Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site allegra.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!floyd!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!alan From: alan@allegra.UUCP (Alan S. Driscoll) Newsgroups: net.religion Subject: Re: Government vs. Religion, Indiana Style Message-ID: <2516@allegra.UUCP> Date: Fri, 8-Jun-84 11:18:31 EDT Article-I.D.: allegra.2516 Posted: Fri Jun 8 11:18:31 1984 Date-Received: Sat, 9-Jun-84 08:00:57 EDT References: <818@akgua.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill Lines: 45 > ... > > Who "owns" my kids ? I believe that the Government DOES NOT own my > children and neither do I. My wife and I are stewards of my three > boys and we WILL answer to God for our stewardhip. I will resist > on almost any level I can the Government interference in that > stewardship. > > ... > > The sticky problem is we allow the Government (usually state or local) > to intrude in cases of overt "child abuse" like battering and sexual > misconduct and once in the arena the Government tends to redefine the > term "abuse". I think that's the case in the Indiana situation. Are you saying that beating a child constitues "abuse", while letting a child die needlessly doesn't? I think you're the one who is trying to redefine the term, and I don't like your definition at all. > I urge opposition to these laws even though it opens up the probability > that innocent children will suffer because of parental foolishness. We're not talking about a little suffering here. We're talking about a wasted life. You and I would disagree on many, many things, but I'm surprised we can't agree on the value of human life. > Freedom, to be meaningful, must include the freedom to be badly wrong > even to the detriment of others. No, no, no! Freedom, to be meaningful, must include the freedom to be badly wrong, even to the detriment of oneself. (This is why I oppose laws against "victimless" crimes, such as drug abuse and prostitution. The question isn't whether these things are good or bad. The question is, what right does the government have to stop anyone from doing such things?) However, for freedom to be meaningful, it must also include responsibility. Your freedom to act ends where my freedom not to be acted on begins. The crucial issue here is that this new law protects person A from the actions of person B. It does nothing to stop person B from hurting him or herself. -- Alan S. Driscoll AT&T Bell Laboratories