Newt Gingrich and adolescence

[New England and The Maritimes]

Has the man not met any teenagers? Like, ever?

I've met plenty of teenagers who are considerably more responsible and competent than bigoted stereotypes would suggest.

an·ec·dote   /ˈænɪkˌdoʊt/ Show Spelled[an-ik-doht] Show IPA
noun, plural an·ec·dotes

Damn, I was so sure it was "Data"...

[Risottia]

I don't agree with everything that Gingrich says here, but I think he's basically right about adolescence, and that we should treat teenagers as young men and women, not as old children. I think that adolescence is an unnecessary social construct that does significantly more harm than good. What do you guys think of Gingrich's take here?

Gingrich's take is totally moronic.

Also, I assume you propose to consider 13-year-olds as "young men and women", hence as adults, right?
Because, you know, there's no legally-recognized "adolescence". There's just being a minor or being an adult.

[Lowell Leber]

"Gradual adjustment to responsibilities" doesn't need to take 15 years. People learn by doing; people learn to make good decisions by making bad ones and learning from their mistakes. I think that young children should be exposed to the world and guided through it, given help to make their own decisions rather than having decisions imposed from above without their input, so that they learn how to make their own good decisions without someone holding their hand.

Adjustment should begin at 13-15 years of age. Younger than that and children don't really have the level of cognitive development to "learn responsibility."

Your idea is stupid.

The ideas expressed in Newt's article are, and I cant believe I am going to say this, spot on. The transition from childhood needs to occur earlier, especially in the US where there are too many adults who up to and into their thirties want to behave and live like teenagers.

[Farnhamia]

Adjustment should begin at 13-15 years of age. Younger than that and children don't really have the level of cognitive development to "learn responsibility."

Your idea is stupid.

The ideas expressed in Newt's article are, and I cant believe I am going to say this, spot on. The transition from childhood needs to occur earlier, especially in the US where there are too many adults who up to and into their thirties want to behave and live like teenagers.

Live rent-free, not have to work unless I want to, not have to pay for my food or clothes unless I want to, just have to worry about school? Yeah, who would want to live like that?

[Salandriagado]

Has the man not met any teenagers? Like, ever?

I've met plenty of teenagers who are considerably more responsible and competent than bigoted stereotypes would suggest.

I quite agree, there are some. However, from what I remember of being a teenager myself (it wasn't all that long ago), the majority of my classmates were, to be frank, useless. There were some notable exceptions, who I agree should be allowed to take on more responsibility more quickly (hence my support for the university scholarship for early graduation bit), but I certainly wouldn't want to shoehorn responsibility onto the majority.

[Quelesh]

Also, I assume you propose to consider 13-year-olds as "young men and women", hence as adults, right?
Because, you know, there's no legally-recognized "adolescence". There's just being a minor or being an adult.

Treating people differently under the law on the basis of a characteristic beyond their control is stupid and unfairly discriminatory.

I've met plenty of teenagers who are considerably more responsible and competent than bigoted stereotypes would suggest.

I quite agree, there are some. However, from what I remember of being a teenager myself (it wasn't all that long ago), the majority of my classmates were, to be frank, useless. There were some notable exceptions, who I agree should be allowed to take on more responsibility more quickly (hence my support for the university scholarship for early graduation bit), but I certainly wouldn't want to shoehorn responsibility onto the majority.

How about allowing them to assume responsibilities (and the rights that come with them) if they choose to? Let people decide for themselves how quickly they want to "grow up."

[Salandriagado]

Also, I assume you propose to consider 13-year-olds as "young men and women", hence as adults, right?
Because, you know, there's no legally-recognized "adolescence". There's just being a minor or being an adult.

Treating people differently under the law on the basis of a characteristic beyond their control is stupid and unfairly discriminatory.

I quite agree, there are some. However, from what I remember of being a teenager myself (it wasn't all that long ago), the majority of my classmates were, to be frank, useless. There were some notable exceptions, who I agree should be allowed to take on more responsibility more quickly (hence my support for the university scholarship for early graduation bit), but I certainly wouldn't want to shoehorn responsibility onto the majority.

How about allowing them to assume responsibilities (and the rights that come with them) if they choose to? Let people decide for themselves how quickly they want to "grow up."

Because the only ones that can actually cope with it will be the ones that don't choose it. Those that choose it will be those that don't think about the responsibilities, expecting to get out of them, and just want the rights, whilst those that could actually cope with it will see the responsibilities and just wont go for it.

[Sunny Marionette]

I think it's an interesting idea...but I certainly wouldn't say it'll work...

[Vorond]

For once I'd like to see the same passion in bashing Obama and Democrats.

And it will begin the moment Obama starts being a moron of as epic proportions as this guy.

Every time I read something like this article my reaction can be summed up as follows:

[Czechanada]

Or we could just revamp the American education system. Reorganize it, toss some more funding in there, and teach kids how to be critical, rational, objective thinkers who question everything.

[Risottia]

Also, I assume you propose to consider 13-year-olds as "young men and women", hence as adults, right?
Because, you know, there's no legally-recognized "adolescence". There's just being a minor or being an adult.

Treating people differently under the law on the basis of a characteristic beyond their control is stupid and unfairly discriminatory.

1.It's legal to discriminate according to the age.
2.It's not stupid - it's easier to draw a line with an age limit instead than with an exam. I would support exams, for one, but I recognize they would be a damn mess. If a 12-year-old can pass the high-school final exams, I agree he should be considered an adult. Hence the parents can kick him out of house for good. Time to get working, you slackers! Or you can join the Army.
3.It's unfair to discriminate someone on the basis of a characteristic beyond their control? No, it's fair. You don't control your height; professional basketball teams discriminate according to the applicant's height. You don't control your intelligence: some employers discriminate applicants according to their intelligence.

[Geilinor]

The fact is, most young people want to be challenged and given real responsibility. They want to be treated like young men and women, not old children. So consider this simple proposal: High school students who can graduate a year early get the 12th year's cost of schooling as an automatic scholarship to any college or technical school they want to attend. If they graduate two years early, they get two years of scholarships. At no added cost to taxpayers, we would give students an incentive to study as hard as they can and maximize the speed at which they learn.

This is a good idea, but was the other political rhetoric necessary? The rhetoric is why so many politicians come across as insane.

[Cill Charthaigh]

I think we need to stop seeing teenagers as criminals, for once.

I'm a teenager and every damn time I go into a grocery store alone the adults at the counters have to give me a very suspicious look and whenever I go to checkout I'm either asked "where's your mommy?" or "are you hiding something in your jacket?" or something along those lines. It pisses me off, I'm not a criminal and I don't plan on it. I'm not 5.

[Maurepas]

The problem is, Newt Gingrich lived a privileged and sheltered life, mainly abroad and away from the United States, and therefore has problems with discerning why everyone isn't exactly like him.

It doesn't help that he has a self-righteous and vitriolic opinion that there are "problems" with how the people are.

Basically I feel it's people like him are why we can't have nice things.

[Bottle]

Newt Gingrich is sometimes described as a "thinker,"

Let me go ahead and stop you right there.

Take a moment to review who these people are, who describe him as a "thinker." Are any of them people you really want to emulate?

Exactly.

[Farnhamia]

Newt Gingrich is sometimes described as a "thinker,"

Let me go ahead and stop you right there.

Take a moment to review who these people are, who describe him as a "thinker." Are any of them people you really want to emulate?

Exactly.

The main one who describes Gingrich that way is ... Gingrich. He's also the Man Who Stands Between You And Auschwitz. He's also just like Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, Reagan, Wilson and FDR, Thomas Edison, the Duke of Wellington, Henry Clay, Churchill and Thatcher, De Gaulle, William Wallace, Pericles and Vince Lombardi. Ask him, he'll tell you. Linky

[Simon Cowell of the RR]

No. Newt Gingrich is an idiot who wouldn't know a good idea if it was enacted by the democratic congress during his tenure.

And the Republican bashing begins in the first post. For once I'd like to see the same passion in bashing Obama and Democrats.

They don't need it.

Except the minor contraception thing. That was annoying.

[Wisconsin7]

Gingrich is obviously insane, can we just all agree on that?

[Simon Cowell of the RR]

Gingrich is obviously insane, can we just all agree on that?

How dare you assume someone is insane because he disagrees with you.
The nerve.

That being said, he is completely bonkers. The entire Republican rule is not talking about preserving auld lang syne, they are telling us to revert to the 16th century.

[Lackland]

I think we need to stop seeing teenagers as criminals, for once.

I'm a teenager and every damn time I go into a grocery store alone the adults at the counters have to give me a very suspicious look and whenever I go to checkout I'm either asked "where's your mommy?" or "are you hiding something in your jacket?" or something along those lines. It pisses me off, I'm not a criminal and I don't plan on it. I'm not 5.

That's a bit too far on the stores part, when I used to work retail it was the groups of teenagers that I worried more about than a lone teenager shopping. Groups usually are the ones that stuff merchandise into their pockets and walk out of the store with them. Teenage girls in particular, a group of teenage girls in beauty aisles almost always spells trouble.

As for Newt's suggestion, he paints a very realistic picture of inner city youth and the hurdles they face in obtaining a better lifestyle. Many of us most likely live somewhat sheltered lives whether it be spent attending universities, public or private schools, working, and living in suburban communities. We do not see the parts of Newark or Los Angeles where the houses are boarded up, and drug use is rampant ( that's a scene out of Grand Theft Auto for most here ). The fact of the matter is that those living in those communities are locked into a life of poverty, and the government is the one block to them getting out of that situation. These are the parts of cities where the schools are labeled drop out factories, and the drug dealer in his shiny Mercedes Benz is a role model ( it doesn't matter that there's semi-automatic hidden under the dash ). I'm fully in favor of opening the door to work for teenagers in these communities myself, complete with an overhaul of the American school system ( but that's something for another discussion ).

[Grenville]

I hate Newt Gingrich. The worst candidate ever. A Washington Insider.

[Cannot think of a name]

I think we need to stop seeing teenagers as criminals, for once.

I'm a teenager and every damn time I go into a grocery store alone the adults at the counters have to give me a very suspicious look and whenever I go to checkout I'm either asked "where's your mommy?" or "are you hiding something in your jacket?" or something along those lines. It pisses me off, I'm not a criminal and I don't plan on it. I'm not 5.

You should look up the laws in your state regarding stopping potential shoplifters. They're pretty specific about when you can stop someone in my state and I don't know if that's universal or not. But just knowing them might get some manager thinking they're about to be sued and perhaps suddenly, you'll be treated a lot better.

[Wisconsin7]

Gingrich is obviously insane, can we just all agree on that?

How dare you assume someone is insane because he disagrees with you.
The nerve.

That being said, he is completely bonkers. The entire Republican rule is not talking about preserving auld lang syne, they are telling us to revert to the 16th century.

....
You're all right.

[Laissez-Faire]

When responsibility are not extended to an individual, and instead are propped up by a social construct, of course faulty decisions are made. In economics, this would be known as moral hazard, and I believe it is a fully applicable concept which can explain a great many things- youth are no exception.

I agree with Newt Gingrich here. If for no other reason than the same concepts have been proven true when it relates to liberty in nearly every other instance.

[Orlkjestad]

Is Newt Gingrich a fucking moron?

Answer: Yes. Only a madman would suggest something like this. Adolescents would just go and be teenagers in adulthood, resulting in pain for them and pain to the economy.