Have sex but Don't get married

The past week has seen a heated debate on social media after government has through the Minister of Justice and Parliamentary Cde Ziyambi Ziyambi gave the green light over the age of sexual consent to remain at 16.

Interestingly the age of consent for boys have been pegged at 18 and the reason being girls mature faster more than girls hence the two year ' sexual bonus' for the girl child.

Government in its corner claims the age of sexual consent  has never had anything to do with age of marriage, saying raising the age of consent to sex to 18 will result in a lot of teens being arrested for indulging in sexual activities. So  in a way, the Minister claims government is protecting youths from going to jail.

While many netizens seem to have bought this narrative from government, one is forced to dig deeper and wonder how issues of sex can be separated from marriage.

What  precedence is being set for our children by legalising their sexual activities while banning marriages before the age of 18?

Surely someone would argue that at 16 one can't fight sexual hormones so would rather give in to those feelings knowing very well the dire consequences that come with sexual activity.

It's true that marriage comes with some responsibility but if one can have sex, can't she also be responsible enough to handle the pressure that comes in the holy matrimony?

Dear reader, I am not in anyway advocating  for early marriages but surely how can the nation use the constitution to promote moral decay in our society. Has the authorities be imagined the consequences of such a move?

Taking health risks and unwanted early pregnancies away, what type of future wives are we breeding as a nation who are given 2 years of exploring sexual activities outside marriage?

If one can enjoy sex outside marriage, would you expect her to hold it as a sacred entity when in marriage or she would always resort to her old ways.

"Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it(Proverbs 22 VS 6)." Is this how the government want people to train children to be responsible parents tomorrow.

When divorce cases escalate, we wonder why forgetting that we are also accomplices to such failed marriages hiding behind the  constitution.

For those of you advocating for such madness, would you want your daughter to be sexual active outside marriage while under the age of 18?

A normal parent would detest that and one wonders whether those who advocate for such have daughters or at least are married.

It is common knowledge that older men are the ones who abuse young girls first before boys have the audacity to approach girls, so these laws are always a loophole to cater for someone's satisfaction.

"State and non-state actors need to dialogue and action on what informs policies and legislative measures on the age of consent and the different age of consent between girls and boys," wrote one Twitter user.

Commenting on the same issue one user said, "A solution is there, we have always had it: a 16 year old child cannot consent to marriage, why should we take sex differently. 18 years and above. Do proponents of #16yearsconsent have 16 year old daughters? & are happy with this ridiculous idea?"

If the Government can vehemently claim that they cannot fight nature and sexual hormones why are they so adamant with the issues of gay rights.

The same principle that government is using in criminalising homosexuality should be the same modus operandi when dealing with age of sexual consent.

What type of a society does the government want, do we hold on to our culture or we completely do away with culture?

Why don't we blend our constitution with our culture? Why are we allowing the 'borrowed constitution' to erase our culture. There is no country without culture and sadly there shall be no Zimbabwe to talk about in the near future, thanks to  constitualism.

A 16 year should  not be legally allowed to have sex.