You are trying to tell me that one human being can be the property of another human being. |
For the millionth time, "property" and "custody" are not identical concepts, because all human beings have the natural
right to life - from the moment of physical autonomy (i.e. birth,
etc) until the moment of verified and documented irreversible death. A society that fails to punish murder will be completely dysfunctional, and there's no reason at all to make an exception for infanticide, especially when there's a growing abundance of charities that would take an unwanted child off anyone's hands "no questions asked".
In order to have the right to liberty and property, however, one must be capable of reasoning, respecting the rights of others, and taking responsibility for one's actions. Human beings are not born with those abilities - they are typically learned in the first one or two decades of life. Furthermore, a person can lose those rights on account of violating the rights of others (imprisonment), voluntary surrender of rights (
freedom of contract), or documented
mental illness. The custody holders / guardians are not the slaves of their dependents, and it is perfectly reasonable that they expect them to do certain chores in compensation for pulling their economic weight. What constitutes such compensation -- from merely good behavior to work to sexual favors -- is entirely subjective.
This limitation on one's rights must be conditional and open to review, which I call the
right to emancipation. If a child wants to leave his/her parents, either to be a fully self-owning adult or to transfer custody to another person or organization, s\he should be able to do so, as per the outcome of arbitration / jury trial. This right is not entirely "
negative", because it creates an obligation on the parents to facilitate some degree of transparency into their family life. In other words, you can exploit your kids, but you can't brainwash or otherwise damage them so that they can't expose you, now or in the future. An evolving system of
competetive jurisprudence and public opinion would naturally lead to the emergence of reasonable standards of parental behavior, though for the most part it would remain a sliding scale.
And I've never tried pot. I'm not a pothead. |
Good for you.
(But since I enjoy playing a jerk on this forum so much, I reserve to call anyone a pot-head for whatever reason I want, teeheehee.)