differece between childish and childlike?
339980
childish => stupid like a child, immature, infantile; negative connotations\nchildlike => literally like a child; neutral to positive connotations
291013
There's an article called "Manners and Etiquette resources for kids online". There are different links to follow and it is quite interesting.
1162704
Do you possibly mean "elders" as in elderly people?  If so, may elderly people do very much like children, but some don't.  This could be for a number of reasons:\n\n* Because little ones move so fast they may be afraid that they will get knocked down and hurt.\n\n* Because many young ones these days are not taught manners and this disgusts the older ones.\n\n* Because many kids are bored around adults and the elderly ones don't know what activities to do with the kids. \n\n* Because they've already finished raising their own chlidren and they are simply too tired to spend much more time with younger ones.\n\nDoes that help?
392472
In toddlers, they mimic the violence assuming its something they can mimic like hitting. In older kids...practically nothing. This is just an agenda pushed by the political right.
530609
Both are same but the voice is different. Second one is in passive voice and sounds more formal.
410622
I agree. It is immature. But at the same time, I wouldn't want my kids to watch things like that. There are lots of words in the human language that can eloquently express yourself and not having to resort to profanity. Sometimes the youth see others doing it and find that it is the "in" thing to do so they do it too. This isn't being really mature. "Let's do it because someone else is and it looks cool." That's not how an adult or anyone should behave.
679478
"Type" sounds like the more specific one, when there is a definite characteristic that defines the group. "Kind" sounds like the more general, blurry one, more inclusive than "type." Connotatively there is a slight difference.
291271
younger than springtime
518842
One is the vice versa of the other, and the difference is just 27 ! \n...And what is this Question doing under the 'Family' category, please ?!
329172
means that the person isnt mature yet
1114807
loose = young/naive\nwild = drinks acts as a child yelling/screaming\nparty = acts irresponsibly/not willing to accept consequences of actions
4868
wtf. Neither. he/she is NINE years old, dont encorage them to be a snob.
1066802
I guess it depends on your dictionary. I didn't see it in Webster's. You must be using a special, childish, name-calling version.
1101908
I think you are absolutely correct!!  I have seen both scenerios....I have friends who let their child do anything they wanted because they didn't want to 'squash their spirit' and now they are in trouble with the law and think rules don't apply to them because they never have before.  Then I've got friends who were pretty strict, made their children say Please and Thank you and show respect, as well as follow rules.  Those children are now self-disciplined teenagers, making good grades and volunteering throughout the community.  It all started when they were 3 and under.  Its hard to do they said, because they felt like they were playing 'drill sargeant' all the time, but it paid off.
822002
that's hilarious..but kinda childish...lol but good one..might use that from now one..jks jks!
1126665
children will play with each when little...\nracism is taught to children by adults!!!
732101
The difference is the definition of harm.  A consenting *adult* is considered to be aware of what he's consenting to, and is considered emotionally capable of dealing with the intricacies and consequences.  \n\nA child is not considered capable of those attributes, and thus is not considered capable of offering true consent.  There is too much risk of harm, especially mentally, and too much risk of coercion (the child saying 'yes' because they feel they have to, not because they actually want to.)  \n\nIt is true that the age at which we consider someone a 'child' in this sense is somewhat arbitrary.  Where you live, it is apparently 18.  Where I live, the age of consent is 14 (with some caveats, most of which are meant to exclude coercive elements.)  This is because the people who wrote the laws had different ideas of when the above considerations I mentioned held true, and when they were not true.\n\nAlso, for those who say "God does not make people gay,"  I present to you Romans, chapter 1 vs 26-27\n\n"For this reason GOD GAVE THEM OVER to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural,\nand in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error."\n\nQuite clearly claims that God made at least these people gay...