I wouldn't have much of a problem with decriminalizing teen/teen relationships, except that a 19 year old and a 14 year old aren't peers.

Anyone who says different doesn't know 19 year olds OR 14 year olds.

Freshman girl and senior guy? Always creeped me out too but it happens, and I'm not sure it should be illegal.

(10-14-2013 02:48 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(10-14-2013 02:24 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  This is still on the fringe of the fringe, so I don't think it's fair to call it the Left's new "crusade".

However, ~60 years ago homosexuality was just as much on the fringe as this stuff is now, and we see how social attitudes about that changed in one lifetime. So people should be careful with predictions about where "intergenerational romance" will be 60 from now.

That's not a fair statement, 50 years before that you could say the same thing about interracial marriage, and 150 years before that, slavery.

The belief in freedom between consenting adults is a long standing, and far more useful common thread between homosexuality and those other, acceptable social movements. Child abuse inherently does not fall under that, and in no way can you draw a comparison based on their actions or politics.

Child abusers/molesters are equally despised on each side of the aisle.

but they are.

(10-14-2013 03:01 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I think there is a legitimate argument for saying that when you deprive society of its ability to define social norms you quite literally open the door for any excuse to accept just about anything.

My thoughts exactly.

(10-14-2013 03:16 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  Freshman girl and senior guy? Always creeped me out too but it happens, and I'm not sure it should be illegal.

Dude.

(10-14-2013 03:16 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  Freshman girl and senior guy? Always creeped me out too but it happens, and I'm not sure it should be illegal.

No, that's high school freshman/college freshman.

(10-14-2013 03:12 PM)Smaug Wrote:  I wouldn't have much of a problem with decriminalizing teen/teen relationships, except that a 19 year old and a 14 year old aren't peers.

Anyone who says different doesn't know 19 year olds OR 14 year olds.

14 is just too young.

15 should be too but so many 15 year olds are fully sexually active now.

Of course all these are too young depending on the age of the other person.

Coming soon to those liberal urban utopian Meccas

(10-14-2013 03:20 PM)Jedi Master Sipho-Dyas Wrote:  Of course all these are too young depending on the age of the other person.

This is where the issue is to me.

14 IS too young, but are we really going to criminally punish a 14 year old for diddling another 14 year old?

The difference to me, again, is that the 19 year old and 14 year old aren't peers. What the hell could they possibly have in common? One is horny and the other is pliant, because they're not mature enough to make the decision.

Gay or straight, this ought to be something we can all agree on.

(10-14-2013 03:19 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(10-14-2013 03:16 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  Freshman girl and senior guy? Always creeped me out too but it happens, and I'm not sure it should be illegal.

No, that's high school freshman/college freshman.

I thought there were 19 year old seniors, but looking back on it, you're right. I've got no problem with that obviously.

(10-14-2013 03:16 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(10-14-2013 02:48 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(10-14-2013 02:24 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  This is still on the fringe of the fringe, so I don't think it's fair to call it the Left's new "crusade".

However, ~60 years ago homosexuality was just as much on the fringe as this stuff is now, and we see how social attitudes about that changed in one lifetime. So people should be careful with predictions about where "intergenerational romance" will be 60 from now.

That's not a fair statement, 50 years before that you could say the same thing about interracial marriage, and 150 years before that, slavery.

The belief in freedom between consenting adults is a long standing, and far more useful common thread between homosexuality and those other, acceptable social movements. Child abuse inherently does not fall under that, and in no way can you draw a comparison based on their actions or politics.

Child abusers/molesters are equally despised on each side of the aisle.

but they are.

But, they aren't. Quote a person I've heard of making a similar statement.

(10-14-2013 03:29 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(10-14-2013 03:19 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(10-14-2013 03:16 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  Freshman girl and senior guy? Always creeped me out too but it happens, and I'm not sure it should be illegal.

No, that's high school freshman/college freshman.

I thought there were 19 year old seniors, but looking back on it, you're right. I've got no problem with that obviously.

Please tell me I read you wrong.

(10-14-2013 03:30 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(10-14-2013 03:16 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(10-14-2013 02:48 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(10-14-2013 02:24 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  This is still on the fringe of the fringe, so I don't think it's fair to call it the Left's new "crusade".

However, ~60 years ago homosexuality was just as much on the fringe as this stuff is now, and we see how social attitudes about that changed in one lifetime. So people should be careful with predictions about where "intergenerational romance" will be 60 from now.

That's not a fair statement, 50 years before that you could say the same thing about interracial marriage, and 150 years before that, slavery.

The belief in freedom between consenting adults is a long standing, and far more useful common thread between homosexuality and those other, acceptable social movements. Child abuse inherently does not fall under that, and in no way can you draw a comparison based on their actions or politics.

Child abusers/molesters are equally despised on each side of the aisle.

but they are.

But, they aren't. Quote a person I've heard of making a similar statement.

quote a person you heard? There are quotes in the article.

(10-14-2013 03:20 PM)Jedi Master Sipho-Dyas Wrote:  

(10-14-2013 03:12 PM)Smaug Wrote:  I wouldn't have much of a problem with decriminalizing teen/teen relationships, except that a 19 year old and a 14 year old aren't peers.

Anyone who says different doesn't know 19 year olds OR 14 year olds.

14 is just too young.

15 should be too but so many 15 year olds are fully sexually active now.

Of course all these are too young depending on the age of the other person.

What if I'm 34 and my girlfriend is 21? *covers mouth and giggles*

(10-14-2013 03:38 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(10-14-2013 03:20 PM)Jedi Master Sipho-Dyas Wrote:  

(10-14-2013 03:12 PM)Smaug Wrote:  I wouldn't have much of a problem with decriminalizing teen/teen relationships, except that a 19 year old and a 14 year old aren't peers.

Anyone who says different doesn't know 19 year olds OR 14 year olds.

14 is just too young.

15 should be too but so many 15 year olds are fully sexually active now.

Of course all these are too young depending on the age of the other person.

What if I'm 34 and my girlfriend is 21? *covers mouth and giggles*

You aren't really peers either, but she's at an age recognized by our culture as a consenting adult.

(10-14-2013 03:39 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(10-14-2013 03:38 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(10-14-2013 03:20 PM)Jedi Master Sipho-Dyas Wrote:  

(10-14-2013 03:12 PM)Smaug Wrote:  I wouldn't have much of a problem with decriminalizing teen/teen relationships, except that a 19 year old and a 14 year old aren't peers.

Anyone who says different doesn't know 19 year olds OR 14 year olds.

14 is just too young.

15 should be too but so many 15 year olds are fully sexually active now.

Of course all these are too young depending on the age of the other person.

What if I'm 34 and my girlfriend is 21? *covers mouth and giggles*

You aren't really peers either, but she's at an age recognized by our culture as a consenting adult.

And still perky. All the way around...

(10-14-2013 03:33 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(10-14-2013 03:29 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(10-14-2013 03:19 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(10-14-2013 03:16 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  Freshman girl and senior guy? Always creeped me out too but it happens, and I'm not sure it should be illegal.

No, that's high school freshman/college freshman.

I thought there were 19 year old seniors, but looking back on it, you're right. I've got no problem with that obviously.

Please tell me I read you wrong.

I meant I've got no problem making that illegal obviously. Ugh, I've gotta stop multitasking.

(10-14-2013 04:13 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(10-14-2013 03:33 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(10-14-2013 03:29 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(10-14-2013 03:19 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(10-14-2013 03:16 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  Freshman girl and senior guy? Always creeped me out too but it happens, and I'm not sure it should be illegal.

No, that's high school freshman/college freshman.

I thought there were 19 year old seniors, but looking back on it, you're right. I've got no problem with that obviously.

Please tell me I read you wrong.

I meant I've got no problem making that illegal obviously. Ugh, I've gotta stop multitasking.

Gotcha. Thanks for the clarification.

(10-14-2013 03:36 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(10-14-2013 03:30 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(10-14-2013 03:16 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(10-14-2013 02:48 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(10-14-2013 02:24 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  This is still on the fringe of the fringe, so I don't think it's fair to call it the Left's new "crusade".

However, ~60 years ago homosexuality was just as much on the fringe as this stuff is now, and we see how social attitudes about that changed in one lifetime. So people should be careful with predictions about where "intergenerational romance" will be 60 from now.

That's not a fair statement, 50 years before that you could say the same thing about interracial marriage, and 150 years before that, slavery.

The belief in freedom between consenting adults is a long standing, and far more useful common thread between homosexuality and those other, acceptable social movements. Child abuse inherently does not fall under that, and in no way can you draw a comparison based on their actions or politics.

Child abusers/molesters are equally despised on each side of the aisle.

but they are.

But, they aren't. Quote a person I've heard of making a similar statement.

quote a person you heard? There are quotes in the article.

A quote of a person I've never heard of, in a source I've never heard of, about a movement i've never heard of. You getting the picture? It's fabricated, just for people like yourself to get worked up over, and no one on this forum cares about their claims being legitimate as long as it's against the team no one likes.

I believe all children under the age of 120 should be protected with additional extreme laws.