People of all ages should be considered inherently equal.

Firstly, that's six questions (nine if you count the rhetorical ones). Second, my answers, in order, are as follows:1) Do you think an 8 month old baby should be allowed to cast a vote in a democratic election?I don't think the baby should be denied a vote because he or she is 8 months old. Assuming we're talking about a typical 8 month old baby, there are issues of linguistic expression and physical ability to pull a lever at five feet in height that would be obviously prohibitive. Questions of intelligence exist as well, but bluntly, those self-same questions exist for a significant portion of the adult population, and it seems unfair to me to selectively apply a requirement of minimum intelligence to one demographic and not another. Whether there should be a universal minimum intelligence for voting is beyond the scope of this debate. 2) More to the point, do you think there should be any age restrictions for choosing the people who govern our society and order men and women into battle?Again, I freely admit that many characteristics common to eight month old humans are naturally prohibitive. It would be generous to posit that there's even one eight month old on the planet capable of such a weighty office; however, I insist that people should rise and fall on their merits, not their demographic. You are positing that in the event that such an eight month old is found, they should still be denied the right to vote based solely on how long they've been breathing air. I disagree.3) Should we also draft that 8 month old into service?See above. 4) Should we let the 5 year old work in a factory?See above, re: merit-based logic. Note that, compared to the spectrum of the typical eight month old, the typical five year old spectrum presents a statistically significant shift in the bell curve. It is not so generous to assume that there's a single five year old on the planet capable of factory work; indeed, for a mundane task on an assembly line as simple as tying a piece of string onto a product, it's safe to say that the majority of five year olds would be capable of performing the task. On what basis would you deny them the right to compete for such labor?5) Is it ok for a 66 year old man to marry a 5 year old girl?Again, the same merit-based argument holds true. The majority of five year old girls may be incapable of choosing a consensual marital relationship with another human being, but that does not mean a blanket line in the sand is appropriate. (I am deliberately ignoring the age of the groom, as it was set to that particular age just to evoke a false appeal to emotion argument. I do not intend to fall victim to the trap of groupthink taboos.)6) Or should we have some form of age restrictions? No, we should not. We should have relevant, merit-based restrictions only. In the case of the five questions above, relevant restrictions would be as follows:1 and 2 - whatever intelligence or citizen-based criteria we see fit to impose on the rest of society3 - the ability to perform military service4 - the ability to perform the relevant tasks in the factory5 - the ability to understand the implications, both emotional and legal, of a marital compact