Jeepfanatic
Marksman
Aren't these two highlighted parts contradictory? Looks like the government does in fact have some authority, since they define the age of consent.
Can a 12 year old take out a car loan?
Aren't these two highlighted parts contradictory? Looks like the government does in fact have some authority, since they define the age of consent.
Can a 12 year old take out a car loan?
Technically yes I believe, however they cannot be bound contractually. My point was that you do allow the government to have a certain level of authority over peoples' sex lives. Really wasn't going any deeper than that.
Can a 12 year old take out a car loan?
The age of consent can be defined by each individual state. There is no reason for the Federal Government to be involved in that either....
What exactly, besides saying I voted for him, did voting for GJ do?
So at what age does a person achieve the ability to be a free person and why?
So at what age does a person achieve the ability to be a free person and why?
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]A State is the state too.[/FONT]
Well obviously the traditional view is a person reaches adulthood at 18. That is when they attain the full rights as a citizen except alcohol consumption (which I don't agree with). As far as how it got there my assumption is that enough people viewed that as the age at which a person reaches full emotional maturity.
I just didn't want anyone shrieking that I am advocating for consensual sex between an adult man and a 4 year old girl.
Well obviously the traditional view is a person reaches adulthood at 18. That is when they attain the full rights as a citizen except alcohol consumption (which I don't agree with). As far as how it got there my assumption is that enough people viewed that as the age at which a person reaches full emotional maturity.
I just didn't want anyone shrieking that I am advocating for consensual sex between an adult man and a 4 year old girl.
I don't think anyone would have taken that from what you said.
My point- it's arbitrary. Some people attain "the age of reason" (however it is defined) at 13, some at 16, some at 32 and some never. Is it a permissible use of State power to set an arbitrary age of maturity?
It won't do any good. If it is either Lucy or Mike, then the argument that maybe the Libertarian candidate is taking away votes from the Democrat is dispelled, at least in your mind.
That is where I am also.
This SS issue is really a sticking point for me. Politicians like to refer to it as an entitlement these days, it is not. Working people and their employers have been paying an equivalent to 13 % of wages into this system since it was created.
I don't recall anyone asking my permission to confiscate that money and the expectation is that some of that is coming back to me and my spouse after we retire.
I began paying in at 12 or 13 and if I stop working at 65 I will not live long enough to put a dent in the amount that I have personally paid in.
So is the libertarian plan to cut me a check for every dime I've personally paid in plus 6%? What about the portion that my employers paid on my behalf? Do I get that as well?
If this is the plan I could likely get behind it ,I just don't see it happening.
Make no mistake I view this money as mine, if it wasn't confiscated from me I would have invested it and it would be worth far more than what I'll eventually draw in SS benefits.
I haven't read an actual plan to dismantle Social Security other than it needs to be done. The actual act of it would be monumental at this point.
My personal belief is pay everyone what they have contributed plus 6-7% of compounded interest for the number of years they have paid in.
Isn't it funny how Social Security is such a great social program that participation isn't optional?
It isn't and it doesn't change the fact that a lot of people have been paying into it for a long time.
Demonizing them for expecting some of their hard earned money back in retirement is counter productive to fixing the problem.
I agree its a problem, I'm not directing the demonizing comment toward you personally but whenever entitlement reform comes up SS always get lumped in.
It is not an entitlement the people drawing the benefits have paid for them many times over.
...In the grand scheme of things I haven't seen enough of a difference in the things I care about between Donnelly and Braun for it to matter to me which one of them is elected. Why not use this as the time to vote third party and try to make an impact?