DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
True Left
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: True Left vs False Left
*****************************************************
#Post#: 26906--------------------------------------------------
Re: Childcare Issues
DIR By: 90sRetroFan
Date: July 1, 2024, 11:04 am
---------------------------------------------------------
In our usage, virtue theory refers to the belief that positive
traits are acquired with maturation. Believing that their
offspring prior to teaching are inclined to kill insects but
that they can be taught not to can be considered virtue theory,
but belief that not killing insects will be rewarded in the
afterlife is a separate point which is not necessarily part of
virtue theory.
In any case, this will lead to violence-initiating blood having
this trait suppressed via rearing and being mistaken for Aryan
blood if we are not careful.
#Post#: 26931--------------------------------------------------
Re: Childcare Issues
DIR By: rp
Date: July 3, 2024, 9:07 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I would say the same about children who act aggressive toward
other children. If you see a child initiate violence against
another child (for example by confiscating that child's toys),
would you say that the former child deserves punishment?
However, I would go further and say that the former child should
be prohibited from reproducing.
#Post#: 26932--------------------------------------------------
Re: Childcare Issues
DIR By: 90sRetroFan
Date: July 3, 2024, 9:34 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
"If you see a child initiate violence against another child (for
example by confiscating that child's toys), would you say that
the former child deserves punishment?"
Yes. Again, all initiators of violence deserve retaliatory
violence.
"However, I would go further and say that the former child
should be prohibited from reproducing."
I'm not sure how this is "going further". We frequently say that
people should be prohibited from reproducing for far less than
initiating violence.
Besides, competent Ahimsa automatically ensures the target will
never reproduce again, so there is no need for a separate
prohibition from reproducing.
#Post#: 26933--------------------------------------------------
Re: Childcare Issues
DIR By: rp
Date: July 3, 2024, 9:55 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
So given that we do not currently have a state controlled
institution to implement such punishment, would you agree that
parents doling out the punishment is a temporary workaround?
#Post#: 26934--------------------------------------------------
Re: Childcare Issues
DIR By: 90sRetroFan
Date: July 3, 2024, 10:10 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
No, the victim should do it, in this case the child whose toys
got stolen (I have no idea why you used the term "confiscate" in
your earlier post). If the thief's parents want to support the
victim in this, they can purchase equipment for the victim to
use against the thief.
#Post#: 26935--------------------------------------------------
Re: Childcare Issues
DIR By: rp
Date: July 3, 2024, 10:45 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
"I have no idea why you used the term "confiscate" in your
earlier post"
I agree it was poor choice of words looking back. I meant it in
the context of settings like a common play area where toys are
shared.
"the thief's parents want to support the victim in this, they
can purchase equipment for the victim to use against the thief."
But what if the child may want to hit the thief, but fears
retaliation? Would it be okay for the thief's parents to do the
job for the victim?
#Post#: 26936--------------------------------------------------
Re: Childcare Issues
DIR By: 90sRetroFan
Date: July 3, 2024, 11:14 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
"But what if the child may want to hit the thief, but fears
retaliation?"
Firstly, it would not be "retaliation", but a new initiation of
violence by the thief. Secondly, the best way to prevent this is
to make your own hit lethal.
"Would it be okay for the thief's parents to do the job for the
victim?"
If the victim is able to do it, the victim should do it. But
let's say the victim is disabled. In this scenario, I would
still prefer anyone else to do the job for the victim than the
thief's parents (as the latter reinforces the very power dynamic
we are trying to get rid of). Why not the victim's parents?
#Post#: 26937--------------------------------------------------
Re: Childcare Issues
DIR By: rp
Date: July 3, 2024, 11:16 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
"Why not the victim's parents?"
Ideally. This is what I thought initially, but there are
legislative hurdles that make this a challenge.
#Post#: 26938--------------------------------------------------
Re: Childcare Issues
DIR By: 90sRetroFan
Date: July 3, 2024, 11:41 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Is it not also currently illegal for the thief's parents to kill
the thief?
#Post#: 26939--------------------------------------------------
Re: Childcare Issues
DIR By: rp
Date: July 4, 2024, 12:05 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Not necessarily kill, but a good beating would suffice. This
would also deter the child from initiating further violence, as
they would fear another beating. Another option would be to stop
giving the child attention at all (silent treatment).
*****************************************************
Page 13 of 20
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page