Do you think a 15 year-old girl should be able to get married?

Again, median age as a standard would also preclude older people marrying because, based on that, it is NOT normal for an adult over 35 who isn't yet married to even get married. "Hello?" Do you see the problem with using the median?

And again, you're forgetting standard deviation. You've said that the median age was once 20 - and standard deviation shows that at least 10% of women who married for the first time were under 18, based on the median alone. Medians aren't baselines - medians are just that, medians; the middle, meaning that there absolutely were a significant number of women married under 18. And again, the "normal" doesn't establish any legitimate basis for the law. If we establish "normal" based on the median, or one standard deviation from it, then it is NOT normal for anyone over 30 to get married. That's hardly grounds for banning it.

 

You were presented with the question of allowing marriage if the girl was pregnant. Most states have an exception for that. If you want to stop them from marrying once pregnant, you're going to have to stop them from having sex. You're so into controlling the lives of others - but the laws are not in your favor. Perhaps a little research into why the states have these laws would help?

Right now - you have no say. You have only an opinion that nearly every state in the union disagrees with . Sorry, but there it is.

Okay, this is interesting. You jumped the shark and went straight to a pedophile insinuation. Let me assure you that after 30 years of marriage - I'm not looking for another husband, especially not a pimply faced teen.

You, on the other hand don't seem to understand that these cases don't involve adults petitioning to marry children. These are teens seeking to marry other teens. Your obsession with trying to control the lives of others is duly noted...and dismissed.

I specifically presented you with the question of a minor being pregnant, which is the main reason permission to marry is granted by the courts. You've failed to show how the young mother or her child is better off without the help off a spouse.

When you start insinuating that other posters must be pedophiles, I have to question your honesty. For example, I've found that when folks want to keep gays from marrying, those folks are often closet homosexuals themselves. So, at this point - I really have to wonder why you're taking the same type of hard line against not allowing teens the benefit of the law in their respective states? Anything you'd like to share????

 

What does any of this have to do with 15 year olds getting married? Are so stuck on the meaning of "median?" It IS a baseline for what is a normal age. If it weren't for medians and averages, we would have NOTHING to go by. IF teens getting married was the "Norm," then the "median age" would be MUCH lower.

No, it was not "20" . . . it was well into the 20s in most cases. Yes, that could mean up or down by a few years. That does not mean that it was "normal" for teens to be married off. We aren't talking about people over 30. They are obviously ADULTS. We are talking about children here.

 

No, you cannot stop them from having sex, but you sure can stop them from getting married. I said they should NOT be able to marry under any circumstances because 15 years old is still a child and MUCH too young to be making a lifelong commitment to anything. If they want to be married, they can wait until they are 18, have completed their primary education and have a job and are no longer under the care of their parents.

You would have to prove that it is beneficial to said child to marry at 15 years old. I think you would have a very difficult time with that.

No, many states have set their age of consent at 18, so you would be wrong. I expect that to be the norm in another few years. As it is now, being married at 15 is extremely rare. Most parents would not allow it, pregnancy or not.

Yes, I feel that men who are interested in lowering age of consent are pedophiles and have ulterior motives, because they certainly are not interested in the health and well being of the 15-year-old CHILD.

You are completely naive to the world if you do not think there are adults who want to take advantage of an ignorant teen. There are quite a few of them around. Yes, sorry, but children do need control and guidance in their lives, so you are wrong there too.

How is another 15-year-old spouse going to help? Oh that's right, they wouldn't, and more than likely they wouldn't want to. The child is better off with the parents, of course.

From my experience, those who defend sex/marriage with the very young have ulterior motives.

Oh, so you make accusations against me for my opinion, but yet you state that you think people who oppose gay marriage are actually gay, and that's okay? Good grief, you're getting out of control.

Teens are CHILDREN, that's why. Duh.

 

I don't have to prove anything. My kids are grown. It's the teens and thier parents who have to prove their case before a judge.

Perhaps, but there are also parents who would kick their daughter out of the house.

Where did that come from? There are no "men" here trying to lower the age of consent. You've dreamed that up. This is about state laws and kids who petition the state.

15, 16, 17. Those are typical young male spouse ages. Someone has to feed that baby. You want to just let it starve? The girl often loses her chance to finish her education if she has to care for the baby all alone. You're missing that. The boy needs to be responsible as well.

You made a very nasty and uncalled for comment towards me insinuating that I would marry a 15 year old boy. Right back at'cha. If you can dish it out - you better be ready to take it in return.

The bottom line is - you don't know what you're talking about and you're seeing shadows behind every tree. If, and when, you can change the laws of 48 states - come back and tell us about it.

Until then, you'll have to give up a little bit of your control issues because 48 states in the union allow 15 year olds to marry under "special circumstances."

And - they're not letting them marry adults. And your opinion is not going to change that anytime soon.

 

I don't believe they are mature enough either.

 

Thats what marriage is, there's absolutely no reason for marriage to exist, other than too claim a woman is property of that man. But your confusing the act of child marriage where a 75 year old buys someones 8 year old daughter uses her as sex toy and a personal servant, and beats and mistreats her. as being the same as a 4 year old boy being married too a 9 year old girl. There are laws against that like sexual abuse, kidnapping, assault etc etc

I answered yes to the question in the poll, which is "should a 15 year old girl be able to get married". nowhere does it say "have sex" with anyone, which is not mandatory in marriage, nowhere does it say she's marrying a grown man or even if the man is older than her (would you care if the boy was 15 or 5 years old for that matter)? Nowhere does it say she cant get divorced, is being abused, is forced to work for him, or that she has even met him more than once in person. As is the case with many polygamous marriages where the man maybe out of the country for years at a time and come home to over 50 wives.

Marriage as a concept in the 21st century is sickening, we have dna tests so establishing who a childs father is, is no longer of any importance, which is the only non-religous reason marriage exists.

If you want too discuss sexual consent laws like the fact that anyone under 18 shouldnt have sex with anyone 2 years older with them (which is a law) then that's a seperate discussion and I would support you. but there's no reason we need too make marriage exclusive to 20-30 year olds, making it more acceptable with all these rules and social stigma, turns a perfectly normal thing like teenage pregnancy into a bad thing, in fact that the new revisionist form of marriage still hurts women in the sense that they are shunned for having a baby outside wedlock even though it's generally considered innapropriate to get married without an education, a place too live, a career, and a hefty savings account, essentially saying nobody should get married and essentially have children, except the upper classes.

we should outlaw marriage or atleast remove any government support for married couples laws like tax breaks and immigration passes, for married couples. Because they are designed too encourage a religous ceremony. And therefore should be considered a violaton of the seperation of church and state.

Marriage is designed oppress women

 

Yes, and it's very rare for a judge to allow a 15-year-old to be married, regardless of whether or not they are pregnant. VERY rare that 2 children would even WANT to be married.

Sure, and there are ones who would try to force their daughter to be married.

Sure there are. Those kinds of men are everywhere. You must be naive to the ways of men. *shrug*

What the hell are you babbling on about? That is not the case in today's day and age. Little boys cannot provide for a family in today's world. It would be impossible.

Perhaps you would. It sure seems like you and some others are arguing about allowing children to be able to be married. Of course, that is the natural conclusion. Otherwise, you would realize how STUPID it is.

I know EXACTLY what I'm talking about, having been a 15-year-old child myself and a mother at 16. (don't really like to reveal that information, but since you think I don't know what I'm talking about, I guess I have little choice).

Oh, and what "special circumstances" are these?

Just a few years back, a 50-something-year-old has-been actor married a 16-year-old girl because her dumb parents gave him permission to do so. Try again.

- - - Updated - - -

Umm, sorry, but along with marriage comes sex. It is ridiculous to think otherwise.

 

Should be allowed with permission of parents. I think it's stupid, but should be legal.

 

Why? Explain. Why is it "okay" for a child to ever be married, with or without parental permission? Do you think parents always have their child's best interests at heart and are infallible?

No, children need to be protected from those who would use and abuse them. This is WHY they are not allowed to sign legally binding contracts.

 

I cannot even believe that people are "pro" child marriage. Disgusting and shameful! Shame on you all!

 

And here again is why the median is not a good basis. Yes, people over 30 are adults, so you're real problem IS NOT that people are outside the median but they are not legal adults, making the median extraneous.

The other thing you're missing wkth the median is that the median age of marriage has always been higher for men than women - for most of US history the median age for women has barely gotten over 20, it was not well over 20. In the 1950s it was 20.1, for example - not "well over 20". And you're forgetting standard deviation, which typically was about 2 years. That means that if 20 is the median, two thirds married between 18 and 22 - and one sixth of women married before 18. One sixth. What one sixth of the population does is not abnormal.

 

So then the question of maturity is irrelevant, isn't it? Most 18 year olds aren't mature enough to make big life decisions, but we let them marry, enlist, etc. A 17 year old isn't allowed to just because of an arbitrary rule.

I have no problem with emancipation and legal adulthood coming before 18 - and in those cases, an individual absolutely should be able to make such a determination, for example.

 

I'm sorry to hear that. That gives you an inside view as to children having children for sure.

As stated, those special circumstances are pregnancy. That's why the states allow marriage if that occurs and the parents consent.

The deal is - no one here thinks it's a good idea to marry at 15. It's just that teens, as you said, make poor decisions and when that decision leads to a pregnancy, the new baby has to take precedence. If a girl can live at home and her mother (the grandmother) is financially able to care for the child while the girl goes back to school and works part-time after school, that's great. I'm not so sure that's always feasible though.

If the girl aborts - she can hopefully return to her old life - minus screwing around. If she keeps the baby, she now has a responsibility to care for it. That means it's unlikely that she can go back to school if she doesn't have supportive parents.

If the girl, her boyfriend and their parents all agree that they can marry, and share the burden of raising the baby, then you really don't have any right to step in and forbid it - especially if a judge rules in their favor. It's not an optimal decision, but we're talking about extreme circumstances here.

I would assume the young couple will stay with one set of their parents, but they do - at that point - need to have at least part time jobs to pay for the baby. Babies are children too, after all. Innocent ones.

 

Again, no one is pro-child marriage.

Your leaps of logic are not going well. Nor are your insinuations that those who disagree with your my-way-or-the-highway position are pedophiles. I have yet to see a poster that would qualify as a pedophile, so you need to get off that kick and start discussing this like an adult.

No matter how hard to try - you will never control everyone. No one wants teens to get married - it doesn't always turn out well - but neither does being a single mother at 15. No one wants those things, but they happen and you don't get to decide what's best in all situations. The parents of the teens and the courts get to decide.

 

Mah, it's a mere social matter influenced by the cultural context of the moment. In ancient Rome it was absolutely normal and common that a woman at 15 left her home to get married [and no one in the "Urbe" was shocked by this ...].

Today 15 years old girls have sex without great troubles and may be being more aware of what they are doing of many "adult" women. A part this detail, to get married is not only a matter of cohabiting and having sex, it's a kind of contract with social relevance and our society is well more complicated than the society of ancient Rome.

Personally I would expect that to get married an individual should at least reach the legal age to get a driving license [if you cannot legally drive a car I cannot figure out how you could drive a family!].

 

`
The Christian way of stopping unwanted pregnancies is now, to publicly shame girls that do get pregnant. What's wrong with this picture?
`
`
`
`

 

I just don't think that most 15 year olds are likely to be mature enough to give consent, and teen pregnancy does nothing to change that reality. If she is not mature enough, we are doing nobody a service by allowing a child to give consent for social reasons. The stigma on the baby is just not there anymore, like it was in the 1950's.

The same two people can live together for a few years, wait to tie the knot and be sure.

 

That's probably why 15 year olds can't consent - not without parental consent and, in most cases, a judicial order.

Yes, they can live together, and many probably do, but if they want to marry - why should anyone other than their parents, or a judge be able to determine if they're making an adult decision? It's not like we allow shotgun weddings anymore. The dads aren't out there threatening to kill the young man if he doesn't marry the daughter.

Granted, most kids are not mature enough to marry that young. But, if they've gone and started a family - and they'd like the baby to be born in wedlock - that decision should be between the teens, their parents and the judge. We have some pretty strict laws on the books about it.

 

"Religious school grads likelier to have abortions"
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31048153/ns/health-health_care/

 

Sorry I missed the fireworks in this thread while I was traveling today. Let me say, those of you trying to justify this, based on a parent and a judge being OK with it, are obviously a bunch of nutbags. This isn't the only topic where posters here want to spout off about the supposed smarts and virtues of judges. And we should be good if a judge says it's ok. Bwahahahahaha. I've known more than a few judges over the years and many are no more competent to make these life changing decisions for others than Joe off the street. In fact, most judges are both egotistical and make decisions based on their own social beliefs, rather than cold hard facts.

Chris makes great points about the maturity angle (lack of in younger teens). The parent and judge aren't developmental psychologists. Why don't we roll out studies that clearly point to younger teens not being mature enough? Young teens are impulsive, risk takers, react to things emotionally, are rebellious, etc. They just aren't capable of making these sorts of decisions. Shame on the states that allow bumble headed parents and know-nothing judges to intervene and say it's OK.

Then there's the clear proof surrounding the cold hard economics of it. Studies cannot be disputed that the majority of teen marriages end in divorce. It also leads to high school dropouts, lower education levels, lower paying jobs, financial stress, poverty, etc.

But you all think because the Dad and a judge says its OK, it's OK?

 

I am not referring to emotional maturity because that is relative. When my grandmother was 15 she already had a children, home, husband, and lived to the ripe old age of 96.

The lack of emotionally maturity is a matter of society, and the responsibility and pressure placed on young persons today. Hand holding and coddling isn't going to help much.

I am referring to the linguistical and biological facts of the definition of pedophillia. We are both talking about hemophillia, which is different.

 

Who said those things make someone an adult?

The definition of pedophillia is an interest in pre-pubescent children. An interest in young post pubescent persons is ****philia. The reason humanity is alive today is because of ****philia.

I am not going to argue basic definitions with you.

 

No it isn't. It's because we now let children progress naturally through their childhood instead of rushing them into marriages and things that take away from their childhood.

- - - Updated - - -

Great post Brian and very informative. Thank you for your input here. This makes so much sense as opposed to some of the absolute nonsense I've been reading here today.

- - - Updated - - -

Bull crap. ****philia is also focused on AGE and youth.

 

You're welcome Chris, however from what I read, you're doing very well defending yourself!

I think the arguments here from some of these folks are totally bogus. They're entitled to their opinions, but makes one wonder. Maybe one or two of them is attracted to younger girls themselves, thus why they so vehemently defend the indefensible.