Your Email:

Subject:

Message:
Entry: The Wrongs of "Rights" Link: http://www.takimag.com/site/article/the_wrongs_of_rights#7596 Post contents: What names have I called you? "Shallow" perhaps, meaning only that I think you're rebuttal is shallow, not that you are a shallow person. If you were a shallow person, you wouldn't be reading Taki, Paul Gottfried or Justin Raimondo. You still haven't explained why a centralized state as opposed to a community is necessary for the prevention of child abuse. Presumably, any community would have rules against assault, rape, murder, etc. with those who transgress being subject to imprisonment, execution, banishment or some other kind of sanction. Presumably, those who rape, murder or assault children are just as guilty of these crimes as those who inflict such crimes on other adults. Presumably, raping your daughter is just as criminal as raping someone else's daughter. Why should there be any legal distinction? I'll grant you that some cultures view children as the property of their parents, to be used in whatever way the parents wish. In such a cultural environment, how will the state be of any use, given that the laws of the state typically reflect cultural norms? Yes, in conservative African societies genital mutilation may well be considered legitimate, just as the purdah may be in a strict Islamic society. But these kinds of norms are largely absent in the West, outside of certain subcultures like Islamic immigrants. Once again, you could apply this argument to any social practice others find horrific. Perhaps the UN should ban abortion on a world wide basis. Perhaps the US should invade China to force them to give up their one child policy. Perhaps there should be sanctions imposed on countries that practice factory farming or allow child labor. Or those who discriminate against homosexuals. The examples you cite are selective in nature. I understand where you're coming from. You're a conscientous person who doesn't want children to be mistreated. Neither do I. I think spouse abuse is pretty crappy as well, but I don't think the UN, the US Congress, the Justice Department, or even state goverments need to be involved with it. Institutionally, I favor autonomous local communities within a broader framework of federated, decentralized particularism. Matters like abortion, childrens' rights vis a vis their parents, the death penalty, marital customs, "age of consent" for sexual relations, animal rights, defintions of property rights, inheritance from the deceased, euthanasia, public sexual displays, religion in public institutions, etc. Yes, some communities may sanction practices that others find hideous. Such is the price for keeping Leviathan at bay. Much of this is subjective. For instance, pro-lifers consider legal abortion to be a crime against humanity. Feminists and liberals think the illegalization of abortion is a violation of human rights. While child slavery and genital mutilation aren't much of an issue in our own culture, there are other issues that are comparable, like parents who deny medical care to their children for religious reasons. Do I personally disapprove of this? Yes. Should the state interfere? I'm not so sure it should. Sent at: 2008 07 06