Re: Depends on what you mean by 'accepted'

where are the large numbers of kids fighting for their own rights? Because, other than a handful, I don't see them.

And where are the large numbers of Afghan and Saudi women fighting for their own rights?

For that matter, where were the large numbers of Western women fighting for their rights a century ago?

Slaves could be killed for rebelling against their masters; you can't kill kids for rebelling, or beat them too badly, or put them in chains, or make them work for 16 hours a day.

You don't read the news much, do you? Baby P's murderers would be out of jail if they hadn't stupidly taken him to a hospital for the wounds they had inflicted

Children can be defiant, yes, but I don't see them challenging the paradigm of parental guardianship.

Yes, and women who refuse to be beaten are not challenging the paradigm of husband's ownership.

The legal, social and scientific evidence suggests that kids' brains are still developing, which makes it hard to determine whether they fully understand the implications of consenting to something.

The brain development never stops. Unless a degenerative disease or substance abuse is involved, even Old People are still developing their brains.

You cannot be expected to consent if you don't know what you're consenting to. This is why consumer protections are a good idea, and other such laws.

You didn't notice, of course, that these two sentences would apply to everything a child does. So yes, bring on the broccoli!

At that, at least Goethe and Sigma are consistent: true parental prerogative would imply that the parents can consent instead of the child. Yet quite obviously they are not allowed.

The fact is, we just do not know enough to make an informed decision, and we will not know enough until society pulls its collective head out of its ass and takes a more-or-less impartial view of the issue.

Ancestor of qtns2di4:
This is a red herringe not. Where are all these studies thou speakest of, which say the Earthe revolves arounde the Sunne? For every one thou cannst produce, I can finde at least two that countere it. The facte is, we just do know not enough to make an informed decisionne, and we shalt know not enough until societye pulls its collective heade out of its asse and takes a more-or-less impartial viewe of the issue. Good lucke making that happen.

If Galileo had waited to tell the truth until society was ready, he would still be waiting to tell it.

Who's to say that in the system you want adults won't be talking over kids' heads in order to "educate" them so they can legally consent, when in reality the adults are just manipulating them?

They already are in almost every matter except sex, so I don't know where you think it would be any worse than now - unless of course, Sex Is Different.

There is evidence that some kids have much greater capabilities then they are expected to have, but I can tell you based on a lot of personal experience with kids that many are operating at the level of expectation or lower.

And I can tell you that blacks in the USA drop out of school more and commit more crimes. So do Roma and Muslims in Europe.

Rights are a privilege anyway; they are not pre-existing in nature. For example, no animals have a right not to be slaughtered by other animals

They have it. They just didn't have a way to enforce it or redress it, which is different.

We invented rights; they are not inherent. We should have to earn them, I think.

*shudder*

(Not that it is even consistent, because in that case (1) I would have the right to have all the kiddy sex I wanted if I earned by my simply doing it despite what anyone else thinks about it and (2) children would have to earn that Right Of Protection you fondly speak about and would be open season otherwise)