The Instigator
TheSaiyanKirby
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Mikal
Con (against)
Winning
15 Points

Should children have the right to sexual relationships/marriage if consensual?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Mikal
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/19/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 786 times Debate No: 46284
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (3)

 

TheSaiyanKirby

Pro

Pedophilia is, according to most scientists these days, a sexual orientation. Now the argument has been made that homosexual marriage should be legalized because love should be the only requirement for marriage. By that logic, shouldn't children have the right to consensual, sexual relationships? Both are just alternate sexual orientations. Please actually think this over and don't just spout profanities. Actually think about it.
Debate Round No. 1
TheSaiyanKirby

Pro

Ok, just think about this: What are the main differences between homosexuality and pedophilia? Both are sexual preferences. The main differences are: pedophilia is more common in nature and has been accepted through the majority of history. So why should homosexuals have more rights than pedophiles if the child consents?
Mikal

Con

Resolution - Should children have the right to sexual relationships/marriage if consensual?


The resolution we are revising is whether children should have the right to relationships and marriage. My adversary is Pro this stance. It is on him to demonstrate this is logical

I am just going to focus on a few points

(1)

They are not mature enough

If they are having sex at an early age, or even getting married they are doing so without their brains being fully developed. Our brains progressively develop when as we grow older. The human brain keeps growing well into your 20's [1]

Basically they are not old enough to comprehend their choices


(2)

Disease

As I mentioned young children are not aware of alot of factors such as aids and HIVS. They are at a higher risk of getting these because of their inability to comprehend safety measures.

(3)

Pregnancy

Same point as (2). They are not aware of proper contraceptives and have a higher chance of getting pregnant. Most people will experiment without a condom or use it improperly their first time.


Conclusion

I did not go into great depth, but there was really no reason due to my opponents limited contentions. Essentially children at an early age are still maturing and can not comprehend some of the choices they make and the impact they will have on them. Giving them the right to have sex and get married at an early age could destroy their life


[1] http://www.news-medical.net...
Debate Round No. 2
TheSaiyanKirby

Pro

Children learn sexual education as early as fourth or fifth grade, when they start going through puberty. Therefore the disease argument does not apply. As far as them not being old or mature enough to make these decisions, the classes you choose and grades you get affect what college you get into which determines what career you have. So they can make decisions that affect their entire future but having a sexual relationship is off the table? Additionally, what is the cut-off for being mature enough, then? Should they have to wait until the fully mentally developed age of 24? And should adults who are not mature or intelligent enough to make decisions also not be allowed to have consensual relationships? The fact of the matter is biology says as soon as you start going through puberty and having the urge for sex, you're ready for it. You're just relying on society to tell you what is ok and what isn't.
Mikal

Con

My adversary entirely missed my post but the key word in this is progressive brain growth.

"Studies using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) techniques, involving brain scans at regular intervals, show that the brain continues to grow and develop into young adulthood (at least to the mid-twenties). Right before puberty, adolescent brains experience a growth spurt that occurs mainly in the frontal lobe, which is the area that governs planning, impulse control, and reasoning. During the teenage years, the brain again goes through a process of pruning synapses"somewhat like the infant and toddler brain (National Institute of Mental Health, 2001). As the teenager grows into young adulthood, the brain develops more myelin to insulate the nerve fibers and speed neural processing, and this myelination occurs last in the frontal lobe. MRI comparisons between the brains of teenagers and the brains of young adults have shown that most of the brain areas were the same"that is, the teenage brain had reached maturity in the areas that govern such abilities as speech and sensory capabilities. The major difference was the immaturity of the teenage brain in the frontal lobe and in the myelination of that area (National Institute of Mental Health, 2001)."[1]

To break this down in lamesnece terms everything plays a factor in how we learn. Our environment, experiences, thoughts, and actions are all apart of growth. Everything we do or see helps us learn. The younger the child is the less he has learned. In addition to this in younger adolescents they have not undergone synapses which helps in decision making also along sensory capabilities. .

There is no set age, different people mature faster but when we are referring to children that is usually in a "Child". This can be anywhere from 1st-12th grade. Assuming that we can both agree that children in highschool are starting to understand things more logically than children in middle score , a more viable argument could be made for anyone above 16. However the argument you presented about being ready at puberty is horrible. They are still undergoing changes that teach them about life and experiences, and their brain has not grown enough to understand the consequence of their actions.

[1] https://www.childwelfare.gov...
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by ladiesman 3 years ago
ladiesman
Sexual behavior, especially in young people is not an entirely black-and-white issue. There is more gray to it than most people think, especially when it comes to statutory rape. If two underage people are having a sexual relationship, I see no reason to prevent them from doing so. If both participants are aware of the pros and cons and considered them, then I think it would be inappropriate to prohibit them from expressing their sexuality and/or experimenting in sexual behavior. Statutory rape is slightly more complicated; in this context, I think the age difference should play a major role in determining whether or not we deem the sexual relationship acceptable. Say you have an 18-year-old and a 14-year-old having sex, that's only a 4-year age difference, so in my opinion that hardly requires constraints. Marriage can go by the same principles.
Posted by Taylur 3 years ago
Taylur
@Topkek -- I understand the difference between consent and maturity, but that does not change the fact that a 2-year-old has the cognitive function to consent as well; if they want something, they can say yes, and if they don't, they can say no. Maturity goes hand-in-hand with consent, and as I stated in a previous comment, I do not believe (from personal experience, both with myself and others) that anyone under 16 (in a very general sense) has the level of maturity to consent to MARRIAGE.

Sex is another story. It's a grey line. Everybody develops at different rates, but I would argue again that 16 is the general age when a body is developed enough to permit sex without any consequential harm.
Posted by the_streetsurfer 3 years ago
the_streetsurfer
This is what happens... you start saying that the only requirement for marriage is love... Now 12 years olds will get married by that logic. This is what we've come to.
Posted by Topkek 3 years ago
Topkek
Lol Taylur, please no ad homs. This website is about logical debate; if someone here chooses to position themselves as PRO for something, that doesn't necessarily reflect their personal views outside of the debate.

Anyway, Taylur, you have to understand that "consent" and "maturity" are purely subjective terms here. You can say that for one, a child is physically unable to have sex. You can also say that brains do not fully develop until people hit their late teens or early twenties, as per CON's evidence submitted within the debate. However, neither of these say that children cannot understand concepts such as sex or consent. Understanding social constructs such as consent is not dependent on a physically mature brain. You simply cannot measure a person's ability to understand consent through biology. So what PRO is asserting here is that your definition of "maturity", as well as the age of consent you believe is appropriate, have been determined arbitrarily using your personal views and morals (or alternatively, a reflection of society's morals), and not with an objective basis.
Posted by Taylur 3 years ago
Taylur
I believe 16, generally speaking, is a mentally mature enough age to have sex. Yes, hormones are flying everywhere, but by this age, most people ARE physically able to have sex without much consequence.

A 9-year-old, as you stated earlier, does not have an appropriate body to have sex and is no where near ready to marry.

I deny drawing random lines -- I believe that you are drawing up random excuses to justify your own paedophilic assertions.
Posted by TheSaiyanKirby 3 years ago
TheSaiyanKirby
Again, you're drawing random lines. Why 16 or 18? 16 year olds are arguably less capable of making rational decisions due to insane hormone fluctuations. Random, random lines.
Posted by Taylur 3 years ago
Taylur
I never said children have the ability to make major life decisions, I said that they THINK they do. I thought I was able to do that as a child, but when I look back, I realise I was very immature and ignorant about the world. This is the same for many children.

18 is a perfectly acceptable age for sex. I would even claim that 16 is borderline acceptable, with the exception that the individual has been through puberty. I do not, however, think that marriage is a good idea for someone that is only 16-18 -- they are simply too young for such a massive life decision.

I am thinking about this logically, and as a logical person, I do not believe children have the mental ability to make an informed decision on marriage. And I do not believe tat the body tells you to have sex DURING puberty -- a young girl's body, say 9-years-old, having only just started puberty, would be destroyed by the process of pregnancy and then breast feeding. It is wrong on a logical AND moral level.
Posted by TheSaiyanKirby 3 years ago
TheSaiyanKirby
So Taylur, children have the ability to make major life decisions but not to have sex? What about 18 year olds? Your brain is not fully matured or developed at that age. Should we stop 18 year olds from having sex? You're just drawing invisible lines through your misguided sense of morality. The fact is biology says to start having sex when you go through puberty, which happens as early as 9 years old this day in age. I said to actually THINK about the argument. Think about the facts.
Posted by Taylur 3 years ago
Taylur
This is an outrageous debate!

Children are not fully mature. When I was a child, I honestly thought I was in love with a girl in my class and I wholeheartedly believed that I made adult decisions. Ask any child if they are mature enough to make important decisions; every child will say yes. But when that child grows up and looks back at their life, they will realise that they really had no clue about anything! I am speaking from personal experience and for cases I have witnessed time and time again.

Homosexual marriage involves two consenting ADULTS.

And, despite Pro claiming homosexuality was not common throughout history, do your research: start with the Ancient Greeks.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Krazzy_Player 3 years ago
Krazzy_Player
TheSaiyanKirbyMikalTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's arguments were backed by sources and made better arguments.
Vote Placed by progressivedem22 3 years ago
progressivedem22
TheSaiyanKirbyMikalTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con thoroughly backed up his arguments with sources, while Pro did not.
Vote Placed by GodChoosesLife 3 years ago
GodChoosesLife
TheSaiyanKirbyMikalTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Cons arguments seemed to be more explicit and reasonably sound and also used reliable sources so he gets those points.