Child Act 'pushes promiscuity'

noxibox said:
They already have all the necessary equipment and hormones. There is no reason to believe preventing access to contraceptives is going to prevent them from having sex.
Click to expand...

Maybe I was far more mature then normal at that age then or something or I just had better control. I know for a fact the if I could walk in somewhere pick up some condoms and no-one would have to tell my parents, it would have encouraged me to not keep it in my pants.

noxibox said:
They're being given access to contraceptives and presumably advice at the same age they're legally allowed to have sex, so there is no problem of inconsistency.
Click to expand...

Yeah right, like the kippy working at the counter in Spar is going to provide good advice when this 13 year old kid goes in to buy some condoms.
 
Anyway at the end of the day, I think this whole idea is stupid. Maybe I am being a little niave, but I tend to agree with the chappy quoted that this will promote promiscuity.

I certainly don't believe that any child under 16 if not 18 is ready to be sexually active. I think the governments idea of just handing out condoms as the cure all for aids, is stupid and not well thought out. In total honesty the only safe sex, is no sex and that is not the solution either.

Really children should be taught by their parents first and foremost, then with schools, family planning, churches, whatever else later, to thing with their head, and i don't mean the one between the legs, rather then just give in to hormones or peer pressure etc etc.
 
Eniigma said:
Anyway at the end of the day, I think this whole idea is stupid. Maybe I am being a little niave, but I tend to agree with the chappy quoted that this will promote promiscuity.
Click to expand...

But what do you base this on? It is not like a condom is currently a hard thing to get hold of for a child.

Eniigma said:
I certainly don't believe that any child under 16 if not 18 is ready to be sexually active.
Click to expand...

And what do you base this opinion on?
 
Eniigma said:
Anyway at the end of the day, I think this whole idea is stupid. Maybe I am being a little niave, but I tend to agree with the chappy quoted that this will promote promiscuity.

I certainly don't believe that any child under 16 if not 18 is ready to be sexually active. I think the governments idea of just handing out condoms as the cure all for aids, is stupid and not well thought out. In total honesty the only safe sex, is no sex and that is not the solution either.

Really children should be taught by their parents first and foremost, then with schools, family planning, churches, whatever else later, to thing with their head, and i don't mean the one between the legs, rather then just give in to hormones or peer pressure etc etc.
Click to expand...

Isn't it a bit naive to assume that they'll follow the doctrine of abstinence? And if they don't shouldn't there be some sort of contingency plan? Also, if these are your beliefs and you choose to impart them to your child that's your choice, but what gives you the right to dictate them to the rest of society?
 
What do I base my agreement on? Read one of my previous posts, I explained it there and can't be assed to type it again.

What do I base my opinion on the age readyness thing... my own experience, my observations of people around me. I know there where many things I though I was ready for at 15 and my parents advised against it and I can see now years later that they where right and that doing would not have been in my best interest even if it would have been fun at the time. I have seen many many people do things they wanted and have regretted it in the end.
 
Syndyre said:
Isn't it a bit naive to assume that they'll follow the doctrine of abstinence? And if they don't shouldn't there be some sort of contingency plan? Also, if these are your beliefs and you choose to impart them to your child that's your choice, but what gives you the right to dictate them to the rest of society?
Click to expand...

Where am I dictating anything to anyone? I have stated my belief and no-where have I said that my idea has to be the one adopted by all.

*If* we lived in some sort of religious state, then we could and should expect a doctrine of abstinence to be followed as a rule. But we do not and should not live in a religious state, and I never said that was the answer, only the safest option.

Anyway that could come down to what are you debating? Stopping the spread of Aids / teenage pregnacies... then condoms could be the way to go.
Raising the so called moral fabric of society... then you could argue for abstinence if you where of the opinion that pomiscuity was amoral.

**now quit debating this with me and let me do some work!
 
Last edited:
Eniigma said:
Anyway that could come down to what are you debating? Stopping the spread of Aids / teenage pregnacies... then condoms could be the way to go.
Raising the so called moral fabric of society... then you could argue for abstinence if you where of the opinion that pomiscuity was amoral.

**now quit debating this with me and let me do some work!
Click to expand...

What does sex have to do with morals? As long as it consensual. Morals are about how you treat other people and behave yourself in regards to how it affects others...

Sorry for the new debate point :o
 
noxibox said:
When I was a teenager almost every one of the most rebellious kids - the ones that were drinking, smoking and having sex whenever possible (behind their parents' backs obviously) - were the ones that came from very strict, controlling homes.
Click to expand...

You keep talking about "them" as if you aren't one, then claim that it's impossible to have a say in how kids make decisions. I assume by your "liberal" attitude that you spent your childhood sleeping around and taking drugs, hence you think it's inevitable. No-one said it's possible to make your childs decisions for them, but it's not impossible to nurture a good concience in a child.
 
Last edited:
Personally making condoms illegal to under age kids is an issue, but I agree that dishing them out willy nilly is going to encourage some good kids to consider stuff they may not have ordinarliy.
 
Eniigma said:
Where am I dictating anything to anyone? I have stated my belief and no-where have I said that my idea has to be the one adopted by all.

*If* we lived in some sort of religious state, then we could and should expect a doctrine of abstinence to be followed as a rule. But we do not and should not live in a religious state, and I never said that was the answer, only the safest option.

Anyway that could come down to what are you debating? Stopping the spread of Aids / teenage pregnacies... then condoms could be the way to go.
Raising the so called moral fabric of society... then you could argue for abstinence if you where of the opinion that pomiscuity was amoral.

**now quit debating this with me and let me do some work!
Click to expand...

I was just saying if your recommendations were implemented you'd effectively be dictating to people. Talking about moral fabric etc. is getting dangerously close to a religious state anyway.
 
Eniigma said:
I know there where many things I though I was ready for at 15 and my parents advised against it and I can see now years later that they where right and that doing would not have been in my best interest even if it would have been fun at the time. I have seen many many people do things they wanted and have regretted it in the end.
Click to expand...

Yes, everyone thinks they're ready at age 15. Some kids will go ahead and experiment even (or because) their parents tell them not to. And they may well regret that choice later.

But let's make sure that they're left with regrets only, and not with a child or a disease.
 
groundnut said:
Personally making condoms illegal to under age kids is an issue, but I agree that dishing them out willy nilly is going to encourage some good kids to consider stuff they may not have ordinarliy.
Click to expand...

I can't see how this line of thought goes. Do you mean some kid is going to think:
"Man I wasn't planning on having sex till I am older but now I've got this condom here it seems like a shame to let it go to waste"?
 
icyrus said:
I can't see how this line of thought goes. Do you mean some kid is going to think:
"Man I wasn't planning on having sex till I am older but now I've got this condom here it seems like a shame to let it go to waste"?
Click to expand...

ROFL. :D
 
supersunbird said:
What does sex have to do with morals? As long as it consensual. Morals are about how you treat other people and behave yourself in regards to how it affects others...

Sorry for the new debate point :o
Click to expand...

Aah... so in light of this debate about what age kids have sex...
Would you say it is immoral for a 12 year old to engage in consentual sex with a 25 year old?

What about consentual death? If someone asks another person to kill them, since it is "consentual", is it morally acceptable?
Since when is right and wrong only relative to how it affects the next person?
 
Last edited:
icyrus said:
I can't see how this line of thought goes. Do you mean some kid is going to think:
"Man I wasn't planning on having sex till I am older but now I've got this condom here it seems like a shame to let it go to waste"?
Click to expand...

Yes.
Often sex is not planned or decided on in advance (surprise surprise!)
 
groundnut said:
Aah... so in light of this debate about what age kids have sex...
Would you say it is immoral for a 12 year old to engage in consentual sex with a 25 year old?
Click to expand...

Whether you want to call it immoral or not is semantics but it is wrong.
 
Syndyre said:
Whether you want to call it immoral or not is semantics but it is wrong.
Click to expand...

Wrong in what way and by who's standards? On the one hand you seem to indicate there is no right or wrong, then the next minute you are using those words.
 
groundnut said:
Wrong in what way and by who's standards? On the one hand you seem to indicate there is no right or wrong, then the next minute you are using those words.
Click to expand...

By society's standards I suppose, currently anyway. I'd say its wrong because the child is too young to make an informed decision when approached by an adult and therefore risks exploitation etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X