View Poll Results: A license to have children?

Voters
122. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    31 25.41%
  • No

    85 69.67%
  • Undecided

    6 4.92%
Page 11 of 80 FirstFirst ... 9101112132161 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 792

Thread: A license to have children [W:81]

  1. #101
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    07-16-14 @ 01:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    47,571

    Re: A license to have children [W:81]

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    Yup, I'd require it. Income and intelligence would be 2 immediate factors I'd use as criteria.
    And what are going to do, go by people's IQs? How are you going to determine one's "intelligence" and whether or not they have enough of it to raise a child? Do they have to get straight A's in school? What's your criteria?

  2. #102
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Theoretical Physics Lab
    Last Seen
    01-06-15 @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,120

    Re: A license to have children [W:81]

    Quote Originally Posted by nota bene View Post
    Income's easy to measure; intelligence is not. There are incredibly bright and talented folks with little formal education and dummies with doctorates. So that's problematic.
    If you have the intellectual capabilities to earn a PhD, suffice it to say that you could learn the basics of being a good parent.

    Or...that PhD also grants you the earning power to hire people that will assist you in child raising.

    Either choice is ten steps up from these ghetto and trailer park sluts who pop kids out with absolutely no way to grant a chance in life to a child.

  3. #103
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    07-16-14 @ 01:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    47,571

    Re: A license to have children [W:81]

    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    No. Social workers are paid even more than eligibility techs. Eligibility technicians are entry-level data crunchers who determine eligibility for public assistance.



    The same people who already are paying for this huge workload.



    Initially it would be an influx. In the long run it might reduce the need for eligibility techs to review benefit applications.
    How are you going to determine someone's eligibility to be a parent by "crunching numbers"? I don't get it. Unless you are planning on determining "good parenthood" by financial means alone?

  4. #104
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    07-16-14 @ 01:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    47,571

    Re: A license to have children [W:81]

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    If you have the intellectual capabilities to earn a PhD, suffice it to say that you could learn the basics of being a good parent.

    Or...that PhD also grants you the earning power to hire people that will assist you in child raising.

    Either choice is ten steps up from these ghetto and trailer park sluts who pop kids out with absolutely no way to grant a chance in life to a child.
    So you have to have a PhD to have a child? No offense, but that's dumb. This is getting really far fetched now (as if it wasn't to begin with - LOL).

  5. #105
    Sage
    lizzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    between two worlds
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,581

    Re: A license to have children [W:81]

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    If you have the intellectual capabilities to earn a PhD, suffice it to say that you could learn the basics of being a good parent.

    Or...that PhD also grants you the earning power to hire people that will assist you in child raising.

    Either choice is ten steps up from these ghetto and trailer park sluts who pop kids out with absolutely no way to grant a chance in life to a child.
    Hell Gip- you don't have to go to so much trouble. Just don't pay them for breeding and feeding, and they will either figure out how to live, or take themselves out of the equation.
    "God is the name by which I designate all things which cross my path violently and recklessly, all things which alter my plans and intentions, and change the course of my life, for better or for worse."
    -C G Jung

  6. #106
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    11-17-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,610

    Re: A license to have children [W:81]

    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    I think this is case-in-point to what I was saying. If I implement a policy that is based on income, let's say for the sake of argument that people under the poverty line are suddenly prohibited from having children until they demonstrate a year of earning above the poverty line... and this policy ends up affecting 30% of blacks, 25% of Latinos, and 18% of whites.... is that a race-based policy? Is it a race issue? I understand if people turn it into one, but that's where the mistake happens.
    I don't know that it's a "race-based policy", but I would say that the policy is definitely a race (and ethnicity) issue. The reason I distinguish is because "race-based" signifies intent to me where I'm not sure it's there. However, even if a policy is not intended to discriminate based on race or ethnicity, it can still be a race/ethnicity issue if it affects certain racial and ethnic groups more than it does others.

    Ultimately, with a policy like the one described by the OP, not only would the lower class decrease in numbers more so than middle and upper classes, but blacks, Hispanics and Native Americans among others would decrease in numbers much more so than non-Hispanic whites. Because such a policy would affect certain groups more than others, that policy becomes an issue for those groups. In all fairness though, race and class would not be the only concerns. Those with mental illnesses, physical disabilities, lower education and so on would be affected as well making the policy an issue for several historically marginalized groups. It's just not a good idea.

  7. #107
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:30 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,569
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: A license to have children [W:81]

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    America would be better if it had more economic prejudice.

    I apologize for not being in love with an entitlement society.

    What does this have to do with entitlements?

  8. #108
    Sage
    lizzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    between two worlds
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,581

    Re: A license to have children [W:81]

    Quote Originally Posted by ThePlayDrive View Post
    I don't know that it's a "race-based policy", but I would say that the policy is definitely a race (and ethnicity) issue. The reason I distinguish is because "race-based" signifies intent to me where I'm not sure it's there. However, even if a policy is not intended to discriminate based on race or ethnicity, it can still be a race/ethnicity issue if it affects certain racial and ethnic groups more than it does others.

    Ultimately, with a policy like the one described by the OP, not only would the lower class decrease in numbers more so than middle and upper classes, but blacks, Hispanics and Native Americans among others would decrease in numbers much more so than non-Hispanic whites. Because such a policy would affect certain groups more than others, that policy becomes an issue for those groups. In all fairness though, race and class would not be the only concerns. Those with mental illnesses, physical disabilities, lower education and so on would be affected as well making the policy an issue for several historically marginalized groups. It's just not a good idea.
    You must not be familiar with the booming white trash population that we have in this part of the country.
    "God is the name by which I designate all things which cross my path violently and recklessly, all things which alter my plans and intentions, and change the course of my life, for better or for worse."
    -C G Jung

  9. #109
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Theoretical Physics Lab
    Last Seen
    01-06-15 @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,120

    Re: A license to have children [W:81]

    Quote Originally Posted by lizzie View Post
    Hell Gip- you don't have to go to so much trouble. Just don't pay them for breeding and feeding, and they will either figure out how to live, or take themselves out of the equation.
    That's what I've been saying. That's all you have to do - no license, no help. I could support an agency that does background searches to determine eligibility to reproduce.

    Otherwise, if you have a kid, you're on your own.

  10. #110
    Ho, ho, ho.
    Superfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    East Coast
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    21,697

    Re: A license to have children [W:81]

    I don't think income should be so much a factor. They should, of course, be able to prove that they can provide a home, and food, and basic needs, but growing up poor doesn't make you a bad person. So many people start out poor, and end up making a great life for themselves.
    Quote Originally Posted by Chomsky
    It's easy to be a Conservative, until you need help.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal
    After years of condemning Bill Clinton for being a rapist, Republicans apparently changed their minds about the whole thing and elected one of their own.
    Quote Originally Posted by iliveonramen
    Fox News knows their audience. Nuance and facts aren't why they tune in.

Page 11 of 80 FirstFirst ... 9101112132161 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •