The Greatest
Love
I believe the children
are our futureTeach them well and let them lead the way
Show them all the beauty they possess inside
Give them a sense of pride to make it easier
Let the children's laughter remind us how we used to be
But do you believe that
children are wards, not property?
In a group, e.g. a state, there are full members and there are wards of
the group. A ward is not yet a full member of the group but is in the care of
the group until they become a full member. A group also needs a sovereign, a leader.
The United States of America was an experiment in that every member of the group
has a say in choosing that leader and making sure that the sovereign’s power to
make laws, administer laws, and rule on laws, were by separate groups of individuals. This distinguishes
it from a hereditary monarchy where the sovereign passes though a hereditary
line to a single individual. It is also is distinguished from an electoral monarchy ( e.g.
the early Holy Roman Empire) where rather than inheritance, the sovereign is an elected individual. The sovereign
can also be chosen by dominance (i.e. authoritarianism). While the sovereign is
typically an individual, the sovereign can be a group, (e.g. the Communist Party
of China). A sovereign serves two roles:
1) the ruler of the group; and 2) the personification of the group. It is possible
to separate these roles, for example a constitutional monarchy where the group
rules, but the personification is inherited.
It possible for both the ruling sovereign and the personification sovereign to be elected as separate individuals (e.g. France). If the ruler is a subgroup of the larger group, the leader of the subgroup typically also serves the personification role ( e.g. Xi of China). While it is theoretically possible for both the personification and ruling sovereign to be chosen by dominance, practically an authoritarian, dictator, will try to exercise dominance and become the personification sovereign, either directly, or by the personification being a puppet of the ruler.
In the United States of America, according to our constitution,
representation is based on members AND wards of the state (which at one point
included women, children, and slaves). Children can become full members based
on their age ( e.g. age to work, age of marriage, age of voting, age to buy alcohol,
etc.). Slaves, who would otherwise have met the age test, became members of the
group when slavery was abolished. Women achieved the right to vote, and arguably
became full members, but there was still the matter of whether a wife surrendered
her group rights, became a ward of her husband upon marriage. (This confusion was
attempted to be corrected by the Equal Rights Amendment). Individuals, who are
not physically, or mentally, capable of membership in the group, may be long‑term
wards of the group.
However a ward is NEVER property. Being a ward means that
it is a status which can change. Property can not change its status. Property
belongs to an individual. Property can be sold, gifted, transferred, or after the
owner has died, can be disposed of according to a will. Upon death, debts are discharged and only the assets, positive
property, can be “inherited.” The heirs
are NOT responsible for, do not, can not, inherit, the debts of the deceased. Children
and wives can not be sold when the husband is alive, nor can they be disposed
of as property in a will. Once upon a time, slaves could be disposed of as
property, but as mentioned before, slavery in the USA was abolished by the 14th Amendment.
Thus legally children and women, including wives, can not be property.
Children are wards of their parents. Parents are wardens
of their children. The group has conceded that its interest as a warden of the children
is inferior to the parent’s role as a warden.
However the group has not, can not, acknowledge a position that children are property
of their parents. If the parents refuse certain actions to their children, who
are only the parent's wards until they reach adulthood, then the parents have abandoned
their role as warden of their children and the group can, and should, exercise
its role as warden. Children can be proud, or ashamed, of their ancestors, but
they are not ever responsible for the actions, positive or negative, of their
ancestors. Parents can be wardens of their own children. However they
are not the wardens of the children of other parents.
This does not mean that adults can not have a special relationship
with those who were once their wardens. However legally they are not, and never
were, property of their wardens. The group lives on because those children
have become adults, are the future. An individual adult has a finite life span, but a group does
not have a definite life span.
No comments:
Post a Comment