Debate Rounds (3)
I believe that people should be able to have to send or possess pictures that were willingly taken or willingly sent. If it's a problem that someone threatens to leak the photos they should of thought harder about sending them to that person. People need to realize they can't save kids brains by censoring the hole God damn world from them. Sexting is treated like you are a messed up person if you do it, but I mean more then half the population probably have taken a nude picture of them selves and there is nothing wrong with that. People make it sound like people under the age of 18 can't think for themselves, but you know what we can. We can common sense and a God damn brain of our own and adults need to realize that. Sexting is nothing compared to actually having sex, but yet sex is socially except able. I do know that there are laws stating that sexting is illegal but I think they need to be removed cause what other rights do we actually have anyways? Government censors everything so why can't we have this one thing that is actually harmless compared to the consequences they have placed with it. If pictures get leaked maybe you will hear stuff about you for awhile but it would go away after a while where as if you get charged for having pictures it is stamped on your life forever. What is the sense in that. Adults think they know so much better then what "kids", anyone younger then 18, do. Why is it that we suddenly can make our own decisions when we turn 18 like honestly nothing mentally actually changes. So I believe sexting should be legal.
Usually I would go through and dissect these arguments one by one, but in this case there's no reason to. Between all of the uncited information, and the insults toward adults, there was a lot of repetition. I'm just going to focus on one major point that Pro introduced
"People make it sound like people under the age of 18 can't think for themselves, but you know what we can."
"Adults think they know so much better then what "kids", anyone younger then 18, do. Why is it that we suddenly can make our own decisions when we turn 18 like honestly nothing mentally actually changes. So I believe sexting should be legal."
The reason that this is not allowed is because of the fact that this is literally the definition of child pornography.
Child Pornography is defined  "as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor (someone under 18 years of age). Visual depictions include photographs, videos, digital or computer generated images indistinguishable from an actual minor, and images created, adapted, or modified, but appear to depict an identifiable, actual minor."
There has to be a line somewhere so that we don't end up with seven year olds sending naughty pictures to 42 year old men and vice versa. Repealing child pornography laws would open Pandora's box for things like this. Can Pro please elaborate on their position? As of right now I am forced to assume that Pro is okay with child pornography getting into the hands of older men and women.
Another thing is that the law against sexting, minors who send and forward on sexts have been criminally charged. Teens have been charged with everything from disorderly conduct to illegal use of a minor in pornography to sexual abuse of children. They use all the bad cases to outline their argument on why it's a bad thing but never recognize the positives towards it.
"A study found that 1 percent of children aged 10 to 17 were engaging in "adult" communication, and seemed to discredit the often-circulated estimate that as many as one in five teenage girls were sexting." The fact that they stated sexting as an "adult" form of communication is another example that the older generation can't except the fact that people under the age of 16 have sexual disires too. What makes sexting something only adults can do?
This goes back to showing why I beleieve adults should have no role in deciding wheater a 16 year old can sext or have a sexual conversation other the phone because adults have a scewed perspective on it because they put their own experiences into their reasoning.
I plead that Pro will stop writing her arguments in one giant block. It's very hard to read that way. Now onto my arguments...
"I believe the legal age to sext should be lowered to 16 because lots of teen are in serious relationships at this age."
Why 16? What makes 16 year olds so much more mature than 15 year olds? If a line must be drawn somewhere, then what is wrong with the current line at 18?
"A survey at a large Midwestern college pulled 300 students to share there experiences with sexting,"
A large Midwestern college, are you kidding me? That's Pro's citation? This is how big the midwest united states is: 
That could range from Ohio State University to University of North Dakota. What defines large anyway?
"the new study found that many students reported having positive experiences."
Many as in 3/10 or many as in 9/10? If a minority of teens are having positive experiences, then there's a good chance that they are having negative ones.
"'Sexting doesn't seem to be as risky as the media makes it out to be,' Allyson Dir, a doctoral candidate in psychology"
Maybe it's the fact that I'm a lawyer on my high school mock trial team, or maybe it's the fact that I'm from a family of lawyers, but I would like to contest the expertise of somebody that doesn't even have their PhD on the topic.
Also, in 2009 alone, two minors committed suicide as a result of nude photos gone viral . In one case, a 13 year old girl by the name of Hope Whitsell sent some nude photos to her male crush. Another girl who liked the boy found the photos and forwarded them to other students. She ended up suffering severe sexual harassment when she returned, and then hung herself.
I know that Pro wishes to make the limit 16 instead (probably because she is 16), so I will now introduce the audience to 18 year old Jessica Logan. During spring break of Jessica's senior year of high school (2008), she sent nude photos to her boyfriend, somebody she thought she could trust, and he forwarded the pictures. After frequent sexual harassment and bullying she offed herself. Can Pro not see the damage that is caused by sexting? Jessica sent the photos to somebody that she could trust. There's no way she could have known that he would do that.
"female undergrads were more likely to have negative reactions to sexting compared to their male peers. She pointed out that"s probably because it"s more socially acceptable for men to be seen as sexually promiscuous, and sexting has been characterized as somewhat of a risque behavior."
This is not a debate over Western culture. Lowering the age restrictions on sexting will not make people stop thinking it's risque. Culture changes laws, laws do not change culture.
"Showing why I believe that adults should have no say in wheater 16 year old can sext. "
Adults should have no say? At all? Is it not the job of parents to do what they feel is best for their own child? A non-PhD holding woman at some university cannot possibly know children better than their own parents.
"There reasoning is that it is harmful on the young human brain and could affect our mental stability, when they just don't see that they are just uncomfortable with the thought of the younger generation being sexual or having sexual thoughts and relations"
Does Pro have proof of this? Also as I mentioned above, teens have literally committed suicide as a result of sexting. These parents are looking out for their kids, for some have died due to sexting.
"But from my eyes you should think very hard about sending a picture of yourself to another person before you do. You should think of the risks and think about if you trust the other enough to not use them against you."
As I stated above, Jessica Logan sent the photos to somebody she thought she could trust. She paid the ultimate price for believing that her boyfriend wouldn't double cross her.
"Another thing is that the law against sexting, minors who send and forward on sexts have been criminally charged."
No kidding, breaking the law is illegal? Who'd have guessed?
"They use all the bad cases to outline their argument on why it's a bad thing but never recognize the positives towards it."
As Pro never introduces any benefits, I think it's safe to assume that there are none.
"'A study found that 1 percent of children aged 10 to 17 were engaging in "adult" communication'... The fact that they stated sexting as an "adult" form of communication is another example that the older generation can't except the fact that people under the age of 16 have sexual disires too."
The fact that who stated this? For all I know, Pro stated this. Maybe there for reasons for the "older generation" not accepting this fact. Maybe that reason is that teenagers have literally died from this. Also, bringing in people "under the age of 16" appears to void Pro's argument which is that the age limit should be lowered to 16.
"...adults have a scewed perspective on it because they put their own experiences into their reasoning."
Is Pro unaware of the fact that adults were also teenagers once? Also, I'd rather have people with experience deciding these things than horny teenagers with absolutely none. Why would anybody choose to learn something the hard way when they can listen to their elders instead?
 http://www.sgim.org...;(This may wish to be downloaded, but it's just a map of the midwest for those who don't want to download a random picture)
Ohgolly forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by EAT_IT_SUKA 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||5|
Reasons for voting decision: PRO forfeited, and CON didn't, therefore, points are awarded to CON for better conduct. PRO had many spelling and grammar mistakes, therefore, points are awarded to CON for better spelling and grammar. CON successfully refuted all of PRO's arguments and had many still standing arguments, therefore, points are awarded to CON for more convincing arguments. Both sides used sources, therefore, no points are awarded to PRO nor CON for more reliable sources. CON clearly won this debate. Thank you.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.