The Legal Rights of Imaginary Friends - Never Forgotten: a Foster's Home Community

Matchsticks · 09-07-2006, 09:09 PM

Last night, while suffering from a bout of isomnia, the weirdest thing popped into my head. What are the legal rights of an Imaginary Friend? Thinking back to a few episodes I can assume that:

Imaginary Friends are allowed to get married. (My So Called Wife)
Imaginary Friends are allowed to have jobs and get paid fair wages.
Imaginary Friends have to follow the law and they will be punished like a human for breaking it. (My So Called Wife, WTIAWTIAW)
Imaginary Friends can get Driver's Liscenes. ('Bus the Two of Us')

Now that brings up some questions for me. If IFs are allowed to get married do they need permission from their owners or is there an IF age of maturity where they can get married w/o permission of their owners? If there is an age of maturity why would a place like Foster's be needed for some of the older IFs (such as Wilt, Ed, Duchess, Coco, and Uncle Pockets) unless the IF age of maturity was much older than that of a human. Or are IF considered to have the legal rights of a Minor therefore they will always need a home to stay in because they are not legal to move out on their own?

So, any thoughts?

Voxxyn · 09-08-2006, 01:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matchsticks

Imaginary Friends have to follow the law and they will be punished like a human for breaking it.

If only that were true for Goofball

Okay, okay, he didn't actually break any laws, but what he did was pretty bad.

pitbulllady · 09-08-2006, 05:17 AM

The whole issue of the legal rights of the Imaginary Friends in the Foster's Universe is a very intriguing question, and one which seems to have no definate answer. It would appear that for the most part, they have about the same rights as African Americans in the US prior to the Civil Rights movement. They can get jobs, but apparently not jobs which pay much, or are considered important, like doctors, for example, nor can they hold public office or serve as officers in the military. Whether or not they receive "fair pay" for what jobs they CAN get, remains to be seen. We've seen Coco work at several jobs, but then, we don't know what she was paid for them. She has no rent or mortgage to pay, no car payments, no utilities bills, etc., so anything she made was hers to do as she wanted.

While no one questioned Mr. Herriman's and Coco's "marital" status in "My So-Called Wife", you have to realize that the main person that they were interacting with was nuttier than a fruitcake, so his reactions should be discounted. We have seen no other references to any Imaginary Friends being married, either to other Imaginary Friends or to humans...yet. I would assume though, that any Imaginary Friend who DID get married, would have to basically have "emancipated" status, and be no longer under the control of his/her creator or anyone else, and prove able to support at least the two of them, which again, goes back to whether or not they can have jobs that do pay fairly and sufficiently to allow self-sufficiency. Also, how would an Imaginary Friend ATTAIN "emancipated" status-would he/she simply declare autonomy, or would a court have to award it, as is the case with teens who seek to be "emancipated minors"? Again, I've seen no evidence of this. I once brought up the topic of whether or not the Imaginary residents of Foster's would be allowed to date, develope long-term romantic relationships, and marry, since most families looking to adopt an Imaginary Friend will only be seeking ONE, and furthermore having an Imaginary Couple around the house, who will need time for intimacy, would most likely be something that would create some issues(putting it mildly)for the kids in that adoptive family, especially if the Imaginary couple wound up having kids of their own(and we've already seen that some, at least, have that ability).

This also brings up the issue of whether or not a kid who creates an Imaginary Friend is his/her "owner". Apparently, Imaginaries still with their creators, or an adoptive family, are consider legal property of the kid and that family, like a tv or a pet. Apparently, laws protecting Imaginary Friends are less strict than those intended to protect animals from neglect or abuse. It's illegal in all 50 states, for example, to abandon a domesticate animal, but doing so with Imaginary Friends when their kids outgrow them, or when the parents decide the kid is too old, is considered perfectly acceptible, despite the fact that Imaginary Friends are far more like us humans in terms of mental, cognitive, emotional, and even spiritual developement. They might even be genitically the same as us, but their genes just manifest in different ways for different appearances. Still, apparently no one has ever been prosecuted for abandoning an Imaginary Friend, while in some states, it's a felony to do the same with a dog or cat. That makes me wonder if Imaginary Friends have protection against acts of violence, by either humans or other Imaginary Friends. Mac warns Coco that "if we did that, we'd go to jail", when she suggests(apparently)killing Peanut Butter to get him out of the coveted room, BUT Mac might not have been aware of the law as it pertains to Imaginary Friends' protection. Obviously, Imaginaries can be held accountable for following the law, as seen in many episodes, like "WTAWTAW", BUT are their laws to protect THEM, which HUMANS are accountable for?

pitbulllady

TheLH · 09-08-2006, 10:30 AM

God, PBL, you're such a genius at analyisis.

There needs to be a section for essays written by you and other people on this site.

You do indeed bring up some good points, as you mention IF laws are like for Blacks pre CRM, which makes me wonder, could Wilt be the MLK for IF's (you mentioned this to me before, I think)?

Another thing I'd like to point out is that, could their be a chance of IF ghettos appearing in the Fosterverse (made up verse name, e.g. PPG's would be Puffverse and the combination of PV and FV would be McCrackenverse)? A place where some IF's try to live indepentantly? Of course, most IF's try to cling to their creators as long as possible, but still...

Since many blacks also still suffer in poverty even today, so Goo must be lucky...

Matchsticks · 09-08-2006, 11:49 AM

PBL, you are made of genius and win. *is blown away by the awesome of PBL*

pitbulllady · 09-08-2006, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matchsticks

PBL, you are made of genius and win. *is blown away by the awesome of PBL*

OK...I'll let you onto the the secret of my "genius". It's called AGE. All that stuff your parents and grandparents keep telling you about the importance of experience and time? It's all 100% true! I didn't believe my parents, either, so I had to learn a lot the hard way. I'm not really smarter than most of you, just a lot older and with a whole lot more experiences behind me, that's all. That, and I'm a Type Five Personality, ruled by logic and the need to keep learning.

And I'm not trying to be sarcastic at all, just in case somebody misinterprets me that way. Most of my observations do indeed stem from my own real-life experiences and those of people close to me, who are much older and wiser than I am.

pitbulllady

Matchsticks · 09-08-2006, 08:08 PM

I can't wait til I get older

I think an IF probably has to gain emancipated status by the courts because they would probably have to prove that they can support themselves and more likely than not that their creator/current owner no longer needs them.

Edited to Add: I just finished re-watching 'Settling a President' and I noticed something to further support PBL's statement of IF having the same rights as Blacks pre CRM. When Herriman is walking past the help wanted signs one of them said that IF were not allowed to apply for the job (I think it went something along the lines of No Imgaginary Friends wanted)

pitbulllady · 09-09-2006, 08:33 AM

Oh, yeah, I remember that sign. I have wondered it Craig and Co. actually were thinking of signs they've probably seen pictured from the pre-Civil Rights Era, especially here in the South, that would have said, "No Coloreds Wanted". I can actually recall those unfortunate days myself. Obviously, if Imaginary Friends in the Foster's Universe had all the same rights as humans, that sign would have been illegal and whoever put it up would have had the ACLU and every other special-interest organization down on them like that whale in "The Hitchhiker's Guide To the Galaxy"! Apparently, there are no advocacy groups to help defend Imaginary Friends against any form of mistreatment or discrimination.

pitbulllady

billytheskink · 09-15-2006, 06:01 PM

on a quasi-related note, the flag that flies at Mac's school looks an awful lot like the first national flag of the Confederacy.
http://www.fosters-home.com/screengrabs/3/311-0007.jpg

http://civilwartalk.com/cwt_main/res.../starsbars.gif

I doubt that was intentional.

Matchsticks · 09-15-2006, 08:58 PM

I KNEW that flag looked familiar!

09-07-2006, 09:09 PM	#1
Matchsticks At Home Comes from the brain-heart. Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: New Mexico Posts: 123	The Legal Rights of Imaginary Friends Last night, while suffering from a bout of isomnia, the weirdest thing popped into my head. What are the legal rights of an Imaginary Friend? Thinking back to a few episodes I can assume that: Imaginary Friends are allowed to get married. (My So Called Wife) Imaginary Friends are allowed to have jobs and get paid fair wages. Imaginary Friends have to follow the law and they will be punished like a human for breaking it. (My So Called Wife, WTIAWTIAW) Imaginary Friends can get Driver's Liscenes. ('Bus the Two of Us') Now that brings up some questions for me. If IFs are allowed to get married do they need permission from their owners or is there an IF age of maturity where they can get married w/o permission of their owners? If there is an age of maturity why would a place like Foster's be needed for some of the older IFs (such as Wilt, Ed, Duchess, Coco, and Uncle Pockets) unless the IF age of maturity was much older than that of a human. Or are IF considered to have the legal rights of a Minor therefore they will always need a home to stay in because they are not legal to move out on their own? So, any thoughts? __________________ Type 9 personailty and the Final Boss of the Internet. Avatar by: cgaussie

09-08-2006, 11:49 AM	#5
Matchsticks At Home Comes from the brain-heart. Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: New Mexico Posts: 123	PBL, you are made of genius and win. is blown away by the awesome of PBL __________________ Type 9 personailty and the Final Boss of the Internet. Avatar by: cgaussie

09-08-2006, 08:08 PM	#7
Matchsticks At Home Comes from the brain-heart. Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: New Mexico Posts: 123	I can't wait til I get older I think an IF probably has to gain emancipated status by the courts because they would probably have to prove that they can support themselves and more likely than not that their creator/current owner no longer needs them. Edited to Add: I just finished re-watching 'Settling a President' and I noticed something to further support PBL's statement of IF having the same rights as Blacks pre CRM. When Herriman is walking past the help wanted signs one of them said that IF were not allowed to apply for the job (I think it went something along the lines of No Imgaginary Friends wanted) __________________ Type 9 personailty and the Final Boss of the Internet. Avatar by: cgaussie Last edited by Matchsticks; 09-08-2006 at 10:37 PM. Reason: Too add something I noticed

09-15-2006, 08:58 PM	#10
Matchsticks At Home Comes from the brain-heart. Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: New Mexico Posts: 123	I KNEW that flag looked familiar! __________________ Type 9 personailty and the Final Boss of the Internet. Avatar by: cgaussie

09-08-2006, 05:17 AM	#3
pitbulllady Co-Administrator Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: South Carolina Posts: 2,276	The whole issue of the legal rights of the Imaginary Friends in the Foster's Universe is a very intriguing question, and one which seems to have no definate answer. It would appear that for the most part, they have about the same rights as African Americans in the US prior to the Civil Rights movement. They can get jobs, but apparently not jobs which pay much, or are considered important, like doctors, for example, nor can they hold public office or serve as officers in the military. Whether or not they receive "fair pay" for what jobs they CAN get, remains to be seen. We've seen Coco work at several jobs, but then, we don't know what she was paid for them. She has no rent or mortgage to pay, no car payments, no utilities bills, etc., so anything she made was hers to do as she wanted. While no one questioned Mr. Herriman's and Coco's "marital" status in "My So-Called Wife", you have to realize that the main person that they were interacting with was nuttier than a fruitcake, so his reactions should be discounted. We have seen no other references to any Imaginary Friends being married, either to other Imaginary Friends or to humans...yet. I would assume though, that any Imaginary Friend who DID get married, would have to basically have "emancipated" status, and be no longer under the control of his/her creator or anyone else, and prove able to support at least the two of them, which again, goes back to whether or not they can have jobs that do pay fairly and sufficiently to allow self-sufficiency. Also, how would an Imaginary Friend ATTAIN "emancipated" status-would he/she simply declare autonomy, or would a court have to award it, as is the case with teens who seek to be "emancipated minors"? Again, I've seen no evidence of this. I once brought up the topic of whether or not the Imaginary residents of Foster's would be allowed to date, develope long-term romantic relationships, and marry, since most families looking to adopt an Imaginary Friend will only be seeking ONE, and furthermore having an Imaginary Couple around the house, who will need time for intimacy, would most likely be something that would create some issues(putting it mildly)for the kids in that adoptive family, especially if the Imaginary couple wound up having kids of their own(and we've already seen that some, at least, have that ability). This also brings up the issue of whether or not a kid who creates an Imaginary Friend is his/her "owner". Apparently, Imaginaries still with their creators, or an adoptive family, are consider legal property of the kid and that family, like a tv or a pet. Apparently, laws protecting Imaginary Friends are less strict than those intended to protect animals from neglect or abuse. It's illegal in all 50 states, for example, to abandon a domesticate animal, but doing so with Imaginary Friends when their kids outgrow them, or when the parents decide the kid is too old, is considered perfectly acceptible, despite the fact that Imaginary Friends are far more like us humans in terms of mental, cognitive, emotional, and even spiritual developement. They might even be genitically the same as us, but their genes just manifest in different ways for different appearances. Still, apparently no one has ever been prosecuted for abandoning an Imaginary Friend, while in some states, it's a felony to do the same with a dog or cat. That makes me wonder if Imaginary Friends have protection against acts of violence, by either humans or other Imaginary Friends. Mac warns Coco that "if we did that, we'd go to jail", when she suggests(apparently)killing Peanut Butter to get him out of the coveted room, BUT Mac might not have been aware of the law as it pertains to Imaginary Friends' protection. Obviously, Imaginaries can be held accountable for following the law, as seen in many episodes, like "WTAWTAW", BUT are their laws to protect THEM, which HUMANS are accountable for? pitbulllady

09-08-2006, 10:30 AM	#4
TheLH Newly Abandoned Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 31	God, PBL, you're such a genius at analyisis. There needs to be a section for essays written by you and other people on this site. You do indeed bring up some good points, as you mention IF laws are like for Blacks pre CRM, which makes me wonder, could Wilt be the MLK for IF's (you mentioned this to me before, I think)? Another thing I'd like to point out is that, could their be a chance of IF ghettos appearing in the Fosterverse (made up verse name, e.g. PPG's would be Puffverse and the combination of PV and FV would be McCrackenverse)? A place where some IF's try to live indepentantly? Of course, most IF's try to cling to their creators as long as possible, but still... Since many blacks also still suffer in poverty even today, so Goo must be lucky...

09-09-2006, 08:33 AM	#8
pitbulllady Co-Administrator Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: South Carolina Posts: 2,276	Oh, yeah, I remember that sign. I have wondered it Craig and Co. actually were thinking of signs they've probably seen pictured from the pre-Civil Rights Era, especially here in the South, that would have said, "No Coloreds Wanted". I can actually recall those unfortunate days myself. Obviously, if Imaginary Friends in the Foster's Universe had all the same rights as humans, that sign would have been illegal and whoever put it up would have had the ACLU and every other special-interest organization down on them like that whale in "The Hitchhiker's Guide To the Galaxy"! Apparently, there are no advocacy groups to help defend Imaginary Friends against any form of mistreatment or discrimination. pitbulllady

09-15-2006, 06:01 PM	#9
billytheskink Permanent Resident I'm Punk Rock... Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Texas Posts: 317	on a quasi-related note, the flag that flies at Mac's school looks an awful lot like the first national flag of the Confederacy. http://www.fosters-home.com/screengrabs/3/311-0007.jpg http://civilwartalk.com/cwt_main/res.../starsbars.gif I doubt that was intentional.