I mean 3 condoms for $6 dollars? If that's sending me a message from the Condom Companies, it would be: "Condoms are for wussies and people with a lot of spending money and people who care about STD's and babies!"
And so, honestly, what do you think about Condoms? Are they condoned? "I love my STDs and love children so I will never use Condoms!"
Correct, and just FYI, never trust a girl to handle the birth control herself. You never know if she missed her pill for a few days then BAM! she's pregnant, your a daddy, and your future is forever altered. Just be safe and wrap it up. Best advice I ever got, and that I can ever give to young men about intercourse.
i am willing to guarantee that 99% of the people who commented in here dont know the difference between sexual intercourse with and without a condom.
I was going to be a bit more conservative and say ~60-70%, especially given both the maturity of many of the posts as well as the age of the posters. I could be off, but I know it's less than 99%.
When you weigh it between Child support for the next 18 years, and 10 bucks for some condoms I think the choice obvious.
Not only that, but if you guys have Health and Human Services, Planned Parenthood, or similar sexual outreach organizations near you there is a good chance you can get condoms for free. Also there are many websites where you can order free condoms for teens. There is a list of links toward the bottom of the page Here in the Phoenix metro area we also have Project Hardhat, and I'm sure there are similar non-profits all around the world.
I recently learned that there is no age limit on buying condoms, strange...
Why would there be? The whole point of them is to prevent pregnancies and STDs, and who more to protect than the younger groups who are more reckless and/or less informed. I say they shouldn't even charge you for condoms until you are at least 18.
But sex among underaged children can be considered statutory ****
Actually that's only sex with a minor by an adult. If you are both underage then there is no legal offense committed. Also, in most states the age of consent w/ parental approval varies from 14-16, and the legal age of consent varies from 16-18 without parental consent.
That's a wide block of time to be sexually active, and no I wouldn't consider it enabling, I would consider it protecting your child. If my kids are going to have sex young I want to make sure they are educated and have all manner of protection available.
They are going to start when they are ready, not when I want them to, so all I can do is teach them and be there to protect them. If that means handing condoms to my 14 or 15 year old child, I'd rather do that than have them get someone pregnant or wind up with an STD.
There are many places to receive free condoms. Almost all doctor's offices and the public health dept. I bet somewhere at school they give out condoms.
I used to teach "Self Management" to undergrads at Ole Miss. It was really just Sex-Ed.
Actually that's only sex with a minor by an adult.
According to my family life teacher if two underage children were to have underage sex, the male could be charged with statutory rape, regardless of age.
That's the way it is in a lot of countries - no matter if 2 underage people consent to the act - it's usually the male that takes the blame for 'rape'.
According to my family life teacher if two underage children were to have underage sex, the male could be charged with statutory ****, regardless of age.
That's interesting, where do you live? Because I have been unable to find one law in the US in which two minors engaging in intercourse amounts to statutory r.ape
B. If any person carnally knows, without the use of force, a child thirteen years of age or older but under fifteen years of age who consents to sexual intercourse and the accused is a minor and such consenting child is three years or more the accused's junior, the accused shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony. If such consenting child is less than three years the accused's junior, the accused shall be guilty of a Class 4 misdemeanor.
B. If any person carnally knows, without the use of force, a child thirteen years of age or older but under fifteen years of age who consents to sexual intercourse and the accused is a minor and such consenting child is three years or more the accused's junior, the accused shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony. If such consenting child is less than three years the accused's junior, the accused shall be guilty of a Class 4 misdemeanor.
Sounds like a crap law to me. I bet it's biasedly enforced as well. Like two thirteen year olds engage in intercourse, only the guy would be charged with the misdemeanor.
If any person carnally knows, without the use of force, a child thirteen years of age or older but under fifteen years of age who consents to sexual intercourse and the accused is a minor and such consenting child is three years or more the accused's junior, the accused shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony. If such consenting child is less than three years the accused's junior, the accused shall be guilty of a Class 4 misdemeanor.
Interesting. However that still only classifies ages 13-15. So from their 13th birthday until the day before their 14th. I would argue that 13-14 is a very young age to be having intercourse anyway, despite my personal experiences at that age.
Also, the sentencing for a class 4 misdemeanor is basically a fine. However I disagree that such a penalty should be imposed anyway, especially for children of nearly the same age. I would contend that if the child is between 13-15 and the other child is in the same age then there should be no penalty, however older children should be mandated against intercourse with those much younger, especially given the wide variation of psychological and physiological differences even within a short timeframe during the ages of 13-17.
Sounds like a crap law to me. I bet it's biasedly enforced as well. Like two thirteen year olds engage in intercourse, only the guy would be charged with the misdemeanor.
