Loyalty to the State
POSTED BY: canttakesky
UPDATED: Monday, March 31, 2008 03:34
VIEWED: 19263
PAGE 24 of 27
OH, BTW BDN, since you are the one complaining about 'constraints' I believe it's up to you to explain your position. And some hand-waving gesture towards some unexamined, unexplained personal notion of 'real life' with no connection to the issue is merely ducking the discussion of your point, not engaging in it.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Uuhhmm, you claim these regulations already exist, just like with driving, so you tell me. ('There are presently laws concerning safe child rearing.') How specific are these regulations ? How close the oversight ? How costly the license ?
You are proposing preventative measures (I think). Reactive measures exist now,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_Abuse_Prevention_and_Treatment_Act
How are you proposing to better this, and please be specific. How would you ensure that Parents were 'properly' raising their children?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"Reactive measures exist now,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_Abuse_Prevention_and_Treatment_Act"
I take it you didn't actually look at the text of this supposed 'law'.
What it says is:
Coordinate and execute subchapters I and III which call for
I
Advisory board
National clearinghouse for information
Research and assistance activities
Grants
Coordination
III
Grants
***************************************************************
So, considering that the child rearing laws and regulations you claim to exist don't actually exist, do you have another point to make ?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
I take it you didn't actually look at the text of this supposed 'law'.
Yes, I did.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/ch67.html
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:WHOA! I wish I lived in YOUR real world!
How would you go about making sure the children of 'bad' parents are taken care of without needlessly intruding on the lives of 'good' parents?- BDN
What is "needless"?
"Needless" as in Infinging on the rights of parents?
"Needless" as Having no positive effect, or having a negative effect on child mortality?
"Needless" as in Costing too much money?
First tell me what your constraints are, and what purpose they serve. Otherwise I don't know how to answer the question.- SignyM
There are no constraints in real life so, all of the above- BDN
Anyway, you dodged the question. So let me put it to you this way:
In the tradeoff between "parent's rights" and child deaths, how many child deaths are acceptable? 1? 10000? 2%?
In the tradeoff between child death and money, how much money is a child worth? $1000? $20,000?
---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Then please point out specifically where this law makes any child-rearing practice criminal. In other words it has to have at a minimum prohibitions and penalties to be an enforceable law, like a motor vehicle code. Because I looked and it wasn't there - this supposed 'law' was merely the establishment of a government body for research, information and coordination.
Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Yes, I did.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/ch67.html
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
S'wenyways, since I DID look and the law isn't what you claim it is, what does this mean to your position ?
Does this devolve to the position that since there are no laws they wouldn't help even if we had them ?
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Then please point out specifically where this law makes any child-rearing practice criminal. In other words it has to have at a minimum prohibitions and penalties to be an enforceable law, like a motor vehicle code. Because I looked and it wasn't there - this supposed 'law' was merely the establishment of a government body for research, information and coordination.
Please stop being cute and pick a State.
How about Wisconsin.
http://dhfs.wisconsin.gov/Children/CPS/PDF/2005CANReport.pdf
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
WHOA! I wish I lived in YOUR real world!
Anyway, you dodged the question. So let me put it to you this way:
In the tradeoff between "parent's rights" and child deaths, how many child deaths are acceptable? 1? 10000? 2%?
In the tradeoff between child death and money, how much money is a child worth? $1000? $20,000?
Are we talking local or worldwide? Are we talking one death in Wisconsin or hundreds of deaths in Africa?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME