• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should child marriage be banned?

Should child marriage be banned?


  • Total voters
    35
They want the two to marry, move in together and take care of themselves. The boy's father doesn't think it matters if the marry or not (he never formally married his wife now of nearly 3 decades), but does tell his son that he is responsible for the children and, like it or not, her. Plus explaining he has no choice now but to learn Spanish. :lol:

There has been some conflict between the families. Mainly her family trying to get his family to give them money for stuff. The father of the boy's response to them and his son is "hell no, none of you are getting a dollar from me" - other than his son can work for him and if so will be paid as he is an independent small business owner operating out of his home for misc. yard work and home repairs.

Ah boundary issues.

If this boy was my friend, I would tell him he absolutely needs to go back to high school and finish, first off, his manual labor job won’t last him past his 40s and there’s probably very flexible option for attending school. In Washington you can go to high school and have the state pay for it up until 21 and for people with special circumstances there’s all kinds of options from online, to night school at a commuter college, etc so he needs to finish his education both for himself and for his child.

Secondly boundaries between the families need to set.

And he should either marry her or plan to once both are 18 if they can’t get necessary permission.

Are the Hispanics Catholic? What’s the religious outlook of the two families?
 
Nearly all underage teenage marriages are because the girl is pregnant. Banning marriage doesn't change teen pregnancy whatsoever. No one yet has really told a harm other than maybe the nuisance of divorce court - where they end up anyway if battling over any children or property. For example, before gay marriage was made legal, civil courts tended to hear their palimony and child custody/support issues exactly the same as if a divorce case anyway.
 
Did I write it inaccurately? The girl's parents want them to marry for sure. They are not willing to let the two of them move in with them, nor is the father of the boy willing to do so. That is somewhat rare for Latino families as often their families act very collectively including for housing. Everyone involved are low income people.

Oh yeah, I got the impression both families weren’t on board with this
 
Reasons to allow them to marry, particularly if having a child, is to allow filing their tax return jointly as the tax rate is lower. It also protects the child and protects the property rights of both.
 
Why does that justify it? The couple can get married at 18 if they so desire. With that circumstance I would say there is high possibility of coercion by the parents.

Uhhh yeah, there is because parents are supposed to coerce their minor towards the right thing.

You want the baby spending their first years being a bastard not properly loved and shifted between different households? Does the baby have any advocates for his or her wellbeing in your philosophy?
 
Oh yeah, I got the impression both families weren’t on board with this

It's going thru predictable stages. Her parents furious at both of them, kicking the girl out of the house - knowing full well she'd go stay with an aunt for a couple weeks until they let her come back. Conflict over whether his family, not just to boy, have to come up with the money for a place to stay etc. Other predictable stuff.

Not sure if they will marry or not. I think they should as that most likely would keep both of them out of trouble - or rather less trouble than if they don't marry. I predict that within the next 2 to 3 months there is going to be a huge Latino wedding in someone's backyard with at least 20 attendants. Neither of the couple have much of any clue what they are getting into, but then who really does the first time they marry? You learn as you go along, just like most of the rest of life.
 
Live together unmarried, no one is saying they can't. They can do whatever, they can live on different planets if they wanted to for all I care. What exactly urgently requires them to get married?

What is the urgency requiring them not to marry?
 
One country should have one law.

What a disaster states rights has turned into.

The disaster has been federalizing everything.
 
Why does that justify it? The couple can get married at 18 if they so desire. With that circumstance I would say there is high possibility of coercion by the parents.

How generous of YOU to allow other people to marry. Obviously you want MORE coercion power than parents as you want 100% total control, don't you? "I, Carjosse, am in control of you 17 year olds, not your parents nor yourself. ME! I control you!"

Want to do sometime? Every teenager has to ask your permission first. :roll:
 
It's going thru predictable stages. Her parents furious at both of them, kicking the girl out of the house - knowing full well she'd go stay with an aunt for a couple weeks until they let her come back. Conflict over whether his family, not just to boy, have to come up with the money for a place to stay etc. Other predictable stuff.

Not sure if they will marry or not. I think they should as that most likely would keep both of them out of trouble - or rather less trouble than if they don't marry. I predict that within the next 2 to 3 months there is going to be a huge Latino wedding in someone's backyard with at least 20 attendants. Neither of the couple have much of any clue what they are getting into, but then who really does the first time they marry? You learn as you go along, just like most of the rest of life.

If they want it to work it will work. That’s the good news.

Now I would say they should set the family drama aside, he needs to propose if he hasnt already, they should get involved with a Church, because I’m a Catholic my bias is that way, I’m guessing the girls parents at least have some cultural catholic connection even if they’re not good Catholics, so he should get on the path to confirmation, sacramental marriage, and be involved and surrounded with a community that wants them to win, and you need to take this guy behind the woodshed and whoop him until he screams he’s finishing high school to make the pain stop. Both of them do.

And stop spending time with people in the culture who encourage living in sin because you are who you hang out with. Full stop.
 
Teenage marriage is more the norm than exception throughout all of human history for which marriage existed - and for the most part the history of the United States. How or how did the human race survive?

My maternal grandfather came here at 13, fleeing conscription into the Czar's cavalry because he could ride a horse. 20 years of his life. He worked manual labor on the railroads when he arrived here, starting as a waterboy, saved his money and sent to Europe for a wife when he turned 16, a mail order bride who was 14. She was believed to be spoiled goods, having been kidnapped and raised by an Hungarian family for 3 years, fated to be a spinster at 16 if she wasn't passed off to some having no knowledge of her past. She was Viennese. They remained married until she passed at age 81 in her sleep. They had four children, three college educated, and my grandfather hung around till he was 97. I'd call that a successful marriage.

I have good friends who met in elementary school, dated during junior high and high school years, married at 17 upon high school graduation. Both college educated, still married with two adult daughters, and they still can't keep their hands off each other after 49 years of marriage. I call that a successful marriage.

It is not a question of age, but one of maturity, love and lust, shared goals and the willingness to work hard for the benefit of the relationship that matters.

Today we serial marriage as the norm, lust ruling over love, no common goals, no willingness to work hard for the benefit of the relationship. Instant gratification rather than the realities of gradual returns.

My first decided we would be married when she was 14. Ten years later she got her way. We raised 4 great kids together, stood by each others side and back through thick and thin until she passed from leukemia. I never had a say in the decision to marry. Good thing, since I would have run like a coward. Best thing I ever did was say Yes at the alter, even if the best man had to keep me standing. I've since remarried, to a wife with a similar loss in her life, and it works. We do love each other. Both marriages have had their ups and downs, but quality effort made and make both work. Age has just been an inconvenience for both marriages.

The real Romeo and Juliet were 14 and 13, respectfully. Passions are not relegated to arbitrarily selected age groups, least of all those suffering from extended adolescence.
 
Because like I said it encourages the mentality that teenage pregnancy is okay if they get married and it removes the ability to stop other abusive or coercive marriages. Many unmarried couples raise children, they can do it for a year.

So the boy can take the girl in and use her as a slam-piece all he wants but he just commit to care for her and their child until 18? This is a pretty messed up world view.
 
We draw the line at 18 for everything else. You can consent to a marriage but cannot sign your own contracts or vote?

In the US for most of our history you couldn’t vote until 21, which I think should be the law.
Also marriage exists and his existed in theocracies, military dictatorships, regular dictatorships, monarchies, and even within legal slavery, so I don’t see how the age at which you can vote has any relevance since marriage has existed for most of history in societies where voting wasn’t even a thing
 
I think its great that a women at age 30 can be a grandmother
 
I think its great that a women at age 30 can be a grandmother

What does that have to do with the topic of this thread? The topic is formal marriage, not pregnancy.

In real terms, 99% of the time the question is should a 16 or 17 year olds couple with the girl pregnant be outlawed from marrying - for which then both would be imprisoned if they do.
 
Last edited:
If they want it to work it will work. That’s the good news.

Now I would say they should set the family drama aside, he needs to propose if he hasnt already, they should get involved with a Church, because I’m a Catholic my bias is that way, I’m guessing the girls parents at least have some cultural catholic connection even if they’re not good Catholics, so he should get on the path to confirmation, sacramental marriage, and be involved and surrounded with a community that wants them to win, and you need to take this guy behind the woodshed and whoop him until he screams he’s finishing high school to make the pain stop. Both of them do.

And stop spending time with people in the culture who encourage living in sin because you are who you hang out with. Full stop.

It's a bit curious how far ahead of the curve the "living in sin" avoidance idea really was. There are just too many economic, emotional, and social uphill battles awaiting children of those who don't marry. Sex is a happening and a fact of life, but having children are imminently avoidable. I believe we have done a terrible social harm to any folks, or their progeny, to whom we say, live together and give it a try. The real Pearl is to give the relationship time to meld, wait to get married, have children if you choose, and then see how your decision turns out.
Regards,
CP
 
It's a bit curious how far ahead of the curve the "living in sin" avoidance idea really was. There are just too many economic, emotional, and social uphill battles awaiting children of those who don't marry. Sex is a happening and a fact of life, but having children are imminently avoidable. I believe we have done a terrible social harm to any folks, or their progeny, to whom we say, live together and give it a try. The real Pearl is to give the relationship time to meld, wait to get married, have children if you choose, and then see how your decision turns out.
Regards,

CP

So you claim REALLY what a pregnant 16 year old should be told is what?

1. You must get an abortion OR
2. You must figure out how to raise they child all alone because it would be bad if the father made a commitment to you and the child or
3. Abandon the child so you are free of any responsibility. Try dumping them on your parents before dumping your child on the rest of us.

Then explain to her really she should have sex with lots and lots of other guys instead because that's the smart thing for her to do. :roll:

Do you care to state any actual harm if they have a marriage license to protect the legal rights of the child and both their legal rights too?

Or is it just that you want them both to pay higher tax rates as punishment?
 
I was watching a show on Netflix and it talked about child marriage among gypsies. It reminded of an article and video I saw a while ago.

From the Idaho Statesman:


Apparently Idaho Republicans are all for child marriage, seemingly citing religious freedom and parental rights. I strongly suggest reading the article, it is something.

Only Delaware and New Jersey currently ban child marriage. 17 states do not even have a minimum age. As Wikipedia points out Afghanistan has stricter child marriage laws than 19 states. I think it is unacceptable if any jurisdiction allows those under the age of 18 to be married.

So what say you?

In most European countries 16 is the age of consent and when one gets recognized as an adult, does not seem to cause an issue there.
 
That's false. Minors (those under the age of 18, in most states) lack the capacity to make a contract. So a minor who signs a contract can either honor the deal or void the contract. There are a few exceptions, however. For example, in most states, a minor cannot void a contract for necessities like food, clothing, and lodging. Also, a minor can void a contract for lack of capacity only while still under the age of majority. In most states, if a minor turns 18 and hasn't done anything to void the contract, then the contract can no longer be voided.

In addition, making a child also is an enforceable contract in all practical ways. No 17 year old male can say "ha ha, I don't have to pay child support because I'm under 18."

Of course, not everyone looks at marriage as entering a government contract and not everyone gets a marriage license who are, in fact, married.

What happened to all the ranting that the government should stay out of people's bedrooms?
I was speaking in principle why i think its a bad idea.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
What does that have to do with the topic of this thread? The topic is formal marriage, not pregnancy.

In real terms, 99% of the time the question is should a 16 or 17 year olds couple with the girl pregnant be outlawed from marrying - for which then both would be imprisoned if they do.

It has all to do with this thread.A 15 year old gets pregnant then her 15 year old gets pregnant.Grandma at 30.
 
So you claim REALLY what a pregnant 16 year old should be told is what?

1. You must get an abortion OR
2. You must figure out how to raise they child all alone because it would be bad if the father made a commitment to you and the child or
3. Abandon the child so you are free of any responsibility. Try dumping them on your parents before dumping your child on the rest of us.

Then explain to her really she should have sex with lots and lots of other guys instead because that's the smart thing for her to do. :roll:

Do you care to state any actual harm if they have a marriage license to protect the legal rights of the child and both their legal rights too?

Or is it just that you want them both to pay higher tax rates as punishment?

Gosh, JOKO. I don't see how my notion of waiting till you're married to have children would make you think I have advice for the pregnant 16yo. I think my want would be to avoid that place and time. I don't know that I have the wisdom or experience to advise or complicate that unfortunate(but unfortunately too often true) situation. I am a parent of two beautiful girls and thank God I never had to deal with that, and my heart goes out to those who were faced with that.
The legal rights or obligations of parents and children vary from state to state. There might be 50 answers to the question of legal rights and obligations. The real object would be to avoid the complications of an unmarried couple and their children, right?
I don't know why you would think I want anyone to be tax punished. I surely didn't write anything like that.

Regards,
CP
 
It's a bit curious how far ahead of the curve the "living in sin" avoidance idea really was. There are just too many economic, emotional, and social uphill battles awaiting children of those who don't marry. Sex is a happening and a fact of life, but having children are imminently avoidable. I believe we have done a terrible social harm to any folks, or their progeny, to whom we say, live together and give it a try. The real Pearl is to give the relationship time to meld, wait to get married, have children if you choose, and then see how your decision turns out.
Regards,
CP

Statistics do not bear this out. Those who live together and f*** divorce at higher rates then those who don’t live together before marriage
 
Gosh, JOKO. I don't see how my notion of waiting till you're married to have children would make you think I have advice for the pregnant 16yo. I think my want would be to avoid that place and time. I don't know that I have the wisdom or experience to advise or complicate that unfortunate(but unfortunately too often true) situation. I am a parent of two beautiful girls and thank God I never had to deal with that, and my heart goes out to those who were faced with that.
The legal rights or obligations of parents and children vary from state to state. There might be 50 answers to the question of legal rights and obligations. The real object would be to avoid the complications of an unmarried couple and their children, right?
I don't know why you would think I want anyone to be tax punished. I surely didn't write anything like that.

Regards,
CP

I have no problem with someone waiting until married to have sex. However, most young teen marriages are when the girl is already pregnant. She is far, far, far more likely to get pregnant without thinking it thru than she is to not get married without really thinking it thru. So the reality is... the girl is already pregnant nearly always when the question of they should they - and should they be allowed - to get married? Generally when courts have allowed 14, 15, 16 year olds to marry it is because the girl is pregnant and the male is reasonably with her youthful age range - like two 16 year olds.
 
The other part of course is what about the 57 year old groom and the 15 year old bride? I think there should be a Romeo - Juliet aspect to under age teenage marriage. However, does that really change if the girl is 18?

What about the 74 year old man marrying the 22 year old woman? Should we more worry about her, him, or if they have a child?
 
It has all to do with this thread.A 15 year old gets pregnant then her 15 year old gets pregnant.Grandma at 30.

Cool, great grandma at 45, or maybe even sooner.

"8 year old girl gives birth in Peru" - saw it on the cover of a National Enquirer while I was bored on the checkout line.

Girls mature so much more quickly than boys. Don't see any pregnant 8 year old boys.
 
Back
Top Bottom