I am 66 years of age,
Paul1405,
Make that 16, it goes better with your mentality. Nobody is that insipid at 66 apart from a bureaucrat !

Really, Individual? Do you really think the "old days" are the "good old days"?

Marital rape was legal until recently.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marital_rape#Australia

Indy, put up or shut up. Give examples of the so called "The Whitlam effect". I might be 66, but what I am not is a dotty old fool living in the past, sucking off society, down on everybody and everything. Now how old are you? Are you not sucking off the public teat through an Aged Pension. Why should you receive a Pension, and I don't due to asset levels, we own property and have cash investments, paid probably more tax that you ever have, and are still paying tax in retirement. Old farts like you who didn't provide for their retirement, pissed what ever you earned up against the wall, why should I support YOU until you cark it! Press gang the whole lot of you into a 'Seniors National Service'sounds are great idea to me. Then you can finally contribute, something you didn't adequately do in the past, otherwise you wouldn't be swinging off the public teat like you are now, and carrying on like a pork chop!

Dear Individual,

I have no clue what the "Whitlam effect" is.

I stand by my statement that many societal changes are detrimental, but my list of detrimental changes could be quite different than yours.

---

Dear AyameTan,

«I think communism is better than capitalism.»

And drowning could be "better" than being burned or crucified - why do we even need to choose between such terrible options?

«Everyone would get a basic minimum of food, shelter, clothing and education.»

Except those like me who refuse to accept money or goods that were stolen or taken by force from others.

But yes, communism is compatible with the idea that all one needs is material: food, shelter, clothing and the like. Under communism, those who want nothing more can be happy, but those who aspire for higher personal goals (including the dignity of living a moral life and refusing to be a thief) are miserable.

«Why should any 6-year-old work in a sweatshop?»

Having been forced to attend school at the age of 6, where I was heavily bullied by the other children, I wonder - I would probably prefer a sweatshop had I been given that option!

«And why would a gay man join a right-wing, bigoted party? He was an idiot.»

If that was the case then he must have been truly confused, but are you sure that he actually was gay? He may have been homosexual, but homosexuality is just a sexual orientation whereas gayness is a political one.

«What do you disagree with about the "gay agenda"? Equality? Tolerance? Acceptance?»

The turning of a biological feature, in this case one's sexual orientation, into an identity.

«Marital rape was legal until recently.»

But it was never moral, then why should it matter?

---

Dear Paul,

«Press gang the whole lot of you into a 'Seniors National Service'sounds are great idea to me.»

There is no need to go down to the level of your adversary: the very thought of compelling others, regardless of age, into "national service" is utterly disgusting and dreadful.

Yuyutsu - until you can provide something better than capitalism, I'm 100% in favor of communism. Ever seen six-year-olds working in a sweatshop instead of studying?

Taxation isn't theft. Taxes build roads, schools, hospitals, and pay for police and firefighters.

Schools aren't sweatshops. You learn things that are useful later in life. Things like math, reading, chemistry, physics, teamwork and so on. Fail.

Sweatshops teach you how to make clothes. And little else.

"Gayness is a political orientation." Please elaborate.

I guess being a bigoted conservative is also a political orientation. One that requires being put within padded walls.

Homosexuality is a sexual identity? What about heterosexuality? Isn't that also a sexual identity?

Last I checked, marital rape was never forbidden in the bible. Neither was slavery. Both are immoral.

Dear AyameTan,

Excellent questions:

«Ever seen six-year-olds working in a sweatshop instead of studying?»

While studying is wonderful, my previous post was about being forced to attend school, which is quite different. One society forces its children into sweatshops, another into schools - I find no substantial difference. Whether or not children learn something there, nobody, let alone children, ought to be forced into any institution: just let them play and study in their own way according to their own inclinations.

«Taxation isn't theft.»

Indeed, ideally taxation ought not be theft.

Sadly however, the way it is practiced today, where money is taken from people involuntarily, with or without their consent, it is a theft, or call it robbery if you prefer. That this money then goes towards important good causes does not change this basic fact.

«You learn things that are useful later in life. Things like math, reading, chemistry, physics, teamwork and so on.»

Even if this rosy picture was correct (many learn nothing, or even acquire bad habits in school!), who is to say what things are useful later in life? The above subjects constitute social engineering towards the goals of the state, not necessary towards the well-being of the children.

«"Gayness is a political orientation." Please elaborate.»

The gay movement aims to create a new social underdog class, presumably based on same-sexual preferences. In reality however, many members of the gay movement are not homosexual and would never consider homosexual activities in their private lives, just as many homosexual people do not consider themselves as underdogs and want nothing to do with this movement.

«Homosexuality is a sexual identity? What about heterosexuality? Isn't that also a sexual identity?»

Neither is!

Sexual orientation is a feature of our biological body.
We HAVE a body - we are NOT that body, hence to identify with our body or with any of its properties or features, is foolish.

«Last I checked, marital rape was never forbidden in the bible. Neither was slavery. Both are immoral.»

Correct on all accounts - since when is the bible a yardstick for morality?