According to the United States Department of State:
"Citizenship is a status that is personal to the U.S. citizen. Therefore, parents may not renounce the citizenship of their minor children. Similarly, parents/legal guardians may not renounce the citizenship of individuals who are mentally incompetent. Minors seeking to renounce their U.S. citizenship must demonstrate to a consular officer that they are acting voluntarily and that they fully understand the implications/consequences attendant to the renunciation of U.S. citizenship."
Isn't it interesting that should a family decide to renounce their citizenship and immigrate to a foreign country, the parents are incapable of making the decision for their minors?
Ever wonder about those people who tout with such vigilance that parents are entitled to decide what they want to do with a child's PERSON, an individual's body? (e.g. the implantation a foreign object) Especially when such an issue is NOT one of life and death. Let's say Deafness...
You see, the Naysayer of Audism and the Hearing World Order will stand forth spewing such blasphemous nonsense about parents' choice, all in the name of liberty and the right to do so without ever accepting the fact that there is no such thing as an informed decision when certain interests hold a monopoly on issues and interests pertaining to deafness and refuse, I mean adamantly refusing, to share the floor with Deaf Culture and it's linguistic families (ASL, LSQ, LSE and etc)
This is really interesting...
Could we say Uncle Sam OWNS our kids for as long as they may be manipulated into thinking as the State would have them?
Could we equally say that the hearing world OWNS our deaf kids for as long as all potential for profit may be drained of them?
Comments please.
If one argues that parents have the right of choice when it concerns their childrens' bodies in the matter of cochlear implants, one can also argue that government has that right too, when foster children are concerned because they are wards of the state.
ReplyDeleteFrom there it can be a slippery slope to stepping in and making decisions for parents who decide against CI's. Reasons the government can use to make this argument--for the better interests of the child (health, education, language, future opportunities, less tax money spent, etc)--depend on the state of mind of the legislators and social services people, influenced by corporations and medical personnel.
We need to argue that the parents, and including government as well, do NOT have the right to make decisions concerning their childrens' bodies if it is not a life or health threatening condition.
Howdy Dianrez,
ReplyDeleteThank you for leaving your wonderful thoughts here. Yes, we do need to argue that NO ONE but THE person has the right to make decisions pertaining to what they want done with their body. More so when it is not a life threatening condition, like deafness.
This is just one clear example that the ultimate aim of lobbyists and corporations is to find every possible way to exploit and profit off their citizens so that those in power may retain it furthermore.
Money is POWER.
People are NOTHING.
Such seems to be the ideology....