What, as a parent, do you consider the age of Majority should be set at, and should the age of sexual consent be set at the same age?

Do you think that, by applying this age limit globally it would help to alleviate poverty, rape, and child prostitution, crime and general abuse?

Would it therefore be a good idea to pass a mandate, through the United Nations Organisation, to enable this to happen as soon as possible?

Hergé

Damn! Could you please give this poll the multiple choice option for me please. I just clicked to post and saw it disappear out of view. Arrgg!

Thanks

[deh]

Now see that poll is no fun, a funner and more interesting poll would've been "At what age did you first get laid (get laid = Have sex)?"

[gotrootdude]

So, we can't talk until a certain age, can't ___ till a certain age. What kinda freedom is that.

Personally, age of maturity and age of sexual consent should be expressed as a guideline and not a mandate as it should be left to judge in court on a case by case basis.

Age has nothing to do with having the mental capacity to act in a reasonable manner.

[Corrosive]

Well, anything would be better than the UK system.

The age of consent is 16, but that's only for girls. In other words, a 16 year old guy can be charged with rape if he has sex with a girl under 16, but not the other way round. This means that male-rape is not covered by law. Gay couples are not allowed to have sex until 18, but lesbian's don't have an age of consent.

This is Scot's law by the way, I don't think this applies in England, Wales or Northern Ireland. We need to get this simple matter sorted out before going through the UN.

Oh, and deh ... you perv!

Originally posted by gotrootdude:
1. So, we can't talk until a certain age, can't fall in love until a certain age. What kind of freedom is that?

2. Personally, age of maturity and age of sexual consent should be expressed as a guideline and not a mandate as it should be left to judge in court on a case by case basis.

3. Age has nothing to do with having the mental capacity to act in a reasonable manner.

1. The freedom to act with responsibility.

2. It is better set as a global standard guidline, especially to prevent child abuse. (See "freedom" and responsibility above.)

3. So we need to determine when it is that people stop behaving irresponsibly or when they stop behaving anti-socially.

It is MUCH easier to run a Military society which would be more of a RE Legion than a religion.

Too much discipline for most people, especially the so-called "religious" and all of these fringe lunatics.

"Hergé"

Originally posted by Corrosive:
Well, anything would be better than the UK system.

The age of consent is 16, but that's only for girls. In other words, a 16 year old guy can be charged with rape if he has sex with a girl under 16, but not the other way round. This means that male-rape is not covered by law. Gay couples are not allowed to have sex until 18, but lesbian's don't have an age of consent.

This is Scot's law by the way, I don't think this applies in England, Wales or Northern Ireland. We need to get this simple matter sorted out before going through the UN.

Oh, and deh ... you perv!

So you tolerate non-heterosexual behaviour in your setting of social guidelines to you?

ALL a lot of cannon fodder to me.

"Hergé"

[CyBerAliEn]

From the great wizard of Oz himself... Herge:

So we need to determine when it is that people stop behaving irresponsibly or when they stop behaving anti-socially.

You set yourself up for this one...

Obviously that is impossible. By your own statements, you are in your fifties. You are still not behaving. Yet there is some 16 year old out there who is behaving. How do you conclude that such an issue and gap be fixed?

Again, you set yourself on that one Herge; I couldn't help myself.


Also, please don't answer my question with some misc "rhetoric" of your beliefs. My question was not serious.

Originally posted by CyBerAliEn:
You set yourself up for this one...

Obviously that is impossible. By your own statements, you are in your fifties. You are still not behaving. Yet there is some 16 year old out there who is behaving. How do you conclude that such an issue and gap be fixed?

Again, you set yourself on that one Herge; I couldn't help myself.

Also, please don't answer my question with some misc "rhetoric" of your beliefs. My question was not serious.

It has more to do with the overall level of sustainable population and how we control people fairly to ensure that the masses of the poor do not overwhelm all attempts to produce stability as happened in Poland/Germany and which was the principle cause of WWII when "religious" fanatics, the Hassidim, who say that they want to live in peace, actually became responsible for ... causing ... the war in the first place simply by having too many children.

These same "religious" fanatics are still fighting in the Holy Land today.

Btw. Anyone know what they are fighting for. Peace or sex?

(See: hole x 2, i.e. hole-i-land, land of Milk & Honey, Promised Land, etc.)

It will never happen if they just keep on and on having children.

Where, exactly, is the science?

"Hergé"

[Corrosive]

So you tolerate non-heterosexual behaviour in your setting of social guidelines to you?

Yes, I do actually.

Originally posted by Corrosive:
Yes, I do actually.

It might seem to be very good of you, but it is entirely contrary to good moral practice and entirely contrary to God Who is well known to see it as an abomination and totally immoral, as well as being a disgusting practice.

The road to hell, etc.

I would at least try to dissude them. Forcibly if I had to.

I don't want to live in a country governed by non hetero-sexual people, as it means that other bad laws are introduced, often by the same people, who only seek to protect themselves instead of protecting the ... normal ... general public.

See drugs and general crime, pornogaphy, prostitution, child abuse, etc. All signs of general decadence and oft "inspired" by anti-religious, anti-moral, anti-social, anti-establishment, fringe minorities.

"Hergé"

[Corrosive]

I don't want to live in a country governed by non hetero-sexual people, as it means that other bad laws are introduced, often by the same people, who only seek to protect themselves instead of protecting the ... normal ... general public.

And what exactly is so abnormal about homosexuality? It's a scientific fact that gay and lesbian behaviour is a natural occurance in nature (it boils down to being born with the brain of the opposite sex, surprisingly). If He didn't want the abnormal in the world, He wouldn't bloody-well have bothered.

And what they have to do with that list you have there I don't know. Enlighten me.

Originally posted by Corrosive:
And what exactly is so abnormal about homosexuality? It's a scientific fact that gay and lesbian behaviour is a natural occurance in nature (it boils down to being born with the brain of the opposite sex, surprisingly). If He didn't want the abnormal in the world, He wouldn't have bothered.

And what they have to do with that list you have there I don't know. Enlighten me.

What do you think Sodom and Gomorah are about and what does the term Holyness mean to you?

You seem to think that if homo-sexuals want to humiliate God on His own Creation that that is alright with you?

That they should seek to subvert young children is alright with you too?

That the church shouuld use pornography as a means of sexually testing people is alright with you?

That the church should permit brothels and even bless them is allright with you?

That this chuch should deal in humiliating people is alright with you?

That homo-sexuals should abuse and humiliate each other is also alright with you?

It seems to me that you have missed your vocation in life.

You should become a paid up member of the iniquitous Spanish Inquisition too and become a catholic.

This "religious" abuse is STILL going on today and yet there is a perfectly clear scientific understanding of Creation and of religious spirituality.

Is this scientific understanding not good enough for anyone, or do we have to listen to the rantings of these tryannical megalomaniac madmen of the cloth?

Which cloth is that do you think?

Read Ezekiel before replying.

Hergé

[Corrosive]

Funny that. You're telling me that homosexuals are trying to convert young children and at the same time, you are trying to convert a 16 year old to Christianity, in whatever new form it is in this week.

I'm not religious in any way, shape or form, and no-one is going to change that any time soon. And if you think I'm joining the single most backwards faith on the Earth (Catholicism)...

Homosexuality is acceptable these days. If you'd spent any time in the real world instead of posting polls here you would know that too. I don't see anything humiliating when it comes to two people who love each other.

And quite frankly, I fail to see how this affects children in any way. I don't know about America, but gay and lesbian sex is hardly thrusted into our faces in Scotland.

Why oh why can't folk be more tolerant?

[Lurker1]

Say Hergé

Did you ever think that homosexuality is God's plan for keeping the population down? You keep complaining that too many people are being born. If all these gay people were reproducing there would be more population. It seems that more homosexuals are born in city's due to the stress from overcrowding. This sounds like science to me.


I am all for gay men. (More woman for me!)