Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 alpha 4/15/85; site ratex.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!ratex!mck
From: mck@ratex.UUCP (Daniel Kian Mc Kiernan)
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: Reproduction -- Response to Sykora
Message-ID: <1073@ratex.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 22-Apr-85 15:58:50 EST
Article-I.D.: ratex.1073
Posted: Mon Apr 22 15:58:50 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 23-Apr-85 06:42:40 EST
Organization: Squids R Us
Lines: 38
Keywords: DeLeon


Lines marked '>' are those of Michael M. Sykora; lines marked '>>]' are
from an earlier entry of mine.

>>]          Reproduction -- a person creates another person, and thereby
>>]           creates obligations to that person.
>
>Would you mind elaborating on what precisely these obligations are, and
>why they are in fact obligations?

What is the purpose of the word 'precisely'?  Is the imprecise incorrect?
     I can't say what they are precisely; I've thought about it for years,
and I expect that I will continue to think about it for years.
     GENERALLY, though, these obligations are those of promoting the
development of the off-spring into an intellectually and physically viable
adult.

     (With such exceptions as rape and botched sterilizations) A person
who engages in a reproductive act does so voluntarily.  Any subsequent off-
spring are unconsenting agents of the reproducer.  Altho the reproducer
may not have WANTED his CHOICE to result in off-spring, nonetheless
THEY ARE THERE BY CHOICE OF THE REPRODUCERS.

     I've collected a fair deal of literature from Libertarian opponents of
parental obligation, and all that I have uses one or both of two arguments.
  1) One cannot cannot control the Will (that is: One cannot establish
rules effectively restricting thoughts and desires), therefore one cannot
alienate the Will, therefore one cannot enter into long-term obligations.
     The initial premise (One cannot control the Will) is debatable, but in
any event the conclusion is a non-sequitur.  A long-term obligation need not
involve the right to force thoughts and desires upon one, it can simply
involve the right to force other actions upon one.
  2) The offspring is a tresspasser.  
     But a trespasser is one using the property of another WITHOUT the free
choice of that other.

                               Back later,
                               DKMcK