The Law is an Ass

The law is an ass because instead of practically applying human conscience, it overrides it. We become disillusioned with our power in society when the laws no longer service reality as we know it, just the prejudices of our great grandfathers. Anything that exists in the law "just because," and not due to any hard fact of nature, particularly when defining status offenses for minors, is typically a service to fantasy over nature.

The law of the king is a decree based upon prejudice. The natural law is one based upon observation. Children grow up in a universe governed by natural laws that drive their development irrespective of jurisdiction, but they are living in an adult society governed by artificial decree and cultural hocus pocus (age-based laws) that limit their expressive potential.

While natural laws by their nature allow children to grow and expand as they mature along the innumerable trajectories that human life finds for itself, the law of the king only confines, restricts, limits, and all but cages them to an artificial magic set of inconsequential circumstances. While natural laws may or may not lead a child to experience the full freedom of their faculties as they develop, the law of the king is unique in that all it does is impose on them for stepping outside its predetermined lines, sometimes harshly.

The law renders minors as brainless objects, differentiated from material possessions only in semantics. For possessions, there are rightful owners. For minors, there are rightful parents or guardians. For possessions, there is conveyance. For minors, there is adoption. For possessions, there is bailment or constructive possession. For minors, there is compulsory schooling and state seizure. For possessions, there is acquired possession without consent. For minors, there is birth.  For possessions, there is a deed or a title. For minors, there is a birth certificate. For possessions, there is a state of being stolen. For minors, there is a state of being kidnapped. For possessions, there is a state of being mislaid or lost. For minors, there is neglect. For possessions, there is a state of being damaged. For minors, there is a state of being abused or mistreated.

There are numerous parallels, but the point is that the law informs itself about what is in a child's best interests based on the same principles one could also ascribe to material possessions. Just like one can ask, "what is in this child's best interests?", one could also ask, "what is in this desk lamp's best interests?" and arrive at the same conclusion for each, differing in semantics only. Fortunately for human dignity, many disagree that children are the same as material possessions. Many would argue that children are actually human beings, with rights of their own-- and that the "m-word" (minor) is make believe.