GirlChat #547895

Start A New Topic!  Date Index  Thread Index

Re: Simple answer

Posted by qtns2di4 on 2012-January-13 19:18:37 EST, Friday
In reply to Re: Simple answer posted by kratt on 2012-January-13 17:19:40 EST, Friday
  Views: 1    Likes: 0     

Yes, by informing children of risks ("just say no" is not informative enough) including the risk of manipulative and of physically abusive adults; and by penalizing adults for preventable STD transmission (even if the sex itself was consensual and not otherwise physically harmful). Although in theory I see a case for also raising the cost of causing an unwanted pregnancy (unwanted for the minor - this can be for a boy too, like with Vili and Mary Kay, although that one was wanted), it should also be low enough that it does not significantly hurt the capacities of the adult parent to provide for the child too. It would still not be perfect and it would still be reactive, not preemptive, but it would not need to involve blanket bans that do not regard the amount of real risk or of minor's consent present in the acts.




qtns2di4

This post is archived, preventing any new replies.

Responses