|
quote:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
hmm....well the following are also reversible:
1. bruises
2. broken bones
3. psychological trauma
therefore, since the above is reversible, its no longer catergorized as child abuse?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Actually, if you study child-abuse cases, you will find that the above 3 have been determined as NOT REVERSIBLE. The theory states that #1 and #2 lead to #3, and #3 damages a person for life.
When you park your car in the lot at a child day-care, you are dumping tons of pollutants into the air that is being pulled inside through the ventillation system. Are you guilty of child abuse?
The city sprays toxins in the air to kill mosquitos. These chemicals have been found to potentially create health problems. Is the city guilty of child abuse?
Children die every year in swimming pools. If you sign your child up for swimming lessons, is it child abuse?
Mcdonalds and burgerking meals are tremendously unhealthy and may cause many health problems. Are parents who feed their children french fries guilty of child abuse?
Circumcision is extremely painful and can lead to plenty of other health problems. Are proponents of this practice engaging in child abuse?
I could go on forever. Just because something is NOT HEALTHY does not make it a crime. *Intent* is the key to identifying a crime. Although you have done a good job of identifying yet one more unhealthy aspect of life on earth.
My argument, is that it's wrong to make it a CRIME. Not that its healthy.
There is a BIG difference between "could potentially" and "did irreparable damage." If we lock up the "could potentiallys" we'd all be in jail for hurling a 3000lb chunk of steel down the highway every day, whether we think we can justify it or not.
|