---

Quote: from Nikki at 2:14 pm on Aug. 5, 2008

---

People who are what, 14, should not have the rights to vote or whatever

---

Yeah, well, that's just your opinion.

It is discrimination. m-w: "to make a difference in treatment or favor on a basis other than individual merit". The favor here is the right to vote, and the basis is the individual's age. If "maturity"(retarded word) tests were given to determine ability to vote, I would consider that individual merit. But age isn't merit.

You may call it logical discrimination, but it still is discrimination.

---

But "logical discrimination" doesn't have any teeth. I could use that phrase to describe not letting convicted pedophiles run a daycare center.

-------
"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"

---

There needs to be laws surrounding certain things, and just because you happen to be considered a "minor" with regards to a certain law, it doesn't mean your being discriminated against as a person.

---

I get the idea that, in terms of statistics that you and I personally value, discrimination by age makes a lot more sense than discrimination by race. But:

1. there are/were motives for both types of discrimination, strong enough that governments don't/didn't ensure rights to the groups of people in question. Governments in the past believed race discrimination was justified; governments in the present (and you) believe that age discrimination is justified. Both bases of discrimination are concerning aspects that an individual cannot affect. They're completely similar (except for the fact that one's age can change, which is an excellent point but a different argument nonetheless) so I don't really see how you can argue that one is "being discriminated against as a person" and the other isn't.

2. there must have been some black people who were not "mature "enough for certain rights, just as there are some minors who are "mature" enough for those same rights. So in neither case is it completely justified to bring in an absolute, because somebody will get what they don't deserve or not get what they do deserve. We can only argue that one is more justified than the other.

Anyways, I agree that calling somebody a nigger is different than calling somebody black (which seems to me to be on the same level as calling somebody underage or a minor). In your opinion, if a slur became popular to refer to minors, would it be as bad as a racial slur?

Post edited at 12:11 pm on Aug. 6, 2008 by hithere

-------
http://www.golivewire.com/forums/peer-iasaoi-support-a.html

Age discrimination is discrimination in the classical sense because citizens of the United States (or respective countries) are being denied basic rights based on a characteristic of their birth, i.e. the timing. Yes, these people will eventually be given rights, but it makes no difference. The laws of a country are supposed to protect all citizen's rights regardless of the characteristics of their birth, not picking and choosing who and when deserve these rights.

You feel a need to deny the basic tenants of modern civilization because you know no other way in which to run the system. Ignorance and fear of change is not an excuse to oppress.

-------
It is my deepest wish that we will one day escape our cradle.