Homosexual Debate Forum age restrictions ?

[BAFRIEND]

I am becoming more and more alarmed about the number of minors posting on sexual inuendo and controversial debates on this forum.

Some of the personal information and input they offer is really inappropriate.

I am going to add any under 18 who posts here on my ignore list and hope CF decides to look into this and revise the rules.

 

[ReformedChapin]

Yes, they aren't trained or mature enough to handle these though issues (unless in special cases).

 

[SallyNow]

..yet there are probably some older teenagers that are capably of talking about homosexuality, and may even benefit from information and discussion.

It's a tough call. Also, what is a "minor" varies from place to place, law to law.

 

[HaloHope]

I'm afraid seeing as a "minor" is under 16 here and even younger elsewhere that I don't feel this can be applied effectively. While I do agree "children" shouldn't be viewing some of the debates here I haven't actually seen anyone I would define as a child posting.

 

[BAFRIEND]

..yet there are probably some older teenagers that are capably of talking about homosexuality, and may even benefit from information and discussion.

It's a tough call. Also, what is a "minor" varies from place to place, law to law.

Regardless, it comes down to the fact that you provide or share information of a sexual nature most likely without their parents being aware. I would not appreciate an adult discussing any sexual topic with my kids.

Some, think it is their place to inform or give advice to kids behind their parent's backs even though they are strangers justifying by believing they are 21st century enlightened gay sages who can save kids from their fundy unwise Bible following mature adult parents.

 

[BAFRIEND]

I'm afraid seeing as a "minor" is under 16 here and even younger elsewhere that I don't feel this can be applied effectively. While I do agree "children" shouldn't be viewing some of the debates here I haven't actually seen anyone I would define as a child posting.

In Texas, I know, a minor is under 18 and if you engage them in sexual dialogue online it is a felony. I think CF needs to revise their rules.

 

[HaloHope]

In Texas, I know, a minor is under 18 and if you engage them in sexual dialogue online it is a felony. I think CF needs to revise their rules.

I'm not entirely sure what sexual dialogue has been going on here (I don't read every thread and post so feel free to point some out to me) but I haven't noticed any I'd say was graphic.

As I said before I don't think children should be viewing this forum but I certainly feel there are those in there mid to late teens who can discuss and debate here intelligently on both sides of the argument.

And this message board covers many countries and many nationalities. Many people here are not in Texas.. or the US for that matter.

 

[*Starlight*]

I totally disagree... I don't see any reason to put any age restrictions here. A young person can discuss even controversial issues just as well as an older person.

In Texas, I know, a minor is under 18 and if you engage them in sexual dialogue online it is a felony. I think CF needs to revise their rules.

Wow. To be honest, that's a really strange law. But if the CF servers aren't located in Texas, then I think CF doesn't need to obey such laws?

 

[UberLutheran]

How about keeping people under age 40 and over age 65 out of the forum?

 

[Pogue]

I totally disagree... I don't see any reason to put any age restrictions here. A young person can discuss even controversial issues just as well as an older person.

Me too. I haven't noticed any especially graphic or explicit conversations here, and even if there were, I can't see what good banning people who say they are under 18 would do, since it's possible to lie about your age online. Furthermore, I think the OP is directed, unfairly, to one member in particular. Most of the posts I've seen by people under 18 have been very well thought out and reasonable.

 

[TheFathersDaughter]

What an excuse to put me on ignore.

I don't care if you put me on ignore BAFRIEND. You don't have to come up with excuses. Frankly I'm surprised you haven't done it yet.

In other news, if there is an age limit, it should be 12 and under (because I'm positive 12 year olds use this site too). Not that I think it's a problem since I doubt an twelve-year-old will want to wander in here.

EDIT: Plus, I'm not quite sure if you CAN ban minors from only ONE forum. It's may not be within their technology.

 

[Bianca87]

i haven't seen anyone under 16 here and anyways they all seem pretty mature...

 

[ReformedChapin]

i haven't seen anyone under 16 here and anyways they all seem pretty mature...

I strongly disagree, especially with the lack of rational arguments they produce. It's more "logic is dumb" and "I'm sorry you don't accept what God told me."

 

[ReformedChapin]

How about keeping people under age 40 and over age 65 out of the forum?

Yes because they have the same life experience and education that a typical teenager.

 

[Kirilov]

If 'minor' means under 16, I would have felt extremely hard done by at 15.
If 'minor' means under 18, I would have felt outraged at 17.
If 'minor' means under 21, I'm laughing.

I think the criteria for 'old enough' to post here is not, and should not be, numerical. I see no reason why a person mature enough to partake of a reasonable discussion should not be posting here. In fact, I think it is positively healthier that young people (i.e, even considerably younger than myself) should engage with ethical issues.

I strongly disagree, especially with the lack of rational arguments they produce. It's more "logic is dumb" and "I'm sorry you don't accept what God told me."

NewGuy101, thats completely unfair. Not to say a little hypocritical.

 

[eastcoast_bsc]

Actually kids that disagree with the OP are the ones he wants expelled. Since most young kids seemed to be a bit more enlightened then some of the older posters.
How would one go about enforcing such a naive policy? On line one can be any age they desire, or any height or weight. One can be a white supremicst in disguise. One can be a member of a kansas cult in disguise. Point is that it cannot be enforced. People will only omit or avoid telling their real ages.

 

[BAFRIEND]

Yeah, I think we recently had a guy on here who admitted he was agnostic/borderline atheist claiming to be a Christian. But he slipped up.

Lying about your personal information or beliefs on a Christian Forum is low.

I think it is funny that the so called wise ones here believe that their young supporters don't have the ethics to tell the truth about their real ages.

 

[eastcoast_bsc]

Yeah, I think we recently had a guy on here who admitted he was agnostic/borderline atheist claiming to be a Christian. But he slipped up.

Lying about your personal information or beliefs on a Christian Forum is low.

I think it is funny that the so called wise ones here believe that their young supporters don't have the ethics to tell the truth about their real ages.

How about using multiple forum names, such as for example lantern and Bafriend. Is that being disingeneuous or dishonest ?

 

[BAFRIEND]

How about using multiple forum names, such as for example lantern and Bafriend. Is that being disingeneuous or dishonest ?

No, because that does not break the rules. Lying about your age and denomination are against forum rules and the agreement with CF.

 

[eastcoast_bsc]

Age of consent is used to determine legal age wgen one is considered legal and competent to agree to having sex. How is that relevant to posting in a forum ?
By the way, the majority of states are around 16