Amazon.com Widgets
  • Definitely yes, Perhaps 12 even

    Teach better sexual education in schools
    But sex should not be something feared.
    You can't put an age on when someone is ready for sex, everyone matures at their own pace
    But a 13 year old is responsible enough to make this desicion.
    Expecially if they learn about safe sex, sti's and pregnancy earlier
    then they can make responsible choices

  • Yes as long as both families agree. Humans know right from wrong when they are around 7.

    They should also have to get a job and work at 13. Americans are just gonna get fatter and lazier and soon this country will start treating people in their mid 20s like children. We need to get back to the way things used to be. Americans are immature because they have terrible parenting. I started working in my dad's shop when I was 8 years old, graduated high school at 16, had save my first 10k (that I earned myself) before my 18th birthday, graduated college at 19, and paid off my home at 29. I also became sexually active at 13, I knew the consequences of my actions because I was made to take more and more care of myself at an early age. Parents now days want to hold their kids hands until they are 30. It's time for Americans to grow up. I'm not saying it's right to prey on the young, but what parents are doing isn't good either, stop sheltering and start letting them be responsible for their own actions.

  • Because once you're of age to reproduce, you're fair game.

    Once you're of age to reproduce, you should fair game in the dating world. "Kids" younger than that used to take on much more adult rolls years ago, but we're so involved in coddling and sheltering kids these days that they're happy with spewing the "I'm just a kid" excuse well into their 20s. If you're worried about lowering the age limit because they cannot make such "adult decisions" then why is the age of consent 16 or younger in most places? 3 years doesn't make much of a difference to me. They look pretty much the same and damn sure aren't smarter in a lot of cases. We should be striving to prepare kids for these types of decisions earlier on so that they can choose for themselves if they want to engage in such activities. I find most girls will start losing their luster after about 21-30 years old anyways, so lowering age of consent standards will only help girls to find these aggrandized romances they've been so indoctrinated to seek out, and maybe they'll learn that there are more important things to focus on than all the lovey dovey, material romance BS promoted by the media. They'll also be that much more physically desirable for an even longer period of time. BTW I am not a pedophile. Pedophilia involves attraction towards prepubescent children, not young adults. I just happen to prefer my women unspoiled by age and cynicism.

  • The age of consent was the fault of homophobic feminists

    The age of consent was raised from 13 to 16 in 1885 in the very same bill that criminalised homosexuality. It was the result of campaigning by puritanical anti-sex feminists who essentially believe that 'All sex is rape'.

    13 year olds are mentally perfectly capable of understanding the consequences of their actions to the required level as they have already lived longer than the life expectancy of many animals (e.G. Dogs, cats) most of whom would reproduce at a much younger age.

    Not being allowed to have a sexual relationship at a young age can result in an increased risk of lifelong celibacy and failing to have any offspring at all (women have a biological clock, you know). This can of course result in depression and suicide.

  • Lower the Age of Consent to 11 !

    - 11 is usually the age humans start being able to reproduce
    - To help avoid criminalizing sex between two high school pupils

    It is obvious that the age of consent is much too high in most of the world, The reasoning behind placing the age of consent at 16 is deeply flawed. After all who is likely to give a young person a good time? Someone well experienced or some fumbling kid? I think i know what I would prefer if i were a kid again.
    If Spain can place the age of consent at 13, then why cant the rest of the world do the right thing and place it at 11?

  • 13 Year Olds Are Both Mentally And Physically Mature Enough

    13 year olds are both mentally and physically mature to have sex and not get the female party pregnant. Both families should know and agree, and both parties should be using protection. Otherwise, 13 year olds can very well be in love, and if it's an act of love, go ahead!

  • YES they CAN give consent... NO it ISN'T rape if they give consent...

    First, here is the definition of consent:

    Consent- permission for something to happen or agreement to do something. (or), The act of giving permission for something to happen.

    If the 13-16 year old is educated properly about sex and knows how to practice sex safely, then how do they not know what they are doing?!?!?? If they give give consent, understand the consequences of practicing sex, and their sexual partner is safe and responsible, then why should it even matter if they have sex?

    I bet the real reason behind this "consent" bullshit is that parents can't cope with the fact that an older gentleman is sleeping with their daughter. Or maybe it's because the dad is frustrated by the fact that his son was able to lose his virginity much younger than him.

    -note-

    This was written by someone bellow the age of 17. (Not some 40-50 year old creep)

  • When does a girl become a woman who can decide if she wants to have sex or not?

    Did you know everyone under legal age (16, 17, 18) is physically a child and mentally not mature enough to decide if they want to have sex or not.....And then.....When they turn legal age they all of a sudden become a woman and they all of a sudden become mature enough to decide if they want to have sex or not.......Im being sarcastic......You people who think it's ok to put guys in jail for having consensual sex with a woman, not a child, a woman, your not going by logic on this topic your going by emotion then.

  • Basic human rights

    It isn't the prerogative of the State to dictate when a person can consent to a relationship. There should be no age of consent laws, period. Who is to say a 13 year old isn't even allowed to determine whether they exercise their own judgement and relationships? Most 13 year old girls wouldn't have any sexual interest in someone their father's age, but if given the chance would explore the possibilities with someone in their 20's. I believe young people should be treated as people and not possessions.

  • 13 is the perfect age

    At 13 girls are young with tight bodies and oozing with sex appeal. Look at any 13 year old girl these days and their hygiene is impeccable. They are mature ans fully capable of making these types of decisions on their own and they should be allowed to without consequence.

  • What perv thinks this is ok?

    13 year olds ARE CHILDREN. No one in their right mind would think a 13 year old has the emotional maturity to knowingly consent to sexual relations with an adult. 13 years olds should be shielded from predators who want to abuse them this way and anyone who is so delusional as to think that 13 years old is an adult should be punched in the face.

  • It encourages grooming and abuse

    In the UK the age of consent is 16. I believe that this is the right age for the law to stand at. But to think that influential people believe that it should be lowered to 13, it just disgusts me! We cannot let these perverts abuse anymore young children and let them get away with it.

  • No, the age of consent should not be lowered to 13.

    At the age of thirteen, children still are very immature and don't completely understand the meaning behind their actions. They are too young to be having sex. At that age they are just really staring puberty and they don't understand how to protect themselves. The age of consent should be sixteen or seventeen.

  • Not 13 but maybe 15 or 16.

    Some people say "they are just children" but really who's fault is that? For at least the first couple centuries A.D. And earlier, people were married and supported themselves usually between 11-14. They handled all adult responsibilities, including sex. If they could do it then, why not now? The only reason 13 year olds are to immature is because of how we raise them. Mothers don't want their "babies" to grow up, father's want their daughters to stay "daddy's little girl" forever, and so they baby and coddle their children, some still holding their kids' hands WELL into their mid-twenties. This does them no favors. Also this isn't about adults taking advantage of minors, there are already plenty of laws regarding real rape and real sexual assault, and if your argument is "protect the children that I refuse to let grow up" then make laws for REAL rape and REAL sexual adult much stricter when the victim is a minor, but it should not be illegal for them to have sex. As things stand now even minor on minor sex is illegal, would you want your kid to go to jail as a minor for having sex with a minor boyfriend or girlfriend who may even be the same age?? Why should we call them criminals for doing what they are biological programmed to do? I think that right now 13 is too young (at the fault of the parents) but 15 or 16 is not. Most of them already have jobs in addition to school, they drive cars, they handle plenty of adult responsibility and they definitely know what sex is, what the risks are and there outcomes. So why not? Hell most of them are tried as adults if they break the law, why are they adults if they break the law but children if they want to have sex? And besides, most 15+teens are having sex anyway, why should we call them criminals for doing what their bodies are biologically programmed to do? If we were meant to have sex older than that, wouldn't puberty occur at a later age?? I say for now lower it to 15 or 16 everywhere then gradually change how we raise our kids, increase sex ed and actually teach them right from younger ages and watch as they prove to us again, as they had for centuries in the past, that they can, in fact, handle adult responsibilities, then at that point you could consider lowering it to 13.

  • Cannot give consent

    Of course not, how is this even a debate? I was lead to believe that the age in question would be 16, but there's no way a 13 year old can give consent. Consent is the only thing that should matter, and the fact is that those under 16 cannot give it.

  • No, the age of consent should not be lowered to 13.

    Children under the age of 18, and some even over the age of 18 do not have fully developed emotional and decision making skills that would suggest they are capable of making decisions about sexual activity. A 13 year old, especially female, does not understand what it means to be pregnant or care for a child, and should not be considered old enough to consent to opening themselves to that possibility. A child must be given a chance to adjust to their changing bodies, emotions, and possible parental roles and expectations before opening them to the possibility of being put in sexual situations by those older (or even the same age) as them.

  • Yes, It Should Be Lowered, But...

    Yes, I do believe the age of consent should be lowered, but at 13, people aren't mature at all and many things aren't opened up for a child at the age of 13. If it was to be lowered, I think it should be lowered to something more mature such as a 16 year old.

  • No Consent At 13

    Although A 13 Year Old May Look As Though They Are Capable Of Making Decisions Of This Nature, In Actuality They Are Not And Regret It Later In Life. They Are Too Easily Influenced By Peer Pressure And By The Thought Of The "Act" Of Doing Something "Grown Up". Simply Put, Most Teens At 13 Are Naive And Don't Realize The Gravity Of An Early Pregnancy On Their Future.

  • No, the age of consent should not be lowered to 13.

    At the age of thirteen, children still are very immature and don't completely understand the meaning behind their actions. They are too young to be having sex. At that age they are just really staring puberty and they don't understand how to protect themselves. The age of consent should be sixteen or seventeen.

  • No it should not.

    The Age of Consent should not be lowered to thirteen. The laws are meant to protect children who could be taken advantage of. At the age of thirteen, people could not possibly know what they're getting into and the consequences. The age of consent should be at an age where someone could better understand the consequences and make better decisions on it. That age would probably be 16 or 17. Of course, people of these ages could still be taken advantage of, however they've had more time to mature and have had time to better understand the consequences of their actions. Thirteen is far too young.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
PathtoWisdom says2021-10-13T17:45:05.727
Most states don't have a minimum age of criminal liability. So they literally think a 14 year old can commit a crime and be tried as an adult, And ackowledge the fact that she/he can make a desicion, But can't decide if he/she wants to be touched or not. That's stupid. I also want to adress the Austin Jones case. The internet celebrity "forced" a teenager to send him her videos while twerking. He forced her, That's wrong. But a 14 year old is both physically and mentally mature enough to make desicions about his/her body. And she made a video about the case, Crying all over the video just for the views in my opinion. She is using Austin for views. And he is in prison. Girl, You were 14, Not 8. Of course it was wrong for him to force her, But the girl is playing dumb for views on You Tube. Austin got 10 years in prison which is really stupid. American laws on age of consent MUST change.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.