But what if there *is* no justification, in your eyes? What if the motives are purely "religious" or "aesthetic"? Or whatever else you yourself do not consider valid reasons. Either you hold that any consenting parent and child should be able to do *anything* at all that tickles their fancy (as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone else…), or you take it upon yourself to decide which are valid reasons and which are not. In the latter case, you are in effect granting that "the state" or "the community" or some body external to the individuals involved should have a say in their life. Your concluding remark seems to indicate that you’d rather not have external forces acting upon individual decisions. If so, your opinions on what counts as a valid reason for making decisions are irrelevant.
28 jan. 2012
Den tatuerade tioåringen
Ett inlägg på sajten Practical Ethics fick mig att reagera -- och kommentera. Författaren svarade, varefter jag kommenterade igen och igen och så småningom på ytterligare några ställen.