TorilMUD Forums

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/ne ... st-23.html

I knew the country before I even read the article lol, Romania.

married a "jewelery seller" at 11 (he was 13). I assume that means street kid selling jewlerly on the street.

Her daughter "left to wed" at age 10 and had her baby 6 months later.

I think most of our statutory laws make sex under age 12 or so illegal always... but how about legal grandmahood at 24?

It's like Fox News up in here today.

I bet if she went to church, this never would have happened.

we'll partially right.

where is this more likely to occur...

A) in a society where there are no limitations on sexual conduct where sex is encouraged as healthy for all ages and we're taught that anal, oral and vaginal sex is just all sex? With anyone they want?

B) in a society that believes in monogamous relationships and no sex before marriage?

kiryan wrote:we'll partially right.

where is this more likely to occur...

A) in a society where there are no limitations on sexual conduct where sex is encouraged as healthy for all ages and we're taught that anal, oral and vaginal sex is just all sex? With anyone they want?

B) in a society that believes in monogamous relationships and no sex before marriage?

In B.

Remember, they DID get married first. It was actually common in Western society until "recently" for girls to be married off by 12-13. (As an added kicker, that was probably before menarche back in those days.)

If you can't have sex until you marry, you marry sooner. That way you can regret your impulsive choice even longer!

fair enough criticism. although giving birth 6 months after getting married... is not exactly sex after marriage.

Let me restate my A and B.

A) very permissive sexual behavior (liberal in our society)

vs

B) much stricter social limits on marriage and sexual behavior (conservative in our society)

kiryan wrote:fair enough criticism. although giving birth 6 months after getting married... is not exactly sex after marriage.

Let me restate my A and B.

A) very permissive sexual behavior (liberal in our society)

vs

B) much stricter social limits on marriage and sexual behavior (conservative in our society)

C) Doesn't matter.

People will have sex regardless, and they will do it before marriage regardless. You act as if bastards were not born before the '20s or something. :roll:

Is it in the public's interest for young children to have sex, get married and have children? Can we outlaw it in the interests of the public good?

You can try. It will work less well than outlawing drugs has.

You want kids to not have sex? Teach them about sex. Students who receive comprehensive sex education are less likely to have sex than students who receive abstinence only education.

http://www.jahonline.org/article/S1054-139X(07)00426-0/abstract

" Abstinence-only education did not reduce the likelihood of engaging in vaginal intercourse (ORadj = .8, 95% CI = .51–1.31, p = .40), but comprehensive sex education was marginally associated with a lower likelihood of reporting having engaged in vaginal intercourse"

kiryan wrote:we'll partially right.

where is this more likely to occur...

A) in a society where there are no limitations on sexual conduct where sex is encouraged as healthy for all ages and we're taught that anal, oral and vaginal sex is just all sex? With anyone they want?

B) in a society that believes in monogamous relationships and no sex before marriage?

Evolution/natural selection/intelligent design/chuck norris elimination of species might happen faster.

Your entire argument and most of your arguments are based on an idea that nothing can change towards a more conservative. We'll I'll remind you that while abstitence only education is often blamed for an increase in pregnancy rates (including the recent surge), its causative effect is poorly supported.

Interestingly enough, this article on huffingtonpost indicates that there were huge increases in teens choosing not to have sex.

About 27 percent of men and 29 percent of young females reported they'd never had a sexual encounter up from 22% about 5 years earlier.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/0 ... ence_Is_Up

Which is why it's notable that abstinence seems to be on the rise among Americans within that age range. Bill Albert, chief program officer for the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, told U.S. News and World Report that he is encouraged by the news that more teenagers and 20-somethings are abstaining. He says that the general view among adults has been that teenagers are having more and more sex, but the new data appears to contradict that.

(in the slides)
Researchers found that in 2002, around 22 percent of males and females between 15 and 24 reported that they'd never engaged in sexual contact but in 2006 and 2008, that changed.

About 27 percent of men and 29 percent of young females reported they'd never had a sexual encounter.

News flash: Waiting until after age 20 to get married is an extremely recent phenomenon, relatively speaking.

I know you like to paint everything as liberal/evil vs. conservative/good, but it gets tiresome to watch you keep trying to pound round pegs into square holes in every thread. Not everybody who does something you disapprove of is a "liberal."

kiryan wrote:Your entire argument and most of your arguments are based on an idea that nothing can change towards a more conservative. We'll I'll remind you that while abstitence only education is often blamed for an increase in pregnancy rates (including the recent surge), its causative effect is poorly supported.

Interestingly enough, this article on huffingtonpost indicates that there were huge increases in teens choosing not to have sex.

About 27 percent of men and 29 percent of young females reported they'd never had a sexual encounter up from 22% about 5 years earlier.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/0 ... ence_Is_Up

Which is why it's notable that abstinence seems to be on the rise among Americans within that age range. Bill Albert, chief program officer for the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, told U.S. News and World Report that he is encouraged by the news that more teenagers and 20-somethings are abstaining. He says that the general view among adults has been that teenagers are having more and more sex, but the new data appears to contradict that.

(in the slides)
Researchers found that in 2002, around 22 percent of males and females between 15 and 24 reported that they'd never engaged in sexual contact but in 2006 and 2008, that changed.

About 27 percent of men and 29 percent of young females reported they'd never had a sexual encounter.

Yes, in a society where sexuality and knowledge is very open we're seeing a reduction in the number of teens choosing to have sex.

Interesting, that.

Almost as if once educated, people are more likely to make rational decisions.

Meanwhile in Romania you have 11 year olds having sex and getting married. Wonder what a country that is 86% Eastern Orthodox teaches about sex?

Sarvis, as usual is discounting the fact that America is largely religious.

Bristol Palin says hi!



Abstinence education is a vital part of teaching kids about sexuality. It is FAR from the only education to give.....if you live in the real world.

GILF?!

Corth wrote:GILF?!

Did you SEE the picture? Blech!

What can I say ... low standards? :)

Didn't see the picture. Just love the concept of GILF. :)

nah dawg, you're just equal opportunity!