Ageism’ is flawed
Discrimination: When It’s Necessary and When It’s Not
Discrimination is a loaded term these days, but let’s face it: sometimes, it’s justified. There are certain characteristics that can and should be taken into account when evaluating someone, like their height, sex, intelligence, and yes, even age.
Take President Joe Biden, for example. At 81 years old, his cognitive and physical decline is becoming increasingly evident. Yet, whenever someone dares to mention it, they’re accused of ageism. But here’s the thing: age is a valid factor to consider when assessing someone’s fitness for a job or their qualifications for certain responsibilities.
Think about it. We have age requirements for various roles. We expect our soldiers to be between 17 and 35 years old. Our presidents must be at least 35. And if a politician is younger than 30, we hold them to higher standards of maturity and intelligence. So why should we pretend that age doesn’t matter when it comes to a candidate over 80?
It’s only logical that we scrutinize their mental acuity more closely. Yet, there are those who insist that age should be disregarded entirely. One shocking example was when the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention claimed it was “ageist” to prioritize the elderly for COVID-19 vaccinations.
Thankfully, many sensible individuals recognized the importance of discriminating based on age in this context. But unfortunately, some bureaucrats disagreed. Even when a federal prosecutor declined to charge Biden for mishandling documents due to his fading memory, Democrats still try to label any criticism of his mental acuity as ageism.
Let’s be clear: Biden’s age is undeniably relevant to his bid for a second term. Anyone who denies this is either blinded by an anti-discrimination ideology or simply a partisan liar.
What are some possible consequences of ignoring or denying the relevance of age in assessing someone’s fitness for a specific role, such as President Biden
Discrimination is a term that carries significant weight in today’s society. It is often viewed as something negative and unjust, but the reality is that there are instances when discrimination can be justified and necessary. Certain characteristics of individuals, such as height, sex, intelligence, and even age, should be taken into account when evaluating their capabilities and qualifications.
The example of President Joe Biden serves as a prime illustration. At 81 years old, it is becoming increasingly evident that he is experiencing cognitive and physical decline. However, whenever someone dares to mention this, they are immediately accused of ageism. The truth is, age is a valid factor to consider when assessing the fitness of an individual for a job or their qualifications for specific responsibilities.
It is important to acknowledge that we have age requirements for various roles. We expect our soldiers to be between the ages of 17 and 35, and our presidents must be at least 35 years old. Furthermore, if a politician is younger than 30, we hold them to higher standards of maturity and intelligence. Thus, pretending that age doesn’t matter when it comes to a candidate over 80 is illogical.
It is only logical to scrutinize the mental acuity of individuals in their later years more closely. Yet, there are individuals who insist that age should be entirely disregarded. A shocking example of this was when the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention claimed that prioritizing the elderly for COVID-19 vaccinations was “ageist.” Fortunately, many sensible individuals recognized the importance of discriminating based on age in this context.
Unfortunately, there were bureaucrats who disagreed. Even when a federal prosecutor declined to charge Biden for mishandling documents due to his fading memory, Democrats still try to label any criticism of his mental acuity as ageism. It is essential to be clear about the relevance of Biden’s age to his bid for a second term. Denying this fact is either a consequence of being blinded by an anti-discrimination ideology or simply being a partisan liar.
In conclusion, discrimination can be justified and necessary in certain circumstances. Age, along with other characteristics, should be taken into account when evaluating someone’s capabilities and qualifications for a given role. It is illogical to pretend that age doesn’t matter, especially when it comes to positions of significant responsibility. Let us prioritize rational evaluation rather than dismissing relevant and important factors.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...