bostonPro

LovePrevails, do you happen to have any links to sources for the above bullet points? I would love to have them to refer to later. Thanks.

I recently read Unconditional Parenting by Alfie Kohn. I enjoyed it and would recommend it.

piece of shit

Its nice to see that a large majority of the comments are against circumcision too.

Would you say having no policy at all is as good or better than having a no-spanking policy? If not, then by default it would have to be a positive step, right. I still think its a positive step if only to expose the idea of not spanking to people who otherwise never considered it. And perhaps exposing them to that idea will lead them down a path of eliminating all forms of aggression against their children. I don't have any kids yet (though i have one on the way) and up until a year or so ago, I, like so many others thought spanking (not beating, but a light tap on the butt) was perfectly fine. Then I was exposed to the idea of no spanking at all and looked at the effects that it had on children. This lead me to realize that other, non physical, forms of aggression such as a timeout also has negative effects. Its like a rabbit hole, i think just exposing people to the idea of not spanking can get them to follow the rabbit hole down a path to completely eliminating aggression from their lives. And who knows, maybe when the hospital sends the social working to talk with the parents that spank, they'll explain that all forms of aggression are harmful. Then again, i'm an optimist.

That quote did make me cringe. Even though the policy isn't perfect, as you pointed out, i do still think its a positive step. Considering 90% of the people in this country still spank their kids, to have a leading children's hospital come out publicly against spanking will hopefully make a lot of parents stop and consider that maybe what they are doing is not in the best interest of their children.

Another step in the right direction... http://www.kshb.com/news/local-news/childrens-mercy-hospital-bans-spanking

I understand what you are getting at. And for the most part I agree that people would learn their character judgement from their parents. But is it possible that the grandfather raised her peacefully and without religion, but as a free thinking human being, lets say she decided to join a church because she liked the charity aspect of it. And throughout the years she was brainwashed by other members of this church, people she considered friends, to think that "gays are bad". In this case, is it still her father's fault? I guess the point i'm trying to make is, are our parents responsible for every single bad decision we make as adults?

Playing devils advocate here. Isn't it possible that the grandfather in fact didn't raise her to be like that. Instead she learned that behavior through peers, significant other, etc...? Without having all the details, why is it automatically assumed that the grandfather had a role in her way of thinking on this particular issue?

It says i'm INTP

I think the revised letter definitely comes across better than your initial letter. Have you asked your roommate if he would be willing to move his voice chat to the kitchen? If so, what was his response to that?

I'm actually a landlord so i've been trying to think about how i would handle this same situation if one of my tenants brought this problem to me. Firstly, i would second dsayers advice to remove anything that could be perceived as threatening as you don't want upset the very person you are asking for help in your initial email. If after your initial email, the landlord doesn't appear interested in trying to help you, then perhaps bring up the rental agreement and tenant act. Hopefully your landlord will try to talk to your roommate about your concerns and see if he would be willing to work something out as i doubt he will want to loose either of you as tenants. Maybe your roommate can move to another part of the house for his chats? WiFi is fairly easy to get these days. While you have every right to get all the rest you need, i would also say that your roommate has the right to video chat. Personally, i don't think video chatting between the hours of 8pm and 10pm is absurd (it just sucks that it conflicts with your sleep schedule). Though it sounds like your roommate is a dick if he is not willing to work with you and find a way to keep his video chats at a minimal level that won't bother you. If all else fails and your roommate refuses to cooperate with you, I would look for another place to live. You should try to wait until your lease runs out, but if you absolutely cannot stand it anymore, ask your landlord if you can terminate your lease early. I think most landlords will work with you if you give them at least 30-60 days notice before moving out.

Thank you both for your replies. This has cleared some things up and made me feel better. I like the stolen ship analogy. Though if i were going to argue against my position, i would say that the analogy differs slightly from my situation in the following way. If i were born onto a stolen ship in the middle of the ocean, i wouldn't really have anywhere to go until we were able to obtain a legitimate ship. But in my case of working for the state university, i could reject the acceptance of stolen money and find a new job (however troublesome it would be). So by choosing to stay at the university, i'm choosing to accept stolen money. Whereas on the ship, i don't really have a choice to jump off because i would likely die out in the middle of the ocean. i think the main link i was missing in my train of thought is that i'm not actively resisting ending violence. On the contrary, i'm trying to promote the ending of violence. I've never voted in my life and don't plan on it. So I've never voted to steal money from others in order for me to have a job.

Thank you both for your replies. I'll be honest, i somewhat expected responses here to be that i should find a new job if i truly believe the state is evil. Its kind of neat experience to have this conversation though. To have someone else argue for my position while i argue against it. I agree to try and focus on the violence and immoral aspect. Knowing theft is immoral and that taxation is theft, thus immoral. How can i tell someone that the government is immoral because it exists by theft while a portion of my income is derived from taxation? It reminds me of an analogy i believe came from Stefan, but could have been someone else, i don't remember for sure. If an obese man approached you and tried to sell you on the perfect diet he created. You probably wouldn't pay much attention to him, not because his idea is invalid or has no merit, but because he clearly isn't following his own advice. So if he isn't following his own advice, why should you? This is sort of how i feel when trying to advocate against the violence that is the state. Why should anyone take me seriously when i make a living from the state. So deep down i feel like i should find a new job in the private sector, but to find a decent paying job in my field of work, i would likely have to commute 50 miles to a larger city. I use to do this prior to working at the university but quit because i found the daily commute added a lot of stress (i easily get annoyed at idiot drivers). So i have been much happier the last 3 years since working at the university which is only 2 miles from my home. And chances are good that if i did get a new job, it would be working for a corporation, which is a product of the state. So i'm not sure i would be much happier on the moral front. Thoughts?

Hello All. I've been researching and learning about anarchy for about a year now. I like to have debates/conversations with my friends (Libertarian/minarchist/constitutionalist) and put forth the anarchists philosophy. Only problem is that one of my friends likes to point out the hypocrisy when i advocate for a stateless society while working for a state university. I work in the IT department for a state university. I certainly do see the hypocrisy in that. And i try to justify it by putting forth the following arguments: I'm just trying to make a living in the statist society I've been given. A squirrel trying to get a nut as it were. I think the university could easily become privatized. I think a lot of the university is already funded by student tuition, alumni donations, etc.. Really, the state tax money that is brought in is to offset the discounted tuition that in-state students receive. Increase their tuition and i think the university could no longer be dependent on tax dollars. Wouldn't you rather have someone working there who opposes the state and would be willing to privatize the university if given the chance. Or would you rather i leave my job for a private company and allow a true statist to fill my position. Its not as if me leaving my job would lessen the tax burden on the citizens. So i guess my question is, are my arguments valid or are they bullshit? Should i be ashamed to work for a state university? Am i at a crossroads where i need to either leave my job for the private sector or stop advocating a stateless society? Thanks.