Subject:
|
Re: Megan's Law, and its implications
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 10 Mar 2003 20:51:21 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
330 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Frank Filz writes:
> "Dave Schuler!" wrote:
> > > Oh, and making kids do chores _is_ abuse! It's just not an abuse that our
> > > society accepts. :-)
> >
> > I think you meant to omit the "not" from that statement. I see your smiley
> > face, but I don't know that chores can be called abuse, even under what I
> > understand of your societal model. If the parent is not otherwise compensated
> > for the costs of child rearing, I don't see how the assignment of moderate
> > tasks can be called abusive.
>
> I think he was saying "It's just not an abuse that our society accepts
> [as an abuse]." I think Chris is mostly against the idea that the kid
> should get an allowance for doing chores, or even just be coerced into
> doing them.
Frank's "[as an abuse]" is a perfect clarification.
Basically, I think that to deny access to our rights as citizens based on the
age of the citizen (which I assert kids are) is exactly the moral equivalent of
denying rights based on skin tone or gender. (Which is to say, an abomination.)
I'm not exactly opposed to paying kids for the chores, just the coercion part.
The kid should be as free to enter a contract for labour as an adult. I do
find it repugnant for the parents to withhold reasonable spending power in
order to defacto coerce their kids.
Keep in mind that ab-use is a synonym for mis-use. I think it a misuse of a
human to enslave them. Even in the happy paternalistic model that most people
take.
> That doesn't mean no chores, just that the kid (or little
> people as Chris has said in the past) should be offered the opportunity
> to help the family by doing some chores. I think there's sort of a
> subtley here that I may not be conveying well.
I'm not sure of the subtlety, but what you write above is correct about my
beliefs.
The question of reasonability in what parents can expect of their kids is asked
above by Dave! I think that there is no contract in place between an unborn
child and the prospective parents that give the parents special privelege in
forcing compliance with rules. _All_ of the responsibility for giving is on
the shoulders of those who had a choice. Parents incur a great responsibility,
much more so than most people understand when first making that choice -- and
usually ever, in my estimation.
Our budget is run democratically. It was simple to explain to my son when he
was four that if we didn't pay the house payment we'd have to live under a
bridge. He was thence in favor of devoting that amount to that purpose. Same
with the utilities. When he wanted something a bit expensive me made him a
part of the budget process so that we could figure out how to get it. We now
have a short-hand method of handling it by just agreeing in advance that we're
going to pay our bills and then give each member of the family a completely
discretionary allowance.
Chris
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Megan's Law, and its implications
|
| (...) Okay, but would you hold a profoundly retarded person equally culpable for his actions as a fully-functioning, mentally healthy adult? To do so would be, in my view, unforgiveably cruel and unfair. By the same token, if a child is (...) (22 years ago, 10-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Megan's Law, and its implications
|
| (...) I've been mulling this over, and something just isn't ringing true for me about it. You claim that your home budget is run democratically, but I don't think I can believe that. I gather that you currently have one child, correct? But suppose (...) (22 years ago, 28-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Megan's Law, and its implications
|
| (...) As one of the people suggesting that everything can be treated as a property right, I would like to point out that I don't think that compensation is the sole remedy. Certainly people who demonstrate an inability to restrain themselves need to (...) (22 years ago, 10-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
24 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
