[HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: When does a kid become a grownup?

[No Limberger]

>Carol wrote:

>But, as I said, I'm not interested in the legal aspects. I'm interested
>in emotional maturity and the simple readiness to take on adult
>responsibilities. I
>So, please. Let's look at the question I asked. *Setting aside the
>complicated legalities*, when, in anyone's opinion, is a young person
>emotionally, mentally, and morally ready to take on the responsibilities of
>adulthood? Obviously, it varies with the individual, but in general?


>Margie wrote:
>I'm sorry, but I think you are asking a question that isn't answerable.
>Maturity occurs over time on many levels in many areas. It does, as you
>said, vary greatly from person to person and the only reason to generalize
>it and establish "an age of majority" is for legal purposes, in order to
>govern the rights and responsibilities of individuals in society.

>Steve wrote:
>I'm not sure you can separate the two. The Law is societies collective
>opinion on the very question you asked.

No.Limberger responds:
I agree with Margie and Steve: laws that are enacted by a democratically-
elected government are (theoretically) representative of the majority
collective
view, which doesn't necessarily reflect what is actually going on
biologically,
emotionally and psychologically. Each person matures at different rates
based
upon a broad variety of factors including genetics, nurturing and the
unpredictable events that occur in each person's life. I have known people
who were very mature at a very young age, as well as people who are
not as mature in their late twenties and early thirties.

Since there is no accurate means by which emotional and psychological
maturity could be measured, the only means left is to come up with a
reasonable age at which the law expects the person to be regarded as
having reached the age of consent. If society as a whole doesn't want
people under 21 to be smoking or drinking because they are not regarded
as being sufficiently mature, then it's ridiculous to allow anyone between
the ages of 18 and 21 enter the military or be drafted because the dangers
of bodily harm and possibly death are just as real by serving in the
military
as they are drinking and smoking. Of course, with smoking, the real
problems won't necessarily show up for decades.

The bottom line, IMPO, if a person can be regarded as being sufficiently
mature
to enter the military voluntarily or be drafted at the age of 18, then
anyone
at or over the age of 18 should also be allowed to vote, drink or smoke just
like any other adult.

On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 11:01 PM, Steve <bboyminn at yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" <justcarol67 at ...>
> wrote:
> >
> ...
>
> >
> > Carol responds:
> >
> > I know the history and the logic ... But, as I said, I'm not interested
> in the legal aspects. I'm interested in emotional maturity ...
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Carol
> >
>
> Steve:
>
> I'm not sure you can separate the two. The Law is societies collective
> opinion on the very question you asked.
>
> We have collectively, though the law, agree that people who are 18 can
> enter into contracts and join the Army. People who are 21 can drink,
> although the entire world doesn't agree with that position. In fact, the
> entire USA doesn't agree with that position, but the Federal government
> blackmail the states into compliance. If the law were changed and it was
> left up to the states, as it should be, many states would lower the age back
> down to 19.
>
> The age of sexual consent is typically 16. We would prefer that kids that
> young did not engage in sex, but we accept that they will, and have deemed
> this the minimum age to make that decision; with a few exceptions. Again,
> not all states and countries agree with this age.
>
> In Minnesota, there is no specific age of consent, but rather a range of
> complex rules for Criminal Sexual Conduct. And I do mean complicated. Though
> I have read them, this is just from memory. I believe kids as young as 12
> can have sex, but only with people of similar ages. For example, 12 and 13
> can, 12 or 13 and 14 can not. Fourteen and 15 can, but 15 and 16 can not.
> Sixteen and 17 can, but 17 and 18 can not. Above 18, you are on your own,
> however, there are still circumstances where a large age differential,
> especially for people in positions of authority, can not. Or can not with
> incurring legal consequences.
>
> So, society and societies, lay out a framework. Not every one fits that
> framework. Some kids have long been mature enough to accept the actions and
> responsibilities, and other kids of the same age are years from that level
> of maturity.
>
> Again, the law lays a framework for society. Some of that framework is
> based on age, other aspects are based on 'special interest'. The
> anti-drinking law was forced in by Mother Against Drunk Drivers. But, rather
> than teach their kids to drink responsibly, they thought is better to change
> the law, that way, they didn't have to face their kids.
>
> Again, kids will milk it for as long as the can and for as long as we allow
> it. But, when it is force upon them, truly forced upon them, they pick it up
> pretty quickly.
>
> Steve/bboyminn
>
>  
>



-- 
"Why don't you dance with me, I'm not no limberger!"


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]