U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old Yesterday, 12:56 AM
 
Location: SM
25,928 posts, read 10,001,595 times
Reputation: 9981

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324 View Post
At what age does a child gain its autonomy?

And if its at birth does that mean the parent has no right to hold their child in captivity at their home? Is linguistic capabilities the beginning of consent? And does a parent even have the right to make decisions for their child?
The "What if?" game has arrived at my doorstep. I'm a glutton for punishment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Yesterday, 12:58 AM
 
Location: Itinerant
6,490 posts, read 4,275,044 times
Reputation: 4978
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avondalist View Post
Rothbard's quote doesn't address the case where the mother decides to carry the child, even if the child would not have agreed to be born had they known what was in store..
That's called life, and you're free to choose to exit any time you wish.

You're trying very hard to present a circular argument. A fetus is in practical terms a parasite until its removed, naturally or surgically. Once removed it may or may not survive, depending on if its reached sufficient development. Once it survives long enough to speak and rationally reason can you really ask it whether or not it wishes to live. At this moment it also has every tool it needs to choose not living.

You can't ask a non-entity what it desires, indeed that's straight from the playbook of the anti-liberty crowd, assume what people want or don't want, and legislate accordingly.
__________________
My mod posts will always be in red.
The Rules Infractions & Deletions Who's the moderator? FAQ What is a "Personal Attack" What is "Trolling" Guidelines for copyrighted material.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 12:58 AM
 
1,954 posts, read 650,214 times
Reputation: 1517
Quote:
Originally Posted by No_Recess View Post
The child has no rights until after birth. Consent is a mechanism within the function of natural rights. Therefore it's not a violation.
So the mother is not responsible for giving birth to a brain damaged child because she drank during the pregnancy?

If that's your conception of natural rights then I find your worldview deficient.

But thank you for following through and clarifying.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:01 AM
 
Location: SM
25,928 posts, read 10,001,595 times
Reputation: 9981
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gungnir View Post
That's called life, and you're free to choose to exit any time you wish.

You're trying very hard to present a circular argument. A fetus is in practical terms a parasite until its removed, naturally or surgically. Once removed it may or may not survive, depending on if its reached sufficient development. Once it survives long enough to speak and rationally reason can you really ask it whether or not it wishes to live. At this moment it also has every tool it needs to choose not living.

You can't ask a non-entity what it desires, indeed that's straight from the playbook of the anti-liberty crowd, assume what people want or don't want, and legislate accordingly.
I owe you a beer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:05 AM
 
1,665 posts, read 1,089,349 times
Reputation: 3287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avondalist View Post
I think that childbirth is absolutely a violation of the consent of the child. Even if the child agrees with the decision after the fact, they had no say at the time.

At the same time, children must be born for our species to continue.

What I'm trying to get at is that consent is an insufficient organizing principle for a worldview, given that it cannot rectify the two previous statements.

The second statement is obviously true. The first could be debatable, but I'm skeptical. You have indicated that you disagree on that, and that's at the heart of where I am trying to probe you.

I'm not assuming libertarianism in all its flavors uniformly believes consent is sufficient to answer all questions. I'd be more sympathetic to an argument that said, "consent cannot explain this, so in these cases we use another organizing principle..."

I'm unsure how consent comes into play with respect to being born. I'm also unsure how it can even be a consideration of the person either birthed naturally or otherwise extracted from a womb -- or artificial womb, for that matter. Perhaps you could elaborate on that for me, or at least explain why you believe it constitutes some sort of violation?


Regarding the portion of your post I've made bold in the quote: That would be precisely my argument. The principle(s) we may observe and recognize, or the degree to which we do so, or give weight to, likely form the basis of our disagreement.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:09 AM
 
Location: Manchester NH
10,056 posts, read 2,818,325 times
Reputation: 2668
Quote:
Originally Posted by No_Recess View Post
The "What if?" game has arrived at my doorstep. I'm a glutton for punishment.
At what age does a child gain autonomy?

I know you can answer the question.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:09 AM
 
1,954 posts, read 650,214 times
Reputation: 1517
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gungnir View Post
That's called life, and you're free to choose to exit any time you wish.

You're trying very hard to present a circular argument. A fetus is in practical terms a parasite until its removed, naturally or surgically. Once removed it may or may not survive, depending on if its reached sufficient development. Once it survives long enough to speak and rationally reason can you really ask it whether or not it wishes to live. At this moment it also has every tool it needs to choose not living.

You can't ask a non-entity what it desires, indeed that's straight from the playbook of the anti-liberty crowd, assume what people want or don't want, and legislate accordingly.
The transition from non-entity to entity seems ambiguously defined (birth or the age of consent?) and also needlessly stark. Can you be a half-entity somewhere in the middle, capable of some reasoning and also not fully free? That's how our bodies develop so I don't see the use for a brightline distinction.

I'm also considering the suffering endured by the child.

The pain of abortion is short and may not even be sensed at early stages.

The pain of living with brain damage may last years until death.

And the brain damage example is good because it may cause the child to never reach maturity. In this way the person can never consent because they don't even understand what the choices are or entail.

I would be happy with an answer that said, "when liberty cannot be achieved, we try to minimize suffering." I'm not satisfied with some of the answers thus far which seem callous.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:13 AM
 
Location: SM
25,928 posts, read 10,001,595 times
Reputation: 9981
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avondalist View Post
So the mother is not responsible for giving birth to a brain damaged child because she drank during the pregnancy?

If that's your conception of natural rights then I find your worldview deficient.

But thank you for following through and clarifying.
"Responsible" in what sense?

Morally, I find it reprehensible.

Legally, I would shun it as best as possible through my associations.

But remember, there is no State in this paradigm. She can only be "held responsible" via contractual law. All her contractual associates would have to go the arbitrator to "hold her accountable". You'll have to use the free market to punish her. I surmise that you and I would disagree on the effectiveness there (you opting for State punishment as "holding her responsible" while I prefer capitalism). That's anyone's guess since we only have statism and not capitalism on how "badly" she was punished.

One thing I can say for sure is the moral and logical consistency in arriving at that point where it's time to "hold her responsible" is definitely on my side. There is no preordained violence in setting up the mechanism to account for responsibility in my paradigm.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:16 AM
 
Location: Manchester NH
10,056 posts, read 2,818,325 times
Reputation: 2668
Quote:
Originally Posted by No_Recess View Post
"Responsible" in what sense?

Morally, I find it reprehensible.

Legally, I would shun it as best as possible through my associations.

But remember, there is no State in this paradigm. She can only be "held responsible" via contractual law. All her contractual associates would have to go the arbitrator to "hold her accountable". You'll have to use the free market to punish her. I surmise that you and I would disagree on the effectiveness there (you opting for State punishment as "holding her responsible" while I prefer capitalism). That's anyone's guess since we only have statism and not capitalism on how "badly" she was punished.

One thing I can say for sure is the moral and logical consistency in arriving at that point where it's time to "hold her responsible" is definitely on my side. There is no preordained violence in setting up the mechanism to account for responsibility in my paradigm.
So when does a child gain autonomy?

If its at birth does that mean the parent has no authority over them?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:17 AM
 
3,246 posts, read 2,751,537 times
Reputation: 1733
Is it a violation of someone consent to give an unconscious person a bed bath? Of course not.

A fetus is not in a state to give consent, hence deciding that it should live cannot be a violation of its consent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top