It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

HELP!! I am confused.

page: 2
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 19 2019 @ 01:43 PM
link   
a reply to: eletheia

Is there a link here somewhere?




posted on Feb, 19 2019 @ 01:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: tayton
a reply to: eletheia

Is there a link here somewhere?



Link to what?

Just confused as to why there are different ages for different stages into

adulthood. Instead of one age where one takes on personal responsibility

and becomes an adult.



posted on Feb, 19 2019 @ 02:41 PM
link   
a reply to: eletheia


Now governments are wanting to lower the voting age from 18yrs to 16yrs.....


I guess I missed this in the news. Which governments want to lower the voting age. Is it all governments, or just a few and of those, just how serious are they about it, or is it only some that would like to lower the age in which ever governments you are refering to. I'm confused about this because I do not recall this having been part of the news lately.



posted on Feb, 19 2019 @ 04:12 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryMcGuire


They have been toying with it for years ......


MPs to debate bill to reduce voting age to 16
Labour MP’s private member’s bill has cross-party support, with one backer saying young people about to be hit by Brexit should get a say over their future
MPs are to debate a bill aiming to reduce the voting age to 16, with the cross-party supporters of the measure arguing it is a long-overdue idea which would boost involvement in politics.
The proposal is a private member’s bill, introduced by Labour MP Jim McMahon, and thus has relatively little chance of finding enough parliamentary time to become law, not least as the government does not back the idea.

But it has not just official support from Labour, but also backing from the Liberal Democrats, SNP, Plaid Cymru and Greens, with the hope that McMahon’s bill could further push the idea on to the political landscape.
The bill, officially titled the representation of the people (young people’s enfranchisement and education) bill, will receive its second reading on Friday, the initial opportunity for MPs to debate an idea.
While the idea of reducing the minimum voting age has been floated at various points in recent years, supporters argue that changes to the franchise in Scotland and Wales could help push the argument.

In 2015, 16- and 17-year-olds in Scotland were granted the vote for local and Scottish elections. They had been allowed to vote in the previous year’s independence referendum, with a claimed turnout of about 75% for the age group.
The Welsh government is currently consulting on changes to elections, including giving those aged 16 and 17 the vote.
Ahead of the vote, the shadow minister for voter engagement and youth affairs, Cat Smith, said there was an “unconvincing and deeply patronising” idea that under-18s were too ill-informed to vote with any meaning.

“The government’s opposition comes as no surprise,” she wrote for the LabourList website. “During the general election campaign, the Conservative party made no effort to encourage voter registration, or to put forward policies that would offer real opportunities to young people.
“The election should have served as a wake-up call to the Tories that they can no longer ignore young people.”

McMahon said: “The fact there is cross-party support to lower the voting age shows that the political appetite for change is there. It has been discussed in the past, but now the time has come to make it a reality.”

The Labour-backing Momentum group is also supporting the measure with a new app called 16andvoting, which helps people send a message to their local MP asking them to back the change.


www.theguardian.com...



posted on Feb, 19 2019 @ 04:25 PM
link   
a reply to: eletheia

Yes, thankyou for that ele, though several times in that article I see that it is an issue being brought up for debate to ''enfranchise'' young people and as well twice I read that it is not supported by the government. So really, it is not governments that are pushing for this change in voting age but rather some who are taking up this issue in the larger governmental bodies.



posted on Feb, 19 2019 @ 04:45 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryMcGuire




The normal voting age was reduced from 18 to 16 for the Scottish referendum, as it was a Scottish National Party policy to reduce the voting age for all elections in Scotland.




I also think the labour party is pushing for it as they think with a younger voter

they stand more chance of getting into government. And its been said that had

16 year olds voted in the referendum the result would have been remain. I am

not convinced of that.



posted on Feb, 19 2019 @ 05:05 PM
link   
Easy way to clear this up for people.

If they're old enough to join ISIS, then it's open season on regular Joe's chasing after them on home turf, right?

There s a line for personal responsibility, it just seems to get REALLY muddled when you talk about a 15 year old joining ISIS being mature enough to know what they're doing, but not mature enough know what they're doing to have potentially chosen to date and bang a 25 year old in another universe.

That's what we need to clear up before we go any further with the debate.



posted on Feb, 19 2019 @ 05:14 PM
link   
a reply to: eletheia

It's a trap!

I'm kidding.....or am I?

I am.

If these girls need help we should cautiously help them.



posted on Feb, 19 2019 @ 08:59 PM
link   
She Brexited early.

Let’s fund an Oxford and Cambridge study over 2 or 3 decades to thoroughly study this topic.

Then, with no hype, you can honestly tell her that, “You’ve been voted off the island. God save the Queen.”

There has to be a line in the sand (no pun intended) that once crossed you cannot come back from.

Welcome to your new country! If you don’t like it, make it better, and not kill civilians because they “answer their phone with their left hand” (or what ever arbitrary excuse to kill is used. Any is as good as another.)

They have no sympathy and neither should we.

(According to ATS, this is coming from a ‘liberal’ because I hate DJT as a human being and am not part of the “cool kids”). Why would I say this? Life is tuff and we don’t cave to terrorists!

-Peace Be Unto You



posted on Feb, 19 2019 @ 10:40 PM
link   
a reply to: eletheia

A "general consensus" worldwide isn't possible because of all the differences I mentioned in my above response.

If you mean people like us...with educations, and in civilized countries w progressive liberties, democracies etc...it's not "general" in consensus in 2nd or 3rd world countries with age old and old world traditions many of whom had little or not schooling living in repressed countries.

In many of them...they wonder what the big deal is w child brides for example. So it depends where we're from



posted on Feb, 20 2019 @ 01:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: mysterioustranger
a reply to: eletheia

A "general consensus" worldwide isn't possible because of all the differences I mentioned in my above response.
If you mean people like us...with educations, and in civilized countries w progressive liberties, democracies etc...it's not "general" in consensus in 2nd or 3rd world countries with age old and old world traditions many of whom had little or not schooling living in repressed countries.
In many of them...they wonder what the big deal is w child brides for example. So it depends where we're from



My bad
I should have made it clearer in my OP that I meant western countries

where there are laws protecting our youth. My main aim was to have one age

as a 'coming of age' and the taking of 'personal responsibility', not a variety

of ages between 16 and 21 years for being lawful as to attaining adulthood and

personal responsibility. As it currently is.


I know comparing the East with the West is tantamount to comparing apples with

oranges.



posted on Feb, 20 2019 @ 05:27 AM
link   
I think 16 is way too young to vote responsibly.When I was 16,I would
have voted for the better looking candidate, not for any issues they
might have had.



posted on Feb, 20 2019 @ 05:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: mamabeth
I think 16 is way too young to vote responsibly.When I was 16,I would
have voted for the better looking candidate, not for any issues they
might have had.


So true
At that age ..... #ME TOO.


Thats why the government wants to give them the vote......

Young enough to be fooled/manipulated .......

Not experienced to see through the spin



posted on Feb, 20 2019 @ 07:29 AM
link   
a reply to: eletheia

Yes, you're correct...it's a different world in general. Slightly off thread...I can relate the following:

I supervised an Officer...Naturalized American, from Yemen...about 29-30 y.o.age. He was looking a new wife...as he said one of them was divorcing from the marriage.

Told him he was married I thought still...he was. It was the 2nd wife leaving. 2nd wife?

He had 3...1 legally, the other 2-cultural as you can only have 1 legal marriage at a time. The middle wife...responsible for all the sex, raising children, cooking, cleaning etc...got tired of it all. She was 22 yrs. old.

He was scouting out the malls and friends families...here in Michigan...for a 12-13...maybe not older than 14yr old...to be her replacement.

Expressing my shock...he laughed and said "I could get another as well. I can have 4"...1 legal wife and the others just technically.

"But, I'll make sure she is the youngest...to carry the load of children, cooking, cleaning and everything else."

Apparently...as I understood him...#1 was legal wife/family matriarch...#2 is for sex and childcare...#3 sex and caring for all the rest...and IF a #4 entered the picture...it was taking care of all...and sex.

As we all go to school, their families decide who will and won't go to school to learn to read, write etc.

The 11-12-13 yr old wives are only needed for home care, child rearing...and sex.

I know it's wacked out..but he just laughed that I had only 1.

"Legal" age...is just a # in countries like that. They put zero into the fact they are just kids...."according to you Americans".

I was rather shocked him asking if I knew anyone with an 11-12 yr old girl.

His wives were 1 over 30, 2nd-(divorcing) was I think 19.....so it was important for him to look for another replacement around age 12...so she'd stay awhile, and was preparing some "dowry" to pay her family when he found one.



posted on Feb, 20 2019 @ 09:32 AM
link   
a reply to: mysterioustranger

Oh I got the shivers reading that!!

One day he may have a daughter of that age, and we all know the soft

spot a man has for his daughters, and he would be happy for that to be

her life.


Yuk I feel quite queasy



posted on Feb, 20 2019 @ 09:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: eletheia
a reply to: mysterioustranger

Oh I got the shivers reading that!!

One day he may have a daughter of that age, and we all know the soft

spot a man has for his daughters, and he would be happy for that to be

her life.


Yuk I feel quite queasy




Made me ill as well. I'd like to think I'm open minded having toured the world a couple times in a rock band...

In the end...he was going to U of M in some medical field that would put him w children all day, everyday.

He used to laugh about it and us in America...as his superior, it bugged me...but culturally? I couldn't do or be critical about anything he did or said.

That would've been racism, predjudice, discrimination...whatever.

He eventually quit, and I'm glad...because he made me sick w his smirks. God knows where he is now...and he's not the only one...

Thanks! Best, M.S., EMT/ERT
edit on 20-2-2019 by mysterioustranger because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join