|
Ego Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea



Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
|
|
This is a moral issue. Morals are an opinion.
The DNA overlord of which we are all apart of cares not if a child smokes a cigarette for DNA has millions more children and will counter the effects of the cigarette through evolution.
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger



Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 12 days
|
Re: the right of ownership of ones body [Re: DimensionX]
#7574457 - 10/29/07 08:53 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DimensionX said: My statement was vague? No more vague than any other statement.
No, your statement was vauge, and not any less vauge than "any other statement". I've already demonstrated exactly how your statement is vauge and doesn't represent the nature of reality. Instead of simply asserting that your statement is no more vauge than any other statement (itself a vauge statement ), perhaps you could actually respond to what I've asserted regarding your statement?
Allow me to reiterate, for your convience. You stated that children are not developed enough to make decisions like that. How do you know? What designates that a child, or that children in general, are not developed enough to decide for themselves if they will consume drugs? You go on to state that, once children are adults, they have enough experience to decide for themselves, but this is even more vauge. What designates one as an adult, and how is it determined that, once one is considered an adult, one is necessarily of enough experience to make decisions for themselves?
Who knows? Some children can be more developed than what some would call adults. Experience is experience, and whether or not an individual is a child or an adult does not designate whether or not they have had certain experience.
So, like I said, vauge, even more vauge than any other statement. 
Quote:
Human brains aren't even fully developed until after the teenage years.
Physical development of brains has what to do with experience, the ability to make decisions, and emotional development?
Quote:
A child has no appreciation for their own vulnerabilities
The same statement can apply to adults, so I fail to comprehend where the distinction between children and adults in regards to the inherent right that a human being is responsible for their human being lies in this statement.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
DimensionX
King of Birds


Registered: 09/26/07
Posts: 5,486
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 2 years, 2 days
|
Re: the right of ownership of ones body [Re: fireworks_god]
#7575264 - 10/30/07 01:42 AM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
You never demonstrated anything, you merely claimed that my statement was vague and didn't reflect reality. Then went on with your own argument. You never said what made my statement vague. I think it was a fairly direct and clear statement. Any adult who has lived such a strange life as to have the same amount of experience as a child, should also be guided until they are capable of guiding themselves. And by the way the only way i can see an adult existing in that position is if they were institutionalized for most of there life.
Experience obviously takes time. Children are new to this world, it is physically impossible for them to have all the experiences necessary to live without guidance.
It has been shown that humans don't develop the ability to consistently think through there actions till after there teenage years. This can been shown, in car accidents which occur to children around school zones, this is because children are as yet unaware of how small decisions can change their life, their ball roles onto the road, they run out to get it without thinking. Also it is shown in the risk taking behaviour of teenagers.
How can anyone learn something without being taught? Why would you let someone you love walk into a dangerous situation when they have no concept of the consequences? Children are not born with any knowledge of life, we must teach them, it is our responsibility. To me your attitude seems to be one of throwing someone in the deep end and seeing if they can swim.
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger



Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 12 days
|
Re: the right of ownership of ones body [Re: DimensionX]
#7575339 - 10/30/07 02:44 AM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DimensionX said: You never said what made my statement vague.
Yes I did, twice now. At least the topic is getting a thorough analysis.
Let's review.
Quote:
DimensionX said: Children aren't developed enough to make decisions like that. Once they are adults they have enough experience to come to their own conclusions.
I specifically presented that this statement is vauge. To state that children, as some collective, singular entity, aren't developed to make such decisions, is vauge. Why? Because we are speaking in generalized terms that do not represent the truth that every human being, at every age, has unique experience. It is impossible for you to assert that one child specifically is not developed enough to make decisions like that, because the ability to make a decision has nothing to do with age. Furthermore, it is quite the stretch to assert that, "once one is an adult", one has the capacity to form their own conclusions.
Such broad, generalized terms used in a statement that seeks to assert certain truth. The fact is, children, at any age, do come to their own conclusions. The only question, naturally, is how realistic these conclusions are. Of course, you didn't say that, further contributing to the utter vaugeness of your statement. As a child, which, of course, implies a wide variety of age, further compounding the question of how much experience "a child" has thus far accumulated, further compounding the vauge nature of your statement, I distinctly recall forming all sorts of conclusions, on my own.
Clearly, the question is not of whether or not a child forms their own conclusions, or makes their own decisions, because it is blatantly obvious that children do, as they are human beings. The only question is whether or not their ability to do so is beneficial to their well-being, as the question is regarding whether or not their conclusions and subsequent decisions reflect the nature of reality.
Thus, the question regards experience, through living life, from which a child can gain understanding of reality, through interacting with reality. The assertion that "once they are adults, they have enough experience" is baseless. What constitutes "enough" experience? Experience cannot be quantified, and it is clearly not the amount of experience that one has, but rather what one gains and understands from the experience one has been privledged with. Simply "being an adult" doesn't substantiate these effects in any way, either.
Quote:
Experience obviously takes time. Children are new to this world, it is physically impossible for them to have all the experiences necessary to live without guidance.
No one lives "without guidance" at any time in their life. We exist in the same state as we always have in this life, the only difference being that we change as we learn and our environment changes as we grow. This is a continual process. We still are children, new to this world. The natural fact that, for most of us, for our first years, our environment is influenced more directly by the decisions of close relatives doesn't change this. We simply benefit from more opportunity to survive and establish more memory. Who knows how able we are to take care of ourselves as a result. We could be overexposed to the environment as children, or underexposed, and each may benefit us or serve as a detriment.
Quote:
It has been shown that humans don't develop the ability to consistently think through there actions till after there teenage years.
Another vauge statement, if I dare to suggest as much. What does it mean to "consistently think through their actions", and how has this been shown?
Quote:
This can been shown, in car accidents which occur to children around school zones, this is because children are as yet unaware of how small decisions can change their life, their ball roles onto the road, they run out to get it without thinking. Also it is shown in the risk taking behaviour of teenagers.
And this is shown in the behavior of adults who consume food that has adverse effects on their health. It is shown in the behavior of adults who intoxicate themselves and expose themselves to situations that threaten their well-being. It is shown in adults who cannot manage their emotional state of being. It is shown in the risk-taking behavior of adults. It is evident in human behavior, wherein adults waste resources and threaten the survival and well-being of our species and others. There is a never-ending multitude of manners in which human beings, of any age, chase their shiny, red ball into the streets.
Age is of no relevance in regards to this.
Quote:
How can anyone learn something without being taught? Children are not born with any knowledge of life, we must teach them, it is our responsibility.
Children learn by living life. We cannot live a child's life; thus, we cannot teach them. It is our responsibility to give children the opportunity to learn, by giving them the opportunity to live. The first step, of course, is to respect the fact that children form their own conclusions and make their own decisions. This implies respectful relationships, interactions through which children learn from who we are. The fact that most view children as that which they own, that which they control, is largely why most human beings are unaware of their sovereignity, allowing others to manipulate them to gain power for themselves.
Have I advocated throwing babies into the streets to fend for themselves? Nope. I've advocated respecting the right every human being has to be their own human being, regardless of age, as well as recognizing the true nature of the phenomenon that is being discussed.
Quote:
To me your attitude seems to be one of throwing someone in the deep end and seeing if they can swim.
Not at all; you've simply misconceived my "attitude".
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
DimensionX
King of Birds


Registered: 09/26/07
Posts: 5,486
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 2 years, 2 days
|
Re: the right of ownership of ones body [Re: fireworks_god]
#7575362 - 10/30/07 03:31 AM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
You have a novel view on parenting. But personally i think it is unrealistic. I think children need to be closely guided, so closely it can become controlling at some points. For example you find them jumping into the drivers seat of your car and playing around with the buttons. You tell them to stop that they might hurt themselves, they say "no!" as children will at times do and they keep on fiddling around. You can try the reasoning approach as much as you want, but alot of the time, unless you tell them with authority they wont listen. I wont let them find out on there own what could happen, because i dont want them to get hurt. And yes at a certain point, this all has to change and you take a purely reasoning approach and if they dont listen that is their choice, you can both find out together whether it is right or wrong. No you cant draw a definite line when this will happen, this must be negotiated between the two of you.
|
lIllIIIllIlIIlIlIIllIllIIl
Stranger

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 11,123
Loc: Texas
|
Re: the right of ownership of ones body [Re: DimensionX]
#7575463 - 10/30/07 05:37 AM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
i have to throw this out here
if age has no bearing on the right of an individual to self determine, then it follows that abortion violates the rights of a fetus
however, not allowing abortion violates the rights of the mother
catch-22
|
MushroomTrip
Dr. Teasy Thighs



Registered: 12/02/05
Posts: 14,794
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
|
|
It would only be so if the fetus could express it's will to live in an understandable way. Also the reason why abortion is not being permitted anymore after the first trimester of pregnancy is not because the fetus has reached a level where it can express it's power of making decisions. So if you want to talk about this matter from a legal POV, the discussion can be entirely different because usually the laws are not representing and respecting the truth regarding human nature.
--------------------
   All this time I've loved you And never known your face All this time I've missed you And searched this human race Here is true peace Here my heart knows calm Safe in your soul Bathed in your sighs
|
lIllIIIllIlIIlIlIIllIllIIl
Stranger

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 11,123
Loc: Texas
|
Re: the right of ownership of ones body [Re: MushroomTrip]
#7575788 - 10/30/07 09:21 AM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
as a child seeing paint thinner used on white paint, in appearance much like milk, and wanting to drink it
i attempted this several times... perhaps i would be dead had i not been forcibly stopped? i had eaten insects and fertilizer so it is possible i could have drank a large amount
hard to reason with a toddler
|
lIllIIIllIlIIlIlIIllIllIIl
Stranger

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 11,123
Loc: Texas
|
|
it seems like, in this case, my rights were violated, and at the same time i am better off because of it
this is troubling to me
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger



Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 12 days
|
Re: the right of ownership of ones body [Re: DimensionX]
#7579648 - 10/31/07 07:41 AM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DimensionX said: You have a novel view on parenting. But personally i think it is unrealistic.
What have I outlined that you feel is unrealistic? Acknowledging the fact that children make their own decisions and form their own conclusions is as realistic as it comes. I am a proponent of recognizing the nature of reality for what it is observed to be. Last night at work, there was a small child walking behind his parents while shopping. He stopped and watched me carry a ladder with curiousity. He was acting with his own volition.
Quote:
I think children need to be closely guided, so closely it can become controlling at some points.
There is a difference between influencing a child's environment, and "controlling a child", which is a notion that is impossible. Once more, a child forms their own conclusions and makes their own decisions. The nature of mammals is that the environment of the young revolve around their parents. Parents choose the set and setting.
Quote:
For example you find them jumping into the drivers seat of your car and playing around with the buttons. You tell them to stop that they might hurt themselves, they say "no!" as children will at times do and they keep on fiddling around.
Yes, I see this at work all the time too. A child will want to play with something, and the parent will wish to move along. They will tell the child to follow them, and the child will say no, and it almost becomes a shouting match sometimes. I conclude that the relationship between the parent and the child isn't very mature in these instances, especially evident in the behavior of the parent shouting, portraying themselves as nothing but children themselves.
Quote:
You can try the reasoning approach as much as you want, but alot of the time, unless you tell them with authority they wont listen.
Ahh, now we are speculating on something that lies entirely dependent upon the unique nature of the child, their parent, and their relationship. This is something that is so diverse and includes a wide variety of variables that I find this speculation to not represent reality.
Quote:
I wont let them find out on there own what could happen, because i dont want them to get hurt.
Of course, the real question is regarding the degree of harm that the child is being exposed to. Sometimes, with human beings, we simply have to get hurt, so to speak, to learn. We learn through experience, after all. Of course, if there is more than a small risk of harm, clearly it is the responsibility of the parent to ensure their child's safety - no one has implied otherwise.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger



Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 12 days
|
|
Quote:
adjust said: it seems like, in this case, my rights were violated, and at the same time i am better off because of it
No, in that case, your rights were not violated.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
DimensionX
King of Birds


Registered: 09/26/07
Posts: 5,486
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 2 years, 2 days
|
Re: the right of ownership of ones body [Re: fireworks_god]
#7579667 - 10/31/07 07:51 AM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I actually think you have alot of good points. I dont want to try and circumvent someones free will, and we do need to make mistakes otherwise we wont learn. But i think this question becomes the most interesting when its thought of in the most extreme circumstances. Is it right to try and stop someone from doing what you are sure will cause them serious harm? Espeacilly when its a child, who has come to rely on you for many of the basic elements of its survival, and also for you to teach them about the world.
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger



Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 12 days
|
Re: the right of ownership of ones body [Re: DimensionX]
#7579705 - 10/31/07 08:06 AM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DimensionX said: But i think this question becomes the most interesting when its thought of in the most extreme circumstances. Is it right to try and stop someone from doing what you are sure will cause them serious harm?
I think the answer might lie within one's methods of attempting to stop them. If you have an adult friend who plans on embarking on an Artic voyage in the middle of winter with no experience and nothing for supplies but tons of alcohol, I think it wouldn't be right to physically restrain them in a cellar to prevent them from causing themself serious harm, although they probably wouldn't mind it as long as you gave them their alcohol meanwhile.
Ultimately, the question as to whether or not it is "right" to intervene must face the reality that there is no right or wrong, only action, and subsequent consequences.
Quote:
Espeacilly when its a child, who has come to rely on you for many of the basic elements of its survival, and also for you to teach them about the world.
I think it is definitely easier to determine how to act with children in these situations, because the ability to analyze risk of harm is much more clear-cut - usually the prospect of physical harm from situations they unknowingly present themselves within. A child poised to fall down a flight of stairs because they are ignorant of what will occur, or from a physical inability to effectively navigate the stairs, needs to be swept from harm's way, prevented from entering into harm's way. These types of situations aren't as prevalent with adults, and this is when the lines begin to blur.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
a_guy_named_ai
Stranger

Registered: 09/24/07
Posts: 767
Last seen: 15 years, 7 months
|
|
If everyone has the right to do what they want with their body, then why not little children?
Obviously their must be more to it.
If everyone has the universal right to do what they want with their own body, but then children do not, then everyonedoes not have the right to do anything they want with their own body.
It must be concluded then that everyone does not have the right to do what they want with their own body, that whatever right they have is by the same token limited in some aspects.
But where does this right come from? The right to do things with our own bodies is given from God. It can't come from anywhere else. People can legislate laws, but that does not make them rights, or truths. It requires universal ordinance of a Spiritual nature. Nothing else can do it.
SO God gave us the right to do some things to our bodies, but other things we can't, because it's limited in some areas. It's now up to each and every person to use discernment and wisdom to find those boundaries and abide by the universal law.
none of us should be judging others though, even if we see someone doing something we deem unacceptable to their own bodies. Freedom of choice to do right or wrong to their bodies is another universal right, for which every man must stand accountable to God for his own personal actions on his own.
Edited by jonathan_206 (10/31/07 04:12 PM)
|
Veritas

Registered: 04/15/05
Posts: 11,089
|
Re: the right of ownership of ones body [Re: a_guy_named_ai]
#7581474 - 10/31/07 04:17 PM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SO God gave us the right to do some things to our bodies, but other things we can't, because it's limited in some areas. It's now up to each and every person to use discernment and wisdom to find those boundaries and abide by the universal law.
Which God? The Christian God? The Muslim God? The Greek pantheon of Gods? The Norse Gods? The Flying Spaghetti Monster?
Even if we take it as fact that a God exists, the multiple interpretations of this so-called universal law make it impossible to decide what God actually wants. Each worshipping group claims that THEY know the actual desires of God, that THEY have defined universal law, and that everyone else is wrong.
Children have the right to do whatever they want with their own bodies. Parents and guardians sometimes infringe upon these rights for the child's own protection. Unfortunately, misguided guardians tend to overextend this "protection" into areas such as masturbation, pre-marital sex, dancing, wearing revealing clothes, hair styles, etc...rather than offering guidance & then letting the child figure out what they want to do. This meddling seems to achieve little aside from alienating the child from his/her parents, and this lessens the ability of the guardian to guide.
|
Silversoul
Rhizome


Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
|
|
After having once followed the libertarian doctrine of natural rights, I no longer believe in them. "Rights" are a useful abstraction through which we can create a more fair and equitable society, but to think they exist independently of our conceptions is rather naive.
--------------------
|
lIllIIIllIlIIlIlIIllIllIIl
Stranger

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 11,123
Loc: Texas
|
Re: the right of ownership of ones body [Re: fireworks_god]
#7583080 - 11/01/07 07:04 AM (16 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
fireworks_god said:
Quote:
adjust said: it seems like, in this case, my rights were violated, and at the same time i am better off because of it
No, in that case, your rights were not violated.
explain this please
i see this as a clear violation of my right to do with my own body as i want
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger



Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 12 days
|
|
You made the claim that your rights were violated. The need for explanation is in your court. Which right of yours was violated, pray tell?
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
lIllIIIllIlIIlIlIIllIllIIl
Stranger

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 11,123
Loc: Texas
|
Re: the right of ownership of ones body [Re: fireworks_god]
#7583107 - 11/01/07 07:23 AM (16 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
i wanted to do something that was of no harm to anyone else and was prevented from doing so
the right i am speaking of is the (hypothetical) idea that every human being has the right to do as they want to themselves
in this case of paint thinner, i was prevented from drinking it
|
lIllIIIllIlIIlIlIIllIllIIl
Stranger

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 11,123
Loc: Texas
|
Re: the right of ownership of ones body [Re: fireworks_god]
#7583115 - 11/01/07 07:30 AM (16 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
i am mostly interested in this:
is there a line of reasoning where one can
1 - respect this idea in general (the right of ownership of ones body)
AND
2 - not respect this idea in limited cases
OR
3 - render the entire question irrelavent
edit: the line of reasoning must be logically consistent
Edited by lIllIIIllIlIIlIlIIllIllIIl (11/01/07 07:46 AM)
|
|