Age of Consent?

OutlawPete

The Government is to issue new proposals that will lower the Age of Consent to 16.

Minister of State for Children Barry Andrews said yesterday the current laws on age of consent were “inappropriate” and out of touch with the modern reality of sexual relations between young people.
“Ireland with Malta are the only countries in Europe with an age of consent of 17.

“It means that prosecutions can issue on foot of one child having sex with a child who is 16½. For me, to apply criminal sanctions of that order, for that kind of activity, which we all know is more common today, is unconscionable.”

Mr Andrews said heads of a Bill would be published soon – probably in January – to implement the conclusion of the Oireachtas committee on the constitutional amendment of children that the age of consent should be lowered to 16 years.

People had to acknowledge “times had moved on” and there was a different attitude to sex among young people. Mr Andrews denied that lowering the age of consent would encourage people to have sex at a younger age. He called for more sex education in schools.

“I don’t think young people are ignorant, they understand that we are not setting this as a target. We are clearly saying that delaying first sex is something that everyone recommends. Those people who have sex at young ages often regret it in later life.”

The Poll just deals with the above and whether or not you agree with the lowering of the Age of Consent and which age you think it should be if indeed you do think that it should be lowered.

On a separate issue, the Bill will also attempt to address the fact that while Men face a maximum of life for incest, women currently only face a possible seven years for committing the same crime.

Mr Andrews said the Bill would also modernise incest laws by introducing a maximum life sentence for women who commit incest.
Men already face a possible life sentence if convicted of committing incest but for now there is a maximum sentence of seven years for women – a point highlighted by the judge in the recent trial of a mother of six, who was found guilty of incest in the Roscommon child abuse case.

There is no mention however of the Government addressing the fact that a 16 year old boy (for instance) can have underage sex with a 16 year old girl and face a statutory rape charge, while the girl is immune from prosecution just for the very fact that she is female. In fact, a 16 girl could have sex with an 11 year old boy and not face any charges with the current laws.

He said the Government would probably not have time to pass the legislation into law but he appealed to the Labour Party, if it entered a coalition with Fine Gael, to continue to support the 16-year-old limit.

During discussions at the Oireachtas committee, which was chaired by Mary O’Rourke, Fine Gael supported maintaining the current age of consent at 17 years, while Labour supported 16 years.

Seems the parties differ on this, so may possibly become an election issue.

So, do you agree that the Age of Consent should be lowered, and if so - to what age?

Source

George83

I don't have any strong feelings about changing the age of consent, but I do feel this is very wrong - There is no mention however of the Government addressing the fact that a 16 year old boy (for instance) can have underage sex with a 16 year old girl and face a statutory rape charge, while the girl is immune from prosecution just for the very fact that she is female. In fact, a 16 girl could have sex with an 11 year old boy and not face any charges with the current laws - surely the law should work bothways.

AnneElizabeth

I think it's find the way it is now. I think it being 17 does make (most) people wait longer. And the people that don't wait are the ones who've been doing it since they were even younger anyways.

I agree with the above post though, a boy and girl of the same age having sex shouldn't be considered statutory rape.

AnneElizabeth

AnneElizabeth wrote: »

I think it's find the way it is now. I think it being 17 does make (most) people wait longer.

Really? From comments you used to hear, most people think it's 16 already because it is in the UK

Mark200

George83 wrote: »

I don't have any strong feelings about changing the age of consent, but I do feel this is very wrong - There is no mention however of the Government addressing the fact that a 16 year old boy (for instance) can have underage sex with a 16 year old girl and face a statutory rape charge, while the girl is immune from prosecution just for the very fact that she is female. In fact, a 16 girl could have sex with an 11 year old boy and not face any charges with the current laws - surely the law should work bothways.

It's the same with normal rape too. A woman can not be charged with rape. It's because legally, sex is defined as the actual act of penetration. Which a woman can't do...

And I think the age of consent should be lowered. 17 is too high. No need for closer age exceptions for 16 or 17 year olds I don't think.

PCPhoto

George83 wrote: »

I don't have any strong feelings about changing the age of consent, but I do feel this is very wrong - There is no mention however of the Government addressing the fact that a 16 year old boy (for instance) can have underage sex with a 16 year old girl and face a statutory rape charge, while the girl is immune from prosecution just for the very fact that she is female. In fact, a 16 girl could have sex with an 11 year old boy and not face any charges with the current laws - surely the law should work bothways.

SHOULD ... but in Ireland ....we ALWAYS have to have "some" people who are above the law.

Coriolanus

16 with lower close age exceptions. 15/16, 15/15 etc.

Trust this country to lower the age of consent, yet probably not increase sexual education.

ilovesleep

How about lowering the age of voting too. Or are teenagers adult enough for riding but not adult enough for a vote.

Kintarō Hattori

Several replies in and is no-one else shocked at just how young the age of consent is in Spain? That's horrific really.

TheZohanS

ilovesleep wrote: »

How about lowering the age of voting too. Or are teenagers adult enough for riding but not adult enough for a vote.

Yeah that's a good idea...

"**** you Deputy Jedward"

Lumen

Kintarō Hattori wrote: »

Several replies in and is no-one else shocked at just how young the age of consent is in Spain? That's horrific really.

I think it is only legal for consenting 13-16 y/os, but I can't read Spanish to check the legislation.

They can also marry at 14, leaving just enough time to get the wedding arranged before the baby arrives. :pac:

Grandmother at 28? :eek:

George83

Kintarō Hattori wrote: »

Several replies in and is no-one else shocked at just how young the age of consent is in Spain? That's horrific really.

Gibraltar is even more shocking - surely 12 is far too early to be even considering having sex?

Kintarō Hattori

Kintarō Hattori wrote: »

Several replies in and is no-one else shocked at just how young the age of consent is in Spain? That's horrific really.

Heard it before so not shocked now no

TheZohanS

Kintarō Hattori wrote: »

Several replies in and is no-one else shocked at just how young the age of consent is in Spain? That's horrific really.

It's lowest in the Vatican State.

http://www.avert.org/age-of-consent.htm

It's a bit strange that in the Vatican City it's not stipulated that you have to be married to have sex, like in Pakistan or Oman. So apparenty it's a sin, but not illegal.

TheZohanS

Deleted User wrote: »

http://www.avert.org/age-of-consent.htm

It's a bit strange that in the Vatican City it's stipulated that you have to be married to have sex

Are you sure about that?

TheZohan

TheZohan wrote: »

Are you sure about that?

I'm only going by that website, where it stipulates where you have to be married to have sex, and the Vatican City isn't one of those. I could be wrong, of course. Apologies, that was a typo. Meant to say that it's not stipulated.

Sesshoumaru

Kintarō Hattori wrote: »

Several replies in and is no-one else shocked at just how young the age of consent is in Spain? That's horrific really.

I'm more shocked at how close we are to Turkey. Maybe some of the people voting for an age of consent the same as Turkey also believe some honour killings might help discourage young people from having sex?

Lumen

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm only going by that website, where it stipulates where you have to be married to have sex, and the Vatican City isn't one of those. I could be wrong, of course. Apologies, that was a typo. Meant to say that it's not stipulated.

Vatican is the same as Italy.

orourkeda

Teenagers screw like bunnies anyway. What difference will a minor tweak to the law make.

Lumen

Lumen wrote: »

Vatican is the same as Italy.

According to the site I posted, the age of consent in Italy is 14. Multiple other places say 14 too.

phill106

Thank goodness it is a private poll, otherwise I would be all over the posts of the people who voted 13... Come on, 13?!

Pherekydes

Sesshoumaru wrote: »

I'm more shocked at how close we are to Turkey. Maybe some of the people voting for an age of consent the same as Turkey also believe some honour killings might help discourage young people from having sex?

I think the poll means that people who vote for that age believe that that age is the correct one at which to start sexual relations. It doesn't mean that those voting for that particular age believe that we should take on that country's laws.

How would it work with the ages of 15 or 16, for instance? Should we pick and choose the most draconian laws from each country listed?

Sesshoumaru

Pherekydes wrote: »

I think the poll means that people who vote for that age believe that that age is the correct one at which to start sexual relations. It doesn't mean that those voting for that particular age believe that we should take on that country's laws.

How would it work with the ages of 15 or 16, for instance? Should we pick and choose the most draconian laws from each country listed?

I would argue that the extreme moral views of the Turks and the age of consent being 18 are linked. Do you think the problem of young girls being murdered by their families in Turkey for having sex outside of marriage is unrelated to the age of consent being 18 in Turkey?

Pherekydes

Sesshoumaru wrote: »

I would argue that the extreme moral views of the Turks and the age of consent being 18 are linked. Do you think the problem of young girls being murdered by their families in Turkey for having sex outside of marriage is unrelated to the age of consent being 18 in Turkey?

I think you'll find that there are honour killings in other European countries whose ages of consent are much lower.

swizzle123

It doesn't matter if the government were to change the age to 21 or to 10. Teenagers have sex when they want and having an age limit doesn't stop them or put them off it. If its something they want to do then having an age limit on it isn't going to make a difference...

I would agree though that yeah if they are lowering the age limit then they should provide better sex education...im outta secondary school now around 5 years and we got little or no sex education..

TheZohanS

phill106 wrote: »

Thank goodness it is a private poll, otherwise I would be all over the posts of the people who voted 13... Come on, 13?!

Get over it, someone voted 12.

Sesshoumaru

Pherekydes wrote: »

I think you'll find that there are honour killings in other European countries whose ages of consent are much lower.

Like in Germany?

http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,344374,00.html
http://www.bild.de/BILD/news/bild-english/world-news/2008/12/17/sister-stabbed-in-honour-killing/are-his-court-tears-genuine.html
http://www.bild.de/BILD/news/bild-english/world-news/2009/06/25/honour-killing-shocks-germany/turkish-dad-stabs-own-15-year-old-daughter-to-death.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4345459.stm

I also found this Guardian article:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/feb/04/girl-buried-alive-turkey

Guardian wrote:

Death reopens debate over 'honour' killings in Turkey, which account for half of all the country's murders

I don't think you can compare honour killings in Turkey to any other EU country, the scale is totally different. I only bring this up because I believe this kind of ultra conservative ideology is related to their age of consent being 18.

I have two kids myself and don't want them having sex at an early age. But I have to be realistic, it may happen and if it does I don't want either of them or anyone else's kid going to jail for having consensual sex

Lumen

Deleted User wrote: »

According to the site I posted, the age of consent in Italy is 14. Multiple other places say 14 too.

The age of consent in the Vatican is the same as in Italy. That's what the law says, it's not coincidence. The site you posted said the age of consent in the Vatican was 12, therefore it is wrong.

phill106

TheZohan wrote: »

Get over it, someone voted 12.

Since i posted, yes. That is even worse. Surely most kids wouldnt even have reached puberty then?

NothingMan

Stupid sexy kids.

enda1

Age of consent should obviously include the close in age exceptions.

Are we now gonna start chucking 5 year olds in gaol for playing doctor?
Seeing as the youngest option is 14 (with closer...) then I'll vote for that.

Pherekydes

Sesshoumaru wrote: »

I don't think you can compare honour killings in Turkey to any other EU country, the scale is totally different. I only bring this up because I believe this kind of ultra conservative ideology is related to their age of consent being 18.

I mentioned the fact that honour killings happen in other countries to show that it's not linked to the age of consent. In my opinion, it's linked to the fact that they are, in the main, Muslim, and it's related to their religion rather the age of consent. Indeed, one of the victims you linked to was married at 16 to her cousin in Turkey.

starbelgrade

Kintarō Hattori wrote: »

Several replies in and is no-one else shocked at just how young the age of consent is in Spain? That's horrific really.

Not really. Many kids are sexually active at that age.. I see no reason in criminalising them for that.

ilovesleep

starbelgrade wrote: »

Not really. Many kids are sexually active at that age.. I see no reason in criminalising them for that.

13 in spain and kids are sexually actively. My god they are very brave. I was terrified of a penis at 21.

Novella

Lowering the age of consent to 16? I don't have a problem with it. So many 16 year olds are sexually active regardless, so why not?

prinz

Novella wrote: »

So many 16 year olds are sexually active regardless, so why not?

It may be right to lower it or it may not be, either way the reasoning above is most definitley the wrong basis on which to do it.

FreudianSlippers

I love 16 year old bitches, so it's win win for me.

Novella

prinz wrote: »

It may be right to lower it or it may not be, either way the reasoning above is most definitley the wrong basis on which to do it.

I don't think the age of consent really means anything to teenagers. If they're gonna have sex, they're gonna do it. I don't think lowering it one year is gonna make a huge difference to anything anyway.

prinz

Novella wrote: »

I don't think the age of consent really means anything to teenagers. If they're gonna have sex, they're gonna do it. I don't think lowering it one year is gonna make a huge difference to anything anyway.

Some of them. Some of them are also going to drink, drive, smoke, etc. Changing laws based on the actions of some or even most people is not always for the best, my point being.

Dublin_Gunner

Are there any stats on how many teenagers have been convicted of stat. rape?

I did a quick search but can't find anything.

Would changing the law really change anything? Probably not. 2 young teenagers that wish to have sex, are going to no matter what the law states the age of consent is.

If laws can't stop them drinking, or doing drugs, I seriously doubt it will make much of a difference to stopping them having sex.

However, where I would like to see the law change is in the area of an older person having sex with a young teenager.

i.e I don't see 2 15 year olds having sex in the same way as say a 25 year old and 15 year old having sex.

So in that view, I would like to see the young age exceptions being invoked.

For example I would have no problem with the law stating 14-17 year olds can have sex (or a 15 yo with 18 etc etc) but stat rape could still be invoked where the age difference is large enough to deem it to be paedophilia.

Obviously that's just a rough example of how I'd like to see it operate. But I'm not sure of the legality of it. (i.e how can one not prosecute a 15 year old for doing the same thing a 20 year old would be convicted of).

Needs a lot mroe thinking to get it right. Well, the law will never be 'correct' in everyone's eyes. I suppose its a step in the right direction of modernising some laws.

Novella

prinz wrote: »

Some of them. Some of them are also going to drink, drive, smoke, etc. Changing laws based on the actions of some or even most people is not always for the best, my point being.

I don't think they're completely comparable. Drinking/smoking/drugs etc., are not in the same category as having sex. Driving? Lower that to 16 from 17 too, if it makes you feel better. Again, not something I think is a huge deal. I think lowering the age of consent based on what most people are doing is a good idea. I wouldn't say the same for the alcohol law, because imo they're not the same, but hey, different strokes for different folks.

Why do you think the age of consent being 16 would be a bad thing?

prinz

Novella wrote: »

I don't think they're completely comparable. Drinking/smoking/drugs etc., are not in the same category as having sex.

What categories would those be? I don't see why the age of consent should be legislated for any different to many other things tbh, what's best for society, not what many people do.

Novella wrote: »

Why do you think the age of consent being 16 would be a bad thing?

In one ear out the other. I never said it would be a bad thing.

itsallaboutheL

Novella wrote: »

I don't think they're completely comparable. Drinking/smoking/drugs etc., are not in the same category as having sex. Driving? Lower that to 16 from 17 too, if it makes you feel better. Again, not something I think is a huge deal. I think lowering the age of consent based on what most people are doing is a good idea. I wouldn't say the same for the alcohol law, because imo they're not the same, but hey, different strokes for different folks.

Why do you think the age of consent being 16 would be a bad thing?

Hey, i have no problem with a 16 year old sticking his mickey in whatever he wants, but there's noway i'm letting him near a car.

16 year olds are idiots.

Cheap Thrills!

17 is too old. It needs to be put back to 16.

Not that it will make a blind bit of difference. Teenagers will still do it whenever they want but 16 is slightly more realistic than 17.

FreudianSlippers

itsallaboutheL wrote: »

16 year olds are idiots.

Sexy, sexy idiots.

Novella

prinz wrote: »

What categories would those be? I don't see why the age of consent should be legaslated for any different to many other things tbh, what's best for society, not what many people do.

Well, alcohol and drugs are damaging and dangerous substances and therefore, in my opinion, not suitable for young teenagers. However, as far as I'm concerned, sex is just sex. It's not bad for you.

I think it would be better for society if so many teenagers weren't committing crimes, simply by having sex. It's just kind of silly. Plus the whole seventeen year old guy having sex with sixteen year old girl, both consenting, yet the guy can be charged with statutory rape... I think that's ridiculous.

In one ear out the other. I never said it would be a bad thing.

I just don't really get why you're arguing with me, that's all. I know what you're saying and it makes sense. I just replied fleetingly to this thread. I didn't really mean it in the, "Ah fuck it, might as well change all of our laws to suit whatever rules are being broken" way.

twinQuins

Yes, yes, prinz, people will always murder regardless of the laws so why don't we just make murder legal - we've all heard that tired line of argumenting before.

The point is, teenagers screwing each other is (in the vast majority of cases) not going to harm anyone. I have always been a firm believer that once an action doesn't harm anyone (and if it harms the actor and they accept that harm may come) it should be legal.
You say laws should be made based on what's best for society - well, how does keeping the age of consent at 18 serve society better than lowering it to 16?

Sesshoumaru

Pherekydes wrote: »

I mentioned the fact that honour killings happen in other countries to show that it's not linked to the age of consent. In my opinion, it's linked to the fact that they are, in the main, Muslim, and it's related to their religion rather the age of consent. Indeed, one of the victims you linked to was married at 16 to her cousin in Turkey.

http://www.avert.org/age-of-consent.htm

Going through that list of countries, the countries with "must be married" and high ages of consent seem to me at first glance to be mostly Islamic countries. You yourself have linked honour killings to the fact they are in the main Muslim. I'm also simply adding that the age of consent is also high because they are Muslim countries. I don't want our reasoning based on the same ideology (although in the case of Ireland I'm referring more to extreme Catholics) that leads to a high age of consent and honour killings of young girls in Islamic countries.

That's why I am saying I was a bit shocked at the significant minority voting for 18 years of age. Would we get some votes for 18 plus "must be married" if it was available?

prinz

Novella wrote: »

However, as far as I'm concerned, sex is just sex. It's not bad for you..

If only that was the case in reality. We have many fully grown and mature adults suffering health issues/financial issues/etc because sex is not 'just sex'

Morkarleth wrote: »

You say laws should be made based on what's best for society - well, how does keeping the age of consent at 18 serve society better than lowering it to 16?

Perhaps I'd argue that if I had said that it would be better to have it at 18. I didn't. Nor is it 18. Perhaps you should pay more attention rather than "tired" old attempts at undemrining what people say.