most adults favor children in need over adults
Submitted by d on October 12 1999 at 17:34:39
In reply to Re: how would you compare this to paternalistic needs? Submitted by BLues on October 12 1999 at 16:55:45
|
When the needs are similar in magnitude, and even in many cases when they are not, non-bl adults favor taking care of the child's need before that of an adult. For me (and perhaps others), the logic works this way: An adult can in some sense take care of himself. An adult who is in need won't have his character and (if the need is food/medicine) body affected quite as much as a child will. A kid deserves a chance to grow up to be a healthy, productive adult, and it is in society's best interest that this happen (if he grows up to be a crook or a lazy bum, that has a monetary cost to society). For this reason I also favor handling the needs of young kids before teenagers, if the needs are similar. You see this in society all the time: Charities and government funds for poor children and families, and less or none for poor adults without families. Free education through age 18 or so, user-pays afterwards. Charity or government funding for childrens recreational organizations but less/no funding for adult recreational organizations. Even in many (thankfully not all) churches, children's Sunday School is deemed more important than adult Sunday School. Now, having said that society favors giving kids in need help before helping adults in need: I think the statement > time would sooner be spent tending to any need no matter how small of a boy then it would be tending to say...an old mans need, no matter how great.< probably does not apply to all boylovers, and certaintly not all people. By the way, I and a couple others here are not boylovers. But that doesn't stop me (or - I'm guessing - the others) from loving boys, in my own way. -David ("d", email is up and down today) |