About the exceptions, like those in the criminal justice system, they are discrimination. But they're not adultism, because they're actually discrimination against adults, not children. Because children are being treated more favourably. Oh, ok, so you must be against this then, since its discrimination. Why are you not advocating for the removal of this discrimination? Also, how do you not see how the restrictions I mentioned are discrimination? They involve the state restricting young people's freedom based on their age. It depends on whether you think children are just small adults. Also, not all discrimination is bad. The state is an inefficient behemoth. it doesnt have the flexibility to determine things on a case by case basis. The best it can do is to set reasonable(or perhaps unreasonable) limits. This does not make it discrimination. Parents also do lots of things that restrict young peoples freedom based on their age. Are you saying that parents can no longer parent and children should be able to do what they want, whenever they want? If not, then where do you draw the line, and why? Do children need care, protection, and guidance? Does care, protection and guidance sometimes mean restricting their freedom? You appear to think that any "inequality", any imbalance, any difference, must be the result of discrimination. This is not the case and just indicates your ideology. Also, if forcing medical treatment can't be respecting autonomy because you're forcing something on someone, than what about forcing minors to get an education/not work/refrain from alcohol etc.? This is irrelevant as to whether you can respect someones autonomy and also force them to do something. The people forcing minors to get an education are not claiming that they are also respecting their autonomy. You ARE making that claim with respect to medical treatment. |