Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (51397)	6/18/2002 2:48:46 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

What I said was that I would not on my own initiative interfere in a parent-child relationship unless there were some immediate danger to the child. I said that if I saw a child drowning, I would try to rescue it. If I saw a child wandering into a busy highway, I would step in and pull them to safety. But when I see a child reading, or viewing, something I might not approve of my own children viewing or reading, if there is no immediate danger to the child, no, I would not interfere. That is the parent's role, not mine. What you said in your post, that I object to, was that I take no role in the responsibility for the children in my community. That is manifestly false. I have been quite active in taking such responsibility -- from being a cubmaster and chairman of our cub scout pack, to an active role in our local sports programs, including coaching and umpiring, and on and on. But these activities are done with the knowledge and approval of the parents. The values I impose on the children (for example, I have a sterner no-swearing rule when I umpire than some other umpires do, but that is made clear at the start of the game, and the parents almost universally prefer my style), are done with parental knowledge. I don't believe in unilaterally, without parental knowledge or approval, leaping in and correcting children who are not in present danger because they're doing something I personally don't approve of. That's quite a different thing from what you said.