6 ms·

It absolutely should be illegal, first and foremost because minor children "off the grid" is a massive risk for abuse. In any case, regardless of the rights and

• mindslight 7y ago
  That's an awfully one-sided "think of the children" you've got there. Requiring humans to be registered (ie insisting that we be legible to the State), is also a guaranteed path to some forms of lifelong exploitation. So like everything, it's a tradeoff.
  • ecpottinger 7y ago
    They either have to go to school or if home schooled pass the tests that show they are learning the basics for their age group. Or are you suggesting it is okay to have children and never educate at all?
    • invalidOrTaken 7y ago
      The real question is why does the state have any say? There's no fundamental reason to trust the state over a child's parents; the reason the state has any say has more to do with might rather than right.
      • caf 7y ago
        The reason is because the state has an obligation to take reasonable efforts to ensure the basic human rights of all people within its jurisdiction are protected. That is, the state has a duty towards the children that is independent of the state's relationship with the parents. There also is a fundamental reason to trust the state over a child's parents: the state has considerably more transparency and oversight over its actions than the parents do.
      • deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      • 9HZZRfNlpR 7y ago
        Because Europeans believe more in collectivism, pushing for greater good together for the society. Also compared to Americans who tend you like individualism we are not paranoid of our government because they are part of us, even if we don't like the politicians. Two different mindsets, it's hard to argue with that libertarian lens with Europeans.
      • onion2k 7y ago
        There's no fundamental reason to trust the state over a child's parents. Most people don't want to harm children and won't sit by when they see it happening. They want to help. That means it's better to get more people involved in the lives of children. "The state" is one way we codify that. I think there's a good argument for enabling communities to assume that role rather than central government, but some group should be there to protect children from neglect.
      • Scarblac 7y ago
        Some parents clearly aren't fit to be parents at all, I trust our collective wisdom as embodied by our government a lot more. Even though child protection services are horribly underfunded and have also become quite bad.
    • dependenttypes 7y ago
      > They either have to go to school This is the real child abuse here.
    • squiggleblaz 7y ago
      Those are two different questions. In Germany, I have to tell the state where I live and every time I move, I have to tell them again. I can't open a bank account, get health insurance, rent a proper place, I can't do anything, till the local council can be bothered staffing the registration office enough to see me. I certainly live at a certain place, but it's as if I'm staying at that address on holiday. In Australia, I don't have to register with the state. If I move house, I have enough things on my mind. If a person is born, died, gets married or (sometimes) changes their name in Australia, someone has to report that fact to the government. But a person is a person, or dead, or married, or has a different name while they're waiting for the bureaucracy to do its thing. In both cases, children have to go to school. Even in the absence of any registration or reporting, there's still an obligation. So what does the registration actually achieve? The government has the power and ability to find out where a person lives. Why compel me to do something you can make obnoxiously difficult? - and which serves no apparent purpose?
  • Scarblac 7y ago
    Yes, but the people on that side of the discussion mostly moved to countries like the US in the last few centuries.
    • benj111 7y ago
      I would think the US takes more notice than most countries as all citizens regardless of where they live and if they've ever actually visited the US are required to pay US taxes.
  • pjc50 7y ago
    > guaranteed path to some forms of lifelong exploitation Like what? Because most states have had registration of births for about a century.
    • jandrese 7y ago
      Like paying taxes. Taxation is theft after all. Also, possible military service maybe? But the GP poster is 100% correct that purposely not registering your children with the state in this day and age is hugely suspicious. You are giving up so many services and getting very little apparent benefit in return, there has to be some ulterior motive. It's not a good place to be where the least terrible answer is that you're a bit crazy in the head.
    • soperj 7y ago
      This is a reply to your reply. Taxation is not theft. You either work in the country and make money, and use everything around you in that country that was provided by taxes (roads, sewer, fire, police, etc) or you don't work and don't pay taxes.
      • Arnavion 7y ago
        (If you click the <# time ago> link in the comment, you get taken to a page just for that comment tree. That page will always have a reply box, even if the main comments page hides it.)
      • wincy 7y ago
        It’s theft because you get thrown in prison if you don’t pay. It’s little better than the mafia, only we’ve been brainwashed to think it’s okay by being forced to attend public schools. I wouldn’t consider it theft if paying taxes was voluntary. Maybe the fire department and police shouldn’t show up if I don’t pay, maybe I can’t drive anywhere, but they shouldn’t show up and steal my home then imprison me. Prison for unpaid taxes is just modern day debtors prison.
        • merpnderp 7y ago
  • voldacar 7y ago
    I'm glad someone else here has read the Scott book!