I'm not saying you shouldn't support people in their self-actualization, but the argument that they should be highly autonomous is absurd. We don't let kids dri

I'm not saying you shouldn't support people in their self-actualization, but the argument that they should be highly autonomous is absurd. We don't let kids drive for a reason, right? We assume they shouldn't be able to buy alcohol or cigarettes right? Or do you disagree with these ideas? After all you're equating not letting kids buy cigarettes as the subjugation of black people in the US. Sure, I give my kid some autonomy. I let him choose what he wants for breakfast in the morning, for example. But the deck was stacked against him. If he had actual autonomy the pantry would be nothing but candy and cookies. But I've already decided, and removed that autonomic choices from him. I guess I'm a bad parent for not letting him have free reign at the grocery store, letting him fully choose what he'll have every meal. > perhaps this should be sought in the replacement of the word “children” with any subjugated group, from “women” to “black people” to “Sicilians” to “Irish” to “<any First Nations people> to… Ok let me try your logic. Children should not be allowed to work. Women should not be allowed to work. Oof, not good. Well I guess child labor is back. I could go on and on. Maybe this rule doesn't make nearly as much sense as you think it does. > I cannot rightly comprehend the ignorance of history that would engender such an utterance. Yeah, I can't comprehend you suggesting the above logic as the right way to determine if a child should have autonomy or not.