 |
| |
|
|
OzzyKP
|
 |
Rockville, MD
Oct 1999
time: 00:19
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by nationalist
Wow. That is one of the stupidest things that I have ever read. Wait five years and re-evaluate that statement. The majority of 15 year old don't even have a sense of self identity that is separate from their parents yet. Some 25 year olds may be on a 15 year old emotional level, but very few. Look at it this way: a 25 year old has possible finished grad school. A 15 year old is a sophomore in high school. I don't care how smart you think you are, your ability to reason is not as developed at 15 as it will be at 25. ou remind me of myself 4 or 5 years ago, and I'll give you the advice that I wish I could go back and give to myself: Grow up. 15 year olds are not adults. |
You have anything to back this up besides your own closed-minded biggotry?
Check out www.tcs.ac, this is a group of parents (much more experienced with raising children than most people on this list) who from birth Take their Children Seriously. Which means they do exactly as I suggested, giving a 5 year old accurate information to make a decision and respecting his choice no matter what it is. And guess what, it works. These individuals raised in an atmosphere where they are respected as equals reason just as well as adults do. TCS isn't even about 15 year olds, they go much younger. They have proven that 10 year olds even reason just as well as adults if given information from which to base their decision.
I have spoken to many of these parents myself, and I have heard their personal stories that back it all up. Go to www.tcs.ac and sign up for their mailing list, they'd be happy to tell you lots of stories to prove you wrong.
Of course I doubt you'll do that, you'll prefer to live in your biggoted ignorance than actually seek out the truth when the truth is opposed to your narrow world view.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
OzzyKP
|
|
Rockville, MD
Oct 1999
time: 00:19
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by WhiteElephants
While I may agree with you on this issue I don't think you really need to "fight for your right to party", eh? And who in their right minds would vote for someone under 35 anyway? |
Well that is what democracy is about. What are you afraid of? If a 20 year old runs for president and is some frat guy without a brain in his head then of course no one will vote for him. If that 20 year old has all the qualities to be an exceptional president, then why on earth not let him have the chance? Do you not have faith in democracy that voters will pick the best candidate and don't need things screened for them? If so then why do you bother to live in a democracy in the first place, move to China.
quote:
Originally posted by WhiteElephants
Are you refering to the deduction your parents get on their taxes for claiming their children as dependents? Oh, you wouldn't be familiar with that. |
I'm speaking of income tax, sales tax, capitol gains tax, you name it. Young people pay all forms of taxes, paying out millions and millions of dollars every year to a government that will gladly take their money but won't let them vote on what to do with it.
quote:
Originally posted by WhiteElephants
Hey pal, when big shots like you wanna start doing adult crimes the pony rides are over it's time to take off the kiddy gloves. Besides if you got kids doing adult crimes why in the hell would you be inclined to give them more rights when they can't even act as responsible citizens as it is?
|
Ah all of a sudden things become adult crimes. This is certainly a logical way to think, when a person does something wrong he is told he is a mature, rational adult. When he tries to do something right (i.e. voting) he is told he is a stupid, irrational child. Gee, I'm glad society has figured out a good, common sense system to treat people fairly.... 
So you are saying is the only possible way a youth could ever prove themselves to be an adult in your eyes is if they commit a serious crime. If this is what you think adulthood is all about, murder, rape, and grand theft, then perhaps the adults are the ones whose rights should be taken away.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
nationalist
|
 |
None of your Goddamned business
Nov 2001
time: 00:19
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by OzzyKP
You have anything to back this up besides your own closed-minded biggotry? |
2 things: life experience and memory. You will develop those as well. I'll just have to take what you say with a grain of salt. BTW, I'm only 19 myself, and can clearly remember what it was to be 15. I am now wise enough to know that I have some more maturing to do. Most 15 year olds (take yourself as an example) do not have that level of wisdom yet.
Last edited by nationalist on 27-04-2002 at 07:29
|
|
| |
|
|
|
WhiteElephants
|
 |
Toledo Ohio
Mar 2000
time: 00:19
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by OzzyKP
You have anything to back this up besides your own closed-minded biggotry?[?QUOTE]
Hey junior, the word I think you're looking for is agist, not bigot, but of course you probably already knew that.
[QUOTE]Check out www.tcs.ac, this is a group of parents (much more experienced with raising children than most people on this list) who from birth Take their Children Seriously. Which means they do exactly as I suggested, giving a 5 year old accurate information to make a decision and respecting his choice no matter what it is. And guess what, it works. These individuals raised in an atmosphere where they are respected as equals reason just as well as adults do. TCS isn't even about 15 year olds, they go much younger. They have proven that 10 year olds even reason just as well as adults if given information from which to base their decision. |
The point is, in case you haven't been listening, that you cannot -- I repeat, cannot -- just give 10 year olds the kind of information that adult possess. It not something you read in a book, or watch on television.
The only thing different between myself and you when I was your age, was that I wasn't as entirely arrogant as you. You're beginning to sound like those morons in the sixties who claimed you couldn't trust anyone older than thirty. Grow up.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
WhiteElephants
|
|
Toledo Ohio
Mar 2000
time: 00:19
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by OzzyKP
So you are saying is the only possible way a youth could ever prove themselves to be an adult in your eyes is if they commit a serious crime. If this is what you think adulthood is all about, murder, rape, and grand theft, then perhaps the adults are the ones whose rights should be taken away. |
What do I have to spell everything out for you? These children have proven that can't even be responsible as children, how are they going to handle the responsiblities of an adult? There not, because were not going to give them the chance since they already blew that one they had.
quote:
Well that is what democracy is about. What are you afraid of? If a 20 year old runs for president and is some frat guy without a brain in his head then of course no one will vote for him. If that 20 year old has all the qualities to be an exceptional president, then why on earth not let him have the chance? Do you not have faith in democracy that voters will pick the best candidate and don't need things screened for them? If so then why do you bother to live in a democracy in the first place, move to China. |
I could care less. I'm just telling you that rallying to be able to drink beer and run for the presidency at whatever age is a pretty pathetic cause and does not warrant your rediculous persecution.
quote:
I'm speaking of income tax, sales tax, capitol gains tax, you name it. Young people pay all forms of taxes, paying out millions and millions of dollars every year to a government that will gladly take their money but won't let them vote on what to do with it. |
Millions? Please. Who are these kids working for Microsoft? And if they're not working for Microsoft who's money are they spending? You guessed it, mommy and daddy's. I would wager a kid of sixteen, depending on how much he works, pays a few hundred (not to mention the money his parents will get back when they claim him on their returns), which I'm sure by that age he is taking advantage of what his tax dollars are already doing for him.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
OzzyKP
|
|
Rockville, MD
Oct 1999
time: 00:19
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by WhiteElephants
The point is, in case you haven't been listening, that you cannot -- I repeat, cannot -- just give 10 year olds the kind of information that adult possess. It not something you read in a book, or watch on television.
The only thing different between myself and you when I was your age, was that I wasn't as entirely arrogant as you. You're beginning to sound like those morons in the sixties who claimed you couldn't trust anyone older than thirty. Grow up. |
It seems you haven't been listening, it has already been done. Your ignorance and refusal to consider new points of view are apalling. If your biggotry is what passes as maturity now a days then you can have it. GO TO WWW.TCS.AC JOIN THEIR MAILING LIST, ASK THEM YOUR FOOLISH QUESTIONS. If you have any desire for the facts of the matter this is what you will do.
Of course you will continue to prove your ignorant closed-mindedness by responding by saying i'm some dumb kid and that you don't need to validate my proof because you already know i'm wrong, because i'm a "dumb kid" who couldn't possibly be right. If this is all the proof you require to have a solid case then I'm glad you aren't a lawyer,.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Adalbertus
|
 |
Cologne, Germany
Feb 2001
time: 06:19
|
|
On the "Right of Speech". There is a good saying that the one's Freedom ends where the Freedom of the others begins.
In this sense Pedophilia is a crime and no law can change this. A group advocating to legalize Pedophilia is the same as one trying to legalize murder or rape.
Even more generally, the freedom of speech ends where you start to hurt other people. In my eyes, it is a great misconception in laws thay you can be sued for hurting someone physically, but hardly for hurting psychially. I just want to add the example of the Russian composer Tchaikovsky, who was driven into suicide by words only (he was homosexual). A "blind" Right of Speech is something very dangerous, and it is almost as dangerous as a too strict control from the side of the state. Hitler well used his Right of Speech. Nowadays he wouldn't have it anymore in Germany, and that's why these laws exist.
I see a homosexual relation with a boy who is sexually mature, but just 14 as something different than pedophilia. A child has no notion of what sex is really about. A 6 year old is almost certainly ruined for life (unless extremely taken care of), a consenting 14-year old, who understands sex, not necessarily. Most of you now seem to be talking about the first case. What exactly is NAMBLA advocating?
The laws against sex with people younger than the age of consent arose from two different things: First, European adolescents become mature earlier nowadays (The composer Joseph Haydn had to leave the boy's choir at an age of 18 due to his breaking of voice. Nowadays this would be extremely late/impossible). Second, the orld has become more complex and while people were able to raise a child at an age of 16, say, 300 years ago, they are not today because they still have lots to learn.
About maturity in general: Growing up is a gradual thing. And for different aspects of life the time when one can take over responsibility is different. (I think even a 6-year old child has enough sense to understand why murder is a crime. And usually their sense is much better than that of 16-year old people who have been indoctrinated that military is something wonderful.) To look through the policies of different parties takes a much longer time than to see why theft is bad. Therefore the ages where one should take responsibility for one or the other is different.
quote:
Originally posted by OzzyKP:
But if a 15 year old is given the same amount of information as a 25 year old or a 35 year old their decisions will be just as rational. |
There is one big misconception in it. The 15 year old is not less intelligent than the 25 or 35 year old. But you simply cannot give a 15 year old all the experience a 25 year old has made in the last 10 years. And there is usually much more involved than simply the information you use directly to decide but also the knowledge where to think more about something, having seen/read about consequences of similar cases.
We had a 64-years-old teacher (just when being 14/15 years old) who said something along the line that he has the "right" to be our teacher not because of a higher intelligence but because he has gained an experience we never can catch up (before his death). Souded a bit arrogant at that time but he was right.
The same holds also for the 25- and 35-years-old. Only that new experience usually is more complex and therefore the growth is slower.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
OzzyKP
|
|
Rockville, MD
Oct 1999
time: 00:19
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by loinburger
All you have succeeded in is substantiating that people are now having sex later in life because they no longer need to hurry up and procreate before they kick the bucket. This is hardly evidence that people are having sex earlier in life, and in fact is evidence that people are having sex later because it is the more appropriate time to do so barring procreation restraints (otherwise, why would people start having sex later just because they're dying later?). |
What on earth are you talking about? My entire point was to show that the lateness of sex now is a historical anomoly. If i have proven that people are having sex later now, I think i have succeeded in my goal to prove that people were having sex earlier before. My point was that throughout human history people began having sex after puberty, it is only our modern closed mindedness, and anti-youth hysteria that has changed this.
quote:
Originally posted by loinburger
I note that you failed to answer my question as to whether or not you've matured at all in the past five years. Have you matured at all in the past five years? If you have, then how can you possibly say that 15-year-olds are just as emotionally and mentally mature as 25-year-olds? |
I was going to respond, but since I am carrying on this argument alone I must let some things drop as there are many people I am debating. To answer your question we need to come up with a suitable definition of "maturity" the dictionary definition I just found is different than how it is often used. Mature just means full grown, or fully developed.
Because of adultist bias the modern concept of maturity and immaturity has developed to further oppress youth. So based on this definition one is declared immature if he does not follow the social norms of adultist society. This term is used to attack ones beliefs, actions, and ideas. The popularization of this term has futher entrenched adultist stereotypes, because now instead of someone being declared "naive" they are declared "immature" and associated with youth regardless of their age.
Just look at how this term and concept has been used in this thread. Loin, we had a long discussion a few weeks ago about objective reality vs. realitive reality. There were sharp disagreements between the various sides, but they were recognized as logical disagreements. Now look how this argument has progressed, rather than have my argument respected by my opponents I am called "junior" or "inexperienced" or "immature" for holding the views I hold. How convenient to be able to erase any arguments by just declaring your opponent as young.
Maturity is a measure of how well someone has submitted to our social norms. If you see a group of teenagers in a restaurant who are laughing their asses off at something, enjoying life, enjoying each others company, just having a wonderful time. Adultists in the restaurant would declare them "immature", because our norms declare we are not supposed to laugh boisterously when we enjoy something, we are supposed to be prim, proper, and act as if the joy of the world has been sucked out of us. Often this term is used with hypocrisy as well. Going out with my friends to a restaurant they will start badmouthing the next table over of teenagers for their loud "immaturity", yet every once in a while my friends will find something particularly funny and bust out laughing in the same manner. But of course that is acceptable, the teenagers are immature.
This term is much like other terms associated with oppressed people. A woman with a strong opinion is a "b_tch" (while of course a man with strong opinions isn't) a woman with mulitple sexual partners is a "slut" (while of course a man with the same isn't) these double-standards and hypocrisies help entrench oppression against a group. Mature and Immature are no different.
So by the two standards I have put forward, the dictionary definition of actual development and growth, and the adultist definition of obeying social norms my answer is thus:
I am just as cognitive and developed and rational and intelligent as I was at 15.
Unfortunately I believe I have succomed in some ways to social norms, so by that definition perhaps I have "matured" but it is a great tragedy. My enjoyment of life has been taken away from me, and now I am more inclined to fear rebuke by others than I was before. I am greatly more inhibited, as all adults are which is why they often get drunk so they can loose their inhibitions that they worked so hard to build up in the first place. My joy has been replaced by fear, and that is no way to go through life. My peers are dominated by fear, and it sickens me. I think my life will be improved if I hang out with "immature" high schoolers, I think all of our lives will be improved if we do this. Shed our irrational inhibitions and f_cking enjoy life.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Tom201
|
|
Amsterdam
Dec 2001
time: 05:19
|
|
Adalbertus
quote:
On the "Right of Speech". There is a good saying that the one's Freedom ends where the Freedom of the others begins.
In this sense Pedophilia is a crime and no law can change this. A group advocating to legalize Pedophilia is the same as one trying to legalize murder or rape.
|
I agree with the first setence.
But I dont see how the speech about murder or rape legalisation is violating the rights of others? IMO you should be allowed to say/write whatever you want, no matter how dumb it is or whatever. I opose the concept of thought crime.
I see no reason why there are the various censorship laws in Germany against neonazi books, writings, etc. It is even counterproductive. Many neonazi theoris are based on conspiracy theories, if you then come up with censorship while you claim to be the free democratic country, the conspiracy theories are getting more reliably.
nationalist
quote:
The majority of 15 year old don't even have a sense of self identity that is separate from their parents yet. |
???
I had a pretty good sense of a seperate identity from my parents since I was 10/11. Most teenagers have their revolting time against parents at that age. Actually I was free to do whatever I want since I was 12 with my parents as optional advicers. With 15 I was very far from thinking of me and my parents as the same identity. Same goes for everyone I knew at the same age at that time....
|
|
| |
|
|
|
OzzyKP
|
|
Rockville, MD
Oct 1999
time: 00:19
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by loinburger
You've changed your point, then. Your original point that I questioned:
quote:
If you want to look at human history people have been having sex at much younger ages since the beginning of time. |
You have failed to substantiate this, and have in fact substantiated the opposite claim.
|
Ok, I think there is just a misunderstanding over my wording. I meant since as in people have been having sex at young ages since the beginning of time and only now have changed. Not that people are now having sex at ages younger than at the beginning of time. I know my wording was tricky and I hope its been cleared up.
quote:
Originally posted by loinburger
That was the definition of "mature" that I was intending, and now I see where you're coming from. I've matured in leaps and bounds since I was 15, which is why I disagree with you that 15-year-olds are just as emotionally and mentally competent as 20-year-olds or 25-year-olds. I've certainly become more emotionally and mentally competent in the last six years, and based on past trends I expect to continue to increase in mental and emotional competence for years to come (although it seems as though the process is beginning to slow, i.e. the change in mental states between the ages of 18 and 19 was more severe than the change in mental states between 19 and 20, which was more severe than the change between 20 and 21). |
Well there is a lifelong process of learning that all people go through. I certainly don't claim that your average 15 year old now has as much experience and knowledge as your average 30 year old. But of course your average 30 year old doesn't have as much experience and knowledge as your average 60 year old.
This brings up a few interesting points. Based on nothing else than world experience and the benifit that gives reasoning ability does it not stand to reason an age barrier is just as justified at 40 then at 18? All those under 40 year olds lack far more experience than their elders. So perhaps a general "life experience" standard is insufficent.
We must instead look at what level of experience and knowledge would be required to function independently in our society. A 70 year old may have much greater knowledge and experience of WW2 than a 40 year old, but is that the type of knowledge that is important to live in our society? No.
Determining what kind of knowledge is needed is dependent on our society and our place in history. Tribal cultures that advanced very slowly and relied greatly on tradition would put a premium on age. Those who have the greatest connections to the past are the most prized. Most able to pass down the ancient stories and ancient ways. This is why you see most tribal cultures with a "council of elders" or something like that, those who are the oldest in this society are the ones who rule.
As technology and change sped up this old way of leadership died out. In the 20th century people weren't as concerned with "the old ways" or "traditional lifestyles" as they were with new technology and new methods of life. So in this rapid changing world the elderly who cling to outdated ways of life are no longer the leaders they are the dinosaurs who are put out to pasture in retirement communities. Middle age people become the leaders because they are most in touch with the world around them and they possesed the knowledge and experience most needed to function in society.
Things are still changing though. Technology is developing at an astounding rate, life now is radically different than life 10 years ago. This kind of rapid change changes age roles as well. Right now the Internet and computers power this world, and who among us are most proficient with this new technology? The young, 10-20 in most cases know more about technology than thieir parents and certainly more than their grandparents. Parents have to go to their children to have them set the VCR or set up their Internet. This is not bizarre, this is just how people respond to rapidly changing technology. So in this world where 13 year olds can hack into Pentagon computer systems who posseses the knowledge and experience most needed to function? I think I have a strong argument to say that the young do.
Do I want to see a world in which you are shipped off to a retirement home at 30? Heavens no. But I think it is time we recognize the true value and knowledge our young possess, and not oppress them out of fear of loosing our place, but rather share power as equals.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Velociryx
|
 |
of Candle'Bre
Apr 1999
time: 05:19
|
|
I run a website for artists, and now and then, an artist will post something that's offensive to some of the regular readers of the site. My position on that has always been quite clear: I support the artist's right to post anything on the site that does not violate current laws or other agreements I have with some of my service providers, even if what I wind up supporting makes me squemish.
Why?
Because it has a right to BE. It has a right to exist, according to our view on free speech.
People who take offense to some of the stuff that's posted always get the same answer from me. If you don't like it, don't read/look at it.
There's no such thing as a "thought crime." I can think how lovely it would be to lob a few nukes in the general direction of France and kill off mass millions of innocent people. I can think that all day long and it doesn't make it illegal.
I can even start up a website advocating that the US government take steps to ensure France's destruction in that very manner. That's not illegal either.
If I begin to act on it. If I hold a fund-raiser and start buying the materials needed to make my own arsenal of nuclear weapons....then law enforcement agencies can step in and shut me down, putting me under the jail for my illegal behavior.
It's true....thought can lead to action. The thoughts themselves, nor the expression of those thoughts, are not illegal. That should not even be up for debate.
I personally think that the most responsible thing to do, given that what the group advocates is currently illegal, is to monitor the site, monitor the activity of site members and IF AND WHEN they begin to behave in ways that break current laws, go after them.
They've organized. That gives them advantages in communication. It also gives advantages to law enforcement, as they now know where to go to look for these guys. It's like a gigantic neon sign on the internet pointing the way.
They can advocate whatever they like til they're blue in the face, but if we care about protecting the right of free speech, there's nothing we can do about it until they DO something illegal.
-=Vel=-
|
|
| |
|
|
|
loinburger
|
 |
Sweet Sauce Jones
Jul 1999
time: 00:19
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by OzzyKP
Well there is a lifelong process of learning that all people go through. I certainly don't claim that your average 15 year old now has as much experience and knowledge as your average 30 year old. But of course your average 30 year old doesn't have as much experience and knowledge as your average 60 year old. |
Yes, but going off of Kohlberg's stages of moral development (I'm sure there are others who have done work on this, like Piaget, but I'm most familiar with Kohlberg), your average person is every bit as morally developed at age 30 as he/she is at age 60, but your average person still has several stages of development to go through between age 15 and age 30--your average 15-year-old is not as rational about some things as your average 30-year-old. This is also demonstrated in Fowler's stages of faith development--your average 15-year-old is far more irrational/gullible/pigheaded than your average 30-year-old.
I have experience working with gifted 12 and 13-year-olds as a summer camp counsellor, and can attest to the fact that they are more prone to jumping to erroneous conclusions, using logical fallacies, and being downright pigheaded than people who are ten years their senior. To most 12 and 13-year-olds, the question "Why did you (insert stupid action here)," as in "Why did you punch Bobby in the face," is still often answered by something equivalent to "Because I wanted to!" or, more commonly, "**** you!"
quote:
So in this world where 13 year olds can hack into Pentagon computer systems who posseses the knowledge and experience most needed to function? I think I have a strong argument to say that the young do. |
Have you ever read Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card? Ender's an absolute genius of a kid who can think circles around most adults, but when you get down to it he is still behind in moral and emotional development. It's not just a matter of gaining more experience or power, it's also a matter of psychological development. A 13-year-old who can hack into the Pentagon is pretty skilled at computers, but ask him "How can you tell right from wrong" or "What is the meaning of life" and you'll get a 13-year-old's answer to the question.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:19.
Apolyton Time is 00:19. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
27-04-2002 06:59
I don't get it . why don't you think that men can have sex with kids? what's wrong with you ? what kind of close-minded bigot are you anyway? 
|