ya, I realize that we agree. Sorry, I should have pointed this out. This subject of drinking laws rolls into our concept of what parenthood and what childhood are, how best to raise kids. I am sensitive on this subject here at a2k because I have been the lone wolf claiming that kids should not be sheltered, caught hell for this idea when talking about teen sex.
Having someone agree with me, even part way,
is an unusual place for me to be.
When I was a kid I had a lot of freedom; I was alone a lot, and my parents
manifested a laissez faire
philosophy, tho very affectionate when we were together.
I loved my freedom and I 'd have defended it if that had been necessary
(tho I do not remember many challenges thereto).
Many decades have passed since then, but I am still that kid inside,
just fatter, older n uglier. I have not had occasion to change the libertarianism
that I held dear and practiced, as a kid. (Note that I lived a usually quiet life
and stayed out of jail.) Let the record indicate that I support freedom for
every human being (not including babies too young to walk n talk).
Altho I did not discuss my sex life at age 11 ( with girls of 17 and of 23 )
I certainly knew that I was autonomous in this as well as in all of my personal decisions.
Accordingly, I supported the concept of freedom of teenage (or 11 year old) sexuality.
I am glad to have enjoyed these experiences and I 'd not begrudge them to anyone.
U will detect that my libertarian individualism embraces your expressed
position, and hence I am in substantial agreement with u, on this point.
I suspect that my love of freedom exceeds yours.
In my espousal of the Original Intendment of the Founders' philosophy,
I am very stingy in conceding jurisdiction to government, knowing (as thay did)
that personal freedom is INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL
to the authority of government.
Are you English, Hawkeye ? or in England ?