visa
New member
Actually, there is a HUGE co-relation between broken families and criminal activity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Impact_of_Legalized_Abortion_on_Crime
13 Year old dad.
- Thread starter StarDust
- Start date
Actually, there is a HUGE co-relation between broken families and criminal activity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Impact_of_Legalized_Abortion_on_Crime
tim098
New member
Visa is right. You should go read the book 'Freakonomics'. I'll summarise one part of it.
In america, when crime rates were starting to fall, the media praised things like police efficiency, booming economy and all the other obvious factors that come to mind. But actually the authors of the book were economists so they were very into statistics, they took the statistics and actually dated back to a particular day when abortion was made legal in america. After about 10-15 years from that date, crimes rates were falling, while abortion rates were soaring.
Basically, these aborted kids would have more likely than not turned out in a broken family. (statistics were of problematic or poor families mainly) I can't really capture the essence of it but its a great read, everyone of decent intelligence should read the book 'Freakonomics'.
So statistically speaking, kids from broken families do tend to commit crime more. And by broken families they don't mean a divorce or whatever, in the uglier parts of America I'm sure their kind of 'broken' families barely exist here.
slumdogmilonaire
New member
so young so much responsibilities. Enjoy being a teenage dad.:twisted:
zamir666
New member
don't worry man. i'm turning 18 in a few months time and still, some lower secondary kids are taller than me. haiz
most_wanted
New member
u are not alone zamir.... Same situation here
kerplunk182
New member
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lina_Medina
Which also means that she had boobs at 5...
Which also means that she had boobs at 5...
dudelove
New member
oh man that creeped me out
pianomankris
New member
OK - i'm from the UK, living in the UK, so here's a British take on it:
The British government have financial schemes for parents, regardless of age of the parents. The parents will have more than enough money to care for their child, irrespective of whether or not they get financial support from their family.
For the government to select who gets financial support and who doesn't is a whole moral 'can of worms'. So, they have to give support to these kids.
This will make things easier for the kids, and may perhaps be one reason they weren't scared to pursue their sexuality in the first place. However, that is obviously speculative on my behalf.
The alternative i.e. being selective on who receives financial support would be, in my eyes, a far bigger moral dilemma than the issue talked about here.
Secondly - irrespective of whether or not the kids are mentally mature enough to deal with having a child (which, on present evidence, they apparently aren't), if they are physically capable of having a child, then, in the eyes of nature, they are ready to have kids, regardless of what the law states.
It must be remembered that rules on age of having sex etc are there to preserve society to exist in the present state of said society, as most societies would cease to exist if they didn't follow the rules of the society. However, with regards to legal age of having sex/having a kid, this, historically, wasn't always the case. It just happens that in the UK the legal age of consent is 16, as society seems to function well with this law in place.
I think we have to place the issue in context, and realise that it is an exception, rather than the rule. It is in no way indicative of a promiscuous society, nor of the 'falling state' of the society of the UK. It is too easy to react negatively against a whole country due to one incident.
I personally don't see the 'shock and outcry' this issue has caused. It just acts to show that physically/sexually, the body can be ready to procreate at a relatively young age, irrespective of whether the mind is ready to come to terms with the responsibility of the act undertaken.
In countries such as Colombia/Ecuador, even European countries such as Estonia, the legal age of sex is 14. So the case of topic here wouldn't really be such a big issue if it was presented in the context of these countries. By UK laws, the act is quite shocking, but by the laws of other countries, it isn't so bad. But I do realise this happened in the UK, and not in, for example, Estonia, so it has to be considered within the context of UK law.
But it should be remembered that what we consider 'morally correct' varies across society to society i.e. there is no absolute moral truth - only that which is decided by each society.
The British government have financial schemes for parents, regardless of age of the parents. The parents will have more than enough money to care for their child, irrespective of whether or not they get financial support from their family.
For the government to select who gets financial support and who doesn't is a whole moral 'can of worms'. So, they have to give support to these kids.
This will make things easier for the kids, and may perhaps be one reason they weren't scared to pursue their sexuality in the first place. However, that is obviously speculative on my behalf.
The alternative i.e. being selective on who receives financial support would be, in my eyes, a far bigger moral dilemma than the issue talked about here.
Secondly - irrespective of whether or not the kids are mentally mature enough to deal with having a child (which, on present evidence, they apparently aren't), if they are physically capable of having a child, then, in the eyes of nature, they are ready to have kids, regardless of what the law states.
It must be remembered that rules on age of having sex etc are there to preserve society to exist in the present state of said society, as most societies would cease to exist if they didn't follow the rules of the society. However, with regards to legal age of having sex/having a kid, this, historically, wasn't always the case. It just happens that in the UK the legal age of consent is 16, as society seems to function well with this law in place.
I think we have to place the issue in context, and realise that it is an exception, rather than the rule. It is in no way indicative of a promiscuous society, nor of the 'falling state' of the society of the UK. It is too easy to react negatively against a whole country due to one incident.
I personally don't see the 'shock and outcry' this issue has caused. It just acts to show that physically/sexually, the body can be ready to procreate at a relatively young age, irrespective of whether the mind is ready to come to terms with the responsibility of the act undertaken.
In countries such as Colombia/Ecuador, even European countries such as Estonia, the legal age of sex is 14. So the case of topic here wouldn't really be such a big issue if it was presented in the context of these countries. By UK laws, the act is quite shocking, but by the laws of other countries, it isn't so bad. But I do realise this happened in the UK, and not in, for example, Estonia, so it has to be considered within the context of UK law.
But it should be remembered that what we consider 'morally correct' varies across society to society i.e. there is no absolute moral truth - only that which is decided by each society.
paperprata
New member
hmm great insight by pianomankris, but i beg to differ about the last point in which you said that moral truth is decided by society.
I think morality is defined differently in every person, and even in one society of people who share the same race and religion, there will inevitably be differences in their views of right and wrong.
Just 2 cents from a newbie!
-paperprata
I think morality is defined differently in every person, and even in one society of people who share the same race and religion, there will inevitably be differences in their views of right and wrong.
Just 2 cents from a newbie!
-paperprata
re_unknown
New member
Nice one.
So, if it wasn't the two other boys, how did the dude get her pregnant when he hasn't even started breaking voice?
So, if it wasn't the two other boys, how did the dude get her pregnant when he hasn't even started breaking voice?
paperprata
New member
glad you agree, re_unknown.
well i honestly don't know (am not a guy!)
but i think guys start producing sperm even before their voice breaks?
well i honestly don't know (am not a guy!)
but i think guys start producing sperm even before their voice breaks?
MutantBanana
New member
Whatever it is, when he is 30 his daughter will be 17.
retardedrummer
New member
lol funny topic. The youngest dad in britain is 12 years old right?
tsk tsk. imagine sexing someone when ur taking ur PSLE that year.. How stressful.
Dont get me started on the 38kkkkkk implantation of boobs...
they are like potential explosives.
tsk tsk. imagine sexing someone when ur taking ur PSLE that year.. How stressful.
Dont get me started on the 38kkkkkk implantation of boobs...
they are like potential explosives.
paperprata
New member
what boob implantation @.@