If you’re old enough to vote, are you old enough to have your own opinions about politics?
And more importantly, old enough to shoot.
The only ones saying these kids are too young to speak are those who can’t stomach lying about these kids being paid actors.
When we see a bunch of young people marching and waving placards and we agree with what they are saying, we say how great it is that young people are making their voices and opinions heard. If we disagree with them, we shrug and say that kids are always protesting and they just don’t understand the implications.
“Too young to speak” is about 2 or 3 years old. These students are well past that point, therefore, they are old enough to speak.
Just what would be the basis for saying that they’re too young? Their degree of life experience? They’ve all had far more relevant experience on the matter than, say, octogenarian Donald Trump has. Indeed, the objection from many is that they’ve had too much relevant life experience.
If they were demanding armed teachers no one on the right would find them too young to speak out, of that we can all be certain. The right would be all, “From the mouths of babes!”
“There’s no such thing as voiceless. There are only the ‘deliberately silenced’ or the ‘preferably unheard.’” Arundhati Roy
The right, want them silenced because they don’t like what they are saying. So transparently partisan.
How shamelessly disrespectful to attack and discredit survivors.
What’s naive is to believe this discredits anyone but those saying it. When they use their dirty political machine to attack young survivors they show their true colours. Literally everyone can see them revealed for who they really are, how low they’ll stoop.
A good point is a good point no matter what age the speaker. Similarly, age, experience and position is no guarantee of coherence and validity. (insert your own example here)
They may be inarticulate (but they haven’t sounded that way to me) but that’s a matter of style not substance. Some of them may even be talking total bollocks, that’s what some kids do, but if you decide to ignore what they say en-masse just because they are teenagers, then you are the idiot, not them.
“they are too young to know what they are saying” is just lazy thinking to invalidate what they say. Rather rich coming from people that would consider those same kids mature enough to wield a deadly weapon.
Obviously, the title of the thread should be something along the lines of “too young be given the forum that they have.”
I’ve always thought, even when I was in college, that college student protests were given more gravitas than they deserved. I was protesting something it college (doesn’t matter what) and it was more of a party, or something to get caught up in than some deep seeded thoughtful undertaking.
I think that they are young and inexperienced, and their voice should be judged accordingly. Sure they have the right to voice their opinion, and yes they should have a say. But I personally value that slightly less than I would from others with more life experience.
Taken another way, if I had other issues that I was personally concerned about, such as the economy, investments, raising my children, my relationship with my wife and I could only talk with one person, would it be a 16 year old, or a valued, middle aged friend with much experience? Doesn’t mean I wouldn’t listen to the 16 year old who chimed in, but I’d value their opinion differently.
It’s utter nonsense. Most of these young people are far more capable than their critics whose minds never left the 1950’s.
The OP has started virtually every single one of his several threads with a statement that “someone” said to him that he appears not to agree with in some way. Occasionally he offers a vague indication of what his own views are but rarely contributes in a substantive manner. Often he never returns to his threads. It is not a posting style that I am particularly fond of. I would certainly like the OP to come back and tell us what he thinks and why, for once.
Anyhoo: Students call out elected officials for being corrupt and amoral. Elected officials and their supporters react in a corrupt and amoral manner by conducting a smear campaign against the students, spreading false rumors about them being “crisis actors” and/or “pawns of the left-wing media”, and demanding that they be ignored because they’re “too young to speak”. Ad hominem-a-gogo.
Once you cut through the bullshit the fact remains that the students have been making some legitimate points that the NRA’s level of influence in our political system is disproportionate, that the proposal to arm teachers will not solve anything and will actively make things worse, that despite multiple mass shootings there remains little political will to mitigate this, and that they would like to change that.
Yes, the students are quite angry and emotional, having seen their friends, peers and teachers shot down in front of them (or having been shot themselves), but 1) that doesn’t delegitimize their arguments, and 2) anyone suggesting that the pro-gun position isn’t heavily based in emotion is deluding themselves.
Perhaps we could have one thread involving teenagers where we don’t bring up he subject of who’s having sex with them?
I already made it, in post #16: “I haven’t seen anyone in this thread say they’re too young to speak.” Basically, I think this whole thread is a strawman.
- I don’t know where you got the idea that there was any “overwhelming consensus” that they are too young for this-this talking point has no evidence to back it.
- You push this idea they are being manipulated over and over again, and have yet to provide any evidence to back it up. Opinions don’t become facts from repetition.
Speaking for myself, my political identity was pretty well set by the time I was their age. I would have resented anyone trying to tell me I was too young to speak or have opinions when I was their age. Some of those kids came home and showered off the blood of their classmates. Quite a few of them have had to practice what to do in the event of an active shooter. They’re tired of being afraid and don’t want to wait for their elders to press the issue. I can’t blame them and I agree with them. Even if I disagreed with them, I would respect their opinions.
That’s two separate things though. Too young to speak? That’s horseshit. Too young to know what they are talking about? Yeah, I’d say so, and my guess is so would most older people unless they are saying something you want to hear or agree with. At 18 or even 21 (hell, from my perspective even 31 :p) you simply haven’t lived life long enough and, generally, don’t know enough to have really informed opinions on pretty much anything. Young people always THINK they know everything, but they don’t.
Now, all you damned kids get off my grass!!
The people saying this crap had no problem with a 16 year old speaking at CPAC.
They may not be smart enough to have views, but they’re old enough to buy guns. Seems a little weird, but that’s the claim.
Were these people too young to speak out?
(Age in 1776)
Marquis de Lafayette, 18
James Monroe, 18
Henry Lee III, 20
Aaron Burr, 20
Nathan Hale, 21
Alexander Hamilton, 21
Just a bunch of ignorant kids.
Not too young to know what they’re talking about. They may lack the opportunity for years of research, experience and considered opinion, but I don’t necessarily see much use of that in my 40+ year old friends who happen to also be firearms enthusiasts–they show all the introspection and political nuance of an 11th grader on this issue.
At least the young’uns in this case have some practical experience concerning the subject of gun violence. I’m not certain how many of the more vociferous gun-toters out there have ANY experience with bullet - people situations. I’ll be taking the kids’ opinions into consideration this time around.
Two things here. First, I’m fairly sure I could find a list this long of kids that age who do or say really stupid or clueless stuff, so not sure it means anything either way. Second, though, is that in 1776 people that age were considered full adults, especially since 21 was middle age. Hell, you were an adult doing a mans (or woman’s) work much younger than that. Today, we are a very affluent society and by and large kids are allowed to be kids much longer…after all, even in the desolate US the average life expectancy is like 79 (as opposed to 35 in 1776…according to Google anyway).
I have to ask for those of you who ‘respect’ what all young people have to say, as opposed to some of these young people who are saying what you want to hear, do you/would you feel the same if they were, say, rabid Trump supporters? Does your ‘respect’ extend to them? What about those who are fundamentally religious? Same ‘respect’? What about if they are climate deniers, or anti-vaxers or gang bangers?