It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Forced birth control? I say YES!

page: 2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in


posted on May, 13 2009 @ 07:42 PM
reply to post by LostNemesis

What about all those guys who take advantage of women? Either rape, or one night stands, or even marry them and leave them. And whichever way, they leave them knocked up or with kids.

Do those women not get your pity? Would you call them "prostitutes" of some sort?

Something is wrong with your logic. I think more men take advantage of women and leave the women with children, than women who take advantage of men so they can get pregnant.

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 07:45 PM
reply to post by Stormdancer777

Thanks for the support. I love kids and I wish we lived in a world where everyone could pop them out and "happy happy joy joy"........but that is sooooo not the case. I'm afraid to have children in this world and I just wish that the masses would SEE the true conditions of things for once....... grrrrrr! Does anyone know what I'm saying!

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 07:46 PM
I am on the fence about this one. I believe stupid people should not breed, but who decides?

My neighbor has a grandaughter that already has one child she cannot feed. She and her loser BF live with the Grandmother and Grandfather. The BF will not work, they just look for the next free party. They are both drop outs, cannot hold a minimum wage job, and low and behold she has another one in the oven.

She should not breed.

She is a waste of resources.

[edit on 13-5-2009 by timewalker]

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 07:47 PM
reply to post by ravenshadow13

I don't disagree with a woman making a decision not to at the age of 18

It's smart, you have many good years ahead of you to have children and, missing things like the college experience etc would always have you wondering... what could have been, it's not the wrong choice.

It just appalls me for all the people we HELP financially in this country...

women and children are literally no priority and the sheer economic waste, when I put it in perspective, this should be the no 1 hand out, no matter how I look at it

Your right, it would be much harder...

But not because we can't afford it, not because it's hard to be a Mom and Love

But because it's MADE hard on women

On a level I don't think our treatment of women in the west is much better than it is in the Muslim world, opposite end of the spectrum maybe but still ridiculous

I think, raising children is... a very important thing and no one should judge how it came about in the first place...

For starters food... we let rot in silos, this isn't a major issue

You could give a baby a Good life IF people had respect for motherhood and didn't label you a slut, that's really the bottom line...

Some colleges have day old cc did

you mention the economy too

I can say only this... we pay BILLIONS to SS, no one is having babies, where is our work force? Illiterate 3rd world immigrants, who is paying that SS?

Kids mostly grow up to be workers... there is a reason China out produces us, how they will sustain their elderly is beyond my comprehension with a one child policy

The reality I think may well be in a generation or so, we will all face a far bigger tragedy starting with the economics of... having no work force to support the old

and I think TPTB know this and don't give a good darn damn so long as beach front property is cheap for them and their families

your right, in regards to what you choose, to not have kids at 18

I'm just saying, it's totally wrong that you should be made to feel that your woman hood makes you less valuable then some degree or some job, mostly we all work at stuff no one needs anyway...

30 million telemarketers in America ROFL

please...someone get these girls off the phone and let them raise kids

I just have allot of respect for mothers... They should be put on a pedastil as I see things

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 07:47 PM
Well I am enjoying the difference of opinion here on this topic, it will make for some good discussion.

On the topic of girls being afraid to discuss their sexual activity with parents. It's not up to the kids, it's up to the parents to be informed about their chilren's lives and created an environment that's open and safe with their kids.

I know I've fostered such an environment with my children and when my daughter became active she was the first to come out and ask me to buy condoms for her aswell as see about alternative birth control.

She's never had a pregnancy, she'll be 18 this year. My youngest son is starting to like girls at the young age of 14 and if he's like his old man, he'll be on the ban wagon in not too long

In his case my husband was the one who dealt with him and everything was aOK. It comes to down educating your child not just on sexual education, but also making them understand that sex is a normal positive thing, that is all too often blow out of proportion.

Now I don't condone my children having sex at such a young age, but I can't watch them 24/7 and to do that would be wrong of me. I have to accept that they have free will, so the best I can do is set up an environment as I said, that fosters their ability communicate and be truthfull and comfortable with the parents.

Now as far as abortion goes, I am pro choice, because as a man, I don't think I have a say either way, so might as well let the women duke it out and simply be supportive.

I understand both sides of the argument well, they both have merit, however fundementally nobody can tell anybody what to do, and being a Libertarian it's not infringing on my rights so therefore I have no reason to object.

Planned parenthood is a good thing, when it's not perversed by religious dogma and un-attainable standards. Abstinence education doesn't work, it simply blames the problem on something else like the devil and doesn't teach kids how to deal with situations let alone how to protect themselves from such situations either.

It's a matter of balance. Education and common sense. As well as good parenting, which to me is the most important thing a human can ever do or be.


posted on May, 13 2009 @ 07:49 PM
reply to post by ravenshadow13

I think we are in agreement on THAT part. When both agree to have children, they should share responsibility of those kids. I think that is awesome and ideal. A divorce should lead to visitation, and maybe even payments if one has the kids more often than the other.

Women FORCED into pregnancy? Ehh... termination is legal, for people who were FORCED into pregnancy. If they were forced into pregnancy and choose to keep the attackers' kid... then that is their choice to stare at the product of such a brutal attack every day for the rest of their life.

Sure, make rapists pay child support.

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 07:50 PM
reply to post by LostNemesis

Hey LostNemesis, star for you! I cannot tell you how many hard working, decent men I know that are paying child support, battling horrific hags and don't even get to see their kids, simply because the female in question felt scorned by the state of the relationship. That is another big issue that needs to be addressed. At this point in my life, I know as many men in the very same situation.

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 07:52 PM
reply to post by timewalker

Thank you Timewalker! If it were only that simple. I am extremely intelligent and motivated, married and I have a good career...yet I have no children. I prefer to keep canines instead! Even as a person that would be a good parent logistically, I have reservations......more people should. Especially those that aren't qualified to operate a blender!

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 07:53 PM
reply to post by LostNemesis

Some women who are raped cannot afford an abortion or feel against it for religious reasons. Some women who are left have the same problems, as well as the fact that they might be left when they are too far along or when they already have children.

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 07:58 PM
One thing I see in this...

My mom died of cancer, it cost AFTER insurance 1 Million dollars, for her to be irradiated on a tube for one year...

My dad got sick from stress after and no longer can work at 72... he is on SS, his dad lived however to 94, so we can expect that likely... there goes another Million from the Fed

I just....

don't know what we have become, that a miserable year of life anyway...and this is my MOM i'm talking about... id more valuable than, a child

that Mil could feed, and house 1,000 children

Children who will spend the rest of their lives contributing if they just have a chance...

My parents Smoked themselves into early death an d retirement

If I had to, my dad could live with me... I'd love the chance to yell at him to turn the lights off for a few years

My dads, entire lifes savings gone... to prolong agony... I started life with nothing because of that

we are sooooo afraid of death we are killing life to try and escape it

and lol

we can't

and we can't take the money with us either

So how did I come to live in a world in which... a person, a Woman... for Christs Sake, gets a 3rd degree to simply get formula or bread?

I just don't know what we are becoming sometimes

what happened to women and children FIRST

where has our dignity gone?

it's 2009... an unwed mother is still a useless slut with rotten kids... we haven't advanced at all

I just wish ...dang it, we got a grip on what our REAL resources actually are

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 08:04 PM
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

The problem I see with this idea , is who decides what the appropriate level of "readiness is" before allowing some one to have a baby? The government? The doctor? The parents?

Also on what ground would it be decided? I can imagine that those grounds would vary quite a bit from person to person. One persons idea of "ready" May be, that they have a steady job and reliable transportation, no prison time, Another may be simply one who is married.

It is too subjective and it will not work. I say, leave it up to the individial. It is none of my business when the woman next door wants to have sex with some one and it is none of yours either.

If she gets pregnant and she ends up being on welfare or what have you, there is not much that can be done. The government will not just allow these babies to go hungry or with out healthcare.

The issue, you have with not wanting your hard earned money to go to people like that, is understandable, and there are people who abuse this systen to get as much money from the government as possible (octomom)....

So perhaps a more reasonable move to make would be to limit the money that they can get. To give them just enough for the kids, and give it in a form that can not be spent on un needed junk. Food stamps for example would be a wise thing to give to parents who need it. A cheaper or free healthcare system for parents in that situation.

I don't know, I am just throwing ideas out, but I truly believe all the ones I have come up with are MUCh better than forcing women to go on birth control. The bottom line is it is none of my business who has sex and when. It is not the governments either, however when it does happen, it is our duty to make sure those children are safe, fed and sheltered and loved.

We can not just stop giving them money, I can understand how you might feel about the women but it is not about them it is about the kids that they ahve brought into this world.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 08:05 PM
reply to post by mopusvindictus

Well, right. I mean, it's kind of crude but the way I see it, we're just animals. Huge eukaryotic multicellular organisms. If it wasn't for technology and medication, we would all die a lot earlier. And the healthiest of us would live on to reproduce. Nowadays, everyone passes their genes along, even if they are evolutionarily weak. And the elderly are kept alive for much longer through artificial means. Which is more important? When do you just let people die? It's hard because we all love things so much, and we have these silly emotions.

That's the thing with abortion and birth control. People say "It's a life! It's a future!" I say "Honestly, it's a bunch of cells right now. You never know what can happen."

Kind of awful, but kind of true.

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 08:05 PM
reply to post by jackieps1975

Your welcome!! I have made some bad choices in my life, even once was married to the wrong woman. I have no children because I am responsible enough to know the consequences of my actions. I could not provide what a child needs therefore, no kids. Maybe I fall into my own category but at least I recognize it.

If only the rest of the world would be responsible, it would be all sunshine.

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 08:13 PM
reply to post by jackieps1975

My beliefs run so deeply and so thorough about this topic that I make most people gag, as I do, probably in general when I let me beliefs surface... I digress.

I'm with the people here that don't think the problem has anything to do with marriage, unions, or religion (mostly), but of the quality of people giving birth. I go out of my way to avoid Wal-Marts, Costco's, and fast food places, because I can't help but make harsh judgements about people I do not know, which I believe to be unfair, but inherent and hard to check.

My solution?

If something as simple as driving being a "privilege" that requires testing, and has certain limitations to those with epilepsy, mental/learning disabilities, bad eye sight and the like, we should at least limit the amount of people with pisspot genetics passing them down onto an life that will have to harbor those traits the rest of their life.

I believe everybody that plans on bringing a life into this world shouldn't be allowed to unless they can pass physical, mental health, and intelligence competency tests all the while any adverse hereditary traits being brought into consideration. Other considerations should be a minimum basis of pay, housing, weight, and behavioral history.

If you can pass those tests, breed away.

My idealism is laughable and I apologize if this has offended anybody.

[edit on 13-5-2009 by DeadFlagBlues]

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 08:16 PM
reply to post by DeadFlagBlues

You're saying you can't have a child if you have poor eyesight or other physically less favorable traits?

What about all the idiots running around with 20/20? And by idiots I'm not talking low IQ, I'm talking wrong choices and lifestyle. Some of that can't show up on a test. And some things like eyesight, hearing, anything really, can be genetic or environmental.

I agree to a point. But, I mean, I wear glasses and contacts. I would raise all hell if I couldn't have a child because of that.

Or, like, depression. If you're in therapy or on medication, are you still prohibited from having children? What about if you have a disease?

[edit on 5/13/2009 by ravenshadow13]

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 08:22 PM

Originally posted by mopusvindictus
I know family's who are poor and have 8 kids

I know family's who are rich and have one...

Yeah and there are a lot of working class couples that will only have one kid because they can't AFFORD to have 2 or 3. Why? In part because they pay TAXES to support the "poor family with 8 kids that expects government aid".

You want to encourage DECENT PEOPLE to have more kids then offer more programs for middle class families (such as tax incentives for WORKING families) and don't punish the middle class working people while rewarding the unemployed breeders that have kids for the government check and all to often raise future criminals.

A few days ago I had this discussion with a coworker. The guy makes a decent living, is married and has ONE kid. He said they seriously debated having a second child but realized if they did they would have to pull the FIRST child out of private school, and that means the kid would go to public school where english is the second language for most of the kids and the quality of the education is much much poorer. They didn't want to make the first child sacrifice so they are only having one.

But I guess you would think turning out 6 kids and giving them a bad education would be a much better idea.

[edit on 13-5-2009 by Sonya610]

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 08:24 PM
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

There are a few problems with this, IMO.

*It would be absolutely impossible to force people to use birth control. How would this even work?

*Then you have the issue of many woman can not nor should not use hormonal birth control. And its too easy to skip the pill and then it screws everything up - pregnancy then can occur. This leaves them with having to get an IUD (can slip and you can get pregnant) or rely on a man to wrap it.

*And another problem is that we need less government in our lives. I know you would never want the government dictating to you how to live your life (anymore then they do now), especially your sexual life.

Unfortunately, many people refuse to be responsible and it is always the children who suffer and always the tax payers who end up footing the bill. I have no idea what the solution is, because at the end of the day I care about those kids - but I am against abortion and I certainly am unable to care for any of them.

We could reform welfare (which I believe needs to be done)....and stop sending checks to these women. But then the children suffer even more.

I just do not see an easy solution to this ever growing problem.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

[edit on 5/13/2009 by greeneyedleo]

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 08:29 PM
reply to post by greeneyedleo

Not that I'm suggesting, but they could put the hormones in the water (would affect men, too, though.)

IUDs also cause increased infection and other side effects.

It's a good question. Oh, wait. Easy answer.

Depo Provera. Although it's been rumored to cause infertility.

The patch, maybe?

I don't know. Seems like those are the options.

[edit on 5/13/2009 by ravenshadow13]

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 08:32 PM

Originally posted by ravenshadow13
reply to post by greeneyedleo

Not that I'm suggesting, but they could put the hormones in the water (would affect men, too, though.)

IUDs also cause increased infection and other side effects.

It's a good question. Oh, wait. Easy answer.

Depo Provera.

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Yes, you are right. That is a possibility. But what if these irresponsible child breeders do not drink the water? And then it would affect all the responsible people who deserve and can raise the children they have.

And the other BC I agree are good.....but how do they force people to use them?

An area that seems to have no solution..............yet.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

[edit on 5/13/2009 by greeneyedleo]

[edit on 5/13/2009 by greeneyedleo]

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 08:45 PM
reply to post by ravenshadow13

I think you have a very realistic and grounded view of your goals waaay ahead of your age and your life, for what that's worth. I think you're going to do big things. No, there's not a "but" waiting

I read the OP's statement and all of you following that view, and I can't disagree with any of you, because we all hold parts of the whole that is the truth AND the solution.

I view childbirth as a priviledge, not a right. I wish -- as all of you apparently do -- that children could be brought into a world where they were wanted and reasonably well cared for.

I think we should make birth control available, and have a cross-section of mothers come to schools and talk to kids about whether they chose to have children, and how it affected their lives. I realize that sounds like I'm painting unwed mothers with a big, wide brush.

Listen: When I was 14, a woman who was a friend of my Mom and Dad pulled me aside one day and talked to me about my girlfriend, and asked questions and then she made me promise that I would come to HER and get condoms before I would have sex without them. She told me her dreams she'd had at my age, and also how much she loved her daughter, but how in later years she felt the loss of her dreams. That stayed with me. I wanted to be responsible, and if not for that sobering revelation from a family friend, I might have done differently.

On paper, I can agree with population control, but when you get to the nuts and bolts of it, (and there are LOTS of nuts these days), it just can't work. People will or will not be responsible; the best of what we can do is educate, and show those stepping up to the plate a longer view of t heir options and those ramifications than they can see themselves.

Good thread.

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in