On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 10:15:31 -0600, Dan Minette
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> > > Good question.  Let me give an example that illustrates it.  Lets
> consider
> > > two newly blended family.  In both cases, there is a 15 year old
> daughter
> > > of the women in the new family. They all move into the man's house.
> > >
> > > In the first household, the 15 year old girl is required to do chores
> > > around the house (vacuum, clean toilets, mop the kitchen floor) for
> about
> > > two hours a week.  In the second, she is required to have sex with her
> > > step-father 2 times a week, taking half an hour each time.  In both
> cases,
> > > she'd rather be doing something else.  Is there any difference?
> >
> >  Yes. There is a small class of jobs related to the maintainence of
> > the family  home society considers children to be capable of.
> 
> >These do not include coal miner, police officer or sex worker.
> 
> But, children are clearly capable of being sex workers. The trade in child
> prostitution shows that.

 Yes, likewise coal miners and, as Rich points out, soldier. I think
it's quite clear what "society considers children to be capable of"
means but if you are determined to pointlessly nitpick please
substitute "society considers acceptable for children".

> >You further
> > muddy the waters by using the word "required", when in fact no child
> > is required and coertion in either case would be abuse (though one
> > would be a much more serious case).
> 
> Parents who require their children to do chores are abusive?

 Sure.

>  If I tell my
> son he cannot leave the house until his chores are done, I'm being abusive?

 No, but if, say, you withheld food from him until he did so you would
be. You might consider his behaviour unreasonable but as far as I know
a child has no obligations to its parents. Children don't have adult
rights so they don't have adult responsibilties. I didn't think this
was controverstial.

 This is an entirely unrelated and complicated tangent though. I
realise your intention was to derail the conversation but how about
sticking to the point.

 Martin
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to