tempestswordsman
TheSilverNoble
tempestswordsman
TheSilverNoble
tempestswordsman
Well it sounds like the only mandate you have in regards to such an "age group" is whatever you choose. That seems like an incredibly fair way to make laws.
"Hey lets consult TheSilverNoble and do whatever he says." You are not talking about a way to actually amend the laws. All your argument comes down to is that you feel the law is wrong and therefore it shouldn't apply which makes about the least sense of all out of all of the things I have heard.
That's pretty much also the reason behind the current laws. Some people though it was wrong the other way.
I personalyl think that most high schoolers are mature enough to make their own choices in that area. Or, at the least, it should be between them and their parents. What should the government butt in, I ask you?
Or should that be the standard? The governemnt should come in whenever "tempestredswordsman" thinks they should?
Tell me, what is the reason that senios shouldn't be allowed to date freshmen? It's not a given you know.
Moreover, even if we assume it's bad, is a law the best way to fix things? Surely you don't think most of those people are actually dangerous. That sending them to jail will actually accomplish something. I think it will make things worse, if anything, but that's me. I mean, teens are still having sex, with all the risks associated with it. Only now they have to worry about jail time on top of all that.
I should have said all that earlier, but let me assure you I do have at least some reasons. Certainly enough to match the other side.
Simply put the government has more right than you to decide what laws are should be in place. While neither of you is per say more qualified than the other you are not in the position to change things. I implore you to get elected and try to change the laws other than that all you can do is express your opinion. For all of your griping and moaning the laws remain the same.
Thanks, I have different aspirations for my life. The government certainly has more right to decide, but that doesn't mean their desicions are right. I'd rather point out problems with the law and vote for someone else to change them, and hopefully get someone else to as well.
Quote:
Next of all the government doesn't need to come in whenever I say so. They do what they do independent of my opinion. The truth of the matter is that you desire their to be special exception put in to place according to your personal opinion.
What you desire is no different. I know they do what they do regaurdless of your opinion, but tell me, you've surely disagreed with a law before. Why shouldn't I voice my discontent?
Quote:
In regards to how I feel about the government butting in I am neutral.
Obviosuly you are not, otherwise you wouldn't support a law like this.
Quote:
In regards to a freshman dating a senior there is social stigma first of all or this wouldn't be an issue that people are debating. Secondly the issue at hand isn't about seniors and freshman dating. It is about somebody of age to be out of highschool simply having sex with a person of age to be in highschool. So your point is fundamentally flawed there because it both represents a different scenario and equates dating to having sex.
I don't see why that makes sich a difference. Each party is just one year older. I fail to see how weather they are in high school or not really matters as long as the age range is the same.
Quote:
In regards to the law being able to fix things I see no better nor worse solution. Why support change that I don't see the benefit of.
Did you even read my reasons? Cause you didn't really counter any of them. Nor provide nay more reason than "I don't think so," which seems o be what you were critising me for.
Quote:
I think that is enough for now. I think this is going to get annoying here shortly. So if I don't return it will be because the topic has reached a certain level of futility and been reduced to pointless on-topic flaming more or less.
Perhaps if you'd respond to my points, the topic could progress. But go on if you will.
Let me start by saying different people have different opinions and at times there is no point in disagreeing when the other person raises valid points you agree with.
Second of all every response you have given has been on the verge of a personal attack because I have my own opinions.
Third of all if you would like me to blindly support the other side with arguments that I don't support I will do that for personal amusement but I have only tried to do my best to express how I feel.
Fourthly I will now proceed to respond to everything you said.
Ok, I think I'm still with you.
Quote:
You said that the government isn't always right but neither are you so in my eyes is just replacing one thing with another not really causing any improvement. Use your voting privileges to the maximum you are in a democracy after all.
Fair enough.
But to clarify, usually when I say something like "it seems wrong that a senior shouldn't be able to date a freshman," I think that puts the argument in a perspective not a lot of people think of it in, though their stance does cause that situation.
Quote:
Of course I have disagreed with laws in the past but as I stated I take a neutral stance and don't assume that my opinion is the best. If you enjoy voicing your opinion in such an activist manor I implore you to continue and i will continue to be neutral.
Fair enough.
Quote:
When did I say that I supported the law in and of itself. I just support what is the law instead of disagreeing and trying to change it on the spot. I am only supporting law. Again I am neutral.
Not buying this. By supporting the law, you have taken a non-nuetral stance. If you were truly nuetral, but I don't think you'd be in here, yeah?
Quote:
In my mind the things I said make the difference. You may disagree with me but that doesn't change the fact that I feel differently.
alright.
Quote:
Yes I read your reasons. I feel that you are trying to polarize this discussion into people for and against your point. I am neither by virtue of a certain neutrality. I have conceded that your reasons make sense not that they are per say right. You can try again if you would like to get a rise out of me. Lastly that most debates come down to are opinions. We both are just throwing them at each other at the end of the day.
I missed your conession earlier, sorry.
Perhaps I am trying to polarize too much. Or perhaps I assumed that somene who comes in to a debate would have a strong opinion on it, so I made few assumptions. I really can't remeber right now.
Quote:
Progress is a relative thing. The debate doesn't need to go down a certain road to progress.
Usually when someone doesn't ackowledge my points, and then say "this is going no where," I read that as "I can't be you but I don't want to admit it, so I'm leaving." If ths is not what you intended, I apologize.
But when someone does that, i think we can both agree that is not progress.
And now I must bid you a good night. Tis late, and obviously I am not in the best frame of mind for a good discussion. I shall return, of course.
