Biological representative

Biological representative

Postby holy vehm » Sat Aug 31, 2013 8:02 am

Just another of my ponderings.

Biological representative.

A child in the UK is considered property of the state and assumes all rights.
The parent has only the rights granted to it by the state.

A biological representative however has the highest of rights and they are inalienable.

A man and a woman create life. This life did not ask to be created. This life was not created by the state. It required no rights to be granted by the state to create this new life.

When this life is created, the creators have an obligation and responsibility to assist this new life to become a fully functioning member of humanity.

The state however only has an obligation and responsibility to assist this new life to become a fully functioning member of society.

We are assumed by the state to be parents, we even consider ourselves to be parents, a concept reinforced through indoctrination. A baby or child is considered to be property, OUR children.

But no man can own another, we do not own our children, only the state considers children as property.

So unless the biological representative is failing in its obligations, no state interference can be justified.
"A ruler who violates the law is illegitimate. He has no right to be obeyed. His commands are mere force and coercion. Rulers who act lawlessly, whose laws are unlawful, are mere criminals".
User avatar
holy vehm
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 3077
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 7:17 pm
Location: http://www.fmotl.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=9142

Return to Children

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests