jonesg

Pathetic.

engly-saxo

Why is it pathetic?

In life, I don't believe anyone is owed anything. No one is "owed" respect, friendship or moral conduct.

Wrenny

I completely agree. My grandfather is a nasty old curmudgeon. He was an ok guy and a distant/mean dad to my dad, so we make sure he has what he needs and have lunch with him once a week, but that's about it. Hmmm but on the other hand, I'm now dealing with my mom who married a super fundie. She was great to me growing up, but now she's ditched me for religion. I don't know that I feel any obligation to her at all.

hinduwoman

Because the Book was written by parents and not children? :wave:

hinduwoman

I keep on feeling that parents' moral obligation towards children is far greater than any child's obligation towards parents can be, because the child was not consulted when he was conceived.

I agree that society functions better when everyone carries out certain moral obligations towards others, but is there any moral reason why parents are more deserving?

premjan

I think children do not owe any obligation to parents for having them, but if they have a happy upbringing, it is natural (as it would be with anyone who treated you well) to consider that it was a kind of favor, whether with attendant obligation to return or not.

Ms. Siv

Quote:

Originally Posted by hinduwoman Do they? The parents bring them up and care for them. So supposedly the children should look after them. But the children were not consulted when they were conceived. The parents brought them to earth for selfish reasons of their own. So why should – affection apart --- children have any moral obligation to their parents?

Technically, you're right ... there is no obligation. Children were not consulted when they were conceived ... and hence they dont owe their parents anything.

But parents, even though they might have had their own selfish reasons for bringing their children into the world, are not obligated to give their children a happy childhood either, right ?
I understand that 'happy' is a rather vague and ambiguous term here ... but lets just consider it to mean good nutrition, shelter, clothing, access to good education and no abuse, shall we ?
Many parents do provide all that ... and more. Maybe a lot of it has to do with genetic programming and the joy of nurturing and rearing a child, and maybe even towards vicariously satisfying some of your objectives and desires through your child ... but again, there's no need for parents to do all that.

IMO moral obligations arise more from reciprocal altruism and empathy, and not from discussing technicalities.

Dont look after your parents because you think its an obligation ... do so because you love them and care for them (if you do, that is ).

Columbus

I was conceived by a couple of stupid college students in the late 50's. My bio-dad booked the minute he found out my bio-mom was pregnant. He had married someone else before I was even born. In a pre-RoevWade world she was not able to just kill me, so here I am. She got rid of me as fast as she could, and for that I thank her. But despite her concerted effort to track me down, I don't even want to correspond with her. I'm rather angry with the State of Michigan for reneiging on the deal they made in 1958 to seal my court records. I honor my parents because they are good people and took good care of me and made me part of a good family etc. But they are not my Mother and Father according to the Bible. My folks are much better than that. I owe my Mother and Father nothing.


I can understand why a Bronze Age moral code would include this commandment. It was a world where most people started families in their mid-teens and rarely survived much past forty. If a family man wanted his inheritance he might find his 50ish father more convenient dead than alive. The old man might well have outlived his usefulness and just be an impediment to getting on with things. Preserving his wisdom for the tribe might well have required a rule for the individuals. But don't tell me an ancient moral code means I owe my Father anything, because I don't.

Tom

fast

Mr. Sawyer,

First, I applaud you on a well written, well articulated post. I am concerned, however, almost ashamed even, that I am unable to agree. Perhaps i need to be kicked. Keep in mind as I nonsense slips in that I am not against children caring for parents nor am I against firefighters. Keep that in mind as I may tend to not appear to have those sentiments below.

This statement, as an absolute, has some implications that I cannot ignore. One with malicious intent can 'create' obligation unbeknownst to those that would suffer the need to reciprocate--or to fulfill the obligation. Ex. A shyster walks into -slips into-a store with a rag & cleaning supplies and begins cleaning; after the sparkling clean results are known, an obligation has been created. It's wreaks of a prevalent mindset: Please don't help me because I DON'T WANT the dreaded, hated, and deplored dirty-word obligation that follows.

Until society, that society hell bent on creating, deriving, making up, and inventing obligations-- obligations exacting a price, a much despised and loathed price that comes with all the trimmings and tags of BENEFIT. Sometimes, the benefit is an after thought, sometimes non existent, but the point is, how much benefit can the slaves of societies whims take. It's not the early days...I cannot take off to plant a stake on some untouched lands. No one wakes up and chooses to become a part of society -- they are doomed by the exacting price of often times artificial BS benefit.

Given the example, I am so inclined to agree, but if we were to delve deeper into the allowable evils of societies practices, I don't know for how long I could maintain being an advocate. At what point does the intelligent ones feeding off the ignorance of others become immoral? We breed lack of choice into our daily lives. Look at the banking industry. Over 98% of the people haven’t a clue of the depth of their banking agreements and all it entails, but I’m getting off topic.

While I'm well prepared to hold an admiration for a child to feel the need to care, I must be very careful in how I might throw around the word "deserve". You call it 'service' carrying all the positive connotations, but how can you put THAT spin on it? Why not call them the creators of hell--a hell in which I am forever indebted to suffer?

Depends on the community, really, but I'll go with what you say, as it may be the popular.

In your first sentence, you say "take advantage", almost to say: reap the rewards. You call it a benefit because so many FEEL that way about it. Clearly, by your own admission, some may not feel that way, as observed by your mentioning the posting of notices, so why then, do you maintain the reference of calling it a benefit? Why not an abomination? Why not a detraction from the peace of being without sight of a fireman? Why must you put a positive SPIN on it and call it a benefit? It is this very thing that you call a benefit that is actually being deplored and despised by some. Um, not me necessarily, but I'm trying to make a point. Benefit is a term that is abusive to those that strive to be free from it.

I realize that I’m darkening the light upon which I am shedding myself here, but if others can just get past how- what- I'm about to say SOUNDS and think just of the issue I’m presenting, then maybe that would facilitate an actual understanding of what's being said.

AT SOME POINT, the reckless imposing of benefit will cost more than we can afford. Is it a world in which we want to live if anyone with a means can dictate the creation of an obligation so long as the benefit buzzword can so be attached? As time marches on, we are increasing finding our selves in a better world (in many ways), but also, and without individual choice, we are by the same token being brought down by the very prices (duties and obligations) that these touted benefits bring. We all perhaps ought to be apart of a compromising society -- one in which brings unity but also allows for detachment. (a bit vague but it's getting late).

Well I’ve been negative enough I guess, so let me leave you with my admiration that I have for post, despite any misguided misconceptions I might have that oppose it.

hinduwoman

Ms Siv,
since parents brought us into this world it is their moral obligation to look after us.

Yeah, I agree that I would look after my parents because I love them; but not because they are simply my parents.

Remember Karna!