Read what other people have said
If the age of consent in s. 150.1 of the Criminal Code of Canada is raised from 14 to 18 then it will become illegal for two young persons age 16 to kiss, assuming kissing is for a sexual purpose. It would also become illegal for a 17 year old boy to touch the breast of a 16 year old consenting girl. Is this what we want in Canada? Would this be a reasonable law?
The present age restriction is fine where it is. If a person gives full consent to be touched, that cannot be classified as abuse no matter what their age is.
14 may be a little young to be able to give consent but I don't think it should be changed to 18. Most High School students range between the ages 14 - 18, and by the time their 17 many of them (I would guess about 70%) have had sexual intercourse at least once. Kids reach puberty around the age12 or 13. Do we actually think teens are going to wait 5 years before they start experimenting with their grown up body and not engage in any sexual activities? I don't think so. Also, many teens around the age 15/16 are getting into pretty serious relationships with the opposite sex. Do we expect them to withhold all sexual acts until they both reach 18? I am 18 and have been with my boyfriend for 2 years. We started having intercourse after 6 months when we both KNEW WE WERE READY! We were old enough to be responsible about it (birth control pill & condom). My mom also knew I was going on the pill and why. Sure it's scary for her but if she agrees why isn't it okay? 16 sounds appropriate.
I BELIEVE THAT THE AGE OF CONSENT SHOULD BE LEFT WHERE IT IS BECAUSE TEENS NEED TO HAVE SOME FREEDOM OF SEXUAL ACTIVITY WITHOUT BEING CHARGED WITH SOME CRIMINAL OFFENSE.
SCOTT KOZLOWSKI
No let us get our freak on at a young age so that by the time we are legal adults we will have been desensitized to sex and sexuality therefore we will focus more on working and raising a family than having sex.
The following is a quote from the London Free Press:
"October 10, 1999 Ottawa looking at raising age of consent to 16
By SEAN DURKAN -- Sun Media Ottawa Bureau OTTAWA -- The federal government is looking at raising the legal age of sexual consent from 14, to possibly 16, and could act next year if it gets broad national agreement, Sun Media has learned. "We have heard strongly from numerous groups, including social and health care workers, who believe that 14 is too young to allow for mature sexual consent and creates opportunities for these young teenagers to be preyed upon and abused by adults," one justice source told Sun Media. The issue will be included in a discussion paper on child abuse and protection which Justice Minister Anne McLellan plans to send out by December to parent groups, the provinces, lawyers, social workers, police, educators and other interested parties. The paper will also ask if the legal age for consenting homosexual intercourse, currently 18, should be brought into line with the legal age for heterosexual consent. And it will ask for opinions on a little-known exemption in the Criminal Code which allows 12-and 13-year-olds to have consenting sex with older teens in specific circumstances. This exemption, aimed at avoiding making criminals of consenting young loves, allows sex with a person no more than two years older who is not in a position of trust or authority. This means a 14-year-old could have consenting sex with a 12-year-old, or a 15-year-old with a 13-year-old. One justice official said the idea of setting 16 as a uniform age of consent for heterosexual and homosexual intercourse "is one reasoned compromise," but stressed the department won't consider any draft legislation until the consultation process is complete. The latest controversy over the age of consent involves Winnipeg photographer Garry Michael Geisel, now 56, who was arrested in January 1997 and charged with one count of possessing child pornography. Police seized photos of girls in various states of undress, including those of three teens who were shot either topless, wearing lingerie or depicted in a sex act with a boyfriend, and who testified at Geisel's trial in April, 1999. The judge hasn't ruled on the case yet because Geisel is submitting a constitutional argument which states that if the law allows consenting sex at age 14, it is unfair to have an anti-pornography law setting 18 as the minimum age for nude models. The age-of-consent issue also flared last month when Reform MP and House Leader Randy White said he technically committed a crime this summer by helping a mother in his B.C. riding kidnap her 15-year-old daughter from the clutches of five drug-dealing males in their 30s. The girl was living and having sex with the men, but the police could not act because she was over 14, so the mother had to pay to have the girl grabbed on the street and whisked away to a tough-love ranch in another province, White said at the time. "
I don't think that raising the age of consent to 18 is right. I am 18 and I feel that if a 16 year-old gives his/her consent it should be taken seriously because if at 16 you're old enough to drive, get married, live on your own, then why wouldn't it be old enough to give consent? 14 is too young but 18 is too old - therefore 16 would be a reasonable age.
The age of consent should remain where it is...it's not fair to put over-demanding sexual limits of any person. If two consenting 16 year olds engage in sexual activity- who is the government to restrict that?
Teenagers follow sexual activities in their own privacy. Who are we, as adults to stop them? Of course, whether or not there are rules or laws, they will not follow them. Nothing seems to happen to people who commit adultery so why punish teens? Mostly everybody stays behind closed doors or in closets anyway.
i think that this should not be allowed to be done. I also think that people should stay out of their business in the first place, unless it regards it as rape or sexual assault.
I think that 18 would be a reasonable age to have sex because in Australia where I live we can legally have sex at 10 and that is too young. 18 is when you become an adult and before that you are too young to be engaging in sexual activity
I am a 16 year old high school student and I think that the age for consent to actual intercourse should be raised, but kissing, etc. should still be permissible.
My overall comment on this, is that a person who is 16 years old and up can make there own decisions. If the young adult can get there learners and drivers license then why can't they make there own decisions . yes it would be different if the person is under the age of 15 years old, then you might consider it being rape. If a person say s no to whom ever is touching them, then it can be called rape or whatever.
I THINK THAT THE AGE OF CONSENT SHOULD BE RAISED BUT NOT TO THE AGE OF 18 . IF PEOPLE FELL THAT THERE READY TO HAVE SEX THATS THERE CHOICE AND NO ONE ELSE'S SO I THINK THE AGE OF CONSENT SHOULD BE ABOUT THE AGE OF 17
I think that the age of consent should be raised. But on the other hand it might no do much for the problems that us parents and peers are facing as of now. Young adults are already having sex as early as 12 and 13. It doesn't matter what anyone says even the law they are going to have sex if that's what they want. Sincerely,
John McKinnon
Raising the age to 18 does not make any sense. I was 15 years old when I had sex. young people are experiencing in sexual behavior. stopping this would only lead the young person to do other things. look at the way they rebel today what's to say they will totally snap do to the sexual frustration. We could be opening up a whole new bag of worms.
Whether the age is 14 or 18 it does not matter. If a teen or even younger is going to perform in sexual conduct there is absolutely no way that that can be stopped. It takes two people to kiss etc. so it should not matter even if the age is 12. It will be done at free will. If it is not done at free will that is rape or sexual assault and we already have rules for that. Why make a rule for something unstoppable?
I think that if an individual wishes to engage in sexual activity of any type that is their business, does it really alter your lives in any way? No, because it is none of your business. I think that if you are talking about making mature adult decisions then isn't one of them to keep your nose out of others business? If you do not wish to have sexual relations until you are 18 years of age, great! that was your choice, if you wish to have sexual relations at the age of 12, that is your choice too. Why are we as humans constantly trying to put restrictions on teenagers and still telling them to act like adults, don't tell them one thing and then tell them something completely different down the road.
Personally, I think that this law shouldn't be established because if a person under 18 is ready for intercourse and is ready to take full responsibility for whatever will come afterwards than he or she is mature enough to have intercourse. But if this law is still established than kissing, breast touching and other things should still be aloud because an adolescent should learn for themselves the other sex before they're 18.
NOV.9/99
AS A 17 YEAR OLD HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT I THINK IT WOULD BE WRONG TO RAISE THE AGE FOR SEXUAL INTERCOURSE JUST FOR THE FACT THAT IF TEENS ARE GOING TO HAVE SEX NOTHING IS GOING TO STOP THEM, AND FOR THE MOST PART IT HAPPENS BEHIND CLOSED DOORS SO WHAT SHOULD IT MATTER?
I think the point has been missed here the intentions behind raising the age is not to keep teenagers from having sex with each other. To me i fight to raise the age of consent to keep 40 and 50 year old adults from having sex with teenagers.
THE AGE OF CONSENT SHOULD NOT BE RAISED FROM FOURTEEN BUT THE LAW SHOULD BE MODIFIED SO THAT ANYONE UNDER EIGHTEEN, LEGALLY, CAN ONLY HAVE SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH SOMEONE WITHIN TWO YEARS OF THEIR AGE. THIS WOULD PROTECT YOUNG PEOPLE FROM BEING EXPLOITED BY OLDER ADULTS. IT WOULD ALLOW ENOUGH LEEWAY FOR YOUNG PEOPLE TO LEARN ABOUT SEXUAL MATTERS WITH PEOPLE THEIR OWN AGE. FOR EXAMPLE A SIXTEEN YEAR OLD COULD HAVE RELATIONS WITH A FOURTEEN, FIFTEEN, SIXTEEN, SEVENTEEN, OR AN EIGHTEEN YEAR OLD.
Just because you are under the age of 18 doesn't mean that you are not mature enough or emotionally ready to have sexual intercourse, I don't think that they should constitute that as sexual assault or statutory rape.
When I was 16 years old (male), I was having sex with an older woman she was 21 years old. Legally it was against law (U.S. law). Come to think about it my first sexual experience was at 14 years of age and she was only 12. I do not see any reason for changing your laws. Teens are going to be teens.
Yes, I think it should be change to 18. I'm my self 18 and I know a lot of girls and guys who have kids. they might be ready to have sex but not to the responsibility of having a kid to take care off. After all they themselves are kids.
I think the age of consent should be 12
at the age under 18 they should go to adult court to decide their punishment for sexual assault
I believe that the law should keep the age at 14 if someone were to change the law it would only cause more conflict also if they do change the law are they going to have a peeping tom spying on children all day and night. no so changing the law would need 1 important part to make it official and that would be children respecting it and as far as I'm concerned kids are are going to look at this law the same way they look at others.
I think that this subject has a lot of things going for it . 14 is to young to be able to give your consent to sexual intercourse I think that 16 is a much more reasonable age . I think that it is very important to protect our children from being preyed upon sexually .
Everyone seems most leaning on one side or the other, but only once has the issue been brought up about where the line is drawn. I feel that yes, fourteen may be too young, but where do we draw the line? Is fifteen too young? Sixteen? And if we do change the law, then how do we define consent towards a sexual act? Is touching a sexual act? In some cases, yes. But then is kissing? I personally feel that two people can have a great time just kissing and not have to go further, so in that way it isn't going to lead to a sexual act, but others may use it as a form of foreplay, so there it would be a lead-up to a sexual act. Where do we draw the line? How would we define it all? I think it might be okay to change the age, but we have no right to limit everything, for as said, teenagers will have sex no matter what you say or do. All this will do is help punish those who abuse people.
Though I personally disagree with engaging in sex at a young age imposing restrictions on it would be ridiculous. It would interfere with teenagers rights. If they are old enough to be held responsible for murder or any other crime they are old enough to make their own decisions regarding sex.
Ok Ya'll need to realize something, I am a 16 year old guy. I have had many other girlfriends in my life, which of most were 15. If it was illegal to kiss to touch each other, every gal that I have ever dated and I would get charged. You see the fact of the matter is this: When you want to date, when you want your first kiss, when you have sex for the first time, you will know. No one can tell you what you can and what you can't do in relationships until you're a certain age. You will know when you are ready to do such actions. You could be ready at 16 years of age, or 19 years of age or somewhere in between, it all depends on the person. I haven't had sex yet, I have been in serious relationships, but I knew that I wasn't ready, so it didn't happen. You can tell someone that they will be ready at the age of 18, because most people won't be, while others will be much younger. 18?? , there shouldn't be a proposed age for this kind of stuff...AND THAT'S THE TRUTH
I think that if the age is bumped up to 18 then younger teens will like they have to sneak around so they don't get charged. This sneaking around to enjoy sexual fulfillment could result in an increase in unsafe sex. Why? because if you are going to be charged for having sex, your not going to want people to know your doing it. I feel that the age should be left where it is.
I wrote before but I feel the need to write again. The way the law is right now a 67 year old man can buy 14 year olds have sex with them and not be charged for child sexual abuse, Any other man in a 14 year olds life teacher, father, priest, doctor who had sex with a 14 year old would be charged with sexual abuse. Something needs to be changed and soon I know in my small town of 10,000 at least 5 teenage girls will stand out in sub zero temperatures selling their bodies tonight. The sad part is there are so many Johns out there who will keep them in business and there is no law to stop them. That is all I have to say.
If a 67 year old man buys a 14 year old to have sex , he will be charged under section 212(4) of the existing Criminal Code. That section creates an indictable offence with a maximum punishment of 5 years. Pimps and others face prosecution under s. 212(2) and 212(2.1). The latter offence contains a minimum punishment of 5 years. You do not need to prohibit consensual teenage sex in order to prohibit teenage prostitution.
yes it is true !!
If they can go to jail up to 5 years, Why then are the same men who were buying the teenage prostitutes 15 years able to be out every night? The province tells me it is federal laws, the police say they can do nothing except charge for buying sex (adult) because these girls are 14-17. WHO IS ACCOUNTABLE?? Some of the girls out now had teenage mothers who were bought by the same men.
I was 14 when I consented to having sex with an eighteen year old man. After he had me, he then went and had three of my best girlfriends, one of whom ended up pregnant and alone. We consented, but I personally felt raped, I believe the age should be raised.
This is really stupid. Just because some people say that you shou;dn't do this because it is wrong and to many girls are getting pregnant it is there fault and they should have to face what they did.
Just so you know at the age of 14 I was not wise to the world like people assume teenagers should be. This 18 year old man who was going around the city of Medicine Hat having sex with young girls made damn sure they were all 14,even if barely. He knew the law. He deliberately set out to have sex with them because A. he was protected by the law. B. All of us were virgins. C. Because he knew the girls he preyed upon were vulnerable and easily influenced. At 14, do we really have the life experience and cognitive development to be able to engage in consensual sex and to understand fully the implications that are involved? Very rarely. I was 21 when I had my first baby and believe me the consequences hit like a ton of bricks real fast, I can just imagine what this might be like for a teenager. It's time to take a stand against the predators is my main point.
I believe that this is a very touchy subject, people should be able to make up their minds about whether or not they are ready to have sex, I think all we can do is educate people about what seems right and not.
sex should be with some one you know will be committed if something did happen not just having sex with whoever comes around, if the age is the same or 10 or so years apart. The only thing I am against is if people have kids and don't have the means to support them in every way, it don't matter if your 14 or 34 if you don't have the means to support a kid then you don't have the right to have sex.
Am a high school student and I think it should be like that but kissing is not a bad think so i think kissing will be okay but apart from this law will be perfectly good for high school kids, breast touching leads to sexual activities.
I believe that most people under the 18 and over the age of 14 are mature enough to make up their minds enough on whether or not they want to have sex. I am 17 and have not have sex. I have "fooled around" with my boyfriend but we have not as of yet had sex. We have talked about it and the risk and the emotional commitment. If you are old enough to have to take criminal responsibility (possibly even adult criminal responsibility) then you are certainly old enough to decide whether or not to have sex. People are going to have sex. It's just the way it is and it would be silly to raise the age minimum of consent. First, who's going to enforce it? The people having sex? I don't think so.
If having any materials involving a sexual context wit a child under 18 is considered kiddie porn and therefore illegal how can a person under the age of 18 be involved in a sexual act. I don't think sex should be relegated to those over 18 however, i think anyone over the age of 18 should be charged with a criminal offence if the age difference is greater than 2 years.
I think the legal age of consent should be left the way it is because teenagers are going to have sex anyways so why make them worry about something else on top of everything else (i.e.. school, home, HIV...)Teens these days will do whatever they want when they want, instead of telling them what to do we should raise awareness of all the risks of sex.
You can't make simple comments like "Only teenagers less than two years apart can legally have sex." What about the guy that is two years and one month older than the girl. This sort of distinction based on distance of age is ridiculous. It is also ageism. A Canadian citizen should not be discriminated against because of his age. It seems that there is a cry in the land to charge young offenders as adults for crimes. Therefore it makes sense to presume that if they can be expected to be tried as adults, then they should have the capabilities to determine if they want to have sex. If a 14 year old girl can be tried in adult court for a serious crime, surely she can consent to sex. Also the age of 14 is the age most people start high school. It only makes sense to use this age as the determining age for legal consent. Is it wrong for an 18 yr old senior high school student to date a 14 yr old FELLOW junior high school student. Of course not. All kids in high school together will socialize with each other in some way. You also cannot arbitrarily cut a high school in half by legally setting the age of consent at 16. It makes no sense. If you are a parent and you don't want your teenager to have sex (at whatever age), an age of consent law won't help you. You must instead have a talk with your child. Don't start passing laws that will make criminals out of school mates. And don't expect a 19 year old Gr 13 male student not to take notice of a beautiful 15 year old girl. You can't criminalize natural behaviour between two consenting young people. There are other things more important in today's society than this. A 14 year old girl today is probably more mature and intelligent today in the year 2000 than at any other time in history. Age 14 is the age where a young person makes the break from public school to high school. Therefore the age of consent should remain at 14. YRW