06-03-2023, 12:25 PM
(06-02-2023, 04:48 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I'm agreeing that it's fake outrage. The "protect the children" argument has been used for so many things and so often that it's become more cost of entry than an actual weighted statement.
In my day politicians were protecting children from music lyrics and Mortal Kombat and now they're protecting children from supposed bathroom invaders in dresses and woke books. I don't know what is going to be deemed a danger next, but I assure you it'll be called a danger to children in order to whip up support for it.
I don't disagree with your general position. In fact I've absolutely made the argument here that the anti 2A people always use "protect the children" to justify their proposed infringements. That being said, there is a noticeable difference here. We prohibit those under eighteen from doing a slew of things, vote, drink, smoke, gamble, etc. because they aren't mature enough to handle those things. I have a hard time reconciling that accepted way of thinking with allowing them to make unalterable and massive changes to their body that will affect them for the rest of their lives.
