Baptism as a rite of public display of “burying” the old self and starting a new life as a Christian should only be performed on someone old enough to understand the significance of such an act. If one wants to christen an infant or have a blessing . . okay but it is completely different when an infant is unaware and probably an unwilling participant. They are two different rituals.
As I said, I don’t want to argue on this thread because it’ll derail and probably provide fuel for the same people that we’re both trying to argue against.
So I’ll just post what I’ve learned and then leave it at that for now. If you want to discuss more, FRmail me, would you kindly?
The question comes down to whether baptism is an act of man or an act of God. If it’s an act of man, then I suppose what you say makes sense. But if baptism is an act of God working on man, then baptism of infants is not just acceptable but extremely important. Not quite to the level of those-kids-will-go-to-Hell like some people claim (Because God works in his own way), but still important because baptism is a gift that the Lord has given to us. It’s God placing his claim on the one being baptized through the means of water and the Word.