It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Reproduction as a right...yes or no.

page: 11
7
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 24 2010 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Freenrgy2

Originally posted by lifeform11
i do not think reproduction is a right that is given to somebody, we are all born with the parts to reproduce therefore it is a universal right everybody is born with, its not something anybody else should decide but the person who's life it is.


Why does a child have to wait before the parent has their kid taken away when it would have been better to have never allowed that parent to have a child to begin with?

And not ALL of us are born with this ability. A small percentage of the population will never be allowed to have children via natural methods. You have the ability to urinate and defecate, but can you do that wherever you want? Are their laws or guidelines that tell you where it is appropriate to do those? And why aren't you...mainly because of health laws.

So think of guided reproduction as another necessary for a healthy society.


because you would not know how capable that parent is untill they have become one, are you suggesting it is only the unemployed or poor in society that can be bad parents? i have seen some shocking parents who had everything they needed to raise children, mine.

the rest of what your saying is just disgusting really, we have to base being a parent on someone who is rich, as though rich people are not capable of treating their children badly or raising them wrong causing problems for society later.

there is no point trying to convince me of something i disagree with. so i am unsure why your trying. you think you should play god and decide who can have children, i think everybody should be allowed to have them if they so choose, however if they do not do a good job, then they should be punished.

we both disagree. so i'll leave it there.




posted on Oct, 24 2010 @ 02:37 PM
link   
i'll just also point out, that a lot of people are on this site because they are fed up of how they are being treated and the state the world is in, caused by people who have been raised in the best situation possible, they are rich, have everything they need when being raised, have parents who work, all the things the O.P. describes.

look at the state of the world, let alone society. look at all the lies, all the killings, all the wars, all the freedoms being striped away, the state of the economy, the evil being spewed out from many countries in the world.

i think it at least proves that having the correct things to raise a child does not mean a better society, because it is not about what you have got, its about raising a child properly, with love and respect, not about how much you can buy them.
edit on 24-10-2010 by lifeform11 because: grammer



posted on Oct, 24 2010 @ 10:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by lifeform11
because you would not know how capable that parent is untill they have become one, are you suggesting it is only the unemployed or poor in society that can be bad parents? i have seen some shocking parents who had everything they needed to raise children, mine.


I never suggested it was only poor people. Many of those who disagree with my position like to take what I've written and try to condense it into a general sweeping statement completely contrary to my position. Income is just one thing that should be taken into consideration of what an individual, couple or partnership should meet BEFORE reproduction.



the rest of what your saying is just disgusting really, we have to base being a parent on someone who is rich, as though rich people are not capable of treating their children badly or raising them wrong causing problems for society later.


What's disgusting is allowing children to be born to parents who have no business being allowed to raise children and if there were guidelines in place for responsible reproduction, they may have never been allowed to have kids. Then there is the disgusting aspect of people engaging in sex only to find out they've become pregnant and for them to end the life of a child because it was unplanned or unwanted. Nowhere have I said that only rich people should be allowed to raise children. You have automatically assumed that from what I've written.



there is no point trying to convince me of something i disagree with. so i am unsure why your trying. you think you should play god and decide who can have children, i think everybody should be allowed to have them if they so choose, however if they do not do a good job, then they should be punished.

we both disagree. so i'll leave it there.


I'm not trying to convince you of anything. If you disagree, that's fine with me. I don't believe I am God and that, I solely, should decide. I firmly believe that we, as a civilized society, should start to look into responsible reproduction. After all, should "Octamom" have been allowed to have had all of those embryos implanted, knowing full well that all of them could be viable and that she would not be able to financially care for them. Wasn't this evidenced even more by her outright confession of wanting a public handout and the fact that she left her children in the care of others while she basked in the media attention?

I am frankly tired of us being a reactive society. It is this thinking that has led us down a path of failed programs and the creation of the welfare state. We must become proactive if we are ever going to change things. Why should society have to punish people after they've already demonstrated that they are insufficient to raise a child, or worse, committed a crime against a child. Think of all the damage done because of allowing them to have a child in the first place.

I would hope that those who truly desire to have children would live their lives in such a way as to ensure that they are allowing themselves, and thus, the lives of the children they wish to have, to have the best chance of success.
edit on 24-10-2010 by Freenrgy2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 01:07 AM
link   
the one thing you keep missing though is the fact that people have children and meet all your criteria, then things happen and they end up in a situation they did not intend. so even in your perfect world you would not avoid, single parents, people lacking funds etc etc. you know all the things you think make a bad parent.

people loose jobs and people die, people fall out of love and split up, people have accidents and can no longer work, all sorts of things happen to people and most of the time it is not their fault, but you think their right to be a parent should be stripped away. i bet these conditions do not strip you of your right because you have either made sure you meet them or you have had your kids and it would no longer effect you. would you complain if a law was bought in saying, that nobody is allowed to have kids unless they own land, own 10 million dollars/pounds, have passed all their education subjects with a+, and are a member of a royal family? would that bother you? why don't we just do that?

you say its not about people being poor or rich then go on to say that income should be taken into account.



posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 01:29 AM
link   

I am frankly tired of us being a reactive society. It is this thinking that has led us down a path of failed programs and the creation of the welfare state. We must become proactive if we are ever going to change things. Why should society have to punish people after they've already demonstrated that they are insufficient to raise a child, or worse, committed a crime against a child. Think of all the damage done because of allowing them to have a child in the first place.


i understand where your coming from about society and i am not saying that some people do not deserve to be parents, there are poor parents out there who do not raise their children properly, i have seen some who make me wonder why they even had kids because they treat them as they are in the way.

but why should other people be punished by the actions of a few? why should certain people have their right taken away when they have done nothing wrong? shell we start locking up sections of society who fit the stereo typical criminal? that will solve crime wont it?

society is in a mess for many different reasons, it is not parents who are solely to blame and it certainly is not all parents.

edit to answer this point "Think of all the damage done because of allowing them to have a child in the first place."

if somebody is convicted of doing bad things to a child, i was under the impression that they were not allowed to live with children again? or go near them? or have them ? their right to be a parent is understandably taken away. this already happens.


edit on 25-10-2010 by lifeform11 because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-10-2010 by lifeform11 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 06:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by lifeform11
but why should other people be punished by the actions of a few? why should certain people have their right taken away when they have done nothing wrong? shell we start locking up sections of society who fit the stereo typical criminal? that will solve crime wont it?


First, it's not punishment but a responsibility. A few? Even if that were true, these "few" have created vast swath of our population now dependent on the goodwill and taxes of other to survive. Worse yet, they take advantage of the system and have more children as this is their source of income.


society is in a mess for many different reasons, it is not parents who are solely to blame and it certainly is not all parents.


Stop generalizing. I've never said its just parents and its not ALL parents. And were talking about single mothers/fathers and partners as well.


edit to answer this point "Think of all the damage done because of allowing them to have a child in the first place."

if somebody is convicted of doing bad things to a child, i was under the impression that they were not allowed to live with children again? or go near them? or have them ? their right to be a parent is understandably taken away. this already happens.


edit on 25-10-2010 by lifeform11 because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-10-2010 by lifeform11 because: (no reason given)


Again, why does a child have to wait to have harm done to them before society steps in and takes away a parent's rights? And whose to say the kid is not making things up to get back at the parent. There are many reasons for your above scenario.

IF YOUR RIGHT TO PARENT CAN BE TAKEN AWAY BECAUSE OF YOUR ACTIONS, THEN YOUR RIGHT TO HAVE CHILDREN SHOULD BE GRANTED OR DENIED BASED ON YOUR ACTIONS.
edit on 25-10-2010 by Freenrgy2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2010 @ 05:31 PM
link   
We already had this discussion 100 years ago. Eugenics is bad. And, as far as that goes, people with bad genetics can be brilliant and a valuable asset to society. Also, there's the problem of where to draw the line.



posted on Nov, 28 2010 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Freenrgy2
 


i see, your one of those people who think everybody out of work is a sponger. o.k. if you hate them that much and it would make you feel happier, then lets take away their rights, turn them into slaves, infact why don't we just shoot them all?
edit on 28-11-2010 by lifeform11 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2010 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Freenrgy2

Again, why does a child have to wait to have harm done to them before society steps in and takes away a parent's rights? And whose to say the kid is not making things up to get back at the parent. There are many reasons for your above scenario.

IF YOUR RIGHT TO PARENT CAN BE TAKEN AWAY BECAUSE OF YOUR ACTIONS, THEN YOUR RIGHT TO HAVE CHILDREN SHOULD BE GRANTED OR DENIED BASED ON YOUR ACTIONS.
edit on 25-10-2010 by Freenrgy2 because: (no reason given)


how can you know who will do harm and who will not?

and the part in caps i am unsure how to take, anger? shouting? but having your rights took away because of an action is fair.

being denied rights because you are deemed not worthy enough in the eyes of who ever makes that decision is what we call a society without freedom.

like i said before, i think it was in this thread, shell we lock everybody up just in case they commit a crime? better to prevent it rather than wait for it to happen is it not?



posted on Nov, 28 2010 @ 07:24 PM
link   
Like it or not, you will be subject to forced sterilization.
TPTB will have population reduction.
And they will start with the perpetual welfare groups which have been growing exponentially.

As to selective breeding to improve the species....sorry you are not qualified to be in that group.
That will be reserved for the Elites. They will become more intelligent, healthier and more beautiful.
They will continue to rule over you.

There will be screening to prevent heritable defects, as many children born with severe defects become a financial burden on society.
Some individuals therfore will be prevented from ever reproducing.



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 03:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by gnosticquasar
We already had this discussion 100 years ago. Eugenics is bad. And, as far as that goes, people with bad genetics can be brilliant and a valuable asset to society. Also, there's the problem of where to draw the line.


This is not about eugenics. Make no mistake, eugenics will certainly be ressurected on a large scale, but using genetic engineering, not breeding and sterilization. This is about ensuring that children grow up in good conditions. And thats good.



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 03:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by lifeform11
reply to post by Freenrgy2
 


i see, your one of those people who think everybody out of work is a sponger. o.k. if you hate them that much and it would make you feel happier, then lets take away their rights, turn them into slaves, infact why don't we just shoot them all?
edit on 28-11-2010 by lifeform11 because: (no reason given)


Slaves? Shoot them? You are crazy. People out of work should not have the right to reproduce, thats all we are saying.



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 03:29 AM
link   
reply to post by lifeform11
 





how can you know who will do harm and who will not?


Person without material means to support a child reproducing IS doing harm - to the child, and/or to the society that has to support that child.



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 03:33 AM
link   
reply to post by lifeform11
 





being denied rights because you are deemed not worthy enough in the eyes of who ever makes that decision is what we call a society without freedom.


Only PERSONAL freedoms is what you should take for granted as your basic rights. These are freedoms that do not involuntary affect another person. Reproduction is not a personal freedom, and it should not be freedom at all - it should be a privilege, just like driving a car or doing other highly responsible tasks.



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 09:29 AM
link   
They have the right to, but I still think it's insane to want to put another child into this crazy world.

Forced sterilization should never be allowed in a society that touts about freedom.



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Maslo
 


what about those who already had kids before they became unemployed? be careful what you wish for.
the next step would be you would lose your kids because your employer can no longer afford to employ you.



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 05:36 PM
link   
Our bodies belong to us. No fascist or communist government should have the power to dictate who has children and how many children they can have.



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 05:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Maslo
 


your the one who is crazy, if you think the right to be a mother and farther is something somebody else can decide and is not a human right.

we were born with the ability to do so for a reason. it is an ability that the tools are given to you at birth for a later date. how is it not a right if god/creation/life gave you the ability.



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Freenrgy2
 

My sig says it all............read it.



posted on Nov, 29 2010 @ 09:57 PM
link   
Yes, Every animal has the right to procreate......


What you don't have a right to is food for your offspring, free medical care, free housing, free clothes. If you can't support your litter whether it be 1 kid or 10 kids you and them should just die of exposure and starvation like any other animal in the wild. just because you want to procreate don't mean others should take care of you.


edit on 29-11-2010 by mwood because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
7
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join