| | I saw this thread in the morning, but was too busy to comment. I come back to it and find it has degenerated into a food fight. Pity. It has potential.
As those who read the unschooling thread know I both have children and am strongly against coercion, which I do not equate with permissiveness.
As my oldest is 12 we will have to wait and see if I change my mind by the time they are adults, but I disagree with the "Nanny" approach that Robert, in retrospect, thinks is good. Note that I have never seen the show, only heard about it.
I think threads on coercion and the rights of children will discuss more fully the fundamentals, but I'd like to address the points raised by Scott in post 27.
I have never had the occasion to use force against my children and would never initiate force against them. However, the use of force is valid in self defense and in the defence of rights in general.
Therefore the question becomes, at least for me, does the scenario Scott paints in post 27 constitute a violation of his rights, justifying the use of force? To me it seems yes.
This never came up in the unschooling thread because we were discussing using force in the context of giving a child an education, not in the context of protecting rights.
I will look for the threads on children's rights and coercion to continue that aspect of the discussion.
If this thread returns to the specific topic of discussing permissiveness in parenting I will post further here.
--jorge
Knowledge is Power. Power Corrupts. Study hard, be Evil. -Anonymous
(Edited by Jorge on 5/20, 9:56pm)
|
|