If this doesn’t make your blood boil, please leave our movement now, because we don’t need you:
We talk a lot about state control over reproduction as a means for genetic improvement, but I have always maintained - and still maintain - that the most directly ethical reason for state control over reproduction is to protect children from the cruelty of their parents. And by this I refer not only to the forms of cruelty that are illegal in current society, but just as much to what is legal (and considered socially acceptable, or even laudable, as in the above example) in current society. This particular incident made the news because the video went viral, but how much more of this is going on every day that is not even recorded on video, and never makes the news?
Every libertarian/anarchist is a passive facilitator of the above. Only positive statists can ever put an end to this by ensuring that people like that piece of shit in the link above never get to reproduce, much less look after children:
These days, whenever I am required to explain positive statism, I go straight to the issue of family tyranny and present positive statism as the countermeasure to this. It saves a lot of time. People might disagree, but at least this way we do not get mistaken for or confused with traditional statists. Please use and contrast this pair of terms a lot: we need to get it through to people that these are two completely different derivations of statism.