Those, too, should be resisted to the greatest extent possible. Again, I don't disagree that the state will act as a moral instuctor, and we should demand our share. But we can accomplish more by resisting its scope at every turn than by committing ourselves to ride the tiger.
The issue is not the child. The issue is who speaks for the child's rights, the parent or the State. I, as a classical liberal, say the parent.
-
-
Ah. I thought governments were instituted by men to secure our rights. I must’ve been mistaken. Sorry. Not sure where I got that idea.pic.twitter.com/Cvqrc6ACZr
-
“The issue is who speaks for the child's rights, the parent or the State. I, as a classical liberal, say the parent.” When the child is unborn, you’d say the same? The parents “speak for the child’s rights” and the state shouldn’t get involved?
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.