I agree that at a certain age and mental responsibility that young adults/children have the right to say NO.
They also have the same right to say YES.
You cannot reasonably argue for only the right to say no. If a person is old enough to make decisions on an issue. That means they can say no, yes, or ask about other options.
Young adult is anyone over 18 so they already have the right to say no to anything. Children are anything under 18. I say right to say no in any other case aside from transitioning because hormones. Before age 18 children have no right to say no to anything even if you are causing them severe mental and physical trauma.
Every state in the USA has laws related to Emancipated Minors. Every State also has laws related to child abuse; and I am told that they are all remarkably similar. Child abuse covers a lot more than just starvation and physical beating.
Every state in the USA recognizes that children have legal rights - that they can in some cases chose different than what their parent would like. In some cases they may have to make the request in a court. But, all states allow that. None of these laws are recent.
I don't get people like you. Are you somehow proud of your ignorance of very longstanding basic laws. Why do you suppose that the most conservative states in American have passed essentially the same laws as the most liberal ones.
It might be that in biblical times that adulthood was tied to sexual maturity... not a specific age.
It might be because its obvious to anyone with a thinking brain who looks at all the various issues involved can see that Children must have rights that are independent than their parents.
Now those rights vary based on age and mental maturity. But, Children absolutely have rights that the parents cannot infringe upon.
As stated already, children do not have the right to refuse/accept medical on thier own terms. They are legally under parents custody. Imacipation means a child has proven to court that they can legally care for themselves. In cases which child is deamed under the care of an unfit parent, that child is often put into foster care. So you are wrong, medical treatment is decided by parents in most cases not the children. Also just because you believe children deserve more rights does not mean the laws work that way. You are not the center of the universe. Wake up and get past your arrogance and realize the world isn't perfect because you think it should be.
And parents who deny a child the proper medical treatment for their situation are charged every year in every state with child abuse.
I asked 1WeirdGuy to read my reply to you above - please read my long rely to him that I just posted.
This is not just a pure black and white situation with a simple answer. Very few situations like that exist. Most situations are grey and complex. condition, with on narrow exception.
Please see my answer to RoyyRogers above about the longstanding legal tradition of all states in the USA to have the same if not very similar laws regarding children rights.
Why don't you understand that decent Republicans understand that children do have rights - and believe so much that they passed laws to protect them.
Please explain to me how protecting children is "far left" for most people in America (and most of the world as well).
I just feel like giving kids hormones is far left.
I'm genuinely curious because you have said in the past you are oldschool republican. Not just your opinion on this but other things you say seems to be to the left. Im curious what conservative values you have outside of guns.
Proper medical treatment for real conditions cannot be denied to children, with the one legal exception if you and your children are part of several religions that proscribe the use of all medical treatments (see below about how that really works). Doing so will get you charged with child abuse - and possibly murder if the child dies. Charges like this happens with some regularity in many states - as children do have legal rights.
It's a known scientific fact that some people are born hermaphroditic, or with other sexual mix ups. Admittedly this is fairly rare. However, for those cases surgery and hormone treatment is in fact medically appropriate once it is figured out to which sex the child identifies with - which may not be known until the teenage years.
Remember, my answer that started all of this was that it depends on a case by case evaluation, as this (as with many issues) is not a pure black and white situation with a simple answer. Some people fall into a grey area - and current laws and medical practice allow treating those people that fall their.
By the way, the bible also tells us to raise are children how they are (and not like we would want them to be). That's discussed (with the appropriate biblical references) in many books on the different personalities people have. But, the biblical references are more broader than that in the opinion of many biblical scholars - and I agree with them after my study of the bible.
Perhaps we have a different definition of what Republican should mean. I doubt that Ronald Reagan would be accepted by the current Republican party. Nor do I believe that Abraham Lincoln would be accepted either although it seems a lot of Republicans wish to claim him as their own - and he was part of the Whig party from which the Republican party formed and split from.
In my opinion - real Republicans (Democrats, etc.) know that extremely few issues are pure black and white; and allow for appropriate treatment of the grey cases; although the two major parties may disagree what that appropriate treatment is. However, given the similarity of laws across the United States on emancipated minors and child abuse standards its clear that there is not any major differences in approach by the two parties once they acknowledge that there is a grey" area that needs to be addressed.
As for how the religious exemption really works. Our main religious freedoms were actually established by the "Society of Friends" (Quakers) and the Christian Science Religion who believed that prayer and proper religious study heals all illnesses (Those are the two groups who faught major legal battles to establish what the religious rights are).
The Christian Science Church has its own hospitals, and have licensed Christian Science Nurse Practitioners and care provided by them is covered under all the state and federal medical reimbursement programs.
I have personally known a Christian Science Nurse Practitioner for over 40 years (from before she attended Christian Science nursing school and was Licensed). We dated several times and seriously discussed marriage twice in our life (and my wife has met her and approves of my ongoing friendship with her). She says that people getting medical treatments is common withing their religion for many situations - because it works for a lot of stuff; and its just not talked about. She herself is currently undergoing medical treatments. Of course, a select few of that religious group deny all medical treatment. The last time I looked it up (about 3 decades ago) people who follow the Christian Science religious practices, which does focus on healthy diets and exercise, tended to die on average about a decade sooner than other Americans from various diseases (the accidental death rate was the same). The mortality data was unmistakable - just not ever talked about within the church according to my friend. However, most people within that religion know that for certain things that medical treatment cures it.
Whats your opinion on children transitioning?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
I agree that at a certain age and mental responsibility that young adults/children have the right to say NO.
They also have the same right to say YES.
You cannot reasonably argue for only the right to say no. If a person is old enough to make decisions on an issue. That means they can say no, yes, or ask about other options.
--
RoyyRogers
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
Young adult is anyone over 18 so they already have the right to say no to anything. Children are anything under 18. I say right to say no in any other case aside from transitioning because hormones. Before age 18 children have no right to say no to anything even if you are causing them severe mental and physical trauma.
--
olderdude-xx
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-1
-1
That is not true. Many adults get charged with child abuse for not respecting the child's right to say no.
Children absolutely do have rights.
--
RoyyRogers
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
1WeirdGuy
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
In sex yes, in medical no...
--
olderdude-xx
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-1
-1
Every state in the USA has laws related to Emancipated Minors. Every State also has laws related to child abuse; and I am told that they are all remarkably similar. Child abuse covers a lot more than just starvation and physical beating.
Every state in the USA recognizes that children have legal rights - that they can in some cases chose different than what their parent would like. In some cases they may have to make the request in a court. But, all states allow that. None of these laws are recent.
I don't get people like you. Are you somehow proud of your ignorance of very longstanding basic laws. Why do you suppose that the most conservative states in American have passed essentially the same laws as the most liberal ones.
It might be that in biblical times that adulthood was tied to sexual maturity... not a specific age.
It might be because its obvious to anyone with a thinking brain who looks at all the various issues involved can see that Children must have rights that are independent than their parents.
Now those rights vary based on age and mental maturity. But, Children absolutely have rights that the parents cannot infringe upon.
--
RoyyRogers
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
As stated already, children do not have the right to refuse/accept medical on thier own terms. They are legally under parents custody. Imacipation means a child has proven to court that they can legally care for themselves. In cases which child is deamed under the care of an unfit parent, that child is often put into foster care. So you are wrong, medical treatment is decided by parents in most cases not the children. Also just because you believe children deserve more rights does not mean the laws work that way. You are not the center of the universe. Wake up and get past your arrogance and realize the world isn't perfect because you think it should be.
--
olderdude-xx
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
And parents who deny a child the proper medical treatment for their situation are charged every year in every state with child abuse.
I asked 1WeirdGuy to read my reply to you above - please read my long rely to him that I just posted.
This is not just a pure black and white situation with a simple answer. Very few situations like that exist. Most situations are grey and complex. condition, with on narrow exception.
Im curious what right wing views do you hold? I have seen you post saying you are old school republican but all your views seem to be far left.
--
olderdude-xx
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Please see my answer to RoyyRogers above about the longstanding legal tradition of all states in the USA to have the same if not very similar laws regarding children rights.
Why don't you understand that decent Republicans understand that children do have rights - and believe so much that they passed laws to protect them.
Please explain to me how protecting children is "far left" for most people in America (and most of the world as well).
--
1WeirdGuy
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
I just feel like giving kids hormones is far left.
I'm genuinely curious because you have said in the past you are oldschool republican. Not just your opinion on this but other things you say seems to be to the left. Im curious what conservative values you have outside of guns.
--
olderdude-xx
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Proper medical treatment for real conditions cannot be denied to children, with the one legal exception if you and your children are part of several religions that proscribe the use of all medical treatments (see below about how that really works). Doing so will get you charged with child abuse - and possibly murder if the child dies. Charges like this happens with some regularity in many states - as children do have legal rights.
It's a known scientific fact that some people are born hermaphroditic, or with other sexual mix ups. Admittedly this is fairly rare. However, for those cases surgery and hormone treatment is in fact medically appropriate once it is figured out to which sex the child identifies with - which may not be known until the teenage years.
Remember, my answer that started all of this was that it depends on a case by case evaluation, as this (as with many issues) is not a pure black and white situation with a simple answer. Some people fall into a grey area - and current laws and medical practice allow treating those people that fall their.
By the way, the bible also tells us to raise are children how they are (and not like we would want them to be). That's discussed (with the appropriate biblical references) in many books on the different personalities people have. But, the biblical references are more broader than that in the opinion of many biblical scholars - and I agree with them after my study of the bible.
Perhaps we have a different definition of what Republican should mean. I doubt that Ronald Reagan would be accepted by the current Republican party. Nor do I believe that Abraham Lincoln would be accepted either although it seems a lot of Republicans wish to claim him as their own - and he was part of the Whig party from which the Republican party formed and split from.
In my opinion - real Republicans (Democrats, etc.) know that extremely few issues are pure black and white; and allow for appropriate treatment of the grey cases; although the two major parties may disagree what that appropriate treatment is. However, given the similarity of laws across the United States on emancipated minors and child abuse standards its clear that there is not any major differences in approach by the two parties once they acknowledge that there is a grey" area that needs to be addressed.
As for how the religious exemption really works. Our main religious freedoms were actually established by the "Society of Friends" (Quakers) and the Christian Science Religion who believed that prayer and proper religious study heals all illnesses (Those are the two groups who faught major legal battles to establish what the religious rights are).
The Christian Science Church has its own hospitals, and have licensed Christian Science Nurse Practitioners and care provided by them is covered under all the state and federal medical reimbursement programs.
I have personally known a Christian Science Nurse Practitioner for over 40 years (from before she attended Christian Science nursing school and was Licensed). We dated several times and seriously discussed marriage twice in our life (and my wife has met her and approves of my ongoing friendship with her). She says that people getting medical treatments is common withing their religion for many situations - because it works for a lot of stuff; and its just not talked about. She herself is currently undergoing medical treatments. Of course, a select few of that religious group deny all medical treatment. The last time I looked it up (about 3 decades ago) people who follow the Christian Science religious practices, which does focus on healthy diets and exercise, tended to die on average about a decade sooner than other Americans from various diseases (the accidental death rate was the same). The mortality data was unmistakable - just not ever talked about within the church according to my friend. However, most people within that religion know that for certain things that medical treatment cures it.