Black Wolf Posted February 19, 2010 Report Share Posted February 19, 2010 Ideally, how should court rooms go about defining parent obligations objectively? I know objectivists agree that there needs to be an arbitrary age of adulthood, and that a child does not have all of the same rights as an adult. However, a child is also not an adult's property - Would parents be allowed to circumcise their children? - Would parents be obligated to provide an education of some form? Another person in this forum brought that up, that there would need to be an objective definiton of education, and the parent would be obligated to provide that definition. Is it really the government's duty to make sure that all kids are educated? - Are there any penalties that should be placed on parents, other than physically abusing children? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clemetson91 Posted February 19, 2010 Report Share Posted February 19, 2010 You should search the forum for more info on this topic. There are already a few threads on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.