Welcome! Sign in to access your account. New user?
ADULT: OFF HOME DIRECTORY SEARCH RANDOM POLL MAKE A POLL

User: Justin

Messages

Click through to message forum for reply and admin options.
Posted in Civil Rights for Youth on 2002-05-22 01:45:02

QUOTE: How can he state in the same sentence that something is fact and then say it is stereotypical?

Perhaps I made an error using "stereotype." Perhaps the better word would be "discrimination." My point was, that most adults are more intelligent than youth, and that's a fact. However, it's also a "discrimination" because I am assuming that all adults are more intelligent than youth JUST because one is adult, the other is youth. But remember, most adults are more intelligent than youth.

QUOTE: Is there not in all eternity past and every household past, a youth who made a truer choice than an adult? If this be true, which it must be, Justin's statement is sent to a dark grave. If his creed is not once true, then it is never true.

Yes, there has been a youth who's made a truer choice than an adult. That does not mean just because of that, my statement is sent to a dark grave. Such an event is uncommon to rare in the past, and only goes to help prove my point of adults usually being the more intelligent class.

QUOTE(modified) 6. If you examine the youth in Jesophat, or Greece, or Rome, or Victorian Britain, or the jazz era even, we see not youth as we see them today. We instead see adults in little bodies. Hold on eof these to any given adult of today, and I will tell you who the prince is.

Want to know why youths in other nations are generally more intelligent, respectful, understanding, ect? Because those countries support my thoughts about stronger parental control. Remember, I said that if the parent says it's okay, then the Government shouldn't be able to do anything, because the parent is (or at least should) the master of the child. Maybe there's a better word than "master" to use here...

QUOTE: If more would be given and expected from youths (by this I refer to those around perhaps the age of twelve or thirteen), I believe we could have a group of young people who could trample Justin's oand other's beliefs.

You already have such a group. So, you want my beliefs trampled? So, you think parents should have less control? You want my belief of refering to youths as "future adults" rather than "minors?" You want my thought of voting on specific taxes destroyed? And don't want youths to be required to obey their parents by law? Tell me, if that is what you're really saying, how "intelligent" and "good decision making" youth will turn out like? It appears you are targeting the wrong beliefs here, Andrew. Remember my points on "Let me clear some stuff up."

QUOTE: (various paragraphs)

Basically you've said stuff about compromises. I like what you know about that-life is FULL of compromises. Isn't that what I am supporting though?

QUOTE: I find it odd Justin approves of them. (refers to Sudbury Method and Democratic Schools).

Why do you find it odd? The fact is those schools are better for the kids, and the schools still follow the law. The Kids even get practice in making good decisions there.

QUOTE: Though of course a ten-year-old will probably know less than a sixty-four-year-old: learning will never cease.

Finally, you agree with me in that area...and yes, learning never ceases.

QUOTE: (your point 12)

My "new found open mindness" is not new. I've always had it. Notice I said I agreed with Duke SORT OF. If you read my "Let me clear some stuff up" posting, you should know that I am shooting for a compromise...

QUOTE: Who is best to make decisions for the world? The people who actually live in the world.

You agree with me there, I see. But I still think youths need more learning and experience before they make decisions in the real world. Who knows? Maybe if the compromise I assume Andrew and I are supporting is reached, youths will have the experience and intelligence at a younger age? ========== In Reply To ==========

Posted in Does God Exist? on 2002-05-22 01:02:36

It looks like you have just said, "prove to me God has existed eternally but in a way I'll still remain aetheist." If you limit answers so much as to get only replies you'll want to hear, than you've never really asked a question. ========== In Reply To ========== ....Don't say God works in mysterious ways either...

Posted in Civil Rights for Youth on 2002-05-21 00:43:16

QUOTE: Justin's remarks about my intelligence and parents in a former posting could be considered snide.

Yes, they could. But I never once made a remark about your parents. The only thing I mentioned about your parents are that their punishments could have made you angry.

QUOTE: 2. Just as all other humans, Justin's opinions are valuable and worthy of esteem. Still, in the opinion of others and myself, they are narrow-minded. Perhaps he reaches his conclusions from misinterpreted experience, of which he fails to logically examine every point-of-view.

I disagree. You see, I used to be a Youth. I know how youths think. I have been in each point-of-view. And I know it's not misinterpretations of experiences that draw me to my conclusions. Now I've seen the adults side of the issue, which you still have at least one more year to go [assuming you are a youth] until you can see the side of the debate I have.

QUOTE: 3. It is now my turn to play the reincarnation of Hobbes. The behaviour of youth today in no way warrants Jusin's opinions. For the behaviour of youth today has it paralleles in all other segments of society. This American (Western, possibly) debauchery infects almost everyone, without regard to age. The opium of the adolescent lemmings is the MTV and the "pop" music. The opium for other lemmings includes the "reality" television, the general televison and "entertainment", the sex, and every other mindless activity. Of course this has been true of many societies past, but the situation of today is more severe.

What you have said does warrant my opinions. It is agreed that you and other youths may very well be capable of making adult decisions. However, you'll probably agree with me that such exceptions are rare. Thus, giving ALL youths those rights would benefit outliers like yourself (assuming you are one of those), however, would harm society even more, because most youths are not capable of muching adult decisions.

QUOTE: I keenly observe everything I see, and I see beastly behaviour and minds amongst youth and every other age group.

As do I.

QUOTE: Should not everyone, weak and strong, wealthy and poor, wise and foolish, and young and old be given a voice?

In most of the above, I would agree. However, a weak should not make a decision for a strong, a wealthy shouldn't make decisions for a poor, a foolish BETTER not make a decision for a wise, and an old should not make decisions for the young (and vice versa). But yes, all of the above should be given a voice.

QUOTE: To state that an adult can make better decisions is stereotypical and terrible reasoning. There will be those adults who are incapable of this, just as ther will be those youths. Likewise, there will be youths capable of everything an adult is.

To state that an adult can make better decisions is a FACT (although yes, it is stereotypical, but still a FACT). It is not terrible reasoning, for the same reason mentioned above. I agree with you saying some adults can't make adult decisions and some youths CAN make adult decisions. However, like you said, only SOME is the case in both situations. MOST adults can make adult decisions, MOST youths can not. Like an Unknown philosopher has said, "It is better to benefit most than to try and benefit all with harmful results for most." Yes, I did rephrase that, but the main idea is the same.

QUOTE: (Point 6)

Have nothing to say about that.

QUOTE: Neither do I agree with Justin on the voting issue. I site the same concepts as in response 6.

Like I have said in my response to your point number 3, and 5.

QUOTE: Youths obey the laws and pay the taxes, but they are unable to vote for the people who impose those laws and those taxes on the,. For example, they are forced to school, when they are unable to in any way direct their education or consequentially improve the condition of the schools.

I agree in most cases of the above. Like I mentioned before about taxes, youths, I feel, do have a right to vote on issues such as sales tax and income tax [if they have a job]. I also agree with your issues about school: Who better to make our schools better than those who actually go to them?

I in no way scoff at Sudbury model and other democratic schools. As a matter of fact, some of the greatest students have come from those schools. They are great schools, for the reasons you have listed. I think that every child should go to such a school.

QUOTE: 9. "Experience", whatever Justin perceives it to be, should not be a prerequisite to fully participate in society. This violates the democratic principle.

Sure. Let the pilot-in-training pilot the Boeing 747, rather than a veteran or an experienced one. Although the point is clear-you're right when it violates the democratic principle. But Democracy isn't pure good.

QUOTE: 10. Justin's definition of intelligence seems to be the culmination of "experience" and knowledge. I personally know of no sociologist or psychologist who would agree with that.

You are incorrect in your thought of my definition of intelligence.

QUOTE: It is flawed to say that adults are more intelligent that youth.

No it isn't. It's a proven fact in almost every case you can show to me. Rest assured that if you show me one case of a youth more intelligent than an adult, I could show you tens, hundreds, and maybe thousands more.

QUOTE: (point 11)

I generally agree with the points you have shown.

QUOTE: It is true that a warrant is generally required for the police to search a person of their effects; this is the same in the entire nation. However, this right is routinely forgotten when it comes to students.

That is an invalid point. Very rarily are they [search warrants]not acquired. Well, at least in my state. If such an event occurs where that right is denied, get your parents to sue, and you'll more than likely win.

QUOTE: 13. In the modern usage of the word "cynical," I would be correct. Today, it is meant to describe any over-negative or non-optimistic sentiment. Language evolves, and it is generally not for a dictionary or essay (i.e. Polotics and the English Language) to claim what is not true of the language.

I have taken the responsibility or correcting that paragraph. In the modern SLANG term of the word "cynical," you would be correct. In the modern slang term, it means to describe any over-negative or non-optimistic sentiment. It's just like using "gay" over "homosexual." "Gay" means happy, merrily, ect. Just because slang means for it to be a homosexual male doesn't mean that's what its definition is. Just like "Kick the Bucket." We know the slang term is to die, but it really means to kick the bucket.

QUOTE: Language evolves, and it is generally not for a dictionary or essay to claim what is not true of the language.

I better not hear of you looking at a dictionary every again...(sarcasim) That ranks upon the top one-hundred dumbest things ever said...(once again, sarcasm). The point is, a Dictionary is used to define a word, spell it, and various other purposes. You have just denied that... Of all the pitiful ways to respond to something.

QUOTE: Although Justin openly states that he misquotes and paraphrases me, I would appreciate him not to attribure contractions to me.

You're the first person who have voiced their disapproval of my "Modified Quote" policy. I wouldn't mind if someone did it to me; as long as the main idea is the same. But I will respect your opinions. If ever you find that I have changed the main idea of your quotes, let me know, and an apology will be given.
My "Modified Quote" policy goes by: -Edit the quote to your discretion, but keep the main idea the same, and TRY to keep opinions unchanged.

QUOTE: 16. Will the readers and Justin please forgive my long postings? I promise them I have applied Occam's razor everywhere I can.

I love the fact that you apply so many allusions into your postings. No sarcasim intended! Perhaps Occam's Razor is made for you...(sarcasim)
  1. Will the readers and Justin please forgive my long postings? I promise them I have applied Occam’s razor everywhere I can.
Posted in Civil Rights for Youth on 2002-05-20 23:51:06

Let me clear some stuff up

Before I do any major responses, let me clear some things up. Although I do wish for restrictions of youths [I hate calling them minors; I just recently was one] on many areas, there are some things I'd agree with Andrew here. Basically, my views can be summarized by: 1.) If an age restriction is required, it should be lowered, BUT parental authority should be the dictating force. EXAMPLE: I don't like the drinking age limit. I feel it should be lowered to an age where people aren't thinking, "Gee when I turn 21 I'm gonna get wasted." However, it should be the parents authority that decides it until that person is 18. So, if the age was lowered to 15, and a 16 year old wanted to drink, but his parents disaprove, he can not drink. 2.) Basically I am for giving more power to parents in ALMOST every way. 3.) Youths should be thought of as the future adults, not "minors." Note I said they should be treated as FUTURE adults, NOT real adults. 4.) I support keeping youth's from voting in most areas. I recently became an adult, and I do NOT want what I once was [a youth, inexperienced in how the adult world runs] making decisions in an adult world. Some areas I feel youths SHOULD vote are in issues resolving sales taxes, and if they have a job, income taxes, or any tax affecting they who work, and any issue involving schools. After all, youths do pay those sales taxes [and income if they work], and they DO have to go to these less than appropriate school systems. And who better to change school for the better than those who actually go there? In fact, I have even thought about limiting the voting on those issues to ONLY students, but I disposed of that-it doesn't take much for a youth with that much power to destroy the school systems-not like some of them don't need to be destroyed... 5.) The parents or gaurdians SHOULD be the just that-a parent or gaurdian. Youths MUST be required to obey them in most situations. You get the picture here, so don't go saying I said that a youth must obey every last thing their parent or gaurdian says if it harms them, ect. I think that's all the points I have here. I'll end the message so I don't end up making a huge one, and post another, replying to Andrew's. ========== In Reply To ========== 1. Justin’s remarks about my intelligence and parents in a former posting could be considered snide.

  1. Just as all other humans, Justin’s opinions are valuable and worthy of esteem. Still, in the opinion of others and myself, they are narrow-minded. Perhaps he reaches his conclusions from misinterpreted experience, of which he fails to logically examine every point-of-view.

  2. It is now my turn to play the reincarnation of Hobbes. The behaviour of youth today in no way warrants Justin’s opinions. For the behaviour of youth today has it parallels in all other segments of society. This American (Western, possibly) debauchery infects almost everyone, without regard to age. The opium of the adolescent lemmings is the MTV and the “pop” music. The opium for other lemmings includes the “reality” television, the general television and “entertainment”, the sex, and every other mindless activity. Of course this has been true of many societies past, but the situation of today is more severe.

I keenly observe everything I see, and I see beastly behaviour and minds amongst youth and every other age group.

  1. Justin is generally correct when he states the difference between the young and old brain. I do not need a biology teacher to tell me this.

    It is true that in many youths (though mind not all) the brain is less developed. Perhaps even to the point in which logic and reason are more difficult, and complex emotions are fewer. The same (or similar) occurs to many geriatric citizens as they age (though mind not all.) Is Justin then going to say that suffrage and civil rights should be denied the elderly?

Of course not. He would correctly state that most or many older citizens were perfectly able to enjoy this right just as fully as they did before, and for those who have suffered the natural aging process, they should neither be denied. This same fact is true amongst young people. The reader must note that mental-emotional ability should not curtail the right to vote or the right to civil rights. Should not everyone, weak and strong, wealthy and poor, wise and foolish, and young and old be given a voice? Is this not the core concept of democracy?

  1. To state that an adult can make better decisions is stereotypical and terrible reasoning. There will be those adults who are incapable of this, just as there will be those youths. Likewise, there will be youths capable of everything an adult is.

  2. I do not agree with Justin concerning the driving age. I believe that everyone should be given the right, after they have the physical ability to drive and have passed all necessary tests and have received the necessary education. Simply because I doubt a three-year-old, or eight-year-old, will ever become a driver, I do not believe they should be prohibited from the possibility.

  3. Neither do I agree with Justin on the voting issue. I site the same concepts as in response six.

  4. By the actions and decisions they make on this day, youths can indirectly affect their lives in the future; Justin is correct on this fact. This is similar to the fact that in the semi-distant past, women, Africans-Americans, and landless men could affect their lives. Even though they were not allowed to fully participate in society.

Youths obey the laws and pay the taxes, but they are unable to vote for the people who impose those laws and those taxes on them. For example, they are forced to school, when they are unable to in any way direct their education or consequentially improve the condition of the schools.

I am sure that many readers and Justin would scoff at such a though, but I direct them to look at the Sudbury model and that of other democratic schools. These schools bring people of all personalities and intelligence levels together. All formal barriers are eliminated. Students are generally allowed to engage in learning at their initiative, and all decisions are made by a school meeting (each staff member and student has one vote.) One would expect there to be anarchy on the campuses, because young people are inherently stupid creatures incapable of making proper decisions for themselves. However, the opposite is true. In about fifty years of history, these schools seem to be blossoming, intellectually and behaviour wise.

It is important to note that these schools are not for gifted or exceptional young people, but for any young person. They all seem to be doing well.

On another note, other youths and I and are to be afforded the same rights as Justin is, under the Bill of Rights. However, those rights are routinely denied and infringed upon [for youths]. Why? Why not any another group? It is because those groups have the recourse of the vote. The Children’s’ Defense Fund, the American Civil Liberties Union, and any other host of interest groups are not adequate at protecting the rights and interests of youth. The only adequate way any group can protect itself is through voting.

  1. “Experience”, whatever Justin perceives it to be, should not be a prerequisite to fully participate in society. This violates the democratic principle.

  2. Justin’s definition of intelligence seems to be the culmination of “experience” and knowledge. I personally know of no sociologist or psychologist who would agree with that. A person can be very knowledgeable and experienced, but not at all intelligent. The opposite is also true.

Intelligence is probably most accurately defined as mental capacity-namely, the ability to think in abstract terms. Our degree of intelligence is determined largely at birth, but is subject to change slightly in the first years of life according to environment. It is flawed to say that adults are more intelligent that youth. Somewhere in the world, there is an infant who is more intelligent than either Justin or me.

  1. By “certain media” I was mainly referring to pornography, but perhaps also violence in media. Justin should not refer to “”differences of the brain,” on the pornography issue. It is just as destructive to the minds of older people as young people. Yet I support the abolition of the age limits for the viewing of pornography out of concern for free speech and my aversion of hypocrisy.

  2. It is true that a warrant is generally required for the police to search a person or their effects; this is the same in the entire nation. However, this right is routinely forgotten when it comes to students.

  3. In the modern usage of the word “cynical,” I would be correct. Today, it is meant to describe any over-negative or non-optimistic sentiment. Language evolves, and it is generally not for a dictionary or essay (i.e. Politics and the English Language) to claim what is not true of the language.

  4. The opinions of older people today about younger people are ignorant. Perhaps they will apply their own personalities (not constructive ones) during their younger days to the young people of today, perhaps their memory fails them after oppression dies, or perhaps they simply create illusions for themselves.

  5. Although Justin openly states that he misquotes and paraphrases me, I would appreciate him not to attribute contractions to me.

  6. Will the readers and Justin please forgive my long postings? I promise them I have applied Occam’s razor everywhere I can.

Posted in Middle East Crisis on 2002-05-18 00:27:44

Jews are not a problem. Arabs are not a problem. America, the Middle East, are not a problem. It's the people who shroud themselvs under a peaceful religion[s] and use it as cover for their wrongdoings. Lose your sterotypes agains America. WTC collapsed because of people who hid under the religion of Islam, a peaceful religion, to disguise their evil actions. ========== In Reply To ========== Most Americans don't even know, that they are constantly manipulated by Jewish propaganda. In America, if you say a single word against Jew, you are automaticaly antisemitist, but you can mix anyone else with a $%!@ and this is OK. Americans have poor knowledge about the history and geography, therefore they rely only on "official" American (Jewish) medias. Even this polls are filtrated by Jews. Arabs are not a problem, Jews are. All Middle East problems are because of Jews. WTC collapse because of American support of Jews. How long great country of USA will be manipulated by Jews?