• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A license to have children [W:81]

A license to have children?

  • Yes

    Votes: 22 20.6%
  • No

    Votes: 79 73.8%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 6 5.6%

  • Total voters
    107
speaking of maturity

how about we at least agree that the situation is complex, there are over 300 million of us

in a country where we have the level of freedom that we do, people are going to make a lot of mistakes

some times the effects of those mistakes ripple out to the rest of society

some of us accept this as a tradeoff, and are glad the founding fathers agreed

if we start taking away the freedom to do certain things, simply because some people abuse that freedom, we are moving away from the idea of America

but yea, who cares of thousands or hundreds of thousands of people die in the streets

real enlightened, mature perspective there pal

We do better for pets that have been unfortunate enough to be "owned" by irresponsible morons. Instead of rewarding that failure of the pet "owner" to properly provide for them, we remove them from that substandard care and usually fine the offender for not doing so voluntarily.
 
After seeing what standardized education has done to the intelligence of the population, I would not support people having to take courses to tell them how to be parents. Making parenthood so robotic would not benefit society. Having a diverse range of parenting creates a diverse population. I know some brilliant people who came from messed up backgrounds, and it was that adversity that transformed them into people with unique perspectives; I have met people from wealthy upbringings who are the most messed up individuals I have ever met. Just because someone can afford to have kids doesn't mean they will be a good parent.

I think it would make more sense to implement limits to how many children people can have, like China is done. If you can only have one or two children and decide to mess that up, then that's your problem, but you have only one shot. People should not be allowed to have litters. And yes, we could easily manage this rule. People who have extra children can be heavily fined into oblivion and their children can not be issued birth certificates. Harsh as it may be, it works in China. Their population will platea by 2050 whereas ours will balloon out of control by then.

Unfortunately, reproductive laws are not likely to happen because the current growth model of economy supports the continual and unfettered reproduction of human beings as capital. The government provides too many incentives for child birth. Besides, it's unconstitutional. If our economy ever collapses a lot of people are going to die.
 
What, of these two hypotheticals, do you see as a more horrendous notion:

A) Denying/suspending the right of an addict to reproduce, or

B) An addict reproducing a child with fetal substance-induced brain damage who then raises him/her in a neglectful and/or abusive environment until the state steps in and puts the child in an unfamiliar foster setting, or series of foster settings?

In other words, you find the act of preventing a horrible situation to be a horrible thing in and of itself.

Huge dilemma.

This is one of my LEAST libertarian stances, I admit. I do not value some people's reproductive freedoms above the rights of children not to be put through immense suffering.

I see South Carolina's former eugenics program (for one example), and I honestly think it the worst of the options. I am not willing to grant social workers, doctors, or any other official that sort of power after the century's long abuse of that power.
 
Undecided
With so many libertarians around, the NO votes are no surprise.
On the contrary. I'm surprised that those who endlessly bemoan the government's mere involvement in education and other supposed overreaches would support the requirement of federal approval in order to procreate.
 
Unfortunately that (bolded) is far from true. If that other person's freedom includes "access" to a protion of my paycheck then that is tryanny not freedom, to me.

Growth of Welfare Entitlements: Principles of Reform and the Next Steps

Over $60,000 in Welfare Spent Per Household in Poverty | The Weekly Standard

http://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/PA694.pdf


i agree that we need to reign in entitlement spending

but in this country, the general idea is that we dont just let people die in the streets

we have safety nets and other programs that are designed to help those in need

along with enjoying the benefits of freedom in this country, we have a responsibility to look out for each other

no one person is directly accessing a portion of your paycheck

your taxes go towards promoting the general welfare, and other expenses as decided on by those who we elect to office
 
speaking of maturity

how about we at least agree that the situation is complex, there are over 300 million of us

in a country where we have the level of freedom that we do, people are going to make a lot of mistakes

some times the effects of those mistakes ripple out to the rest of society

some of us accept this as a tradeoff, and are glad the founding fathers agreed

if we start taking away the freedom to do certain things, simply because some people abuse that freedom, we are moving away from the idea of America

but yea, who cares of thousands or hundreds of thousands of people die in the streets

real enlightened, mature perspective there pal

Wonderful. So you support absolutely NO repercussions or accountability.

Tell you what - how about you pay the money these pieces of crap steal from my pocket when they make irreparable, costly mistakes.

And people wonder why we have an endless entitlement problem. Here you go, people.

Way to tow the line, entitlement baby.
 
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.

Yes. I had to jump through hoops to adopt my son, and I'm not complaining. I would rather people have to go through some process to have children. Too many people have them and then either can't take care of them financially or emotionally.
 
The net result of that kind of policy ends up punishing the children, rather than discouraging the parents.

So be it. Give them an abortion voucher instead of a bigger check every month. Your side of the aisle likes those.
 
i agree that we need to reign in entitlement spending

but in this country, the general idea is that we dont just let people die in the streets

we have safety nets and other programs that are designed to help those in need

along with enjoying the benefits of freedom in this country, we have a responsibility to look out for each other

no one person is directly accessing a portion of your paycheck

your taxes go towards promoting the general welfare, and other expenses as decided on by those who we elect to office

Supporting breeding by morons, and letting them play parent too, even if it is completely evident that they do that very, very poorly, is not promoting the general welfare - it is eternal perpetuation of the welfare state, by "General Welfare" heading up the endless "war on poverty" that will never be "won"; morons beget morons that, in turn, beget, still more, morons. The cycle must be broken; not simply maintained at 15% of the US population forever.
 
We do better for pets that have been unfortunate enough to be "owned" by irresponsible morons. Instead of rewarding that failure of the pet "owner" to properly provide for them, we remove them from that substandard care and usually fine the offender for not doing so voluntarily.

i agree

i was criticizing that view as expressed by a poster who at the same time was calling for increased maturity among our citizenry
 
Supporting breeding by morons, and letting them play parent too, even if it is completely eveident that they do thet very poorly, is not promoting the general welfare - it is eternal perpetuation of the welfare state, morons beget morons that, in turn, beget morons. The cycle must be broken; not simply maintained at 15% of the US population forever.

Thank you.

His kind of mentality reminds me of a dam with a bunch of small cracks and leaks. He's trying to plug every hole with his finger, and I'm trying to evacuate the village before it gets washed out.

Which one has the logic?
 
Supporting breeding by morons, and letting them play parent too, even if it is completely evident that they do that very, very poorly, is not promoting the general welfare - it is eternal perpetuation of the welfare state, by "General Welfare" heading up the endless "war on poverty" that will never be "won"; morons beget morons that, in turn, beget, still more, morons. The cycle must be broken; not simply maintained at 15% of the US population forever.

the programs in place are not in existence to "support breeding by morons"

some people take advantage of the system - no doubt

but that does not mean we scrap the entire system

it is cynical in my opinion, to view the programs, and the recipients thereof entirely in one unfavorable light - the assumption that they are morons that breed

this country is big, complex, and there are a lot of moving parts

when we identify a problem, like welfare fraud, lets address that problem and come up with some solutions

not just calling everyone on welfare some kind of degenerate moron
 
So be it. Give them an abortion voucher instead of a bigger check every month. Your side of the aisle likes those.

My side of the aisle likes coercing people into abortions by threatening them with starvation? That's actually the exact opposite of what I and mine like. We like abortion as a choice, and we don't like pushing anyone further into poverty and starvation.

But sure, go ahead and keep making stuff up.
 
the programs in place are not in existence to "support breeding by morons"

some people take advantage of the system - no doubt, but that does not mean we scrap the entire system

it is cynical in my opinion, to view the programs, and the recipients thereof entirely in one unfavorable light - the assumption that they are morons that breed

when we identify a problem, like welfare fraud, lets address that problem and come up with some solutions, not just calling everyone on welfare some kind of degenerate moron

Welfare fraud is actually peripheral to what this is really about. Welfare statism is the inadvertent promotion of survival of the weakest. Welfare's long-term effect is socially degenerative.
 
Reproductive rights are unique in that reproduction creates another human that will also have its own rights.

Therefore reproductive rights cannot be sacrosanct, as it inevitable results in a helpless life who is entitled to its needs being met by its mother and father. Reproductive rights are not just about the rights of post-pubescent humans to procreate. They are about balancing the parents' rights with the incoming rights of the newborn. When parents can't demonstrably meet the newborn's needs, their right to create the newborn should be nullified.
 
Wonderful. So you support absolutely NO repercussions or accountability.

Tell you what - how about you pay the money these pieces of crap steal from my pocket when they make irreparable, costly mistakes.

And people wonder why we have an endless entitlement problem. Here you go, people.

Way to tow the line, entitlement baby.

i never said that i support no accountability or repercussions - where did you read that?

oh wait, you didnt, you just assumed and then projected

in another post in this same thread ive called for solutions to the problems of welfare fraud and abuse

i havent seen you offer any suggestions though

also - what makes welfare recipients "pieces of crap"? the fact that they are poor?

finally, if someone has stolen something from pocket, maybe you should call the police and report a robbery

otherwise, the taxes that are deducted from your paycheck are not illegal
 
the programs in place are not in existence to "support breeding by morons"

some people take advantage of the system - no doubt

but that does not mean we scrap the entire system

it is cynical in my opinion, to view the programs, and the recipients thereof entirely in one unfavorable light - the assumption that they are morons that breed

this country is big, complex, and there are a lot of moving parts

when we identify a problem, like welfare fraud, lets address that problem and come up with some solutions

not just calling everyone on welfare some kind of degenerate moron

I look at results, honestly, not feel good theory. You can not call a permanenet gov't dependent underclass "progress". A gov't check does not work as sunstiotute for "daddy", yet that is the basis for much of our current welfare system - add cash to support that kind of breeding. No requirements for a HS education, remaining sober or following any personal improvement plan.

Marriage: America's Greatest Weapon Against Child Poverty

An Analysis of Out-Of-Wedlock Births in the United States | Brookings Institution
 
My side of the aisle likes coercing people into abortions by threatening them with starvation? That's actually the exact opposite of what I and mine like. We like abortion as a choice, and we don't like pushing anyone further into poverty and starvation.

But sure, go ahead and keep making stuff up.

No I am saying that is what you should do. Your side of the aisle is all about forcing people to do things and taking things from people and all that autocratic choice in the guise of "creating opportunities" so this is just another in the evolutionary arc of "Progressive Thought"
 
i never said that i support no accountability or repercussions - where did you read that?

oh wait, you didnt, you just assumed and then projected

in another post in this same thread ive called for solutions to the problems of welfare fraud and abuse

i havent seen you offer any suggestions though

also - what makes welfare recipients "pieces of crap"? the fact that they are poor?

finally, if someone has stolen something from pocket, maybe you should call the police and report a robbery

otherwise, the taxes that are deducted from your paycheck are not illegal

When idiots know that they can milk it and game the system by having kids supported by tens of millions of taxpayers, abuse and fraud will never end.

It reminds me of those California parents who just send their kids to "time out", then wonder why they don't get any type of respect and raise kids who are incorrigible. Sometimes you need some "tough love".

In your system, nobody learns a lesson because you completely wipe away all culpability. You can say you don't, but you obviously do.
 
When idiots know that they can milk it and game the system by having kids supported by tens of millions of taxpayers, abuse and fraud will never end.

It reminds me of those California parents who just send their kids to "time out", then wonder why they don't get any type of respect and raise kids who are incorrigible. Sometimes you need some "tough love".

In your system, nobody learns a lesson because you completely wipe away all culpability. You can say you don't, but you obviously do.

I agree but I wouldn't call them idiots. They can work the system with the skill Warren Buffett works the stock market.
 
Welfare fraud is actually peripheral to what this is really about. Welfare statism is the inadvertent promotion of survival of the weakest. Welfare's long-term effect is socially degenerative.

sure, ok, and we are getting sidetracked from the original point of the thread

but the only argument i am seeing in these posts is that

because welfare fraud exists --> we should legislate and regulate reproductive rights based on intelligence

the conclusion does not follow the premise
 
When idiots know that they can milk it and game the system by having kids supported by tens of millions of taxpayers, abuse and fraud will never end.

It reminds me of those California parents who just send their kids to "time out", then wonder why they don't get any type of respect and raise kids who are incorrigible. Sometimes you need some "tough love".

In your system, nobody learns a lesson because you completely wipe away all culpability. You can say you don't, but you obviously do.

one - i never said that fraud and abuse will ever end. it is part of human nature for some people to try to take these kinds of advantages. that doesnt mean the entire system needs to be thrown away

the fact that "california" partenting isnt the same philosophy that you would apply to child raising is irrelevant - all are free to raise their children in whatever way they deem appropriate

what is "my system"? I am referring to the current setup of the government, it is the system that all of us participate in

and if a person is caught defrauding the system, then i completely support harsh punishments

there should be culpability and i support that

if you have to put words in my mouth to make your point, its not a good sign
 
It's interesting that it's mostly libertarians and conservatives that support such a huge intrusion by government into individual's lives. I guess I can take their whole "too much government' argument even LESS seriously than I already do. It's becoming clearer and clearer by the day that what they really mean by "too much government" is "I want to do what I want and screw everyone else" - as I suspected. Also, the contempt some people seem to have for those who they think don't deserve children is disturbing to the point that I think those expressing it are a threat to society. There's clearly a huge emotional component going into a lot people's opinions on this topic and emotion is definitely not a good basis for intruding on people's lives this severely.

As for the topic specifically, since the people who would be primarily effected by this would be non-whites and the poor (of all races/ethnicities), a policy regulating who can have kids would just increase racism and classism, increase white and wealth privilege and severely intensify racial and class tension. In other words, it would disrupt society significantly. For instance, I really can't imagine a lot of black people would ever be able to let old wounds heal knowing that their government enacted a policy that would prevent many of them from having children due to poverty within the population. I mean, that's really sick. I can't believe people are supporting this.

That said, there is a problem with parents who can't raise children. In order to address this problem, I propose we come at it from a place of compassion rather than a place of contempt - a place of understanding rather than a place of superiority and supremacy. As others have suggested, we should promote parenting classes in a way that research shows will be effective. We should also improve the education system in general to help people make better life choices in general. There are plenty of things that we can do to help people make better decisions. That's the responsible way to handle the problem. Requiring a license to have children is the dangerous way.
 
I am very sure that my view will be very unpopular but I think that mankind would greatly benefit from a global reproduction cap of one child per person. As a result global populations would eventually be reduced. Most of our environmental, energy, food, and resource problems would be eradicated if the population was greatly diminished. Just an extreme example to make my point, imagine if the global population were 10,000 people. With 10,000 people almost no matter how reckless they were in resource consumption or methods would they have any profound effect on supply or environment. Many of mankind's current dilemma's are only compounded by our ever growing populations. As a result mankind acts in all sorts of despicable ways to secure our limited resources and wealth such as wars, manipulation, ect. I believe that we are on a path to great suffering. At some point our constant population growth will exceed our ability to support that population and a great many will suffer as a result.
 
Back
Top Bottom