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 39 of 80 FirstFirst ... 29373839404149 ... LastLast
Results 381 to 390 of 792

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

  1. #381
    Advisor Fog hit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    10-31-13 @ 08:42 PM
    Gender
    Posts
    408

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

    If something isn't done soon, we will end up like China... Limiting the number of children, just to prevent massive starvation.

    I am with those who would stop any benefits after 2 children. I would also reduce incarceration time for vasectomies, or sterilization.

    I have to say that, I am surprised by the number of Libertarians who would require education, or the state regulating procreation.
    Nothing in excess.

  2. #382
    Guru
    Morality Games's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Last Seen
    05-24-16 @ 10:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,733

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    Who said that (the bold)?
    I don't care about fine semantic distinctions that you think are important, particularly not as bait. Reproduction is a sexual activity that involves sex.
    If you notice something good in yourself, give credit to God, not to yourself, but be certain the evil you commit is always your own and yours to acknowledge.

    St. Benedict

  3. #383
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:01 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,180

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

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    Your ideology blinds you. Here, let me help you out...
    (snip)
    governments often condition the provision of ordinary benefits on the satisfaction of unrelated demands (such as making highway funding conditional on states' passing particular laws). Given the potency such offers possess, one might suspect that there are many offers that one cannot reasonably refuse, possibly reflecting great imbalances in power or prior historical injustices between the bargaining parties. (See, for instance, O'Neill 1991; and Berman 2001.)
    "One might suspect the offer cannot reasonably be refused, reflecting power imbalances" does not mean "definite coercion."


    Do you consider Workfare to be coercion too?

    How about employment in general? I'm "forced" to work for others if I want to have money to pay bills and feed my family? My worker places contingencies of our arrangement on my successful performance of the things it wants done. Is this coercion? Does my employer therefore "have all the power imbalance" just because he's the one cutting the checks?

    Thanks for your citations, but the idea that a welfare contingency is automatic coercion is ridiculous. Thinking of coercion that way casts doubt on the validity of all sorts of otherwise completely valid contractual agreements.
    Last edited by Neomalthusian; 02-24-13 at 03:56 PM.

  4. #384
    Irremovable Intelligence
    Removable Mind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    23,517

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Alyssa View Post
    Should people be required to qualify and obtain a license to have children? If so, what should be the standards to qualify and why?

    People need a license to drive, hunt, fish, etc and society is inundated with government regulations as it is, and yet people can breed freely without regard for their ability to provide for their children and regardless of genetic health. Personally, I think it would be disastrous to give the government control over reproduction, especially considering the lousy job it does with everything else. And yet, it is illogical for unhealthy and/or poverty stricken people to breed.
    There is a simple solution. All males born must have a reversible vasectomy at birth.

    Then all children must begin parenting classes at about 7th grade and continue till 12th grade.

    All couples who want to have children...must pass a written or verbal parenting skills test. If they pass, then the male can have a vasectomy reversal.

    If at anytime a couple (or as an individual - whichever applies) is found guilty of abuse, neglect, or abandonment...the guilty parent or parents must be permanently sterilized.

    Sound cruel? It's no more cruel than millions of abused, neglected, and abandoned children have had to endure over the ages.

  5. #385
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:01 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,180

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Morality Games View Post
    I don't care about fine semantic distinctions that you think are important, particularly not as bait. Reproduction is a sexual activity that involves sex.
    Um, I would say sexual activity/sex is a pleasurable activity that may result in reproduction. If some of the ideas that have been tossed around in this thread were enacted, it would be sexually liberating, not sexually regulating.

  6. #386
    ˇSelah!
    Alyssa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    southern and midwestern United States where Protestant fundamentalism is dominant
    Last Seen
    05-07-14 @ 09:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,648
    Blog Entries
    2

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Gina View Post
    That is coercion. Needy people trading their fertility for food is coercive.
    Nonsense. Fertility should come with stipulations. EVERYTHING in life has stipulations. In nature, if animals cannot provide for their young, they do not survive. Humans live against nature, and it is no longer sustainable. If people have children they cannot support and need help with that, fine, but they should not be having more children for everyone else to support.

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    Your ideology blinds you. Here, let me help you out...

    Coerce - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

    co·ercedco·erc·ing
    Definition of COERCE
    1: to restrain or dominate by force <religion in the past has tried to coerce the irreligious — W. R. Inge>
    2: to compel to an act or choice <was coerced into agreeing>
    3: to achieve by force or threat <coerce compliance>
    — co·erc·ible adjective
    Examples of COERCE
    A confession was coerced from the suspect by police.
    <was coerced into signing the document>

    -and-

    Coercion (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

    2.4 Coercive Offers?

    While the dominant strand in recent theory has associated coercion with threats, and denied that offers can be used to coerce, this sharp differentiation of these two sorts of proposals has come in for some criticism. The parallel structure of conditional threats and conditional offers has led some to deny that there is a deep distinction to be made between them. Others have focused on the role of both in the broader political and economic context, and found that these broader conditions make coercive offers a live possibility. Dealings in capitalist markets are often highly exploitative; governments often condition the provision of ordinary benefits on the satisfaction of unrelated demands (such as making highway funding conditional on states' passing particular laws). Given the potency such offers possess, one might suspect that there are many offers that one cannot reasonably refuse, possibly reflecting great imbalances in power or prior historical injustices between the bargaining parties. (See, for instance, O'Neill 1991; and Berman 2001.)

    -and-

    What is COERCION? definition of COERCION (Black's Law Dictionary)

    What is COERCION?

    Compulsion; force; duress. It may be either actual, (direct or positive.) where physical force Is put upon a man to compel him to do an act against his will, or implied, (legal or constructive.) where the relation of the parties is such that one is under subjection to the other, and is thereby constrained to do what his free will would refuse. State v. Darlington, 153 Ind. 1, 53 N. E. 025; Cliappell v. Trent, 00 Va. S49, 19 S. E. 314; Radicli v. Ilutohins, 95 U. S. 213, 24 L. Ed. 409; Peyser v. New York, 70 N. Y. 497. 20 Am. Rep. G24; State v. Boyle, 13 R. I. 53S.
    LOL it's your type of ideology which keeps the rest of us paying for other people's children.

    My husband and I barely manage to keep our heads above the water each month, and we are drowning in bills and yet our pathetic paychecks cover our expenses. However, we are also paying for other people to breed. I have a problem with that. I got my tubes tied (which I paid for btw), so why shouldn't they? hell I'd even support paying them extra money to get the procedure done. Even if these people were offered $10,000 plus welfare benefits, it would still save money overall.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    "One might suspect the offer cannot reasonably be refused, reflecting power imbalances" does not mean "definite coercion."


    Do you consider Workfare to be coercion too?

    How about employment in general? I'm "forced" to work for others if I want to have money to pay bills and feed my family? My worker places contingencies of our arrangement on my successful performance of the things it wants done. Is this coercion? Does my employer therefore "have all the power imbalance" just because he's the one cutting the checks?

    Thanks for your citations, but the idea that a welfare contingency is automatic coercion is ridiculous. Thinking of coercion that way casts doubt on the validity of all sorts of otherwise completely valid contractual agreements.
    Too many people are "thinking" with their emotions, ovaries, or testicles. Common sense is refreshing on this issue.

    Quote Originally Posted by Removable Mind View Post
    There is a simple solution. All males born must have a reversible vasectomy at birth.

    Then all children must begin parenting classes at about 7th grade and continue till 12th grade.

    All couples who want to have children...must pass a written or verbal parenting skills test. If they pass, then the male can have a vasectomy reversal.

    If at anytime a couple (or as an individual - whichever applies) is found guilty of abuse, neglect, or abandonment...the guilty parent or parents must be permanently sterilized.

    Sound cruel? It's no more cruel than millions of abused, neglected, and abandoned children have had to endure over the ages.
    No. I wouldn't support children being forced to have surgery.

  7. #387
    Phonetic Mnemonic ©
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your right... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:11 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    33,413

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    "One might suspect the offer cannot reasonably be refused, reflecting power imbalances" does not mean "definite coercion."

    Do you consider Workfare to be coercion too?

    How about employment in general? I'm "forced" to work for others if I want to have money to pay bills and feed my family? My worker places contingencies of our arrangement on my successful performance of the things it wants done. Is this coercion? Does my employer therefore "have all the power imbalance" just because he's the one cutting the checks?

    Thanks for your citations, but the idea that a welfare contingency is automatic coercion is ridiculous. Thinking of coercion that way casts doubt on the validity of all sorts of otherwise completely valid contractual agreements.
    Sorry, but no. Cherry-picking the semantics of three words... which could just as easily be interpreted opposite of what how you choose to interpret them... does not equate to disproval. Legal lessons of definition from Bill Clinton ("It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is.") were ridiculed then, and are still ridiculous now. Taken overall, the points and citations stand.
    If you claim sexual harassment to be wrong, yet you defend anyone on your side for any reason,
    then you are a hypocrite and everything you say on the matter is just babble.

  8. #388
    global liberation

    ecofarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Miami
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    66,400

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Morality Games View Post
    I don't care about fine semantic distinctions that you think are important, particularly not as bait. Reproduction is a sexual activity that involves sex.
    In common sociologic parlance, "reproductive activities" includes any non-cash-producing activities toward the health and perpetuation (that word/aspect is where the term derives) of a family or group, including food production storage and preparation, sanitation and other group supporting activities that do not generate cash income. For examples, this can include informal education for children, basic physical child care and washing clothing.


    I dunno where the semantics debate began or if this is directly relevant to that exchange, but I thought I'd note such.
    Last edited by ecofarm; 02-24-13 at 04:17 PM.

  9. #389
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    03-11-13 @ 07:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    420

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Removable Mind View Post
    There is a simple solution. All males born must have a reversible vasectomy at birth.
    Then all children must begin parenting classes at about 7th grade and continue till 12th grade.
    All couples who want to have children...must pass a written or verbal parenting skills test. If they pass, then the male can have a vasectomy reversal.
    If at anytime a couple (or as an individual - whichever applies) is found guilty of abuse, neglect, or abandonment...the guilty parent or parents must be permanently sterilized.

    Sound cruel? It's no more cruel than millions of abused, neglected, and abandoned children have had to endure over the ages.
    I see alot more potential problems than solutions here. The overwhelming numbers in which immigrants will overtake citizens for one. Religious debates by Catholics, Muslims, and Evangelicals among others. The at home births and hiding of children from the government as has happened in other countries with such laws. Lawsuits for wrongful death (youre putting millions of babies under a surgical procedure you're bound to have deaths). Has any research taken place on the liklihood of reversal/ damage to the reproductive abilities of males whove had this procedure before a certain age? Its not feasable and even if it didnt break several natural laws and go against several constitutional rights would you be paying for it? How about the funerals of the boys who dont make it? The wrongful death suits? The suits later on when these boys prove capable fathers but the reversal doesnt work?

    I see alot more problprobl

  10. #390
    ˇSelah!
    Alyssa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    southern and midwestern United States where Protestant fundamentalism is dominant
    Last Seen
    05-07-14 @ 09:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,648
    Blog Entries
    2

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

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    Sorry, but no. Cherry-picking the semantics of three words... which could just as easily be interpreted opposite of what how you choose to interpret them... does not equate to disproval. Legal lessons of definition from Bill Clinton ("It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is.") were ridiculed then, and are still ridiculous now. Taken overall, the points and citations stand.
    No they don't. People are required to meet a standard to receive money. They don't meet said standard. They do not receive the money.

    Not coercion.

Page 39 of 80 FirstFirst ... 29373839404149 ... 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
  •