GirlChat #592535


Re: Agreed...

Posted by EthanEdwards on 2014-April-16 06:05:29 EDT, Wednesday
In reply to Re: Agreed... posted by Dissident on 2014-April-16 02:42:07 EDT, Wednesday

  Views: 0    Likes: 0     
Thanks for the calm and cogent reply.

When it comes to children, I don't think it's good to set some grand standard of liberty that is independent of human values.

I have argued that parents are generally the best people to watch out for a child's interest, but sometimes the state must override the combined desires of parents and child.

I've mentioned before the 6-year-old in a divorce case who is likely to choose a parent who lets him indulge every whim and sets no rules. I can mention now a 10-year-old girl who decides she wants her clitoris and surrounding tissues cut off. I can mention a 10-year-old who likes free samples of heroin. I can mention a 7-year-old who accepts his parents' religion and thinks it is appropriate if he is severely beaten when the devil makes him disobey his parents. And now I can also mention a girl who likes the idea of her parents prostituting her for extra family income.

Idealistic notions of liberty would support all of those children -- more crucially, it would support the adults who help those children carry out those decisions. For anyone who is willing to accept those consequences, then I have no further argument to make. (I would, with a wince in some cases support the right of adults to do all those things to themselves.)

I think society inevitably brings moral values to bear on particular questions relating to acceptable treatment of children. The issues are often difficult and complicated. If I think a set of changes in society will lead to lots of children choosing prostitution, and I don't like that idea, then I think it is entirely appropriate to argue against such changes.

We can leave it to our readers to decide which vision they would like to support.


This post is archived, preventing any new replies.

Responses