The Instigator
PartTimeHipster
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
schachdame
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

Should the age restriction for sex move to 21? (any country)

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 1 vote the winner is...
schachdame
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/15/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,062 times Debate No: 54723
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)

 

PartTimeHipster

Pro

First off, there are people out there who are stupid enough to believe "You can't live without sex" and so they start off as soon as they are of eligible age, with no thought on contraceptives and STD's. So what's the disgusting part of teen sex? Teen pregnancies! These teens were not thinking of anything else during their first time, and now their worst fear is this child. Basically, the teens who are addicted to sex can be judged by their immediate actions and their influences on this child will make the child worse than the teens!

There are good people out there who don't have sex until after their marriage proccess and are aware that their partner is there forever. The teens, on the other hand, are "goofing around", then there will be an immense break-up and the teen mother will have to raise the child on her own.

Is this really what society is becoming in terms of sex? I would like to see a Con response to see what you think and/or how the age restriction for sex (in any country) should remain the way it currently is.
schachdame

Con

/PERSONAL NOTE/ I think this is a good choice for a debate topic and I hope I will be able to provide you with more than just the arguments you are expecting to face, so that it'll be a challenge for you as well. As a non-native-English-writer I am going to do my very best to provide my arguments with the grammar and spelling you deserve but hope you will overlook an occasional mistake.

I don't think that it is necessary to raise the legal age for sex, because it directly links to the question about the level of responsibility you think a person under 21 is capable of. I am going to argue that the age limit of 21 does not necessarily guarantees you to lower teen-pregnancy and that Teenagers and young adults between the age of 15 and 20 are capable of making responsible decisions about their body as well as the importance of allowing them to show this responsibility.

Furthermore I want to explain how some views might be based on misguiding TV-content and that not that many young sexually active Teenagers are sex addicts.

In addition I think it's problematic to rate people, who wait till marriage to have sex, as "good people". I am warning us both (!) to not drift into this topic too much. This is hopefully not going to be about whether or not marriage is necessary to have sex nor the worth of a marriage in terms of "forever". We might not be able to totally avoid this topic but I hope it's not going to shadow over the main points.

I am looking forward to this.
Debate Round No. 1
PartTimeHipster

Pro

PartTimeHipster forfeited this round.
schachdame

Con

Seeing that my Opponent forfeited this round, I am going to present the arguments I promised to

Raising the legal age limit for sex, will not effectively prevent teen-pregnancy. It would only make it illegal. The group of adolescents that do decide to have unprotected sex early, that are often stereotyped in the media, are undoubtedly a social problem because they are part of vicious circle of teen-pregnancy and low education. The reason why these young people become mothers around the age of 15 to 20 is not, that the law prevents them from having sex earlier, but they either don't have the sex drive yet or lack the physical constitution to conceive a child. Being underweight for example can mess up a girls menstrual circle in a way that makes pregnancy rather unlikely, leaving her with the false impression that she is on the save side. Raising the age limit would not influence these teenagers one may described as "irresponsible", as alcohol laws and bans are often ignored in the relevant social stratum as well.
Making even the purchase of condoms and sex itself illegal for those under 21 will have extreme effects. For once, the endangered group of teenagers is going to be more like to have unprotected sex and pregnancies are going to be even more often kept secret. This means conclusively more children in toilets and dumps, young girls physically and emotionally broken, because they fear the legal consequences.

While I am on that: I disapprove the statement that teen-pregnancy is "disgusting". It might be not pleasant to watch for some of us, including me, though pregnancy itself is naturally necessary enough to be not "disgusting" and a pregnant 13-year-old, is probably something bizarre to look at but does not deserve the degrading adjective "disgusting".

Let's move on from that. There are many things that are allowed to people between the age of 15 and 21 in which context they may harm themselves. In some countries it's alcohol and smoking as well, but talking about the US it's still driving, vacations on their own, working and handcrafting with electrical circuits, using certain chemicals, and so on. All these things are not always supervised an small mistakes might lead to fatal accidents. Yet we allow teenagers to do these things because we regard it as a necessary skill for adulthood or because they have already the intelligence to understand what they handle as good as an adult and can therefore protect themselves.
In terms of sex, the later one is relevant. A 16-year-old-teenagers has already a life-perception that allows her/him to understand what pregnancy means. He/She can interpret the costs of a child if you provide the calculation. They can physically master the technique to put on a condom or take oral contraception medication (which is probably the more difficult one). Conclusively are Teenagers perfectly capable of understanding the risk and capable of keeping themselves safe.
Those who take the risk or don't know about it are not unable to understand it. They just have not been taught properly. Being informed about how sex works and how pregnancy and STD's can prevented is something that needs to be done before or at least as soon as the child is becomes sexually mature. Which is usually way before they turn 20 There is no way of preventing them from this and rape is only one reason why it's no option to withhold them from knowing their body till they are 21.

Finally I am going to talk about my Opponents introduction, that there are people who think, one cannot live without sex. Although, talking only about higher species, there usually cannot be life without sex, a individual might either be born without a sex drive or have very little or choose not to have sex. Still, not only humans use sex for recreational purposes and to strengthen their relationships - there are also some more (1) or less controversial (2) articles about the positive effects of sex for the brain and hormone balancing. Something a lot of teenagers might especially enjoy.

Considering the risk of a responsibly engaged sex act, there is no reason to raise the legal limit to 21. I hope to have shown that it would even create more problems than it could solve.

(1) http://www.webmd.com...
(2) http://www.plannedparenthood.org...
Debate Round No. 2
PartTimeHipster

Pro

PartTimeHipster forfeited this round.
schachdame

Con

Please extend argumentation for this debate.
Debate Round No. 3
PartTimeHipster

Pro

PartTimeHipster forfeited this round.
schachdame

Con

As this is the last Round and considering that my opponent fully forfeited the whole debate; I presume I am morally allowed to suggest the voters that there should not be much to think about who deserves their favours.
Debate Round No. 4
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by PartTimeHipster 2 years ago
PartTimeHipster
Hey, schachdame. I'm very sorry for disappearing without saying anything for Round 2. But I would like to say you did well, especially since you were here longer that I was. Your arguments were very strong, but I still stand by my own opinion and what I said before. Thank you for at least taking part and congratulations on winning.
Posted by schachdame 2 years ago
schachdame
dear daltonslaw - Can you explain me what you mean by "misinformation by conservatives in school"? I am not from the US and I have a hard time recalling a situation in which someone actually communicated false information about sex. I once had a religious teacher that was under the hilarious impression the HIV virus was so "small" that it could slip easily pass through the material of a condom; but I recall 20 students protesting to get her a warning not to promote her own believes at school. I am still giggling about this.
Posted by daltonslaw 2 years ago
daltonslaw
The problem is not that the consent age is too low (it's actually too high in my thought) the problem is misinformation provided by stupid conservatives and the lack of sex-ed at school. As a 15 year old youth I think I am perfectly capable to control my body, thanks to the information that I have.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
PartTimeHipsterschachdameTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF