libertarianism and age restrictions

What does libertarians say about age restrictions? Can a 6 year old buy cocaine? can a 13 year old girl prostitute herself? Or do you have to be considered an adult? If so; at what age are you an adult?

 

Normally there's this thing called the common sense factor

 

something that pedophiles doesn't give a shit about....

 

you're kidding me right?

 

This thread doesn't ooze pre-conceived hostility or anything. Wow. Snarl much, OP?

 

Libertarians are mostly in favour of unrestrained pursuit of self interest in order to maximum their freedom. I think the OP has a valid point to make.

At what expense are Libertarians willing to go to maximize their sexual appetite and social freedoms?

 

Well, luckily he has you to translate for him...
Not trying to be a bitch, but really. If he actually wanted answers, that would be fine, but just making a thread for the sole purpose of dumping all over someone's beliefs is lame, as is making a sweeping generalization over everyone who calls themselves by this name.

 

I'm a libertarian too, but not to stuck in a tunnel vision to question my own believes...

 

That's the way it should be.

 

Generally there's a line at molesting children and 6 year old crack children, again, common sense. Or obviously Obama is just going to lead the country into communism and McCain would've started war with 78 countries

 

I'd say common sense of the parent figure would play a huge part.

There are some 30+ year old's who I personally would still consider to be children. j/k...... kinda lol

 

In contrast to negative myths about libertarians, we do not condone drug use by children, nor is the average libertarian a libertine, seeking only to fulfill our seemingly unquenchable thirst for sexual pleasure and intoxication.

At what expense are Libertarians willing to go to maximize their sexual appetite and social freedoms?

This is an absurd, collectivist position masquerading as a question. It assumes all libertarians think alike, and that the singular thought is about carnal pleasures. The expense those opposed to personal liberty are willing to go to to maximize the state, and minimize civil liberties is clear, as we can see and hear every day. Government pervades nearly every ascpet of our lives and yet many callously call for even bigger and more intrusive government.

Libertarians seek to maximize individual freedom and minimize the role and cost of the state. It is laughable that those opposed to this philosophy immediately go to 13 year old prostitutes and six year old cocaine users and then pretend we are the perverse ones. What sort of mind jumps to those examples?

With a hesitant suspension of disbelief, I will oblige the OP and act as though the question was legitimately inquisitive rather than damning.

Even the anarchist libertarians do not condone the above, and despite insistence to the contrary, a society without government would still have rules, and would protect the individual, including children. In the event drug prohibition ceased to exist, drugs such as cocaine would be available in stores, in various strengths and measured dosage sizes. Store owners and corporations owning many stores would clearly have a policy against selling addictive drugs to children as the public reaction would obviously be a refusal to patronize that store. Stores selling cocaine to children would quickly find themselves out of business, so nobody would do it.

On the strictly moral side of the question, there is no standard libertarian answer to the question "when does one reach adulthood," though Murray Rothbard in his AnCap book For a New Liberty addresses the issue quite well.

Rothbard states that most accepted definitions of adulthood are arbitrary as time lines such as one's 18th, 19th, or 21st birthday are meaningless as people--at every age-- vary in maturity, responsibility, etc. He argues for an entirely different standard, stating that the most fair signal of one's independence is independence itself: if a person leaves home and is willing and able to support him or herself, they should be treated as an adult and offered all the allowances, and take all the responsibilities of adulthood.

The question "what about the children?" in its various forms has long been used as an excuse for more government, and less freedom. Libertarianism is often attacked for its alleged philosophy of treating children like adults. Less often is statism attacked for its insistence on treating adults like children.

 

I think you just converted me.

 

I don't understand who you are addressing. Me?

I was asking a legitimate question that I paraphrased from the OP. (Yeesh, I tried to get a few discussion points going and wound up getting a reply with the phrase "trying not to be a bitch, but...")

 

Yes, I was addressing you, but only partially. I was saying that while your point was articulated mostly as a "discussion point" rather than an accusation, the OP's sounded very hostile toward the position, even though he refers to himself as a libertarian (like, "I am this, but not like those people"). I meant that I didn't mean to be harsh, but the way you paraphrased his post didn't come off quite as hostile as the OP did when he spoke in his own words.

Just sayin'...

 

Whoops. Double.

 

:iagree: Great post.

 

. . . . . . . .




. . . . . . . . . . I'm gonna eat some of this! Yummy yum!



Have fun, play safely, and don’t play with fire!

 

In searching "drinking ages around the world", itis stated that there is no minimum age to drink in Armenia, Azerbaijan, CHINA, Fiji, Nigeria, Portugal, Soviet Georgia, Thailand, or Vietnam. It seems backwards that kids in the US are supposed to learn to handle liquor after they are driving.

 

As a studying biologist, I can see the reasoning behind the drinking laws.
The brain is not fully myelinated until sometime in your thirties (myelin being the protective coating that covers neuronal pathways), so if you drink excessively before then, it slows down that process. Once you hit the age where myelination stops, that's it. There's no more. Unmyelinated neuronal pathways cause all kinds of problems, since the nerves can't conduct impulses properly, such as vision problems, neuropathy, memory loss, loss of coordination, speech impairment, extreme sensitivity to heat, incontinence, etc.
How old should a person be before they are considered of age to decide whether or not it is more important to get smashed every weekend with their buddies or risk fucking up their brain for the rest of their life? Honestly, it's a good question. I've known some very mature and intelligent 14 year olds and some dumbass thirty year olds running around.
That said, I'm not going to lose my damn mind over drinking age. I think the system we've got now is all right. Parents can decide in the privacy of their own home whether or not they trust their children with alcohol. It never really burned my ass that I couldn't go buy my own booze... When you've always got wine and such in the house, you learn pretty quick that it's not that big of a deal, and that drinking doesn't mean you have to get piss-drunk.
A lot of adults I know still have yet to learn that...