From: Ann Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I disagree that parents are necessarily the sole arbiters of their children's
> fate. Parents are not the owners, but the *stewards* of their children. As
> such,
> there are certain limitations on their authority. To begin with, there are
> countless decisions which they simply do not have the right to make, on the
> behalf of their child (or more distant descendants). They do not have the
> right
> to bind their child into slavery, either temporary or permanent, or to have
> healthy body parts of that child surgically removed for cosmetic reasons (the
> American love affair with male circumcision notwithstanding). They have no
> more
> right to do this than a banker, with whom various people had entrusted their
> money, would have to go and take that money and spend it all on himself,
> drinking and gambling, as if he were the owner of the money, rather than the
> steward of it.
>
> Furthermore, although the parent is the *default* decider of a child's fate,
> or
> their steward, their is a point at which the control over the child's fate
> should be taken away from an incompetent or abusive parent, and given to
> someone
> else. Certainly someone like Sybil's mother should not have had any control
> over
> her child.
There's just one fookin' problem. Who decides? Shit, the most expensive
present I got for high school graduation was a suitcase and I can take a hint.
Visited relatives three times during the next 20 or so years. (Until La
Esposa, shortly before gaining that title, insisted on meeting the gene pool
I'd crawled out of), and as a side effect we've been in fairly regular contact
since. (Some of my nephews and nieces are decent folk, others are doing hard
time). My sisters are still butt-ugly (there was never a temptation toward
incest in our crowd, the sisters look like me with better mustaches and sparser
beards). So every time I go up to an FSP event, I have to stop in Manchester
and listen to Mom mumble while she goes off on dozens of tangents (she was
never the sharpest brick in the chandelier, but Alzheimer's or some other form
of senile dementia is taking control). (And let's not mention Dad, best I can
say is that the San Diego VA hospital gave up on his liver about 20
years ago and he's been in the ground since not long after -- if I last three
more years, I'll have the longevity record for anybody with my Y-chromosome, in
the old days it was black lung, the last couple generations it's been cirrhosis
now that we live past 40 or so (and yes, I do like me beer) and the odd heart
attack). {Mom's family lives longer, but kidney failure, intestinal cancer and
senility are not pretty sights -- uncle Doug, Mom's younger brother, took the
easy way out -- his heart exploded, so it was quick).
--
Ward Griffiths [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"What I know [about the art of the sword] boils down to this: If you see a guy
running at you with a sword, put two rounds in his chest to slow him down, then
one into his brain to finish him off". Aaron Allston, _Sidhe Devil_
The two halves of the ruling Party are arguing over who gets to be the Top this
time. Either wins, Top or Bottom, they both win by the situation. For us
individuals, BOHICA.
--- Begin Message ---
I disagree that parents are necessarily the sole arbiters of their children's fate. Parents are not the owners, but the *stewards* of their children. As such, there are certain limitations on their authority. To begin with, there are countless decisions which they simply do not have the right to make, on the behalf of their child (or more distant descendants). They do not have the right to bind their child into slavery, either temporary or permanent, or to have healthy body parts of that child surgically removed for cosmetic reasons (the American love affair with male circumcision notwithstanding). They have no more right to do this than a banker, with whom various people had entrusted their money, would have to go and take that money and spend it all on himself, drinking and gambling, as if he were the owner of the money, rather than the steward of
it.
Furthermore, although the parent is the *default* decider of a child's fate, or their steward, their is a point at which the control over the child's fate should be taken away from an incompetent or abusive parent, and given to someone else. Certainly someone like Sybil's mother should not have had any control over her child.
|
--- End Message ---
