| | Michael Kelly wrote, Bill,
Wanna see all hell break loose? Try dealing with the question of who owns a stray child.
(I'm still bothered by this.)
Or how about this question: Are children property? Both good questions, Michael. I would say that children are not property, and that nobody owns the stray the child. The child owns himself, but if he wants adult help and support, then he must be willing to consent to adult guidance and supervision. If he places himself under the care of adoptive parents, then he must abide by the parents' rules; if the parents violate the conditions of the agreement by failing to give the child proper support and guidance or by abusing him or her, then the child can request a change of parental support. He or she can ask to be adopted by someone else. But there has to be demonstrable evidence of neglect or abuse in order for the request to be granted. Some native American tribes permitted children of a certain age to choose their parents, instead of being tied to them by an accident of birth. I think this is something worth considering. Children should have some say in who supports and supervises them.
Dean, you asked: What does it mean for one thing to own another thing? What does it mean for one thing to be the property of another? It means that the owner has the right to determine the use and disposition of that which he or she owns. So, if a person owns himself, then he has the right to direct and control his own actions and his bodily disposition, which is why no human being can properly own another. Ownership of another person presupposes self-ownership and is simultaneously inconsistent with it. If I can own you, then by the same logic, you can own me, which would negate my right to self-ownership and, accordingly, my right to own anything other than myself. Self-ownership is an equal right, which applies to all self-responsible human beings without exception.
- Bill
|
|
