At what age does one gain what/all rights?

[guitarlifter]

I'm just interested in seeing what people believe. If one says that one believes in one having full rights upon conception or birth, then that would mean that some parents may not even get the chance to raise their children. A parent cannot pick up their child if the child is acting against it. A parent couldn't spank their child either, I suppose. If one says a certain age, others will argue that the person is being denied their unalienable rights. If rights are truly unalienable, then how can we grant them rights at a certain age? Should it be a set age at which one gains rights, or should it be granted if a child can pass some sort of test? I'm still figuring this one out for myself. What's right?

[kah13176]

John Locke believed spanking children was counterproductive as it teaches children to be good based purely on reward and punishment. He believed the better way was to foster love between the parent and child, since then a display of disappointment or encouragement would be much more effective at conveying right and wrong. I'm still not legally an adult, but I believe any violence against children is a direct infringement of the non-aggression principle.

Furthermore, Murray Rothbard believed that children should have the right to run away, and to "choose their own parents". The parents seeking children would not be impeded by the state, and they would also tend to be more loving than average, since they are actually LOOKING to find children to love and care for, unlike many families who have children simply because of a drunken New Year's party.

This is a sticky subject, because it is unclear when children can fully grasp the consequences of their actions, and when they develop a full understanding of property rights and contractual law.

[BuddyRey]

John Locke believed spanking children was counterproductive as it teaches children to be good based purely on reward and punishment. He believed the better way was to foster love between the parent and child, since then a display of disappointment or encouragement would be much more effective at conveying right and wrong. I'm still not legally an adult, but I believe any violence against children is a direct infringement of the non-aggression principle.

Furthermore, Murray Rothbard believed that children should have the right to run away, and to "choose their own parents". The parents seeking children would not be impeded by the state, and they would also tend to be more loving than average, since they are actually LOOKING to find children to love and care for, unlike many families who have children simply because of a drunken New Year's party.

This is a sticky subject, because it is unclear when children can fully grasp the consequences of their actions, and when they develop a full understanding of property rights and contractual law.

You must have wisdom far beyond your years to have already read Locke and Rothbard and put considerable thought into their ideas (sorry if that sounds patronizing but I genuinely mean it - that's very impressive).

I didn't even crack open an econ book until the age of 23; the same age at which I ceased to be a socialist. Correlation, maybe? ;)

+rep!

[Legend1104]

Certainly believe that all people have rights at conception (others may say birth) but young children are not on a level of development to be able to express those rights in a way that is safe (to themselves and others) yet. That is the function of the parents, to teach them about their rights and to prepare them to live in the world with other people having the same rights. It is certainly debatable about the actual age at which a child is capable and has the right to freely express those rights.

[Carehn]

When you execute them despite what the world may say.

You always have them. A 5 year old will just let his dad tell him not to drive a car or get a job. for some people it may be 10, 25, never. Rights are part of mans nature. He only needs to execute them. You may get the death penalty for speaking but they cannot take that right from you.

Guess what im saying is when ever the hell you man up and take them.

[Carehn]

This is a sticky subject, because it is unclear when children can fully grasp the consequences of their actions, and when they develop a full understanding of property rights and contractual law.

Most men cannot fully grasp the consequences of their actions/ Thus that argument should be void. And by who's standard of grasping. Maybe God or some aliens will come down and our smartest man will look like a fly trying over and over to fly through the window, never having the ability to even comprehend glass.
I never like the idea of one human telling another they have no rights because they are stupid or ignorant. They child in my eyes has rights when he not only says im getting a job buying a car and getting the hell out of this place, but when he or she can do so on her own dime. When your self sustaining in the aria in witch certain rights deal with.

This topic sucks! I just keep loosing my focus.

[Brooklyn Red Leg]

I went with 'certain age', but only with the descriptor 'Puberty'. That is the physical demarcation line between childhood and adulthood.

[kah13176]

I didn't even crack open an econ book until the age of 23; the same age at which I ceased to be a socialist.

lol thanks. I never really had any interest in politics or philosophy until I saw "The Revolution: A Manifesto" on display at the bookstore. The title and Constitution in the background caught my eye; so glad I judged a book by its cover. Thanks Ron Paul.

[tangent4ronpaul]

ummmm.... like NEVER! - rights have been stolen PERIOD!

[Indy Vidual]

The day we live in a (relatively) free society and enjoy this discussion will be a very happy one. :)