4 ms·

Sure, and that is besides the point. Liberal western democracies are not perfect, but they get a few things right and this is one of them. I believe that child

by telmo 7y ago

Sure, and that is besides the point. Liberal western democracies are not perfect, but they get a few things right and this is one of them. I believe that children are not cattle, and I would keep believing that even if 100% of everyone else thought otherwise.

rayiner 7y ago
I’m thinking you’re reading “community property” more literally than I intended it—with the focus on “property” and not “community.” Obviously children are not property. But children are also not independent adults. They must be socialized. Legal codes all over the world, including the UN Declaration of Human Rights, recognize that parents have a right to choose how to socialize their children. My point is that communities are also entitled to have a say, or at least express their views, in how children in their community are socialized. (“Community property” is a legal concept in the US where assets belong to both spouses simultaneously, with each spouse having a full, undivided interest. The metaphor is to express that family and the community has an interest in each child, not that children are property.)
- tptacek 7y ago
  I think the words you're using here are --- if not unclear, then at least "not carefully chosen to avoid offending this particular audience", but the point you're making is pretty straightforward, and it's not hard to think of comparable secular parenting decisions that we generally have no trouble criticizing parents over. But there's also a subtext here, which is that there's a distinction to be made between good-faith, substantive parenting critiques and externally-mandated arbitrary critiques. If there's institutional pressure to ostracize former members of a community, that's problematic. I think you probably have to acknowledge that subtext to really engage on this topic --- which, who could blame anyone for not wanting to really engage on religion on HN?
  - rayiner 7y ago
    > If there's institutional pressure to ostracize former members of a community, that's problematic. I’m not sure, in 2020, I agree. I’m sensitive to the issue. The penalty for apostasy in Islam is death. But I don’t begrudge all the Pakistani cab drivers who try to convert me. They believe they’re doing me a favor. (I’m never the one to bring it up obviously. It always arises awkwardly when I mention that I’m from Bangladesh and then they assume I’m Muslim.) Leaving religion out of it — nobody has a right to be accepted by a community. In a free society people can leave, but can they really demand a particular sort of treatment?
- nradov 7y ago
  No thanks. My trashy neighbors from down the street are entitled to exactly zero say in how I socialize my children. They can lump it.

by telmo 7y ago

rayiner 7y ago

I’m thinking you’re reading “community property” more literally than I intended it—with the focus on “property” and not “community.” Obviously children are not property. But children are also not independent adults. They must be socialized. Legal codes all over the world, including the UN Declaration of Human Rights, recognize that parents have a right to choose how to socialize their children. My point is that communities are also entitled to have a say, or at least express their views, in how children in their community are socialized. (“Community property” is a legal concept in the US where assets belong to both spouses simultaneously, with each spouse having a full, undivided interest. The metaphor is to express that family and the community has an interest in each child, not that children are property.)

tptacek 7y ago
I think the words you're using here are --- if not unclear, then at least "not carefully chosen to avoid offending this particular audience", but the point you're making is pretty straightforward, and it's not hard to think of comparable secular parenting decisions that we generally have no trouble criticizing parents over. But there's also a subtext here, which is that there's a distinction to be made between good-faith, substantive parenting critiques and externally-mandated arbitrary critiques. If there's institutional pressure to ostracize former members of a community, that's problematic. I think you probably have to acknowledge that subtext to really engage on this topic --- which, who could blame anyone for not wanting to really engage on religion on HN?
- rayiner 7y ago
  > If there's institutional pressure to ostracize former members of a community, that's problematic. I’m not sure, in 2020, I agree. I’m sensitive to the issue. The penalty for apostasy in Islam is death. But I don’t begrudge all the Pakistani cab drivers who try to convert me. They believe they’re doing me a favor. (I’m never the one to bring it up obviously. It always arises awkwardly when I mention that I’m from Bangladesh and then they assume I’m Muslim.) Leaving religion out of it — nobody has a right to be accepted by a community. In a free society people can leave, but can they really demand a particular sort of treatment?
nradov 7y ago
No thanks. My trashy neighbors from down the street are entitled to exactly zero say in how I socialize my children. They can lump it.