University of Oslo scholar Joona Rasanen published an article in The Journal of Medical Ethics called “A Moral Case for Legal Age Change,” reported The College Fix. Joona gives three reasons why people should be allowed to change their age. “1) the person genuinely feels his age differs significantly from his chronological age.” Feelings don’t care about your facts, am I right? I also love this term “chronological age.” That’s akin to saying “edible ice cream” or “car with wheels.” It’s redundant, it’s stupid, and while ludicrous to most of us, it’s something that could be really poisonous to the logical operation of society if it gains mainstream acceptance.
Anyways, Joona’s second reason is that someone should be able to change their age if “the person’s biological age is recognized to be significantly different from his chronological age.” Alright so here he’s probably talking about the development of someone’s brain or anatomy being unusually fast or slow. Well, tough, Joona — you know, these Marxist academics claim to love diversity, except when it comes to diversity of thought or, apparently, diversity of body and mind types at a given age.
Third, the Norwegian scholar says that someone should be able to change his age when “age change would likely prevent, stop or reduce ageism, discrimination due to age, he would otherwise face.”
Whoa, whoa, hold on there, Joona. When people discriminate against someone for their age, it’s typically based on how that person looks. How many people say “oh, Jeremy, you know, I got a hold of your birth certificate and ha! you’re old.” The only exception to this is telling boomers or millennials to shut up because of their mindset — again, usually not their actual age.
