C'mon, Mr. Saletan. Usually you are a thinker. This idea is a stinker. Tell me this: what do you say to people who think that 16-year-olds should not be responsible for murders they commit, because "their brains are not developed all the way"? If 16 is the "age of consent," then get ready for even more teen births, STDs, broken relationships, welfare moms and predatory older men. Your defense of predation because someone's horny for a 13-year-old is reprehensible, and antithetical to a society that protects kids and expects people to take responsibility for their actions. You clearly don't have kids, or at least not normal ones.

Shame, shame.

I agree what about 7/8 of the rest of the world. You certainly have yor job cut out.

7/8s of the world?

Lets see, China, 1/6 of the world, kills people for doing drugs. Do you agree with them?

Or the Muslim world stones women for adultery. Do you agree with them?

Just because others do something does not mean its correct.

I DON'T AGREE becuse a majority of the world does somthing but it is a fact. People can be better but they are not. The point is since biblical times 12 and 13 years old have been marrying, agree-not- but a fact in the world. so do we invade othe countries and bring our enlightenment to them?? our teenage inticements(what do your daughters wear to the mall)??

"The point is since biblical times 12 and 13 years old have been marrying, agree-not- but a fact in the world."

So, if you want 12 and 13 year olds to have sex, then have them get married.

Otherwise, if they aren't married they shouldn't have sex.

rockyhiker13:

C'mon, Mr. Saletan. Usually you are a thinker. This idea is a stinker.

I'll let that one slide.. ;)

rockyhiker13:

Tell me this: what do you say to people who think that 16-year-olds should not be responsible for murders they commit, because "their brains are not developed all the way"? If 16 is the "age of consent," then get ready for even more teen births, STDs, broken

But 16 is presently the "age of consent" in many places and in many other places it's younger than that.

So then, what exacty is your point?

Here are some arbitrary ages: 14, 17, 19.

The biggest problem in this area is what has been mostily ignored in comments.

Why should a 15 year-old having sex with a 18 year be a crime?

Or.. why should the penalty be the same as it it would be if the ages were 15 and 50?

Nobody should have a criminal record for having sex with someone 5 years their junior.

In some cases it may not be "morally correct" (depending on one's morals) but it should not be a crime. That just doesn't make sense.

rockyhiker13:

Tell me this: what do you say to people who think that 16-year-olds should not be responsible for murders they commit, because "their brains are not developed all the way"?

I feel that it is hypocritical to deny a 16 year old the privledges of adulthood, and then decide at some arbitrary point that what they did was "adult" so they should be considered an "adult". Any time the legal system has a fuzzy area where two criminals who are exactly the same in all respects (including the crime they've committed) can be charged drastically different it opens up the system to unfair practices. If 16 year olds are adults, then they should be treated as such legally. If they are not, then they shouldn't. Otherwise whether a 16 year old is an adult really is at the whim of the prosecutor.

Bridget47:

If 16 is the "age of consent," then get ready for even more teen births, STDs, broken relationships, welfare moms and predatory older men.

Prove it. There are states with an age of consent of 16 as well as those with an age of consent of 18. If your statement is true, rather than emotional rhetoric, you should be able to find a systematic study that indicates this.

Bridget47:

Your defense of predation because someone's horny for a 13-year-old is reprehensible, and antithetical to a society that protects kids and expects people to take responsibility for their actions.

Well it really depends on that someone. What if a 15 year old is horny for that 13 year old? I think that seems pretty normal to me. While I would agree that it would be better if they didn't have sex until they were older, if they do has a crime been committed? Or do you think that a 15 year old who has sex with a 13 year old is the same as a 40 year old who does?

"Well it really depends on that someone. What if a 15 year old is horny for that 13 year old? I think that seems pretty normal to me. While I would agree that it would be better if they didn't have sex until they were older, if they do has a crime been committed? Or do you think that a 15 year old who has sex with a 13 year old is the same as a 40 year old who does?"

In this scenerio both are under the age of concent "16" so both sets of parents would be notified and they would decide what legal recourse or civil recourse would be necessary.

We have a court system that has determined that "mental age" is a viable idea when convicting someone for a crime. The Supreme Court did as much when it set a legal age that must be reached before the death penalty can be given to a defendant. The old argument "well some 13 year-olds are more mature that 15 year-olds" does not apply so if the Supreme Court can set an arbitrary age of responsibility for the death penalty than it is not outside of reason that a state goverment, with evidence by psychologists and sexual therapists and surveys, will set an age of consent for sexual activity.

You will always have people trying to rationalize an illegal act with "well some variables are different from case to case", but these people are merely looking for a COP-OUT.

If a 22 year-old, horny or not, has intercourse in whatever way, with a 15 year-old with the age of mentally being able to concent to the act set at 16, then YES the 22 year-old has committed a crime because HE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER and been able to take control of his body. This should be a no-brainer except for those looking for a cop-out.