politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
At 18, he’s legally free to walk away from his shit-for-brains father and make his own choices.
He chooses nepotism. He may not be totally mature, but they are his choice.
He’d be free to walk, taking a leap into the unknown at the cost of losing almost everything he has. Expecting that sort of heroic act of him is not entirely reasonable.
OTOH, judging by the photos, he does give off Brock Turner/Kyle Rittenhouse vibes. If, having grown up where he did, he turned out to be an aggressive predator, it would not be a huge surprise.
I’m almost certain he’d be able to land on his feet.
Almost any publisher would pay rights for “growing up trump”, for example.
I wouldn’t have expected him to totally walk away… but his choices are now his to make in a way they weren’t before.
Also, why do we act like 18 is the magic minimum age when someone should know better? I remember being 15, 16, 17 and having a solid understanding of morals and how to participate in society. I wasn't special.
It's not "You're 18 now, so you should know better." It's "For fucks sake, you're 18. You should have figured this shit out years ago."
Dude exactly. At the time I understood I didn't know shit but I understood nonetheless and that helped me make decisions about how to act and what to do in society and how I was perceived by those around me. We were young and ignorant not stupid.
Because it needs to be somewhere. It’s basically arbitrary
The point I'm making is we set 18 as the age when you're responsible for your own actions, but it's not because just in that moment you become responsible.
We set the age at 18 because it's a really generous guess. Most people understand how to interact with others years before their 18th birthday. If someone is still fucking up at 18 then consequences are appropriate.
Legally.... yes. it is where you become responsible.
Mentally, emotionally, and any other way? you're right. there is no single age. But the law can't really make fluid distinctions like that without becoming an unweildly mess. So we get one age, everyone younger than that (*) is not a legal adult and everyone older is. that's how it is, and yes, its pretty much an arbitrary decision that was made ages ago.
(* there is a process where children can become emancipated and have no guardians, taking legal responsibility for themselves. but it's extremely rare for courts to grant it. usually they just dump the kid into the system if there's cause.)
We weren't talking about legal responsibility in this thread, were we?
The above conversation seemed to be about the social consequences Barron should face for choosing to be part of this mess, right?
It took me well into my 30s to walk away from religion. Especially in an isolated environment, it's likely he doesn't really understand his choices, and though he has had a much more comfortable way of life than us, it's still hard to transition to a much less forgiving way of life. I had to leave behind friends and family I still wish I had a good relationship with, but the cultlike environment (JW) is specifically designed to discourage leaving. Learning about other viewpoints are heavily discouraged, as is associating with people not in the same belief structure.
While mine was religion, with how polarizing his father is and the protection needed, I don't doubt he had even less access to other people and viewpoints than I did. I at least got to meet people online, at work,and through shows (funny enough, Futurama was a huge part of breaking me away) to get some other viewpoints, but some of my friends were homeschooled and wouldn't watch or be allowed to watch almost anything secular.
It's why so many are afraid to allow kids to go to college (pretty discouraged by JW also), because they might change. I say at 18 the chance of someone in his position being able to get alternative experiences is slim to none.