I'm not a fan of child support laws, and my basic beleif is that a father shouldn't have to pay for a child he doesn't want. And that I certainly shouldn't have to pay for a government to step in and force him to be a responsible adult.
However many people find this view to be too "cold," was there anything in place before the government took over and are there any facts and statisitics that show how the government getting involved is actually worse for the child? And how could a stateless free-market society actually improve this system? Marriage Insurance?
Thanks
I have always said that there is an obligation of parents to care for the children. We have not discussed what should be done outside the bounds of contracts to those individuals should they not be willing to meet their obligation. So my arguement is not contingent on the existence of a third party.
Again, you bring up the idea that there will always be a third party willing to take the child. This is just factually false. There are numerous times and circumstances where there is no third party. You are the one relying on a third party to come and rescue the baby from the street.
Finally, where you abandon the baby is irrelevant. Babies by definition can not care for themselves and are not mobile for about six months. The fact that you are abandoning the baby in a location that without the assistance of a third party the baby will die indicates that you in fact are willing to let babies die in the street. Now maybe you wish you had not said that and you are trying to run away from that statement.
Maxliberty:We have not discussed what should be done outside the bounds of contracts to those individuals should they not be willing to meet their obligation.
I think we should, as I believe that was my original question.
Maxliberty:There are numerous times and circumstances where there is no third party.
Like what, especially in a free-market society?
Angurse: Maxliberty:We have not discussed what should be done outside the bounds of contracts to those individuals should they not be willing to meet their obligation. I think we should, as I believe that was my original question. Maxliberty:There are numerous times and circumstances where there is no third party. Like what, especially in a free-market society?
Once we have established there is an obligation which is what much of the discussion was about then we can move on to what to do next. First, I think the situation generally is rare where both of the parents are unwillingly to care for the child. Second, most people I would estimate over 95% will belong to some sort of PDA which will have its own rules regarding safeguarding children. So we have a small percentage of independents to begin with whose actions will not be covered by any PDA and even among these the % where both parents will abandon their child will still be very small.
The only circumstances then are where we have independents where both parents abandon their child and do not turn the child over to some third party which may very well exist but is not a guarantee. So in these very rare circumstances we will have two independent parents that abandon their child in some location leaving the child to die.
The free market will have organizations like the SDK in the Liberty Colony that extend their services charitably to those unable to defend themselves. So for parents who murder or attempt to murder their children the SDK will act as if the child is a client of the PDA and take the same action as it would with any other client who has been murdered.
I didn't fully answer when third parties may not be available. One example is that a third party may be available but may not currently have space or may need additional time to secure adoptive parents. So there may be some period where they can not immediately provide the service. Also, people might live very far away from other services and so geographically these services might not be available. The Liberty Colony will be very small at first so there may not be anyone willing to care for someone elses child.
Maxliberty:I have always said that there is an obligation of parents to care for the children.
And I have argued that there isn't. You have yet to prove that conception is a violation of rights (which is the only thing that would merit obligation).
Ahh, but if there is a contract, then there is an obligation. I never argued against that.
Maxliberty:Again, you bring up the idea that there will always be a third party willing to take the child. This is just factually false. There are numerous times and circumstances where there is no third party. You are the one relying on a third party to come and rescue the baby from the street.
I wasn't quite saying there will always be a third party. I was saying your critique must alwo apply to your argument. If there is not always a third party, there propably won't be an arbitration service, in which case our discussion would be moot since theren's no one who can take action against the circumstances.
Maxliberty:The fact that you are abandoning the baby in a location that without the assistance of a third party the baby will die indicates that you in fact are willing to let babies die in the street. Now maybe you wish you had not said that and you are trying to run away from that statement.
No I didn't. In fact, I never offered support for these people and said quite clearly:
banned: I would say people like that are sick, immoral, and deserve God's wrath, that does not mean I can punish them for it, they haven't aggressed upon anyone.
I would say people like that are sick, immoral, and deserve God's wrath, that does not mean I can punish them for it, they haven't aggressed upon anyone.
I have always been referring to the fact of whether action can be taken out against the parent legitimately, not whether I would allow a baby to die in the street.
And location matters a lot. If you put a baby IN an object, that is false imprisonment, and that would constitute legitimate legal action.
If I had been placed, unconscious, on your airplane without either of our knowledge, would you not be murdering me if you chucked me out the hatch at 30,000 feet?
Maxliberty: The free market will have organizations like the SDK in the Liberty Colony that extend their services charitably to those unable to defend themselves. So for parents who murder or attempt to murder their children the SDK will act as if the child is a client of the PDA and take the same action as it would with any other client who has been murdered.
Wouldn't mean that the "SDK" has domain over people who never agreed to their services? Sounds a lot like child welfare and the police.
Conception is caused by the parents actions and it creates an individual that is now dependent upon them for its care. Since the parents have created the individual that is dependent on them for it's care then they have an obligation to care for the child. If the parents had not acted the situation would not exist.
You argue that there should be no consequence to individuals that abandon babies to die. I disagree. Again, you are responsible for what you said and the fact that your views allow children to be murdered and you think this is allowable behavior reflects poorly on you. I understand that you are trying to distance yourself from your own arguement. Your idea that people can take a newborn baby into the woods or the street or wherever else to die and that no one should be held accountable when the child dies is ludicrous and is the opposite of a free society which requires accountability.
Again, I repeat on the issue of the third party that I have said that there is an obligation and that obligation exists regardless of whether there is an enforcement mechanism. My arguement is not dependent on there being a third party. If you murder someone you have committed a crime regardless if you are punished or not.
Angurse: Maxliberty: The free market will have organizations like the SDK in the Liberty Colony that extend their services charitably to those unable to defend themselves. So for parents who murder or attempt to murder their children the SDK will act as if the child is a client of the PDA and take the same action as it would with any other client who has been murdered. Wouldn't mean that the "SDK" has domain over people who never agreed to their services? Sounds a lot like child welfare and the police.
Yes, one of the difficult questions to answer in a free society is how to protect those individuals that are unable to protect themselves, like children. However, in a free society like the Liberty Colony you are free to offer a competing PDA service that advocates child murder or child rape or whatever. However, you are simply on notice that the SDK has adopted its own position regarding the protection of children and to the extent that you protect child murderers and rapists there will be conflict. Eventually you have to give yourself what I call the front lawn test. What actions of your neighbor that if you saw him doing in his front lawn would you take action on? There is no middle ground between you believing in child murder and me opposing it.
Maxliberty: Yes, one of the difficult questions to answer in a free society is how to protect those individuals that are unable to protect themselves, like children. However, in a free society like the Liberty Colony you are free to offer a competing PDA service that advocates child murder or child rape or whatever. However, you are simply on notice that the SDK has adopted its own position regarding the protection of children and to the extent that you protect child murderers and rapists there will be conflict. Eventually you have to give yourself what I call the front lawn test. What actions of your neighbor that if you saw him doing in his front lawn would you take action on? There is no middle ground between you believing in child murder and me opposing it.
So, if I up and abandon my child (ignore his mothers whereabouts) this group will take the child in? But will I, the abandoner, be punished?
Yes, you will be punished. The fact that I rescue the baby from your attempt to kill the child does not leave you blameless. Attempted Murder is viewed as a criminal act as well by the SDK.