Quote:
Originally Posted by Vettezuki
Uh, care to explain to me how these constitute protecting people from themselves? Sounds a lot like fairly clearly protecting one from another in some pretty clear cases doesn't it?
Actually, protecting in the first case, and punishing in the second. The latter is a bit easier to come down on the side against the negligent (and moronic) hypothetical father. Now for a real example, how about a parent who refuses medical treatment for their children based on religious convictions. How about recent cases of optiing out of vaccination? Not easy is it?
BTW, CPS is filled with absolute fuc*king horror stories of taking a child from a non-perfect home and putting them in homes where they get killed. Hot damn! I'd call that a negative consequence.
|
That was purely an example of the law protecting children, if it wasn't clear enough. Which was the first part of what you said.
As far as protecting people from themselves, I don't know if I agree with it, but the law does. If they decide you're suicidal or a looney toon in the hospital, and you refuse treatment, they have a right to tie you down and fix you and then charge you for it.