Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
I think you're drifting into special pleading. I don't think it's a valid point in any case. Many choices parents make for their children can have a profound and lasting effect on them. Even things like where they choose to live, what clothes they dress them in, even what haircut they give them. The "wrong" choice in any of these areas can affect educational outcomes, the likelihood of getting bullied at school, the friends they will make - any or all of these things can permanently change the way that child's life might otherwise have been, yet none of these are things any reasonable person would think to attack as parental preferences that their children should be "protected" from.
|
Am I to take this to mean you also accept that enforcing an ideology, regardless of subject, is also potentially, just as damaging and therefore should be approached with caution? Should this therefore not lead one to perhaps refrain from those 'choices' which do not need immediate resolution (such as a haircut) and excluding those 'choices' that are not always one which can be changed (such as where one lives) until a time when the child is old enough to make that choice for them self whether to be included in an ideological group rather than enforcing it upon them?