Reply #111: Warm fuzzies? [View All]

[Pithlet]

You think that forcing a person to parent, and then punishing them for doing a bad job (by the government who doesn't own us. *Snark*) is going to make a kid's life better? You think that because a person is genetically related to another means there is some kind of unbreakable bond? That people punished by the government are going to magically start loving the children they didn't want? They aren't going to take that aggravation out on the child? In your fantasy world, anyway. Your, warm, fuzzy fantasy world. But, not in reality world.

My argument has nothing to do with warm fuzzies. It has everything to do with reality. YOU are the one who is insisting that there is some kind of unbreakable ownership because of genes. YOU are the one who is pushing the ownership angle. YOU are the one who is treating a child like property in your argument. MY argument states that a child is owned by NO ONE. People DO NOT own another human being simply because they share their genes. Therefore, they cannot transfer that ownership to anyone else. Period.

I am done with you. I'm glad the world isn't run by people like you who think that some magical principle based on something as spurious as genes is more important than a human being living in a happy, loving home. That that genetic connection is more important than all other considerations. I do not think that one human being ever owns another. That is why it is not property to be transfered. YOUR argument, however, does.