Yong Tsui offered the terrified child as a slave because he wanted him off his hands. He put up a table with a sign on it, giving the youngster’s name and age and boasting of his capacity for hard work. But when bidders began to ask how much the boy ate, angry bystanders attacked the father.
Police now have the lad in care in Wuhan, central China. Yong told them the boy’s mother died three years ago and he could not afford to raise him. An officer said: “He has no job, no home and no money. He says he wasn’t interested in money, just finding a home for the boy.”
Source: The Sun
I know China doesn’t exactly have the best human rights record and I’m happy that bystanders attacked the father (he deserved worse). I’m quite disappointed by the fact that there were bidders. The greatest disappoint is from the official reaction. Apparently it’s no big deal to chain your boy to a pole and sell him to the highest bidder if you can’t take care of him…
The Sun told on Saturday how the two-year-old got hooked after dad Mohammed gave him a fag at 18 months. Now he weighs 4st and trundles round on a toy truck blowing smoke rings – too unfit to run with other kids. Mum Diana, 26, wept: “He’s totally addicted. If he doesn’t get cigarettes, he gets angry and screams and batters his head against the wall. He tells me he feels dizzy and sick.”
Ardi will smoke only one brand and his habit costs his parents £3.78 a day in Musi Banyuasin, Indonesia. Officials have offered to buy the family a car if he quits. But fishmonger Mohammed, 30, said: “He looks pretty healthy to me. I don’t see the problem.”
Source: The Sun
Give you toddler cigarettes and go to jail? Nope… you win a free car!
It’s not as though America doesn’t get in on some of the idiocy:
A little over two years ago, a Fresno jury found Father Eric Swearingen guilty (9-3) of molesting a former altar boy, however, Bishop John J. Steinbock has continued to allow this man to work with children at the Holy Spirit Parish in Fresno, California.
What is Bishop Steinbock thinking? Would a school district allow a teacher faced with the same situation as Swearingen (I find it inappropriate to refer to him as “Father,” as it shows deference to a man who, frankly, doesn’t deserve it) to continue working with children? As a parent, would you want your children around a man like that?
Source: Injury Board Blog Network
Well, what common thread do we see here? Complete lack of common sense in how to deal with a situation. A father chains his kid to a pole and tries to sell him? You put the father in jail. You give you toddler cigarettes and continue to do so? You don’t get a free car, you get punished! You molest child, you shouldn’t be allowed around them! Of course, that’s the Catholic church and their record is sadly pretty clear. What about parents role though?
I’m pretty much a Libertarian. I believe in individual rights but human beings are not property. Having a child is a unique responsibility. You take it upon yourself to have a child and in doing so you are accepting a huge responsibility. There are many non-criminal options in dealing with the situation if you can’t care for a child, starting with not having sex. Once you have a child though, you have a huge responsibility. Unfortunately, our society and obviously other societies do not place the proper amount of emphasis on parental responsibilities. Even in American you can do some pretty horrible things to a child and all you do is get your child taken away. Criminal activity should be met with criminal charges! You shouldn’t get a free car, you should be punished and made to wear a jailhouse outfit.
Where did parental responsibility go anyway? If you can’t feed your child, we give you food. If you can’t house your child we help with that. We give them public education, we make health care available to them but at what point are we as a society assuming the parental responsibility? At what point are we both acknowledging you are completely unable to care for your child, yet we are leaving them in your care? We are, on one hand affirming children as property, giving the parent a very wide birth to do what ever they see fit to their child (criminal or not) without punishing the parent. On the other hand, while allowing or tolerating criminal behavior, we are also subsidizing the bad parents. Here’s the reality, if you can’t care for the child you should not have them. If you treat your child in a criminal manner you should be charged criminally. I really don’t see what’s so hard about this. No more buying bad parents cars, no more subsidizing bad parenting and no more acting like crimes against your own child are somehow less than other crimes.
Possibly related posts: