Welcome to Gaia! ::

I'm not surprised the age limit is lower for homosexuals. You pretty much hit the reasoning difference right there though: It's because the fear of two homosexuals reproducing doesn't exist. Of course, because that isn't possible.

But, on the same side, 13 is a tad young to be allowing the idea of sex to even show up. I'd have to go with the majority and go with 16, since by then, they're a tad more mature, and have better understanding.

Hardly. Children are already out having sex at 10. 13 is ALREADY 3 years too late to try and teach them how to protect themselves from things they've already begun to spread amongst themselves.

(So this thread is a little old. I feel like I made it forever ago.)
I just remembed this and thought it would fix in with 'sex ed' and this who conversation.

Sometime this spring in my History class we watched a news clip about how three 5th graders were trying to have sex in the class room when the teacher left to check the assembly schedule.

Also it was a known fact that this school did not teach sex education.

So that is just CREEPY.
1) They weren't even sexually mature. I mean we're talking 10 - 9 year olds.

2)They were trying to do it infront of ALL the other kids.

3) How hard is it to at LEAST teach the 'don't touch what the bathing suit covers' rule?

We started "sex ed" in the 6th grade. Girls learned about periods and boys learned about wet dreams and maybe some other stuff. 7th grade we learned about the actually organs and some forms of protection. But we didn't learn about female forms of protection (Female condoms, ect.) until 9th grade. You don't have to start sex ed when kids are in the 1st grade or anything, but schools need to at least have common sense. Most parents think its awkward to talk about sex to their kids and never do anyway. Someone at least needs to teach them some things.