Loyalty to the State
POSTED BY: canttakesky
UPDATED: Monday, March 31, 2008 03:34
VIEWED: 19263
PAGE 17 of 27
Well, that's that then. No need to screen for child abuse, to prosecute parents, to put children into a safer environment. And really, why have any laws at all regarding child welfare ? B/c you see it involves the big boogeyman government, and that's scarier than any monster-parent could ever be.
***************************************************************
"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:
B/c you see it involves the big boogeyman government, and that's scarier than any monster-parent could ever be.
True enough.
SergeantX
"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Then you've just come down on the side of acceptable loss. Of children. As trade for your rights.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Not so much. I've just acknowledged that what you said is completely true. The government IS scarier than any one parent. It has the capacity, and the historically proven tendency to do far more harm. Seriously, one parent is really only gonna be a danger to their own kids. And then only if they can hide their malevolence from all their family and friends and neighbors (that's assuming the family and friends and neighbors aren't sitting around on their hands waiting for the government to do something).
But if they want kick it up a notch, if they want to threaten more than their own kids, they really need to get the government involved. Let the pros handle it, eh? So, you've now officially come down on the side of tyranny and evil.
Oh, I see, not fair huh?
Well, because I don't believe in the dragons at the gate, because I don't believe that, on the whole, government does jack squat to reduce the amount of injustice and evil in the world, you've declared that I hate little kids. Yeah.. I love the terrorists too. And I kick puppies.
Mostly I've just had it with morons who think that every time they get freaked out about the ugly facts of life, we gotta panic and pass a bunch of stupid laws.
SergeantX
"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You're right of course.
We should just get rid of all laws - the ones that make murder and rape and assault a crime, or theft and destruction of another person's property. Or maybe the ones about stopping at red lights or driving down the right side of the street. Fuck government. Fuck rules. Fuck laws. We should just all get guns.
Right ?
But anyway, it's nice to finally know where you stand. You would prefer that there be NO laws - not even ones to punish parents after proof of abuse. Because, as you've said in so many words - "Seriously, one parent is really only gonna be a danger to their own kids" - individual children are an acceptable loss in the face of your hatred of any kind of government.
***************************************************************
"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 SignyM:
No Magon, you didn't kill the thread.
Wouldn't be the first time if I did. I'm violent in that way.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
individual children are an acceptable loss in the face of your hatred of any kind of government.
Sure, yeah, "acceptable loss". Whatever. This is a stupid game Rue.
I don't think you can honestly make a consistent argument that government eliminates more suffering than it causes. You haven't tried, so maybe you agree. You, and Signy, also haven't made any attempt to address the rather obvious idiocy of institutional education - which is what you're holding up as the only honorable way to curb child abuse. Cause, you know, anyone who disagrees burns babies alive and such.
SergeantX
"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Brings to mind a conversation I had with a friend of mine almost 20 years ago. It was about higher education and the fact that in every country it's rationed in some way. In the UK at the time the government paid tuition but only if you passed a set of standardised tests to get into university. In the US entry requirements for university was lower but candidates tended to be self selecting because of the need to pay tuition.
Anyway, my friend said in effect that societies effectively limit access to higher education because in the end it still needs people to empty dustbins and repair sewers. If tomorrow every child's true potential could be realised who would do society's dirty jobs?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME