[FoRK] "Hopeful and Decent"

J.Andrew Rogers andrew at ceruleansystems.com
Sun Nov 7 21:19:08 PST 2004


On Nov 7, 2004, at 6:59 PM, Joseph S. Barrera III wrote:
> That sounds totally reasonable. Or even Heinleinian,
> if you're serious about "any group of people".


I'm very serious.  While it may be reasonable for the government to put 
restrictions on some parameters of such arrangements (e.g. minimum term 
length) to make them useful, I see no reason to restrict the number of 
people nor the nature of the relationships.  Things like insurance 
coverage should accommodate such arrangements.

Our legal culture still very much buys into a narrow notion of the 
"tribe" being either something you are either born into or can extend 
within very narrow parameters.  That may have made some sense as a 
practical matter when you were bound to your default tribe by 
geographical proximity, but that hasn't been the case for a while now.  
My effective "family" is really a small group of close friends that 
I've known for many years, but I have biological relatives who I 
haven't talked to in a decade or two that have a stronger technical 
legal relationship.  That makes no sense.

I have been a proponent for many years of the idea that a family or 
"tribe" should be a voluntary association determined by contract, 
particularly in a time when involuntary associations are no longer a 
practical reality in many cases.

j. andrew rogers



More information about the FoRK mailing list