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.
Tell me why its not then. If a human is forcible locked in a cage, that's an act of aggression.
Only if the one locked in a cage objects to being locked in a cage. If the child is picked up and does not protest, then there is no violation of it's right.
Aggression can only be determined by the person who is the subject of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324
Why do you have different standards for adults and babies when autonomy is universal (by your own standards).
Same standard. Children when they object are asserting their rights.
Only if the one locked in a cage objects to being locked in a cage. If the child is picked up and does not protest, then there is no violation of it's right.
Aggression can only be determined by the person who is the subject of it.
Same standard. Children when they object are asserting their rights.
One would think.
*good time to take of the glasses and rub the eyes*
Only if the one locked in a cage objects to being locked in a cage. If the child is picked up and does not protest, then there is no violation of it's right.
Aggression can only be determined by the person who is the subject of it.
Same standard. Children when they object are asserting their rights.
The Child can't speak, this has been agreed upon.
He can kick and scream, but that's all. So without linguistic capabilities a human forfeits their autonomous rights?
No child can consent to be born. Are there good and bad kinds of births?
It's widely accepted parents act in place of the child until an age of maturity, but this question is a bit different since the child's immature state wouldn't have existed had the parents not created the child.
Many servile human relationships involve "consenting adults" who are in desperate situations. Those "consenting adults" were at one time "non-consenting children". Do parents bear some blame for this?
How can one minimize coercion and also be a parent?
Mike tosses in the Red Bull Crap Flag!
This is without a doubt the craziest post I ever read on C-D
Though I'm not quite a Libertarian, the OP's objection has merit. No one asked to be born (or refused it). And yet, here are. To kill oneself, from peeved feeling of violation, or despair of living to live, isn't the same, as to undo the reality of having been born. And none of this would matter, if on the whole we would be satisfied with the human-condition, or even if unsatisfied, if we laconically accepted the reality of being alive and of facing life's burdens.
Well, one solution is human extinction, through voluntary non-reproduction... if we come to espouse the idea, that creating any new sentient life is an affront against said life. That would neatly solve our various political squabbles and philosophical laments.
Another solution would be to just shut-up-and-color, accepting life's endemic unfairness and making the best of it. Neither option is, I think, of unalloyed appeal. We face a problem, don't we? I don't have a satisfactory answer.
Did you communicate your desire to not be forcibly locked into a cage to the alleged perps?
As I've already told you the child can't speak. Linguistic capabilities must be what give humans rights in that case?
Anyways that is only the tip of the iceberg for your problems. If consent is the default position (a ludicrous claim) then you can walk up to a person and punch them in the face and they can't be at blame since said person never told them not to.
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.