₦airaland Forum

PoliteActivist:
Actually the opposite is often the case. Many girls become lesbians, can't stand being penetrated

I can vouche for this. There are many girls who can’t stand normal sex because of exposure to early sex. Same with men by the way - early exposure turned them off sex with women

CanadaOrBust:
I can vouche for this. There are many girls who can’t stand normal sex because of exposure to early sex. Same with men by the way - early exposure turned them off sex with women

And then they molest others and the cycle continues - that, unbelievably, is what VirginFinder is advocating

PoliteActivist:
And then they molest others and the cycle continues - that, unbelievably, is what VirginFinder is advocating

Nope!

Who is to blame The one who defiled the innocent girl ab initio by deflowering her when she was below 18. That fellow should be sentence to life.

So why punish anyone who decides to have consensual sexxx with the girl thereafter

PREVENTION IS BETTER THAN CURE.

PoliteActivist:
I think you are right. I don't know how anyone can read that bill and say that it says 11 is age of consent.

How dare you argue with our honourable judges, lawyers, activists and ageofconsent.net/world

Virginfinder nice chatting witcha. Humbly collect your L on your way out. Try another. It’s not the end of the world.
YOU CANNOT WIN THIS BECAUSE SECTION 7 IS TOO CLEAR AND UNAMBIGUOUS. IF CONSENSUAL SEX WITH AN 18 YEAR OLD WERE LEGAL IT WOULD NOT BE MENTIONED JUST AS 23 IS NOT MENTIONED.

God speed, and once more don’t forget your L

CanadaOrBust:
Here is what u said. There is no age. The only provision u gave is that the girl must have been having sex:

I should have added age. It's just a proposal though. Nothing sacrosanct. The lawmakers can work on it and give us something good.

CanadaOrBust:
Virginfinder nice chatting witcha. Humbly collect your L on your way out. Try another. It’s not the end of the world.
YOU CANNOT WIN THIS BECAUSE SECTION 7 IS TOO CLEAR AND UNAMBIGUOUS. IF CONSENSUAL SEX WITH AN 18 YEAR OLD WERE LEGAL IT WOULD NOT BE MENTIONED THERE JUST AS 23 IS NOT MENTIONED.

God speed, and once more don’t forget your L

Go and tell that to our judges, lawyers, activists and ageofconsent.net

They have interpreted the law as professionals and without emotions.

I will look for Femi Falana's position on the law. He also faulted it for technically making the age of consent 11.

Why make provision for various age ranges instead of 18 alone 18 is the age of legal maturity in Nigeria. Once you are 18, you can be imprisoned. But you can marry even if you are not 18. You can have sex if you are not 18.

VirginFinder:
Nope!

Who is to blame The one who defiled the innocent girl ab initio by deflowering her when she was below 18. That fellow should be sentence to life.

So why punish anyone who decides to have consensual sexxx with the girl thereafter

PREVENTION IS BETTER THAN CURE.

So if someone robs your shop, robbing your shop should henceforth be legalized; if someone beats you up, beating you up becomes legal etc

PoliteActivist:
Actually the opposite is often the case. Many girls become lesbians, can't stand being penetrated

That's those who were brutally raped.

Often times, exposed girls willingly gave consent to the sex either with an age-mate/age-group person or someone much older...

Those ones go haywire afterwards.

PoliteActivist:
So if someone robs your shop, robbing your shop should henceforth be legalized; if someone beats you up, beating you up becomes legal etc

It's not the same.

Like I said, not every under-aged girl's first sex is a rape case! Some asked for it and want to continue to enjoy it afterwards.

Why blame those with whom they decided to enjoy it with after the first time

VirginFinder:
Go and tell that to our judges, lawyers, activists and ageofconsent.net

They have interpreted the law as professionals and without emotions.

I will look for Femi Falana's position on the law. He also faulted it for technically making the age of consent 11.

Why make provision for various age ranges instead of 18 alone 18 is the age of legal maturity in Nigeria. Once you are 18, you can be imprisoned. But you can marry even if you are not 18. You can have sex if you are not 18.

Listen, there are laws in the books that are never enforced. Our debate here is what it says in the books not what anybody said it says. Luckily what is says is
crystal clear where even an elementary school kid can say it.

So that’s why 18 is mentioned. Ok explain the below or forever keep shut:

(3) A person who commits an offence of defilement with a child between the age of twelve and fifteen years is liable upon conviction to imprisonment for life.

CanadaOrBust:
Virginfinder nice chatting witcha. Humbly collect your L on your way out. Try another. It’s not the end of the world.
YOU CANNOT WIN THIS BECAUSE SECTION 7 IS TOO CLEAR AND UNAMBIGUOUS. IF CONSENSUAL SEX WITH AN 18 YEAR OLD WERE LEGAL IT WOULD NOT BE MENTIONED THERE JUST AS 23 IS NOT MENTIONED.

God speed, and once more don’t forget your L

Be eas on the poor guy, he is already in enough pains.
It is not easy to be arguing something where everyone can read it for themselves and see that you are wrong!

VirginFinder:
That's those who were brutally raped.

Often times, exposed girls willingly gave consent to the sex either with an age-mate/age-group person or someone much older...

Those ones go haywire afterwards.

They are incapable of giving consent! Get that into your head. They are deceived, coerced, manipulated or they simply had no idea what they were doing!

VirginFinder:
It's not the same.

Like I said, not every under-aged girl's first sex is a rape case! Some asked for it and want to continue to enjoy it afterwards.

Why blame those with whom they decided to enjoy it with after the first time

So assuming your system is followed, how do you tell the difference

PoliteActivist:
They are incapable of giving consent! Get that into your head. They are deceived, coerced, manipulated or they simply had no idea what they were doing!

Easy bro!

Take out your frustration on our lawmakers and judiciary not me!!

Age of consent in Nigeria is 11 not 18!!!

As regards my proposal, I opined that many girls under 18 willingly decided to have their first sex. Most of them had it with their age mates or boys in their age group.
Afterwards, such girls should be adjudged to be able to give consent whenever they have consensual sex with anybody.
But those who are below 18 and are still virgins should not be adjudged to able to give consent!

PoliteActivist:
So assuming your system is followed, how do you tell the difference

Of course, you know what it mean to deflower a girl There's enough evidence!

CanadaOrBust:
Listen, there are laws in the books that are never enforced. Our debate here is what it says in the books not what anybody said it says. Luckily what is says is
crystal clear where even an elementary school kid can say it.

So that’s why 18 is mentioned. Ok explain the below or forever keep shut:

(3) A person who commits an offence of defilement with a child between the age of twelve and fifteen years is liable upon conviction to imprisonment for life.

The fact that this 7(3) exists ends all possible arguments because it is worded exactly the same way as (4)

PoliteActivist:

Be eas on the poor guy, he is already in enough pains.
It is not easy to be arguing something where everyone can read it for themselves and see that you are wrong!

Continue deluding yourselves.

I don't see any of you ever showing up on this sort of debate ever again as you have learnt a lot consciously or unconsciously but you just won't admit it.

Many of you just came across the sexual offences bill of 2015 some days ago...

I know when the bill was passed and I know the furore it generated at the time. All and sundry were angry that the age of consent was technically pegged at 11.

VirginFinder:
Of course, you know what it mean to deflower a girl There's enough evidence!

So how can u tell if she was deflowered by rape or by "consent" so as to decide which one pedophiles can have

VirginFinder:
Continue deluding yourselves.

I don't see any of you ever showing up on this sort of debate ever again as you have learnt a lot consciously or unconsciously but you just won't admit it.

Many of you just came across the sexual offences bill of 2015 some days ago...

I know when the bill was passed and I know the furore it generated at the time. All and sundry were angry that the age of consent was technically pegged at 11.

Oga, we can read! And the language is very simple, not full of legalese as some laws. What part of it don't you understand and a school kid can explain it to you!

VirginFinder:
I should have added age. It's just a proposal though. Nothing sacrosanct. The lawmakers can work on it and give us something good.

And what age would u propose is ok for a 50 year old to start having underage sex with a girl?

PoliteActivist:
The fact that this 7(3) exists ends all possible arguments because it is worded exactly the same way as (4)

Yet it is still empty and not categorical. There is no mention of sentencing. And it allows for consent.

CanadaOrBust:
And what age would u propose is ok for a 50 year old to start having underage sex with a girl?

If the girl is physically mature enough and has already started having sex prior to meeting the man...

PoliteActivist:
Oga, we can read! And the language is very simple, not full of legalese as some laws. What part of it don't you understand and a school kid can explain it to you!

You understand as laymen. The professionals understand it better. I go with the professionals.

VirginFinder:
How dare you argue with our honourable judges, lawyers, activists and ageofconsent.net/world

We are not arguing with anyone. Our debate here is clear: what does it say on the books. Luckily what it says is very clear and unambiguous

VirginFinder:
Sure I know enough based on overwhelming evidence from recent court judgments, activists, ageofconsent.net/world etc etc

Judges rule based on what is in the books...

You know it is categorical yet no one has ever gotten life as it “categorically” mandates!

There are laws on the books judges completely ignore

PoliteActivist:
So how can u tell if she was deflowered by rape or by "consent" so as to decide which one pedophiles can have

The first sex is one event. Subsequent ones are another.

The girl can give consent to have sex after the first sex. Where she doesn't give it, then it's a clear case of rape...

So there is no basis for your question.

CanadaOrBust:
It is categorical yet no one has ever gotten life as it “categorically” mandates!

There are Laws the books judges completely ignore

Well, maybe you should take it up with the judges for deciding to temper justice with mercy...

VirginFinder:
You understand as laymen. The professionals understand it better. I go with the professionals.

Professionals understand legalese better than you, NOT very simple English, as us the case here

CanadaOrBust:
We are not arguing with anyone. Our debate here is clear: what does it say on the books. Luckily what it says is very clear and unambiguous

If it were not cleverly drafted to confuse ignoramuses like you it should simply have been one provision thus:

"A person who commits an offence of defilement with a child 18 years or less shall upon conviction be sentenced to imprisonment for life."

PoliteActivist:
Professionals understand legalese better than you, NOT very simple English, as us the case here

So why are you going against the professionals