shou'd parenting be a right or a privilege?

[Hygro]

Do you believe that getting to a be a parent is a human or civil right

or

Parenting should be privilege based on some criteria, whether that criteria is passive (defaults to yes, you have this privilege unless you [fill in blank]) or active (requires something like classes, or certification all the way to genetic requirements or requirements of health).

 

[Fugitive Sisyphus]

Sure it is a right.



*this does by no means imply that the government is responsible for your ability to have children.

 

[MobBoss]

Well, it is a priviledge as there is no gurantee available from the government that you can or will be a parent.

However, everyone has a right to that priviledge in order to try to be a parent. It just doesnt work out for some people.

 

[StarWorms]

Being able to try and be a parent is a right, actually becoming a parent isn't.

Ye Gods, I agree with MobBoss on something

 

[Shadylookin]

Its a privilege. the government can and should take away your children if you're abusive of them for example.

 

[Xanikk999]

It should be a right that can be lost.

 

[MobBoss]

It should be a right that can be lost.

So the government should provide you with a kid if you are unable to have one?

I dont think so.

 

[mrt144]

you have the right until you lose it through awfulness. thereafter it is a privlidge.

 

[Stegyre]

So the government should provide you with a kid if you are unable to have one?

I dont think so.

Oh, my! The possibilities for this are too numerous - and disturbing - to lightly pass over.

 

[Mise]

I think the distinction between the two is fairly meaningless...

 

[Yoda Power]

I know how bad some children can get if the parents get it their way, I'm happy those children were removed by the state. Parenting is not for the parents, it's for the kids!

 

[Mise]

So the government should provide you with a kid if you are unable to have one?

I dont think so.

So, what qualifies as a "right" in your books? What things must the government provide a guarantee for?

 

[Perfection]

So the government should provide you with a kid if you are unable to have one?

I dont think so.

Adoption system?

I think it's a right to have children, but parents gotta pay for all the stuffs.

 

[mdwh]

Well, it is a priviledge as there is no gurantee available from the government that you can or will be a parent.

However, everyone has a right to that priviledge in order to try to be a parent. It just doesnt work out for some people.

I presume we are talking the latter in this poll - this is actually the big problem with "rights".

So the government should provide you with a kid if you are unable to have one?

I dont think so.

Of course not, and that absurdity comes from this misunderstanding of rights.

Most rights are "negative" rights - a right to X doesn't mean that other people have to provide X to you, it means that other people are not allowed to take X away from you. But all too many people seem to think that rights should be interpreted in the former case, leading them to think that we shouldn't have these as rights unless they are a necessity to life.

Also, saying should someone have X as a right seems to place the burden of proof on the person saying it should be a right. I would say that everything should be a right by default, unless you can show why it can be taken away.

It's a particularly big problem for things seen as "hedonistic" - so you get people saying we obviously don't have a right to look at porn, or have sex for pleasure. But saying that the Government shouldn't ban people from having sex obviously doesn't mean that the Government has to provide me with someone to sleep with!

I prefer to explicitly phrase rights in the negative sense - should the Government have the right to tell people what to look at? Should the Government have the right to prevent people from having children?

I find it rather hard to see why the Government should have the right to prevent people having children when it comes to the question of being a suitable parent. Though I can see that the person may lose the ability through indirect means - e.g., being in prison.

 

[GenMarshall]

It's a priveralge. Not a right.

 

[MobBoss]

Adoption system?

I think it's a right to have children, but parents gotta pay for all the stuffs.

Lets have some common sense from the prophet of common sense.

If it is a right to have children, but you cant have them naturally, then an adoption agency couldnt deny you adopting a kid. However, we know thats not true....if the adoption agency thinks you are unable to provide for a kid finanacially, then you will be unable to adopt. Ergo, having a kid is a priviledge, not a right.

 

[mdwh]

Lets have some common sense from the prophet of common sense.

If it is a right to have children, but you cant have them naturally, then an adoption agency couldnt deny you adopting a kid. However, we know thats not true....if the adoption agency thinks you are unable to provide for a kid finanacially, then you will be unable to adopt. Ergo, having a kid is a priviledge, not a right.

A right to X doesn't mean that a private 3rd party has to give you X.

 

[GenMarshall]

Lets have some common sense from the prophet of common sense.

That sounds a bit redundant

 

[MobBoss]

A right to X doesn't mean that a private 3rd party has to give you X.

Actually, if it abides by US law is does have to give you what is rightfully yours. If the government makes basic health care a right, private 3rd parties will have to provide you health care subsidized by the government. Ditto with adoption agencies. If having a kid was a constitutional right, adoption agencies could not deny anyone the right to adopt a kid.

But they can...and often do.

Ergo. Having a kid is a priviledge, not a right.

 

[Hygro]

The question, though, is should it be a right, or a privilege.