Parents are legally considered slave traders

[Shotacon]

A person held captive under coercion can reasonably be described as enslaved or treated in a slavery-like condition even if they are not made to work, particularly if the captor exercises ownership-like control over their movement, bodily autonomy, personal relationships, or ability to leave. International law defines slavery by the exercise of “any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership,” not by a requirement that the victim perform labor.

“Slavery is the status or condition of a person over whom any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership are exercised.” - https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-me ... convention That is the basis for the statement that the legal definition focuses on ownership-like control, rather than expressly requiring the victim to perform work.

"Slavery" means, as defined in the Slavery Convention of 1926, the status or condition of a person over whom any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership are exercised, and "slave" means a person in such condition or status - https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-me ... -trade-and

Minors are human beings. They are afforded human rights under international law as humans. Parents are provided legal cover to sidestep these rights in favor of their own wishes and power. This is state sanctioned slavery plain and simple. Minors do not effectively have any rights without their parents approval. This needs to change NOW!

[weird.organisms]

A person held captive under coercion can reasonably be described as enslaved or treated in a slavery-like condition even if they are not made to work, particularly if the captor exercises ownership-like control over their movement, bodily autonomy, personal relationships, or ability to leave. International law defines slavery by the exercise of “any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership,” not by a requirement that the victim perform labor.

“Slavery is the status or condition of a person over whom any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership are exercised.” - https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-me ... convention That is the basis for the statement that the legal definition focuses on ownership-like control, rather than expressly requiring the victim to perform work.

"Slavery" means, as defined in the Slavery Convention of 1926, the status or condition of a person over whom any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership are exercised, and "slave" means a person in such condition or status - https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-me ... -trade-and

Minors are human beings. They are afforded human rights under international law as humans. Parents are provided legal cover to sidestep these rights in favor of their own wishes and power. This is state sanctioned slavery plain and simple. Minors do not effectively have any rights without their parents approval. This needs to change NOW!

Mind if I share this around the web?

[Shotacon]

Be my guest. Anything I write is for the movement of our cause.

[Bookshelf]

Not long ago, I was watching one of those crime videos where a young boy was killed by his parents. It was a classic case of social services being aware of abuse/neglect and not really being able to do anything about it. Eventually this all led to his death.

The comments were filled with statements such as: "the social services should be prosecuted for his murder too" and "how could no one know? they all let this happen" as you expect on this sort of content. Obviously that sounds like an easy path to take, right? Blame some public service. The issue is, at every step in the story, the social services were following the law. They were following laws that other parents spent years trying to bring in to empower their own control over their kids (ie, "parental rights").

When they spoke to the child to make sure he was fine months prior, at least one parent had to be present because that's what the law in the state demanded, even if they were the ones suspected of abuse; they'd have needed more immediate evidence to isolate him otherwise. When the parents took him out of school to homeschool him with minimal supervision, that was allowed, and it also reduced the ability for social services to legally interfere.

You see this a lot among people, when something tragic at home happens .How did XYZ organizations not know about this and intervene when they had the chance? Then some of these same people will go and protest and lobby in favor of a new "parental rights" laws that makes it even harder for the public to protect children from abusive or neglectful parents.

[Shotacon]

That is exactly true Bookshelf.

According to the US DOJ, 60% of surveyed children had been exposed to violence, crime, or abuse.

Sounds like parents are not all they are claiming to be in best abettors of care. Maybe if minors had more autonomy, they would seek out better and healthier situations like extended family or friends. If provided proper liberties, adolescents could work and live on their own. The point being is they will always seek out the situation that is best for themselves, albeit even if it comes with the normal struggles and missteps that even adults face.

We only need to look at the story of Gabriel Fernandez to see that the current structure is broken and needs to change to favor minors having a voice and autonomy to direct their own future.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-T7VXlB4qUI