About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unread


Post 0

Monday, August 6 - 4:00amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

I was recently called a statist for making an off the cuff remark. I believe this person a troll however it made me think about the topic. Let me provide some background and then my thoughts on it.

 

Over the weekend we enjoyed kayaking down the Thornapple as a family. Beautiful day. We eventually came upon swarms of those who had taken to tubes. Many of them were drunk (by many I mean it was all we could do to paddle around the masses of people who had tied their tubes together with twine.) It wasn’t long before we were constantly hit by the pungent smell of weed. It was constant. Many of these people were stoned and drunk.

 

I believe if you want to do this - fine. However, many of them had children. In my opinion they moved into an area where they should be charged with neglect.

 

Comments?



Post 1

Wednesday, August 8 - 6:31amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

No argument here.



Post 2

Wednesday, August 8 - 8:24amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

OK - so I'm not floating around in left field (hehe.)

 

It seems these individuals (who I suspect range in age from 18-25) are likely single, have no children and believe being a Libertarian means one gets to do whatever one feels like.  Down with statism in ALL it's forms - which to me sounds a lot like anarchy and not Libertarianism. I want to naively believe there is a bit more common sense among this group of people.  My mistake!



Post 3

Saturday, September 15 - 12:34pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Tim,

 

The threshold for where the line is drawn in whether a guardian is harming or neglecting the incompetent is arbitrary.

 

For example, I would at least draw the line at whether an action causes "immediate permanant damage".  But then even in certain cultures immediate permanant damage is considered acceptable... such as male genital mutilation, or the injection of aluminum causing immune response against oneself: random autoimmune diseases.

 

Personally I'd consider feeding a child a standard american diet full of sugar and grains neglect.  That offering milk & historically natural paleo diet meals be the standard.  But that seems pertty draconian, especially since my diet is pretty expensive, and most people haven't come to the same conclusions to me on what is good for the human digestive system & body.

 

To solve this I'd propose highly distributed governance on this particular issue.  For example, a large multi-cultural civilization may allow for multiple guardian-incompetent contracts & arbitration companies.  A civilization may then require its residents to have a contract with one of these arbitration companies in order to be eligable to be a guardian.

 

Cheers,

Dean



Post 4

Sunday, September 16 - 3:44amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

It will take a lot of hard work, including both study and analysis, to pin down what, exactly, should be required of parents, whether there should be any relativism relating to culture, economic wherewithal, or other considerations, and if so, how much.  For example, there are some cultures that practice "female circumcision", which I think would be more aptly named "female castration".  I vaguely remember an issue of someone from such a culture who had come to the U.S. and still performed the procedure, or wanted to.   I don't think that should be permitted because of the serious permanent harm it does to the victim.



Post 5

Sunday, September 16 - 3:47amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

I disagree with the statement that the threshold is arbitrary.  But to make sure we're on the same page, perhaps you could define what you mean by arbitrary.



Post to this thread
User ID Password reminder or create a free account.