Should people have to get a license to reproduce?

[Take2]

Actually, I would be opposed to the creation of the state of Israel if that creation were going on today. It was a bad idea, certain to go badly. Colonialism at its worst, not that it ever seems to have had a best. But now, I don't think we can blame the children or grandchidren for those mistakes. But I don't think random outside nations like ours should be shoring up one side against the other.

In what way did I say we need to please everyone or make everyone happy? I just said that any solution to a social ill has to be logistically and financially feasible, and it would be nice here in the US if it didn't fly in the face of the Constitution. I don't really care about who is happy or not, that's not really the job of legislation to make people happy.

I don't think the only options are to enforce murder or enforce controls on birth. Education is another option, empowerment is an option. In my opinion, the best way to improve society is to educate the children. I think that children truly educated on birth control and given free access to it would adjust our population. I think that removing some of the societal pressures on the very poor would enable them to be better parents. I think that educating children on the issues of personal finance will enable them to make better futures for themselves. I think that leaving the war in Iraq and Afghanistan would lesson some of the pressures on our society AND free up funds to put into our sad excuse for a public school system. Those are some of my solutions, as I mentioned before.

[chump4u]

As far as the human hunting.... as funny as it was to read I hope you weren't serious. Preventing people from being born into unfavorable circumstances is one thing, but killing people who aren't murderers is a whole different story. One that I wouldn't condone.

Yeah, it was serious, a little bit, maybe. I actually would be in favor of issuing hunting licenses that allowed the holder to shoot any animal wearing gang colors or flashing gang signs, but that's a little different than what I wrote above.

I think I was channeling Jonathan Swift a little: "A Modest Proposal" for the 21st Century, updated from the 1729 version. That's just a guess, though; the voice in my head might not have been Swift at all.

[courtney90]

Compulsory sterilization programs are nothing new. The USA funded them [unsuccessfully] throughout the early-mid 20th century, and Nazi Germany designed such programs (inspired by US eugenics) to "maintain the purity of the race, as an end-solution to the Jew question." (quoting Hitler directly) This is inhumane on every level. You simply cannot force a person into sterilization without violating basic human rights. Who are we to judge people, whether they're fit for parenting? Furthermore, who are we to decide who gets to be born? Do you really think it's fair that people were euthanized and castrated for being black, Jewish, blind, mentally retarded/ill, criminals, etc., etc., list of endless causes and reasons?



So, according to you, people (criminals, unproductive people, etc.) should be sterilized (lol) because they are a "burden to society". You know who you sound like? Any idea at all? I'll give you a hint H _ _ _ _ R.



[url=http://www.ushmm.org/research/center/presentations/discussions/details/2001-08-14/]The Nazi Persecution of Deaf People[/url]

Outrageous! IMO, you don't know a damn thing you're talking about... half-assed claims and generalizations.

The only reasonable solution we have to these apparent problems are orphanage homes and serving justice for the children who are mistreated/neglected/abused... you seem to be unaware of exactly how many great people in the history of this planet grew up in difficult situations, with tough childhoods, and abusive parents... not to mention the illegitimate sons and daughters, who went on to be the greatest inventors, writers, and leaders who ever lived. What would the world be like without those people? Well, let's just say it would be fücking dull, and you probably wouldn't even have electricity.

Sorry, I just can't take you seriously if that's how you think.

I agree with what you are saying and I also agree with the OP. You are right that some of the greatest people can turn things around for themselves and make things and thier life better. But like I said I agree with the OP as well. There are so many people in this world that are having kids just to be able to get welfare which is complete bull$hit. It just sucks for the hard working people that have to give their money to these worthless parents to just sit on their a$$ and reproduce while taking a free ride through life! I don't think the government would ever make people have to get a license to reproduce but something has got to be done. There is nothing that I hate more than having to give away my hard earned money to some lazy a$$ that doesnt' want to do anything other than be a lazy POS.

[Regnent]

Yah, honestly, I think there should at least be some sort of test, or standard that at least affects things like social services.

While I'm sure I would fall under the 'failed' category to some here (for both reasonable, and just plain personal opinion), I think there should be something in place, if not to stop or limit, but even just a better teaching, and enforcement.

We get quite a bit of government (or your if you want to get all up in arms about it) money. I'm not embarrassed, or ashamed.
Do I think that alone means I shouldn't have children? Not in my opinion.

What bothers me is when people don't improve their situation, or act more responsibly. Nothing bothers me more than seeing the liqueur store the busiest around the 20th (child tax time).
Mentally unfit, irresponsible, abusive, etc. There's lots of reasons why someone shouldn't have children, but I think it's highly debatable whether it's anymore 'right' to sterilize someone over it.

[SelflessnHumble]

Actually, I would be opposed to the creation of the state of Israel if that creation were going on today. It was a bad idea, certain to go badly. Colonialism at its worst, not that it ever seems to have had a best. But now, I don't think we can blame the children or grandchidren for those mistakes. But I don't think random outside nations like ours should be shoring up one side against the other.

In what way did I say we need to please everyone or make everyone happy? I just said that any solution to a social ill has to be logistically and financially feasible, and it would be nice here in the US if it didn't fly in the face of the Constitution. I don't really care about who is happy or not, that's not really the job of legislation to make people happy.

I don't think the only options are to enforce murder or enforce controls on birth. Education is another option, empowerment is an option. In my opinion, the best way to improve society is to educate the children. I think that children truly educated on birth control and given free access to it would adjust our population. I think that removing some of the societal pressures on the very poor would enable them to be better parents. I think that educating children on the issues of personal finance will enable them to make better futures for themselves. I think that leaving the war in Iraq and Afghanistan would lesson some of the pressures on our society AND free up funds to put into our sad excuse for a public school system. Those are some of my solutions, as I mentioned before.

Oh, k. Thanks for sharing them again. I must have missed them.

I just don't get why you need to sound as though you're upset about another person's opinions on subjects like these?
I'm not a softy so no matter what is said to me I never take offense. What I happen to notice is that "what the heck!" and stuff like that doesn't seem reasonable to say
especially if you don't understand one's position in the first place.

This is why Incognito may have felt threatened because of your strong approach in undermining his position: which again, is valid just as much as yours is.

I can see how your ideas would work: but not in this reality EVER.
Saving money, unbiased education, and empowerment is NOT what our Government is about.

For this reason alone: we must be dependent on big brother or else we are labeled domestic terrorists.
The entire system as a whole is a joke. What we are taught in school is also a joke. Education now versus then= dumbing down a nation.

[Take2]

Sorry if I sounded upset, I know inflection is hard to determine on a message board. I am not mad, I never get mad about what strangers say anonymously online. I do feel strongly about the topic. I think that it is a horrible idea. I was just explaining why, no ire or anything.

[SelflessnHumble]

Sorry if I sounded upset, I know inflection is hard to determine on a message board. I am not mad, I never get mad about what strangers say anonymously online. I do feel strongly about the topic. I think that it is a horrible idea. I was just explaining why, no ire or anything.

K cool. That is VERY rare in a woman from what I've come to know about women.
I dislike generalizations but in certain cases they can hold up in a discussion.

I don't have an interest in how our current Government operates. This doesn't mean I would ever harm a politician because to me this issue of licensing to have children is common sense.
The same with every issue known to us as a political/socio-political and/or economical *issue.*

I get this a lot when I talk to people face to face, randomly on the street.
I'm more pro opinion than people think I am on these boards. However when someone disagrees with me in real life: I appreciate that without taking offense.
You try bringing up politics publicly/randomly on the street you may find yourself physically defending yourself! I ask WHY!?!?!?!?

Why are people so invested (personally) into these ideals when most of them don't even know how things are supposed to operate in the 1st place!!??

Take the Constitution for example.
Things I know concerning our body of Government are not opinions...They are fact.
However try telling someone they have the right to travel: they have no clue. Right? Instead they repeat *like aggressive parrots*
"Driving is a privilege" and they only feel this way because of the many unqualified DL recipients that plague our roads (our gas tax pays for)

When you have the minority KNOWING how Gov't is supposed to be....and the vast majority ignorant to their DUTY to know the laws and the Constitution...(mostly because
they have to work 80hrs a week each parent just to provide a half way decent living due to the inflated costs of things) you begin to see how horrendous our Government IS.

[Incognito]

....Incognito, your little huff in post 38 is silly....

Since you claim not to be upset or in an otherwise unfavorable mood I won't pursue this comment. I will say that I think arguing over something that is only a rough idea is asinine. Debating it is one thing but you seemed to be getting caught up in "people's rights" and the seeming repugnance of the license. That is one reason I didn't comment for a bit. The other reason is that I've been busy house hunting. Dealing with bank owned properties sucks.

What if instead of sterilization people were fined, mandated to serve community service, or imprisoned for having a child without a license? I don't see the moral repugnance in any of those options. If you're going to go back to someone's "right" to procreate I still ask why it should be an unquestioned "right".

[Take2]

I could get behind the idea of a severe fine for having a child without a license. I would still be VERY concerned about the actual implementation of such a thing, because government-run programs tend to be corrupt and poorly designed. But imprisoning someone for having a child without a license will NOT improve how that child is parented!

Buying REO? That is a whole slew of headaches, why do you want to do that?

[Incognito]

Yes I agree that most government programs are either poorly designed, or poorly run. I think that mainly has to do with the size of the programs and poor management structure. Any program/company/organization with one level of workers and six levels of management is bound to fail.

I was looking at REOs because of the attractive price point of many of them. Of course that quickly faded when I set foot in many of them. Holes bashed in walls, fallen ceilings, water damage, mold were all things that I saw while looking at REOs. I did find two that were great deals. Unfortunately one went under contract just a day after I looked t it and the bank that owned the other one was not cooperative at all. While dealing with them someone else came and made an offer closer to what they were asking so I was out of the running. Out of maybe 20 foreclosures I saw only two were good deals for non investor types.

[sadie_genie]

This is an offshoot of another thread, but I believe that people should indeed have to get a license to have children. If you fail to get a license you should be sterilized (tubal ligation and vasectomies are reversible). Extreme? Many people who simply look at their "rights" and "personal freedoms", instead of the larger picture, always think so. Consider that there are thousands of unfit parents per city that collect money from various agencies while not contribution to society at all. These same people who are supposed to be using their 'free money' to raise their children do not 9/10 times. Those children eventually become unproductive, violent, worthless adults just like their parents.

Its funny that movies that have touched on this subject always have some kind of cold, authoritarian backdrop, but what about the very real possibility that a solution like this could stem overpopulation, keep children from being born to unfit parents, and keep children from being used as meal tickets by people who just want to collect child support or government assistance?

Your argument has a logical flaw. You are saying here that those who are poor (who need to collect money from agencies) are unfit parents therefore they shouldn't be allowed to have children. Your criteria of "fit" you have outlined here is personal income. How do you know parents who are rich (or at least rich enough not to have to collect money from various agencies) would make "fit" parents and who would not raise violent, unproductive, and worthless children?

It seems that your argument stems largely from selfish motivations.

[Incognito]

It seems that you read that one way, assumed that I meant it that way (instead of asking or reading the posts that followed that clearly show that I am not saying that being on government assistance makes a bad parent). I'll spell it out clearly one more time for anyone who missed it or is too impatient/lazy to read the other posts: I am saying that many of these unfit parents are lazy loads who won't even work and collect monetary assistance. I AM NOT saying that every government assistance recipient is a lazy person or unfit parent.

As I also said earlier being rich (or simply of reasonable wealth) is no guarantee that the parents will be "good parents" either.

[doppelgaenger]

Yeah, I don't think Paris Hilton would make a very good mom. And if they ever did put compulsory sterilization into effect, I'd bet you a million dollars she, among others, wouldn't have her tubes tied.

Good luck maintaining the 14th amendment with such a noble cause.

I don't really think governmental interference is really necessary because the stupid ones will weed themselves out of the gene pool. There is no need for Soviet-style, assisted suicide by firing squads (come get one now, just $149.95 taxesnotincludednomoneyordersorCODs!!!)

[Incognito]

You're a smart man Doppel, so you of all people should know that the "stupid ones" will never "weed themselves out of the gene pool". They are the very ones who reproduce as a pass time or as a way to generate income. Smart, responsible people usually plan on having children, if they want them and believe that they can provide for/take care of them. Again only one person mentioned killing people, which wasn't me by the way (nor do I agree with that stance).

On a funnier note, if Paris Hilton had a kid there is no doubt in my mind that she'd whore her life out as a reality show. As much as I usually disdain reality shows I'd watch every episode of that. It would be like watching a train wreck happen in slow motion.

[doppelgaenger]

Exploiting one's children for welfare isn't very stupid at all - those people usually need the money anyway; they're in poverty... the stupid ones are those who take that money and feed their chemical addictions, etc. Compulsory sterilization to get rid of THAT is absolutely unreasonable. You're just an angry taxpayer.

I still stand by my opinion - taxes and welfare are fücking awesome. I think there should be more funding and more taxes! Hooray for taxes!