From: Rafal Smigrodzki (rafal@smigrodzki.org)
Date: Mon Jul 07 2003 - 18:24:09 MDT
Lee Corbin wrote:
>
> So far, you have restricted yourself to criticizing the actions of
> the parents and their employees, and for that I commend you. By
> now, most commenters on your side would be proposing that force be
> used to prevent parents from taking these steps. As I hinted in
> my reply to Eliezer, this induces a great irony: the state may be
> permitted to apply force, but not the parents.
>
### Persons who have been wronged may apply force. Their agents may apply
force on their behalf. I would be willing to act on behalf of humans who
have been harmed, e.g. by wrongful imprisonment inflicted on them by persons
who produced these human's DNA and contributed nutrition to their fetal
growth (and mistakenly assume that having performed these actions entitles
them to ownership of the humans in question).
Whether I would choose to use a private protection agency or a monopolist
provider of security services, the state, is not relevant to the argument.
It is also irrelevant what kind of labels you are using to describe the
humans involved - whether you call some "children", or "parents" - the only
thing that matters is who was harmed and how to rectify it.
Rafal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jul 07 2003 - 15:33:42 MDT