Children are human beings. Human beings cannot be property. Giving birth to a child gives one a responsibility to raise it, but it is not property with which you can do with it as you please. All human beings have rights in a human society, children included. Additionally, they have the right to have and parents have the responsibility to give what the child needs to properly develop and thrive. Posted by: HumbleThinker1 Report Post

Children are by all mean human beings Children are by far human beings, therefor having the need to choose, since our entire lives we spend it choosing. This means that the child is property of no one, just like your boyfriend or girlfriend, father or mother or friends are not your property. Human beings are not property of anyone, since they think by themselves, having the chance of getting yourself, "surprisingly" a child that thinks differently to you. You are the father, not the owner, act like a mentor, not like a rich little ass, that can tell their maids off whenever he or she feels bad or has had a rough day. YOUR CHILD IS A HUMAN BEING THAT MAKES CHOICES, there for HE/SHE IS NOT YOUR PROPERTY! Report Post

Absolutely not Here's why Some people say that children are property because their parents have legal consent for them, and while this may be true it does not mean that they are property. A child is a human being, while not a fully developed one they are still a human being. Human beings are not meant to be property, such philosophy puts the person of interest(in this argument it would be the child) in a state of worthlessness, comparing them to your tv or your house, a human being has cognitive functions, an inanimate object does not. The last time a human was considered to be property the entire United States was torn in two. If you want to follow the philosophy that a child is your property because you take care of them then wouldn't that also imply that people in nursing homes are the property of the nurses? That people in the hospitals are the hospitals property? If you want to assume children are property because you take care of them these are other things you have to assume these things two because they fall under the same guidelines. Another point people who say yes are is that because a parent brought them into this world they are their property, but if your going to say that then wouldn't that mean your always going to be considered property to your parents, even after turning 18? And being a parent also doesn't always imply that the parent gave birth to their child, adopted parents can raise their children without giving birth to them. Thank you for listening to my rant/speech if you agree/disagree comment why! This is just my opinion after all Report Post

No one asks to be born. No one asks to be born. So anyone's birth is a mere lottery as to what type of parents you will have. Will they educate you on what it means to be a sentient being or will they use you as labor? Will they feed you well or poor? Will they abuse you (take the recent case in California) or nurture you? Objective, impartial humans are needed to verify parent/child relationships are optimal and lacking abuse.



If you read some of the other comments posted by other people, the ones who do think they are property tend to be religious. I wonder why? Snarc. Report Post

In every life, it is inherent of his/ her own right of living. It is the obligation of the parents to support this right of living, not the parent's right. An obligation is very far different to a right. The gift of life is not owned by the parents and thereby not of their control. There are cases that parents who give an all-out support but still they fail to raise a good citizen. Their children end up in jail. It is because, the right to live a kind of living is solely determined by the child itself. Report Post

No, of course not. Children are human beings capable of forming thoughts and making decisions, and, to the person who said kids are like robots, you are wrong. Children should be treated as your equal and as your family, not as your subordinate. And, if you want, you can keep telling yourself that you love your kids, but just know you are lying, you terrible-grammared, soulless, child-hating fool. Report Post

People yes, property no! Parents do not own children the same way a family owns a dog or a vehicle! Parents are responsible to raise those children until those children become adults. Children are people due to the fact that they are human beings. A parent might need an adult child to take care of that parent as the parents gets older, but even the parent is not property of the adult child. You can buy or sell tangible property which human beings are not tangible property. Report Post

H h h H h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h hhhhhhhh h h h hhh h h h h h hh h h hh h h h h h h h h h hh h hh h h Report Post

Children are Sentient Beings Any singular entity that can form his/her own thoughts and opinions that are different from those around it ought to be considered sentient, or at least that's what I think. Children--while they often reflect or mimic traits of their parents and role models--display obvious signs of being conscious by 2 years of age.



While I, myself, am only 14 years of age, am still a child (or as my mom says, "a piece of property"), I adamantly refuse to believe that that's all that I am.



Children are fully capable of forming their own thoughts, goals, and opinions. While I suppose that it'd be hard to see one's own child as anything but an obnoxious automaton, it's true--we are people. Actual people who're just years away from being legally considered so (which is another issue entirely; the demeaning of minors by law).



Many people would use the argument, "Oh, well, you children just haven't reached mental maturity. You aren't mature enough to think. Just enjoy your childhood, sweetie." However, that's just as subjective as it is demeaning and disgusting.



Besides, it's been clearly demonstrated that some people have a higher mental capacity than others. If this is true, is it not also true that, proportionally, some children could be "technically" more mentally developed--even if not yet fully--than some adults? If the oh-so-mature actions that have been exemplified by some of the adults in my life are any proof, then yes.



It is this "children are property" mentality that leads parents to demeaning actions such as forcing bars or cupfuls of soap into a child's mouth for saying something that contradicts with what they wanted to hear, or hitting another fellow human being with a piece of leather because they're a child that did something disagreeable.



If we're so mentally underdeveloped, then how exactly is it just that we should be punished in these ways for disagreeable actions? While discipline and accountability are definitely two very important things in the raising of a child, they need not be learned through force or making sure that a child knows that he/she is a piece of property. Report Post