anything in the U.S. pre-2004 should be fair game.  Santorum's record on sex issues has been around since long before that and I agree being conservative doesn't automatically mean repressive, it is only in some cases.

[jerusalemcar5]

So you have 14 for porn access, correct? Isn't that repressive since many people experience puberty before that age?

You have to draw the line somewhere, and 14 is a hell of a lot better than 18.

In your opinion.

Well, in the opinion of nature actually.

[jerusalemcar5]

So you have 14 for porn access, correct? Isn't that repressive since many people experience puberty before that age?

You have to draw the line somewhere, and 14 is a hell of a lot better than 18.

In your opinion.

Well, in the opinion of nature actually.

Your opinion (and anyone's for that matter) is just that, your opinion. Stop trying to make it out to be more than it is.

Well according to the National Institutes of Health (American institutes that were absorbed by Atlasia), "The hormones also cause secondary sex characteristics and interest in sex." "When a healthy child is somewhere between 9 and 16 years old, he or she will enter puberty."

Look Here

So I think 14 for pornography is a reasonable compromise.  16 is the extreme end of sexual urges.

[jerusalemcar5]

Should be 9 then. Don't want to repress anyone's sexuality here.

Sounds good to me. Like they'll want to look at porn at that age anyway. If they do, why shouldn't they? I like the 9 idea.

I'd support that, but I don't think it would pass very easily.  I'd estimate 80% of Atlasia's male population would break that law by 16.  That's why I think 14 is more appropriate, possibly 13.  Since under the current bill a 15  yr old and a 17 yr old could have sex, but the 15 yr old couldn't then look at porn

[jerusalemcar5]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Actually, we do it just fine without bringing up Senator Santorum. Thanks anyway. We'll call you when your commentary is worth anything.

But you don't know my number! . Haha.  By the way it is 1-315-382-5968.  Call whenever!

[jerusalemcar5]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Actually, we do it just fine without bringing up Senator Santorum. Thanks anyway. We'll call you when your commentary is worth anything.

But you don't know my number! . Haha.  By the way it is 1-315-382-5968.  Call whenever!

I wouldnt do that. Last time a member posted thier phone number here...........   >_>

It isn't actually my phone number.  It is a message.

[jerusalemcar5]

I'd suggest the following changes to your amendment SoS:

Section 7: Pornography
It shall be legal for persons of ages 12-14, with parental notification, or 15 years of age or older, without parental notification to buypossess and view pornography depicting only persons of 18 years of age or older.


I cannot picture a more awkward or impossible conversation than asking one's parents for pornography.  Notification still bugs me, but I feel it is more appropriate.

[jerusalemcar5]

Disgusting! Nay

'Hawk'

I wonder if you think it is disgusting to allow someone the freedom to consent to sex after death or for someone to consent to view pornography.  Both?