Do parents own their children?
Do parents own their children?
Posts
Total:
24
We have a commitment to them to turn them into good citizens and happy people and a responsibility to make sure they do not die until they reach adulthood.
Once adult hood is reached are obligation is to defend them if the police shoot them in self defense by saying
"He wuz a good boy, he dindu nufffin"
We also have an obligation to provide the media pictures of him at 12 years old before he joined any street gangs.
No, you dont own children, you cant circumcise them or vaccinate them against their will. You also cannot tell them what to do.
At best case for you, you can engage in free trade with them by offering housing and food and other stuff in exchange for them obeying some of your rules.
At no point you may actually take away their freedom.
I have never hit my son but if my son said that shit to me he would be telling teachers he ran into a door knob.
-->
@WyIted
We get it, you are a bad parent who thinks he owns children.
-->
@Best.Korea
This is the first time I thought you have gone too far. This is unacceptable. Please never say this again
-->
@WyIted
Maybe you shouldnt threat to punch your son because of something he said.
-->
@Best.Korea
@WyIted
So we take ownership of children.
We own the responsibility.
-->
@Best.Korea
So you believe parents go into a trading bartering bargaining compromise with children like an agreement.
Let me ask, when is this agreement initiated and executed ,when the child can sign on the dotted line?
-->
@WyIted
Watch this:
-->
@Best.Korea
So you believe parents go into a trading bartering bargaining compromise with children like an agreement.
Let me ask, when is this agreement initiated and executed ,when the child can sign on the dotted line?
-->
@Mall
So we take ownership of children
I dont take ownership of anyone.
-->
@Mall
So you believe parents go into a trading bartering bargaining compromise with children like an agreement.
I simply believe that people dont own children.
Let me ask, when is this agreement initiated and executed ,when the child can sign on the dotted line?
There is no point at which you own children, not even while they are in the womb. They are separate beings with their own goals.
-->
@Best.Korea
No, you dont own children, you cant circumcise them or vaccinate them against their will. You also cannot tell them what to do.At best case for you, you can engage in free trade with them by offering housing and food and other stuff in exchange for them obeying some of your rules.At no point you may actually take away their freedom.
this sounds great
but there are some very practical restrictions on "freedom"
-->
@Best.Korea
There is no point at which you own children, not even while they are in the womb. They are separate beings with their own goals.
self-sovereignty makes your body equivalent to a sovereign state
and a state can deport anyone it wishes based on the whims of the king
-->
@Best.Korea
So do you or don't believe parents go into a trading bartering bargaining compromise with children like an agreement?
-->
@3RU7AL
but there are some very practical restrictions on "freedom"
The only restriction on freedom is when a person does something to violate the body of another.
self-sovereignty makes your body equivalent to a sovereign state
Each individual owns his body.
"No individual can claim the body of another" is the principle which can be upheld by everyone in same way without causing any self-negation in the process.
Any opposite principle is a self-negation, because if individual A can claim body of individual B, individual B cannot do the same to individual A.
If I am forced to go to school, I cannot later open my own school and force my teachers to go to it, nor can everyone in society practice that same type of force on everyone.
So in same way, any aggression on the body cannot be made a universal action without yielding self-negation.
In every case of aggression on body, only some people can do aggression in same way, but all cannot.
But everyone in society can respect body rights without creating any self-negation, since respecting body rights can be made a universal action and can be same for all.
and a state can deport anyone it wishes based on the whims of the king
When it comes to abortion, I am not really a fan of abortion, but woman's body does belong to a woman.
-->
@Best.Korea
The only restriction on freedom is when a person does something to violate the body of another.
so no fences to keep kids from running into traffic ?
no temper tantrums when you tell them they must go to bed or brush their teeth or eat their vegetables ?
-->
@Best.Korea
and a state can deport anyone it wishes based on the whims of the kingWhen it comes to abortion, I am not really a fan of abortion, but woman's body does belong to a woman.
bingo
-->
@3RU7AL
so no fences to keep kids from running into traffic ?
You can tell kids not to run into a traffic, or you can all simply stop using cars and make streets safe again.
Now, people are allowed to have a fence on their property.
However, they are not allowed to forcefully keep other people in that fence.
no temper tantrums when you tell them they must go to bed or brush their teeth or eat their vegetables ?
Its really just an illusion of control. Kids will eat when they are hungry, sleep when they are sleepy, and if they dont brush their teeth, its not really the end of the world. Besides, brushing isnt even a good way to have healthy teeth.
-->
@3RU7AL
@Best.Korea
If a mother didn't own what was in her body owning her body included, then the violation of rights would exist for that unborn person.
If you're going to be about rights, where and when does it start for a person?
You believe in a trading agreement you can't pinpoint where even the child signed onto. How can you do so with unborn baby's rights?
-->
@Mall
Parents are,
Offspring are,
Responsibility is an expectation,
But not always forthcoming.
Ownership is a concept.
-->
@3RU7AL
@Best.Korea
Do you not believe in controlling children for their own good?
Do you believe their personal so called rights, individual autonomy needs to trump what an adult knows better for them?
Example, if the child doesn't want to be fenced in to be able to go out of safe boundaries in which the child is ignorant of , which is ignorant of what is safe and dangerous.
If a child doesn't want his or her hand held while crossing a busy street.
The issue you run into with trying to make everything else child danger proof is that it becomes astronomically factorial of all the different scenarios that could be perilous never conceptualized.
It's directly practical to just safeguard the child.
That's under constraints, rules, control, generally no bargains.
A responsible parent that takes ownership of the parental role does not allow the child to run off in the mall, into the parking lot, into town with this ridiculous unrealistic system of trying to make every element the child can come across child hazard proof .
-->
@Mall
clearly, children do not have the same rights as adults