[DRAFT] The Threshold of Majority II

[Charlotte Ryberg]

I'll give this one more go. Clause 9 is out of the new draft, so is the mental capacity test, and that's because my stance is in support of equality.

For reference, a ruling by Ard during the development of the defeated proposal.

---

Threshold of Majority

Category: Human Rights
Although the threshold of majority is normally used to confer voting rights, it is not applicable to all member states. In Charlotte Ryberg the voting age is two years early from 18.

Strength: Mild
Although this resolution affects all citizens it also allow nations, according to Ard, to have differing thresholds for gaining or losing differing rights, responsibilities, protections or privileges, ranging from gambling to smoking.

Rationale for consideration: To address a long-standing loophole/annoyance in which some member states were able to circumvent age-specific legislation by setting the threshold of majority to an extreme value. Such concerns have plagued various age-related legislation.

Clarifications: This resolution does not specify a certain age or threshold due to the HoC rule.

OBSERVING that the Threshold of Majority, also known as Age of Majority or Age of Maturity, is where an individual legally becomes an adult and qualifies for the rights, privileges and obligations thereof;

CONCERNED that there is no consensus for the definition for the Threshold of Majority in all member countries for many reasons and there is no way to compel member countries to adopt one specific chronological age,

NOTING that defining the Threshold of Majority as one where the actual mental capacity of an individual is too low, or one where no individual will ever reach, may cause inefficiencies and infringe upon the rights and protections of said individuals;

SEEKING to provide a framework for the determination of a sensible Threshold of Majority:

In this resolution:

• “Threshold of Majority” is a threshold where an individual is no longer considered a minor and is emancipated with full legal rights and responsibilities such as the right to enter into a contract or to assume ownership of real estate;

The General Assembly hereby introduces the following measures:

Part 1: General:-

1. Member states must adopt an Threshold of Majority for each sapient species within their jurisdiction, which occurs at a point or age where a typical individual is of an appropriate and/or sufficient mental capacity to be considered emancipated.

2. Member countries whose population is made up of multiple species may freely define a Threshold of Majority unique to each of their species.

3. Member countries may delegate the responsibility of establishing a Threshold of Majority to a sub-national or regional administration for their jurisdiction.

4. Member countries may introduce judicial provisions for the removal of some or all of the Rights of Majority from an individual as a result of criminal law or loss of mental capacity, provided that such process is done in the best interest of the individual and not in violation of international law.

5. PROVIDES for member countries or their sub-national or regional administrations to set arbitrary thresholds for gaining or losing differing rights (e.g. age-restricted sales), responsibilities (e.g. compulsory education), protections (e.g. statutory rape) or privileges (e.g. voting rights), provided that such variations are appropriate with the intents and purpose of this resolution, and not in contravention of international law;

6. The duties of the World Health Authority shall be extended to help, on the request of member countries, determine a sensible Threshold of Majority for each of their species that is compliant with the intent and purpose of this resolution.

Part 2: Emancipation of Minors:-

1. Member countries who provide for individuals to petition for emancipation prior to achieving the Threshold of Majority through their judicial system must consider the following requirements for the petition to be valid:-
a) The minor must be able to prove that they are economically self-sufficient, or would be without the interference of their legal guardians;
b) The minor must be able to prove that they have obtained an educational level which allows them to pursue a sustainable career/ambition;

2. An individual who is emancipated in such manner shall be considered over the Threshold of Majority for the purpose of national and international law.

[Darenjo]

Dr. Park, after reading the proposal, and comparing it with a few of Darenjo's comparable laws, finds a possible discrepancy within the proposal, that could make teenage life in Darenjo rather complicated. Having a 16-year-old daughter, Dr. Park rises to voice his personal concern:

1. Member countries must adopt a Threshold of Majority for each sapient species within their jurisdiction, provided that such threshold occurs around the point where that specimen is typically of an appropriate and/or sufficient mental capacity to be considered emancipated.

The only problem I have with this is that most human nations, to use an example, set the "Threshold of Majority" between the ages 18 to 21. Darenjo uses 18. However, Darenjo has a program that allows minors down to age 15 to be "emancipated" from their parents should they show themselves to be capable of supporting themselves. I am concerned over the language of this clause, since it makes it unclear as to whether a gap of three years falls within the range of the following:

around the point where that specimen is typically of an appropriate and/or sufficient mental capacity to be considered emancipated

The Darenjon government has directed me to not announce a position regarding support until our question is answered.

Darenjon GA Ambassador Dr. Park Si-Jung

[Charlotte Ryberg]

For reference the original clause was:

1. Member countries must adopt a Threshold of Majority for each sapient species within their jurisdiction, provided that such threshold occurs at a point where the individual is of an appropriate and/or sufficient mental capacity to be considered emancipated.

I basically seek to require member states to adopt an age of majority for each sapient species within their jurisdiction, which occurs at a stage or age where a typical individual is of an appropriate and/or sufficient mental capacity to be considered emancipated. This time I had to drop the mental capacity test not just to de-Rybergify the proposal but to reinforce that the age of majority is universal within a member state and everyone who reaches a certain threshold automatically becomes and adult, which is also more economical because that means less work in identifying which one is a legal adult or not.

In regards to the capability of supporting themselves, an arbitrary age may be set for the right of a minor to live in a house of their own, but the age of majority usually indicates that this is when they are able to enter into a contract or home ownership agreement which I will make clear shortly.

[Quelesh]

I notice that there is not currently a clause specifically allowing member states to grant various rights to those who have not reached the threshold of majority, as long as said rights do not conflict with international law. Hopefully this is an unintentional omission.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

I notice that there is not currently a clause specifically allowing member states to grant various rights to those who have not reached the threshold of majority, as long as said rights do not conflict with international law. Hopefully this is an unintentional omission.

As long as it is universal within a member country's jurisdiction, fine.

Let's try:

PROVIDES for member states to set an arbitrary age for gaining or losing differing rights (e.g. age-restricted sales), responsibilities (e.g. compulsory service), protections (e.g. statutory rape) or privileges (e.g. voting rights), provided that such variations are appropriate with the intents and purpose of this resolution, and not in contravention of international law;

[Darenjo]

I notice that there is not currently a clause specifically allowing member states to grant various rights to those who have not reached the threshold of majority, as long as said rights do not conflict with international law. Hopefully this is an unintentional omission.

As long as it is universal within a member country's jurisdiction, fine.

Let's try:

PROVIDES for member states to set an arbitrary age for gaining or losing differing rights (e.g. age-restricted sales), responsibilities (e.g. compulsory service), protections (e.g. statutory rape) or privileges (e.g. voting rights), provided that such variations are appropriate with the intents and purpose of this resolution, and not in contravention of international law;

Darenjo feels that the proposed clause would be good for the proposal as a whole. Should such a clause be entered, Darenjo's support would be whole - we support it now, but we are still in the process of finalizing that support.

[Ethel mermania]

Greetings from Ethel Mermania, a small country with a fondness for broadway musicals.
The nameless drones of the ethel mermanian foreign service wishes to have the clause below to make explicit the right to make different ages for different enfranchisements, which is what we believe is your intent. As the clause reads now there is only one age for all the different rights and responsibilities.

I notice that there is not currently a clause specifically allowing member states to grant various rights to those who have not reached the threshold of majority, as long as said rights do not conflict with international law. Hopefully this is an unintentional omission.

As long as it is universal within a member country's jurisdiction, fine.

Let's try:

PROVIDES for member states to set an arbitrary age for gaining or losing differing rights (e.g. age-restricted sales), responsibilities (e.g. compulsory service), protections (e.g. statutory rape) or privileges (e.g. voting rights), provided that such variations are appropriate with the intents and purpose of this resolution, and not in contravention of international law;

[Charlotte Ryberg]

That's my intent there, honoured ambassador: Let's try:

PROVIDES for member states to set arbitrary thresholds for gaining or losing differing rights (e.g. age-restricted sales), responsibilities (e.g. compulsory education), protections (e.g. statutory rape) or privileges (e.g. voting rights), provided that such variations are appropriate with the intents and purpose of this resolution, and not in contravention of international law;

Again the thresholds will be universal for each species, and not attached to an intellectual capacity test, which is believed to be the downfall of the previous version.

[Bears Armed]

I notice that there is not currently a clause specifically allowing member states to grant various rights to those who have not reached the threshold of majority, as long as said rights do not conflict with international law. Hopefully this is an unintentional omission.

As long as it is universal within a member country's jurisdiction, fine.

"Ahem! 'Universal within the jurisdiction concerned', yes, no problem: 'Universal within a member country's jurisdiction', no.
"If you are still allowing nations to have the basic age of majority determined separately by the governments of their political sub-divisions, as I and my homeland's government favour, then any variations in the ages at which specific rights are recognised should also be determinable at that level rather than just nationally."


Artorrios o SouthWoods,
Chairbear, Bears Armed Mission at the World Assembly,
for
The High Council of Clans,
The Confederated Clans of the Free Bears of Bears Armed.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

My mistake there, sorry. However my stance is that while and age for some rights are nationwide, the ages for some rights may be statewide only (this may be apparent for age-restricted sales). In a RL example, While most of the USA has an age of majority of 18, Alabama and Nebraska has an age of majority of 19 and Mississippi, 21. So let's try:

6. PROVIDES for member countries or their sub-national or regional administrations to set arbitrary thresholds for gaining or losing differing rights (e.g. age-restricted sales), responsibilities (e.g. compulsory education), protections (e.g. statutory rape) or privileges (e.g. voting rights), provided that such variations are appropriate with the intents and purpose of this resolution, and not in contravention of international law;

However, I cannot agree with the ages of majority being separate for genders, as that would be discrimination.

[Monikian WA Mission]

Over all I like this proposal and would vote for it except for this.

5. Member countries may introduce judicial provisions for the removal of some or all of the Rights of Majority from an individual, provided that such process is done in the best interest of the individual and not in violation of international law

It is the feeling of Monikians that adults or emancipated minors should never lose any rights except as the result of due process of law for criminal offenses. We feel that this provision might force us to expose our citizens to potential abuses while they are in other member nations who do indeed establish a judicial procedure for the removal of some/all Rights of Majority. Furthermore we are uncomfortable with the removal of any civil rights on the basis of "done in the best interest of the individual" which literally could mean any and everything provided it doesn't violate already established international law.

ETA:

I cannot agree with the ages of majority being separate for genders, as that would be discrimination.

What about species that have more than one sex? (Gender being masculine/feminine, sex being male/female.) Monikians for example have three sexes. We have females of course and we have Genomes (males who contribute genetic material in mating) and Binomes (males who catalyze fertilization of the ovum but contribute no genetic material). Currently under Monikian law Binomes have a higher age of majority as they require distinct training in their role as catalyst of fertilization. Furthermore Binomes while necessary for reproduction are exceedingly rare, there are approximately 1 Binome for every 400 females at any given time and as such Binomes are also not permitted to engage in monogamous marriage (IE the use of 'sord'tonak [a powerful narcotic which is used by married couples to insure monoandry] during mating).

Surely the delegation can see that due to biological circumstances and needs as a species there may actually need to be differing ages of majority on the basis of sex.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

Over all I like this proposal and would vote for it except for this.

5. Member countries may introduce judicial provisions for the removal of some or all of the Rights of Majority from an individual, provided that such process is done in the best interest of the individual and not in violation of international law

It is the feeling of Monikians that adults or emancipated minors should never lose any rights except as the result of due process of law for criminal offenses. We feel that this provision might force us to expose our citizens to potential abuses while they are in other member nations who do indeed establish a judicial procedure for the removal of some/all Rights of Majority. Furthermore we are uncomfortable with the removal of any civil rights on the basis of "done in the best interest of the individual" which literally could mean any and everything provided it doesn't violate already established international law.

This clause intended to reflect the loss of mental capacity of an individual; in member states there may be provisions to protect people who are unable to make their own decisions. However, it is becoming clear that the shifting of majority rights to another person is a matter of mental health rather than pure majority, and therefore Ms. Harper is considering narrowing this clause to only cover criminal law and loss of mental capacity. It should be noted that everyone who reaches the age of majority shall automatically be afforded majority rights except for extenuating circumstances such as penal servitude and loss of mental capacity.

ETA:

I cannot agree with the ages of majority being separate for genders, as that would be discrimination.

What about species that have more than one sex? (Gender being masculine/feminine, sex being male/female.) Monikians for example have three sexes. We have females of course and we have Genomes (males who contribute genetic material in mating) and Binomes (males who catalyze fertilization of the ovum but contribute no genetic material). Currently under Monikian law Binomes have a higher age of majority as they require distinct training in their role as catalyst of fertilization. Furthermore Binomes while necessary for reproduction are exceedingly rare, there are approximately 1 Binome for every 400 females at any given time and as such Binomes are also not permitted to engage in monogamous marriage (IE the use of 'sord'tonak [a powerful narcotic which is used by married couples to insure monoandry] during mating).

Surely the delegation can see that due to biological circumstances and needs as a species there may actually need to be differing ages of majority on the basis of sex.

The current wording as it stands only mandates the Threshold of Majority for each sapient species within their jurisdiction, but again gender discrimination comes under (here we go again)... GA#35.

[Monikian WA Mission]

ETA:



What about species that have more than one sex? (Gender being masculine/feminine, sex being male/female.) Monikians for example have three sexes. We have females of course and we have Genomes (males who contribute genetic material in mating) and Binomes (males who catalyze fertilization of the ovum but contribute no genetic material). Currently under Monikian law Binomes have a higher age of majority as they require distinct training in their role as catalyst of fertilization. Furthermore Binomes while necessary for reproduction are exceedingly rare, there are approximately 1 Binome for every 400 females at any given time and as such Binomes are also not permitted to engage in monogamous marriage (IE the use of 'sord'tonak [a powerful narcotic which is used by married couples to insure monoandry] during mating).

Surely the delegation can see that due to biological circumstances and needs as a species there may actually need to be differing ages of majority on the basis of sex.

The current wording as it stands only mandates the Threshold of Majority for each sapient species within their jurisdiction, but again gender discrimination comes under (here we go again)... GA#35.

As the Monikian Mission understands GA#35 we would be able under our laws to continue our practice of prohibiting Binomes from monogamous marraige. Their biological function should be compelling enough reason to continue the practice. However, I will instruct the Monikian Ministry of Interplanetary Affairs that legislation should be presented to the Supreme Council prohibiting Binomes from being sent to the WA Mission as diplomats, or support staff (which is the entirety of the MWAM population) and requiring that breeding pairs sent back to Monkiah (which is not a member of the WA) should they require the reproductive services of a Binome. Naturally of course binome children born to the males on MWAM diplomats or staff would be considered to be minors, and allowed to stay until such time as they must return to Monkiah for their education.

That said, I want no mistake made that this prohibition on the part of a small segment of our population is discrimination. Indeed being the Binome for a mating pair is usually considered a great honor and many religious institutions set aside monastic accommodations for the Biomes. Also it is not uncommon for those both religious or non-religious to invite the female's most senior superior (who is also most likely female--matrilineal society and all that) to wash the feet of the Binome.

This clause intended to reflect the loss of mental capacity of an individual; in member states there may be provisions to protect people who are unable to make their own decisions. However, it is becoming clear that the shifting of majority rights to another person is a matter of mental health rather than pure majority, and therefore Ms. Harper is considering narrowing this clause to only cover criminal law and loss of mental capacity.

We would strongly encourage such a revision as our Monkiah also has provisions for the removal of majority rights outside of criminal offenses for the neurologically disabled.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

Number 5 has now been tightened. The current wording of section 1, 2 and 3 suggests that within a jurisdiction the Threshold of Majority should be universal for all three genders as described.

[Monikian WA Mission]

Talik' Murshan rose to speak.

"As this proposal is written now we have no problem supporting it. That said, I will inform Senior Ambassador Albertron of the gender question and I believe that the most equitable solution would be a prohibition of sexually mature binomes (our age of majority for most issues being 7 of our years and also the point at which Monikians become on average sexually mature) from being in the Monikian WA Mission, not that any are in the Mission now. We feel that this 1/8th of our population, by their biological role is too important to be simply allowed to start performing that role without proper training--they might 'sord'dunak with a client, thereby rendering either them or the client chained in monogamy, which would be both unethical and also destructive to the reproductive needs of the other 7/8ths of our population."

[The Digital Rule]

Mental capacity determines responsibility, age does not.

In a future world where genetic and biological engineering is rife, there are few definitive lines between species. They all change and evolve as a collection of unified organisms, of varying age to mental capacity ratio. I hope not to discriminate between age or species.

My nation is based upon current/near-future technology and so we maintain an age limit for sexual consent, jury duty, drug use, gun control and vehicle operation. We don't have an age limit on military service or the right to vote, as these are determined by a competency test which all but the stupidest among a sentient species could pass, so that any age/species who are residents of my nation can vote and support their nation, even if they aren't old enough to bear arms or drink under our constitution.

This proposal seems too controversial for too many people to be accepted by the community :/

[Eireann Fae]

Mental capacity determines responsibility, age does not.

In a future world where genetic and biological engineering is rife, there are few definitive lines between species. They all change and evolve as a collection of unified organisms, of varying age to mental capacity ratio. I hope not to discriminate between age or species.

My nation is based upon current/near-future technology and so we maintain an age limit for sexual consent, jury duty, drug use, gun control and vehicle operation. We don't have an age limit on military service or the right to vote, as these are determined by a competency test which all but the stupidest among a sentient species could pass, so that any age/species who are residents of my nation can vote and support their nation, even if they aren't old enough to bear arms or drink under our constitution.

This proposal seems too controversial for too many people to be accepted by the community :/

"It seems to me that the fourth clause would serve your purpose..."

[The Digital Rule]

We only use emancipation when it comes to minors seeking a place of residence independent of their guardians, and similar situations. To send every minor who wishes to vote, and have a say on things which affect their rights, through the judicial system... just seems foolish. Even so, we wouldn't have one single threshold of majority, which I think is what the debate has been around in previous posts.

Clause 6 basically invalidates this idea of a "threshold of majority" by saying I can set the age limits however I want for whatever organisms I want. Unless I'm not following it correctly :S

EDIT: Also, to make my point clearer from earlier, the line between species will be blurred in the future. The speed in which an organism reaches maturity won't be based upon any single defined species, it will be based upon their genetic modifications.

[Monikian WA Mission]

Clause 6 basically invalidates this idea of a "threshold of majority" by saying I can set the age limits however I want for whatever organisms I want. Unless I'm not following it correctly :S

"Are you saying that your nation or its sub-national units (if any) do not establish arbitrary age limits on rights, privileges, sexual consent, and etc anyway? After all if you want to get really technical, basing it merely on mental capacity would be far too difficult for primitive societies as that would require a test of some sort to see if an individual does indeed have a mental capacity of an adult. As such the creation of age lines, within the parameters of the the society itself is far easier.

"Under Clause 5 your nation could enact a law stating that if a minor wants and can pass a test to determine Adult Mental Capacity than your nation could on those grounds provide for judicial emancipation.

"Finally, my society is space-faring and much more advanced than most known human civilizations, other sentient beings we are unsure of as we have had less contact with them though. Even though we have both genetic engineering (which we have used to increase our strength and intelligence at a pace beyond which natural selection would do on it its own--a remnant of the Slavery days during the Era of the Screams prior to our revolution 700 years ago) we have chosen to not modify ourselves with other species as the results have been sterile individuals. Furthermore, the act of mating itself carries a great deal of significance to every sentient species we have thus far encountered."

[The Digital Rule]

I appreciate the intelligent response, I see them far too rarely these days :S

Here are some arbitrary age limits in my country:
drive a moped, sale/use of some drugs (caffeine pills, antibiotics): Age 16.
hold a learner driver's license, gamble, smoke tobacco: Age 17.
own a full driver's license, other drug-use (alcohol), sexual consent, operating certain heavy machinery, judicial service and frontline army service: Age 18.

These ages aren't that unusual compared to other societies of my time. However, to register to vote, you must go to a government facility and pass a competence test. It isn't designed to strain mental capacity, it's merely to ensure thet you're somewhat conscious of what you're doing. It's made so almost any hill-billy could pass it, and a five year old could probably vote if they wanted. Those who are illiterate, blind, or have some other reason are given helped by an official so their votes are also counted. Once that test is completed at any government facility, any species or age group who is a resident within my nation can vote. There is no need for an age of majority in this instance, neither is there any reason to emancipate a minor when a political vote is not the same as living without a guardian.

With regards to how difficult the test is to implement, it doesn't really slow things down all that much.

[Monikian WA Mission]

I appreciate the intelligent response, I see them far too rarely these days :S

Here are some arbitrary age limits in my country:
drive a moped, sale/use of some drugs (caffeine pills, antibiotics): Age 16.
hold a learner driver's license, gamble, smoke tobacco: Age 17.
own a full driver's license, other drug-use (alcohol), sexual consent, operating certain heavy machinery, judicial service and frontline army service: Age 18.

Talik' Murzhan responded.

"So then there are arbitrary age limits in your country then--either on the national or sub-national level. We have arbitrary age limits in our society as well even though we do not use caffeine, tobacco or alcohol (either because they are poisons to us, don't do anything, or simply are not useful to our biology.

"For example a learner's permit for a hover vehicle begins at age 6 (Our planetary orbit is 2.5 times as long as that of earth's so this would be about age 15 for an Earth Human). Holding a full operators license for a hover vehicle for personal use 7 years, an a chauffeur's license (mass transit, taxi service, and of course chauffeuring for social events) 10 years. The age of sexual consent is 7 for females and non-binome males (binomes its is age 10--their reproductive role requires special training). Use of 'Sord'dunak age 10, Use of 'Jabrukah (a beverage similar in effect to us as ethanol is to humans) age 10, Jhanifrim age 10. Antibiotics, medications, and medical drugs have no age limit provided they are used under the care of a healer. All political rights are granted at age 7.

"We also provide for the emancipation of minors judicially provided that they are over age 6 and can support themselves through work. Fortunately in our society it is an extremely rare occurrence but it does happen from time to time.

However, to register to vote, you must go to a government facility and pass a competence test. It isn't designed to strain mental capacity, it's merely to ensure thet you're somewhat conscious of what you're doing. It's made so almost any hill-billy could pass it, and a five year old could probably vote if they wanted. Those who are illiterate, blind, or have some other reason are given helped by an official so their votes are also counted. Once that test is completed at any government facility, any species or age group who is a resident within my nation can vote. There is no need for an age of majority in this instance, neither is there any reason to emancipate a minor when a political vote is not the same as living without a guardian.

"While my society would not exactly agree on the way your society implements its acquisition of political rights; mainly because even though among our species it is not uncommon for someone as young as 2 to have informed opinions on many political issues though lacking the experience and foresight to see how a proposed matter of legislation might not only effect them but any other member of our society and as such considered by us to not be fully qualified to assist in the process of government. Would it not be possible under Clause 6 which reads;

. PROVIDES for member countries or their sub-national or regional administrations to set arbitrary thresholds for gaining or losing differing rights (e.g. age-restricted sales), responsibilities (e.g. compulsory education), protections (e.g. statutory rape) or privileges (e.g. voting rights), provided that such variations are appropriate with the intents and purpose of this resolution, and not in contravention of international law;

"Be permitted to set the arbitrary threshold at birth/hatching/pod ejection/etc, or some age where passing the test is extremely unlikely anyway due to a lack of sufficient development on average, and require that in order to use those political rights the citizen is required to pass your testing format?

With regards to how difficult the test is to implement, it doesn't really slow things down all that much.

"Perhaps for your society no. This of course is fortunate, however, I would imagine that more primitive societies--IE societies which have yet to develop or implement at least silicon microprocessing technology might find testing every citizen difficult, especially if they have a very large population.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

Again, Ms. Harper feels that we should not go down to a competence test system because it was one of the elements that led to the downfall of the previous attempt. A human aged eight could pass all their A-levels but still has to wait until they are 18 to start buying shares or have extenuating circumstances to attempt early emancipation though the judiciary.

[Monikian WA Mission]

"Ambassador Harper, the point was that that a nation could set an arbitrary age for this at 0 (whatever 0 means for their species) and then apply a test on their own. On an international level I would find that competency testing would be inappropriate and would vote against such a measure. For us Monikians we support the draft as it is and would argue for its passage as it would open up other areas for bloc--I mean legislation."

[The Digital Rule]

If "Joe Thoughtless" aged 35 still living with his redneck parents can influence the country without any kind of scope or insight, I don't see how my nation will end up worse off if "Timmy Uneducated" can also vote when he still wets the bed. So long as the test can't be passed by something with no idea what it's doing (a pet budgie), but still excludes neither the idiotic or the naive, everybody has equal rights, with regards to age and species as well as gender and culture. We are a more developed country, and so the majority of the population remains significantly older anyhow.

I presume with that information you can see why we do it this way. I also like the fact politicians still have to address school children in their campaigns too It's all done without the need for a judge (see previous posts.) We believe to influence the country carries a lesser responsibility (as any idiot can vote, similar to America but without discimination on age) than emancipation, which is dealt with by a judge.

If we are allowed to set the Age of Majority at 0 years old, may I ask what the point in having a resolution on it is?

[Charlotte Ryberg]

If "Joe Thoughtless" aged 35 still living with his redneck parents can influence the country without any kind of scope or insight, I don't see how my nation will end up worse off if "Timmy Uneducated" can also vote when he still wets the bed. So long as the test can't be passed by something with no idea what it's doing (a pet budgie), but still excludes neither the idiotic or the naive, everybody has equal rights, with regards to age and species as well as gender and culture. We are a more developed country, and so the majority of the population remains significantly older anyhow.

I presume with that information you can see why we do it this way. I also like the fact politicians still have to address school children in their campaigns too It's all done without the need for a judge (see previous posts.) We believe to influence the country carries a lesser responsibility (as any idiot can vote, similar to America but without discimination on age) than emancipation, which is dealt with by a judge.

If we are allowed to set the Age of Majority at 0 years old, may I ask what the point in having a resolution on it is?

Setting the age of majority to 0 would not be compliance with clause one especially as it uses the words "typically appropriate and/or sufficient mental capacity". I could not give out straight numbers considering the nature of the NS Multiverse.