Email
Password
Remember meForgot password?
    Log in with Twitter

article imageOp-Ed: Should the age of consent be lowered?

By Alexander Baron     Sep 24, 2013 in Lifestyle
The age of consent for sexual relations is 16 in the UK; there are those who seek to lower it. Who are they, and what would be the result?
The age of consent in Spain was 13 years, something many people would consider shockingly low. It has recently been raised to 16, bringing it in line with sensible norms. The age of consent varies from country to country, and in the US, from state to state.
Nevertheless, there are those who would like to see it lowered, and at times they use arguments that are superficially persuasive. Who are they, and what would be the result if they had their way?
Broadly speaking there are two types of people who want to see the age of consent lowered: paedophiles and those pursuing a sexual agenda, a homosexual agenda in particular. Needless to say, there is much overlap. One of the former was the Dutch paedophile Edward Brongersma, the title of his book, Loving Boys, says it all. Judith Reisman had his number; she is the woman who exposed, debunked and continues to debunk the fraudulent gospel of Dr Alfred Kinsey.
In the UK, the Organised Homosexual Movement has been agitating for the lowering of the age of consent for a long time, and they are not exactly shy about it.
Having succeeded first in legalising homosexual acts between consenting adults (as it should be), the lobby pressed on to lower the age of consent from 21 to 18, and then from 18 to 16, in line with the age of consent for normal sex. They got that, and guess what, they still want more. Check out this photograph of a picket outside Parliament.
While even powerful politicians were terrified of being branded homophobic, a group of people who might just know what they are talking about, spoke out. In its November 13, 2000 edition, the London Daily Telegraph published a letter signed by ten doctors under the title Physical dangers of 'unnatural' sex that warned "The Government's commitment to reducing the age of consent introduces vulnerable teenagers to a lifestyle strongly linked to premature death. It causes physical damage to the anus and spreads infections such as hepatitis and sexually transmitted diseases such as HIV. Men who practise anal sex and then have sex with women give them very severe pelvic infections with resulting infertility or chronic ill health."
Wisdom would suggest that our law makers should pay more attention to ten doctors than to hundreds of angry homosexual agitators and their amen corner. Alas, their voices went unheard.
The result of this surrendering to the pressure and at times naked tyranny of the Organised Homosexual Movement can be seen in the rise of sexually transmitted diseases especially in our cities. It is though not only boys who are at risk of being corrupted and abused by sexual degenerates.
Although the extent of his crimes has been exaggerated, quite likely greatly so, there is now no doubt that Jimmy Savile was a prolific sexual predator. Far worse than Savile though were the grooming gangs that have recently been brought to book, because while Savile was by and large content to grope girls here and there, these organised sexual predators meted out not mere sexual abuse including rape but treatment to vulnerable young girls that was frankly sickening. And they did this with the age of consent at 16. What would happen if it were lowered to 14 or even 12? Unbelievable though it may sound, there are some who argue even for this.
A recent report by the Taipei Times includes some statistics which - being derived from a legal source - are probably reliable. It is clear from these and others worldwide that the lower the age of consent, the more vulnerable are the young to sexual exploitation, exploitation by men, not by slightly older teenagers out to get their ends away. Much of the exploitation of young girls is carried out by men who have daughters or even granddaughters of their own. So what if the age of consent were raised to 21 or even 25? That suggestion is clearly silly, the age of 16 for normal sex is about right, although a proper sex education - not the politically correct garbage of gay studies, etc that passes for it, but teaching kids the facts of life with all the medical and other implications, can help promote if not abstinence then a responsible attitude towards sex, especially for girls, and the way boys treat them. Who would argue against that?
This opinion article was written by an independent writer. The opinions and views expressed herein are those of the author and are not necessarily intended to reflect those of DigitalJournal.com
More about age of consent, Homosexuality, Paedophilia, Paedophiles, unnatural sex