License to have children

reply to post by RealSpoke


Yep you are absolutely correct. Seems there is a kind of upsurge in this kind of mentality lately. Kinda spooky.

If you look closely at the numbers, you will see that the people that breed the most are the lower classes, the poor and the uneducated, this makes that particular class (i hate it when i have to categorize people by this but oh well...) even more poor and unable to be educated while the higher classes produce a maximum of 1.5 kids per family.

This is social devolution and will lead us to a new dark age if we are not careful.

By the way, china needs to be stoped, its gone way out of hand, aborting a 5 month old fetus?

Originally posted by Idonthaveabeard
Too many people having kids to get houses, to many people having accidental kids. Producing a drain on our resources, introducing criminals into society.

Dont get me wrong im not blaming the kids for this, they turn out this way because of bad parenting and the environment they grow up in. I mean even to adopt a stray dog in the UK you have to pass an inspection. But your aloud to bang out little human beings willy nilly?

What I think should happen is (for example) temporary castration at birth. Then if you want kids later in life you apply for a license to have your castration reversed.

Castrating ppl from birth is not a good solution to the "poor people" problem. Such thinking is that society is all about wealth, that living is about because someone decided your parents are a "loving couple" who can pay the bills. Money money money, that's all that counts.

Not saying your intent has no merit but the government castrating ppl and granting licenses is too nazi-esque. It will never work because you will be punishing the resulting child and not the parents. In China they don't do all that license 1st world nonsense, they just force you to abort if you get caught.

Our dear leader has been busy with eugenics plans of his own.

WASHINGTON, D.C., January 26, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Following on the heels of the elimination of the Mexico City Policy, President Obama has confirmed that the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), which helped instigate, perpetuate and enforce China’s coercive one-child policy, will again receive taxpayer dollars.

Appended to the statement announcing the end of the Mexico City Policy, Obama said: "In addition, I look forward to working with Congress to restore U.S. financial support for the U.N. Population Fund.

And in case anyone wanted to compare dear leader to our former Prez

President Bush halted funding for UNFPA when it was discovered by an independent investigation in 2001, and confirmed by a U.S. State Department investigation in 2002, that the UN group supported restrictive laws and coercive population control tactics in China, including forced abortion and sterilization.

www.lifesitenews.com...

reply to post by Idonthaveabeard


ah yes a Nazi wet dream , and how we enforce this new eutopia idea of your . What if some one has a child illeagaly do we have force abortions ? Do we start raping the women in order to kill the fetus . And if the child is born what then ? Do we KILL the child . Your program would only be posible in Westran developed countries . Westran countries arent reproducing enough btw . This kind of program would turn humanity into livestock .

Pretty stupid idea, alternatives would be alot better. Like, offering giving up your child to a hospital more known. Honestly, druggy's babyies will grow up to be criminals either way sometimes even if still grown up in foster hood. Make baby's that are "given" up to hospitals, have no way to know who their real parents are, have no connection. Seems fair, the people who cannot handle it will still selfishly give the babies up and its probably for the best.

If we had more babies than wanted, I apologize, but from what I understand theirs a lot more looking to adopt than whats available.

reply to post by BoyTheEarthTalksTo


that I might support as long as it didnt go to far

Most of the opinions and replies to this post seem to miss out on a very important point: Humanity's ecological footprint.

www.footprintnetwork.org...


There are currently too many humans using too much of earth's resources currently and it's on pace to get worse. Starvation is already a problem in 3rd world countries and will grow into a problem for core countries in the future.


There are many people who are very against allowing government to dictate who gets to have children and who doesn't and it makes sense for people to feel this way. It is imperative though that these people try and understand the consequences though of continuing on the pace which we are on now. Where is everyone going to live and get their food from in a future where the earth can no longer sustain such a large population?


People need to be educated better and that is the bottom line. Education and independent thought are becoming non-existent. Take a look around people. Why is it that today's 16-19 year old girls think it's cool to have a baby? What ever happened to planned parenting and teaching our children how to make educated choices? I've started to rant so I'll stop now.

reply to post by Idonthaveabeard


Or if someone might think a certain way , Perhaps people who are more resistant to group think or social collectivism and are resitant to being controled by goverment . What a wonderful idea . And of coruse certain people who are connected and have lots of moeny wont be subject to these laws .

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by skepticconwatcher

 

They tried that in the 1930's. It failed.

hurr durr Hitler

They tried it all over the world and even today, they have it in China.

No government entity has a right to tell anyone who can and cannot procreate.

I disagree, and I have yet to see any good argument to justify the amount of condescending attitude some people express towards this idea in this thread.

Who has convinced you that to disagree with a fundamental right given to all is a condescending attitude?

con·de·scend·ing/ˌkändəˈsendiNG/
Adjective:
Acting in a way that betrays a feeling of patronizing superiority.
(of an action) Demonstrating such an attitude.

Those that espouse agreement with this thread's topic are clearly those that are subscribing to a patronising superiority - NOTHING gives me the right to insist that OTHERS must have a license to bear children. A license means that certain requirements must be met, and therefore anybody that those in charge deem "unsuitable" will be denied that license. It is the height of arrogance on the part of those that feel superior to others that would do this, it is the height of arrogance to assume that poor people aren't capable of providing love and guidance to their children, and it is the arrogance of MAN to play God. This entire subject screams and shouts the time in which we live, the time in which men willingly give up their God given rights and life for evil. The beast controls the MIND. It whispers good sounding arguments that blind people to the reality that they are creating a future for themselves and a future for their children that is straight out of Orwellian fiction. But guess what? It wasn't fantasy - men are going to create it and support it every step of the way because their MINDS have been indoctrinated to agree with the controllers. The mark of the beast is obedience to it, the mark of the beast is doing actions in support of it. We, as a society, are reaping what we are sowing. But most are blind to it - prison levels are not overflowing because populations levels have increased! Prison levels are overflowing because the morality of the western nations has changed. Address the CAUSE instead of supporting a solution that only benefits those who think that they are superior to others.

reply to post by Imightknow


population control could only be enforced in Westran deveopled nations , The West isn't have enough children , we have a population short fall . Not all 16 and 19 year old girls want to run out and have children , thats a weak argument . The issue with the ecological footprint is this rediculas comsumerism and materialistic culture we have . This we have to loose . So you got that new I Phone or I Pad, ya know all those cool personal devices which are manufacture with toxid materials not to mention a waste of resourses and engergy ? We want forced population conrol but we also want our toys and lifestyles .

The race card will definately be played regarding this issue! It's so sad that some people view EVERYTHING under the sun as a racial issue.
Please turn off the tv for humanitys' sake

i agree with the concept, but when put into practice it would become currupt like most other things implamented and controlled by governments

I agree that population control is necessary, BUT….

A licence system is far to open to corruption. Before you know it the rich and influential will have the privilege. This sanctions depopulation of the vulnarable.

Such a rule must be across the board - the same for everyone, rich or poor etc.

I suggest vacectomy for men after 2 children..

reply to post by jiggerj


In my country, the number of students from poor families beating reputed competition exams is almost ten to one as compared to rich ones.
I am an Indian,MIT Cambridge post-graduate with an uneducated mother and a matriculate father.
Do you know what is the driving force for me?
It's the hardship of my parents for me i have seen through my childhood.
I want to serve my parents for their remaining life and when i see people abandoning their parents more so in the so called civilized western world, i don't know what to say or feel.

Maybe it's the broken society which uses chilldren as toys whose authorship is decided in courts.
I think we have a situation of girlchild abortions in my country and on the other hand depiction of abortion as a form of progress in your world.
This proves to me that IQ isn't the deciding factor of the morality of a society.

reply to post by Idonthaveabeard


I have said this for a long time, when i first suggested this to some friends they looked at me like i had grown 2 heads!

The prime minister Cameron was recorded saying that perhaps we, as a society, should start looking at some form of "training" and a licence before being able to have children.

I absolutely agree. We are required a license to drive and many others thingsthisshould be the same. At least mandatory training would be nice. The problem is simple, how do you enforce it??? It's not as if we require a diploma to f**k. The Jerry springer crowd proves that all day long. Figure that out and we may have something?

reply to post by Idonthaveabeard

Totally agree with the OP.

Just looking at news reports of 3 men having wait for it....78 children by 36 different women nails it for me.

The old adage 'Don't breed em if you can't feed em' comes to mind.

For me the teen population have abused the 'right' to breed, now breeding is a financial investment if you wish, its no longer about love and family with the poorer folks, its purely a means to an end. I'm from the old school of kids, we thought long and hard before we planned our daughter, did we have the money, yes, did we have the emotional skills, yes did we understand the long term commitment..YES.

And that is where younger people FAIL miserably, the 70 - 80s saw the evolution of the single mother council flat syndrome in the UK, girls got 'knocked up' to get a flat out of the system, a situation that still goes on today with it being passed down the family from mother to daughter like a gift.

For the religions that disapprove of condoms or surgery to stop the ability to produce children I have to say STOP, I for instance know that the Koran indicates that a man who takes on a wife or wives must be able to support and treat them with equal quality, the same with children, HE must be able to support them..HIM, not other people. I can't say for the catholic religion but you would hope the same message was in there somewhere.

I should mention that rarely do either religions follow any guidelines, they just pump the kids out for the state to look after...

I know my words will be attacked but those doing it really need to face facts, we ARE killing the planet, we cannot afford these extra beings, the resources are not endless, the simple fact is that we are taking up far too much room on this planet and devouring the resources.

Just take housing, there was a 17yr waiting list (the waiting lists are now scraped in favour of need so family with 10 kids beats me even though I've been waiting 12yrs) in my borough, there's simply no social housing stock unless you meet the 99 kids criteria thus rewarding the kid explosion.

I personally think that forced snips are needed after 2 children, I also would love to see a blanket lock down of benefits after 2 children, you have them you get no more benefit, end of.

Of course the do gooders and abusers of the system will say that's unfair but you know what, hard luck, lets imagine the economy does crash and we have a depression, there won't be any benefits to have, you will be reliant on getting off your arse and finding work or food or whatever, there's no social right to benefits and maybe a serious breakdown in the system will make some actually aware of having mouths to feed by your OWN hard work.

No EBT, no Benefits, no free phones and housing...Just daily graft and horror.

You guys can go ahead and live that Outer Party lifestyle if you like. I'm a proletarian and always will be. You can look out your clandestine love hideaway, glimpse my beauty and hear my song. My life and my loins are my own.

Name a single thing humans judge accurately. Name a single system we have created that is just and infallible. Trust the future of humanity to humans? EFF RIGHT OFF.

Nature rules. Long live Nature.