|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Feb 14, 2010 5:45 pm
Much of libertarian argument relies on the concept of individuals consenting to contracts, behavior, etc. It's easy in today's context to qualify statements by saying "two consenting adults," but what about children in "Libertopia" and how would they be treated? Would they be considered individuals at birth and therefore have the right to refuse, say, vaccinations? Or would there be an acknowledgment of the underdeveloped nature of being a child; that is, that children - often enough to make the generalization about them - tend not to be cognizant of what they need to know in order to make such decisions and therefore become lawful adults at some designated age? Finally, children are, presumably, the ward of their parents but does the state have any rightful power to intervene and make a value judgment regarding the treatment of children?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 6:04 pm
The appropriate role of the parent is as protector of their children. They also initiate the learning of many of skills that more or less guarantee some integration into society as a whole, and hopefully success in life.
There is some evolutionary logic to allowing parents to be the primary keepers of their own biological children. Presumably it's in their interests to have their offspring do well, and for them to do all the appropriate behaviors to accomplish this.
When parents fail to be parents, that's when you hit a lot of turmoil. How long should a state entity allow bad parents to keep their children? Who gets custody? What if surrogate parents are from another country?
One can start to see why even a very bright kid would have difficultly sorting this out without some entity guarding their best interest. I suspect these things are dealt with best on a case by case basis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 1:36 pm
Less Than Liz Much of libertarian argument relies on the concept of individuals consenting to contracts, behavior, etc. It's easy in today's context to qualify statements by saying "two consenting adults," but what about children in "Libertopia" and how would they be treated? Would they be considered individuals at birth and therefore have the right to refuse, say, vaccinations? Or would there be an acknowledgment of the underdeveloped nature of being a child; that is, that children - often enough to make the generalization about them - tend not to be cognizant of what they need to know in order to make such decisions and therefore become lawful adults at some designated age? Finally, children are, presumably, the ward of their parents but does the state have any rightful power to intervene and make a value judgment regarding the treatment of children? Well I think that children are the most important thing as they will be the next chapter in this nations great history but they are easily corrupted with influence and power or just pure intimidation so I think there should be no influence out side of the family its that simple you cant teach children evolution in school.School is for children to gain knowledge to survive in the this country math history writing basic science and you know I have experienced a position when I had to make a choice Mommy or daddy and I knew at the Young age of 3 that daddy hurt me mommy cares for me you cant make a discussion for somebody even if they are little children.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 10, 2010 10:27 am
Less Than Liz Much of libertarian argument relies on the concept of individuals consenting to contracts, behavior, etc. It's easy in today's context to qualify statements by saying "two consenting adults," but what about children in "Libertopia" and how would they be treated? Would they be considered individuals at birth and therefore have the right to refuse, say, vaccinations? Or would there be an acknowledgment of the underdeveloped nature of being a child; that is, that children - often enough to make the generalization about them - tend not to be cognizant of what they need to know in order to make such decisions and therefore become lawful adults at some designated age? Finally, children are, presumably, the ward of their parents but does the state have any rightful power to intervene and make a value judgment regarding the treatment of children? In every society you have to draw a line somewhere, and that line is most likely going to be an arbitrary, one size fits all line. We know portions of the brain are still developing well into the teen years, and they are the parts most often associated with reasoned rational judgment. Draw the line anywhere and you will most likely have early developers who lack the rights of majority but possess the relevant wisdom to make good decisions, and you will also have late bloomers who lack the wisdom to make good decisions but will possess the full rights to make them. You also can't make the line so late in life that we tow people around forever without ever having them take responsibility for themselves. The answer, then, I think, is to keep our age of majority about where it is, but provide easier ways, for those who demonstrate the capability, to achieve legal emancipation status. Beyond that, children largely need to have a guiding hand that makes intelligent, informed decisions for them. With respect to the role of the state in all this, the state takes far too intrusive of a role in parenting. It needs to step back in some matters. However, we do need the state to ensure some minimum standards of care and safety are being provided. If for no other reason, severely dysfunctional and abusive families can produce criminally inclined youths who go out and pose a danger to the safety of law abiding and well intentioned individuals. Much like our right to bear arms does not give us the right to build personal nuclear weapons, so too do your rights as a parent not extend to the right to raise children to be killers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 12, 2010 3:36 am
Unschooling and the liberation of children is a must in any libertarian and emergent society. IMO we need to remember one specific. Children are in fact human beings. If one adult has the same right to individual sovereignty, then the same should apply to children. The problem also arises from the fact from the line in the sand that declares one from being a persons property and pretty much a SLAVE of the parent, and "self-ownership." I remember being 17 turning 18 and feeling completely patronized by the people around. Now I am 18 now and essentially very little has physically or mentally changed within those 365+ days. And now that I'm 18 after years of being, essentially someones pet and being belittled, I'm magically supposed to act as an adult? For other thoughts I suggest the School Sucks project: http://www.schoolsucksproject.com/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 14, 2010 7:10 am
Quote: For other thoughts I suggest the School Sucks project: http://www.schoolsucksproject.com/ From the site: Quote: 1. The twelve-year process of an American public education has a dramatic effect on the mind of a child. When we first enter school at age six, many of our best personal attributes are already in place. We are curious, innovative, unique and creative in ways that we will rarely be able to replicate throughout the rest of our lives. But over time, school sucks those essential attributes out of too many of us…and replaces them with predictability, obedience and indifference. Um, the makers of the site are familiar with the Montessori method, aren't they?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 7:45 pm
you know the public schools are failing American children the government cant do anything really well except war and there only duty is defending and protecting citizens rights nothing more so education is a privilege not a right so it should not be provided by the government
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
