Would it be so bad to be required to have a license to have a child?

As much as this would seem like a good idea, I would say it is a very bad idea. The first problem is that how do you control people? If a man and a woman choose not to use protection and have sex, there is nothing the state can do to stop such. And what would the penalties be, fines, imprisonment? Such is an invasion of privacy into realms that should not be allowed on any circumstance. However, I do agree that the system is too often abused, and who is to pay, but the tax payer. I would not seek to impose penaltities on those who have say one child and with no support, but when it goes beyond that, then that is when the aid needs to be cut off, when the reality of what they are doing needs to be hammered home and that they should not get that much aid to where the incentive to not work, to where they get free stuff for having large number of children without considering the burdens of such. Not every single parent familys are like that I have seen both good and bad, but the reality is that such needs to be approached with caution.

Anyone else notice that when "unintelligent" people encounter an idea they don't like, they refute it by applying the principle to everything in existence and comparing that to reality?

"I think we should have a license to... drive a car"

"OH!!! HOW ABOUT A LICENSE TO WALK, AND A LICENSE TO BUY FORKS?!?!? IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE!!! WAT IF YOU NEED A LICENSE FOR EVERYTHING!?!?"

"I think we should place a ban on smoking..."

"GASP!!! THEN WHAT'S NEXT? A BAN ON COFFEE? A BAN ON FRIED FOODS? WHAT HAPPENS WHEN EVERYTHING IS BANNED!?!?"

Seriously, don't you people get tired of yourselves?

reply to post by RestingInPieces


How does that make someone unintelligent? Its a method of debate. Arguments arn't just based on logos. You have ethos and pathos as well.

The type of response you call unintelligent derives from pathos.

Originally posted by Hardstepah

look at our society these days. we have children being raised by, and these are just a few adjectives to describe the people raising our future; unintelligent, ignorant, racist, poor, lazy, freeloading morons.

Government intervention is largely what has created what you describe above with it's socialist welfare state stealing from the producers and providing a free ride for those again described above and your solution is to have government decide who gets to have children... Sigh!... Brilliant!

I stayed out of this thread just because of the title and the idiocy it seems to represent. But it got the better of me and I just had to post. Someone on this thread may have already said it but in case they didn't I decided to chime in.

Get the government out of it and let natural selection take care of things and you won't have this sort of problem on a large scale. I always cringe when I see people advocating more government to fix government created problems.



[edit on 20-4-2010 by hawkiye]

reply to post by Hardstepah


That what you see and makes you sick its caused by this cruel capitalism that you make part of too. Politicians and businesspeople resemble Nazis. What a inhuman ignorant idea try to measure the love that even a ignorant poor person could give. Special licence should our goverment have to rule, so that the importance of all human life is recognised and we can apply our energies to important objectives.
We all make part of this good and bad things we see out there but bureaucracy is not the solucion...all you need is love

reply to post by apacheman


One of the most honest and intelligent posts I've read here.
Thank you, for that.

reply to post by apacheman

Word up also!!

I personally think its a good idea, but it has to start before that. Kids should be taught how to learn and life-skills in schools. Sex used to be something sacred, now its flippant and everywhere around us. So you have billions of people having sex and millions of people having children everyday - who don't really deserve the right to, because they don't understand it.

A license yeah, after you've gone through an educational process. There should be parenting classes you have to go to if you're pregnant aswell. You can't pass the test, you prolly shouldn't be having a baby.

Education is better than enforcement, and it would take a generation or two to implement.

If that doesn't work, you could sterilise everyone at birth, and desterilise them when they wanna have kids. But that might come across as nazi-eugenics

Having children is a right you earn, not a right you're born with.


ETA: inherited wealth should be illegal, money could get re-invested in decent public schooling, preventative healthcare and other public programs.

ETA2: There should be a One-Child Policy for a few generations aswell, and a Two-Child Policy after that - unless you're that guy who is immune to aids (or something to that effect).

[edit on 20/4/10 by ghostsoldier]

[edit on 20/4/10 by ghostsoldier]

Originally posted by RestingInPieces
Anyone else notice that when "unintelligent" people encounter an idea they don't like, they refute it by applying the principle to everything in existence and comparing that to reality?

"I think we should have a license to... drive a car"

"OH!!! HOW ABOUT A LICENSE TO WALK, AND A LICENSE TO BUY FORKS?!?!? IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE!!! WAT IF YOU NEED A LICENSE FOR EVERYTHING!?!?"

"I think we should place a ban on smoking..."

"GASP!!! THEN WHAT'S NEXT? A BAN ON COFFEE? A BAN ON FRIED FOODS? WHAT HAPPENS WHEN EVERYTHING IS BANNED!?!?"

Seriously, don't you people get tired of yourselves?

I don't know if these people are unintelligent or simply selling populistic ideas to a populistic crowd, but...

Selling 'freedom' as a concept is a no-brainer.

Say "Don't take away my freedom" "Don't take away my individual rights" "Soon you'll need a license for everything" etc, and 99% of the crowd will agree, because we all have that notion that we're bossed around at various levels at home, at work, in society, it's appealing to a basic human notion.

I've got a 12 year old at home, and the teenage rebellion is already looming in the air. HE wants to decide when it's time to go to bed, HE wants to decide how much video gaming he can do, HE wants to decide if he's going to school tomorrow or not, or whether he should brush his teeth or not or eat the salad on his dinner plate, etc.

His basic argument is "Why should you decide?", my standard answer is "Because you're underage, and I'm an adult". Somewhere along the line he understands and accepts that it's me who puts a roof over his head, provides him with food, clothes, video games and everything his world consists of, but still his basic urge is to break loose from that authority and do his own decision-making. Oldest story in the world, eh?

Put a boat in the water, and put ten people in the water around it. One person climbs aboard the boat, then another. The people in the boat work in team to help others aboard, but at one moment or another they will have to - collectively - consider the fact that if they let more people aboard, the boat will sink and everyone will end up in the water again. There will be different opinions in the team, some will say "We can take a few more" while others will say "no there's already too many", but in the end it's the team capable of taking a collective decision that will keep the boat afloat.

Of course, this is an allegory for the subject of this thread. The over-crowded boat is where we're all in right now, and some unpleasant, freedom-depriving decisions will have to be made, for the better of humanity, not your personal interests. It's no longer your call, because it concerns us all.

So people, please realize that "freedom" is a relative word, and that freedom in the society we've created comes with as many responsibilities as rights.

Do you think you're free? If so, I suggest the following; take off all your clothes and walk stark naked down the main street in your town or city, and we'll see how far you get before you're taken into custody for indecent behavior.

Some kind of freedom, you can't even walk outside the way nature made you, harming no one, doing nothing wrong.

Perhaps we should create a license for it?


[edit on 21-4-2010 by Heliocentric]

reply to post by Hardstepah


I agree with the OP! Too many unfit people are getting knocked up every minute. It's sad that there are couples out there who have the means and the knowledge to raise children, who desperately want children, and yet the wife is barren or whatever.

I'm not sure if a license would do the trick, but I sure wish that some people were obligated to be spayed and neutered. Yeah, I said it. But it's true. Look how many babies wouldn't have to be brought up by drug addicts and all that. I don't know how they would go about selecting people to be barren, but I think it's a good idea!

For instance, I have a relative who has had three kids (one right after the other) and is pregnant again and she and her dead beat "husband" couldn't afford the first child. I'm telling you, they should have been forced to not reproduce!

reply to post by Hardstepah


As a Christian, FREEDOM LOVING CONSERVATIVE PATRIOT and a psychologist and sociologist . . .

I've chewed on this issue a very long time.

I ABSOLUTELY DEPLORE big government, heavy handed government etc. I almost lean much toward libertarian inclinations and values.

HOWEVER,

I've about come to the conclusion that it would sure help if couples HAD to ATTEND 8-12 WEEKS OF 3 HR/WEEK PARENTING CLASSES BEFORE CONCEPTION WERE POSSIBLE.


And, I'd hate to see alcoholics, meth addicts, terminally addicted to welfare etc. types getting licenses to have children.

Yet, I hate, hate, hate the level of government necessary to require that.

I'm just not comfortable with the degree government would have to be invovled in such a scheme.

The minute some such requirements are made to have children, we are in a totalitarian state and the powers that be become ever more tyrannical and narrow, rigid and ruthless in their requirements.

It is easy to see that . . . uhhhhh . . . the current Marxist, globalist leaders over the USA etc. would not allow any patriots, Christians, conservatives to have children. TILT--EVERYBODY OUT OF THE POOL TIME!

That would be FAR too stiff a price to pay, imho.

Practically and realistically speaking, it won't happen.

The globalists may try and pull something like that off but I think their whole scheme will be destroyed by Christ at the scheduled, literal Armageddon before it gets very far along.

It's sure a pregnant issue, however.

My univ classes have plenty of students far too clueless about themselves and life in general--much more so about being responsible successful parents.

Originally posted by BO XIAN
I've about come to the conclusion that it would sure help if couples HAD to ATTEND 8-12 WEEKS OF 3 HR/WEEK PARENTING CLASSES BEFORE CONCEPTION WERE POSSIBLE.


And, I'd hate to see alcoholics, meth addicts, terminally addicted to welfare etc. types getting licenses to have children.

Yet, I hate, hate, hate the level of government necessary to require that.

Parenting classes is a good thing for everyone, some may need it, some may not, but it never hurts to inform and educate people.

The problem with your second statement is that you put ethical values into the decision making. To you, alcoholics, drug users and well-fare addicts are less qualified to raise children than less say devout, drug-free, hard-working Christians.

To an academic atheist, it might be Christians that are less qualified to raise children, since they're more likely to indoctrinate the children with their religious dogma (or whatever reason he/she can think of).

Once we allow ourselves to exclude certain people based on the criteria of our ethical values, we've set the stage for a dictatorship.

To me, the problem is not about whether ugly people or people that deviate from our norms should be allowed to procreate, this is - I agree - basically a fascist notion,

The problem is that the world is becoming chronically over-populated, and we must ALL assume the consequences of uncontrolled population growths.

Population control can be done in several different ways. If for instance we would space out between generations, and not have children before the age of 30 (which is more or less what's happening in several industrialized nations by itself), then the numbers of births will decrease and we have an efficient tool for population control,

Of course, every now and then a 16 year old will get knocked up anyway, so we just have to find a humane way of dealing with that, while still making it very clear to people that their personal freedom isn't more important than the future of this planet.

Ohhhh. a new way to eugenics. Younger crowd should probably look this up. It has an interesting beginning but a terrible outcome.

A simple question to the OP. Are we going to use the Nuremberg Laws as the basis for setting up the panel that issues licenses?

Hi ATS. This is my first posting although I have been trolling this site for a long time.
This idea has been in my thoughts for a long time. Humans are overbreeding to the point where we can't even feed and shelter our population.
I believe no one should be permitted to have more than 2 children in order to conserve what limited resources we have left.
When I see shows like "The Duggar Family" it makes me sick to my stomach because I question why people want to breed like they are having litters. I think it is a ego thing with people such as these, as they are always in the stoplight.
It may sound radical, but that is how I feel.

I bet just about every person on this thread would cry if you suggested that a particular race should not breed. Or if we suggested the the Nazis were right in their programs. I bet you'd froth at the mouth.

Yet, you think that concepts that essentially would limit breeding to a decision made by the the top 2-8% of the planet's rich people (you) makes sense.

Which would essentially eliminate breeding for 90% of the world's indigenious peoples, and most ethnic groups. Leaving a high percentage of the European White population, and virtually annihilating Africa.

Of course, you're doing it "for the planet" which is so much more trendy than saying that you are hiding the fact that you are elitist white power people who are too afraid to admit it and therefor even your minds have found a way of hiding your beliefs from you.

Death with candy coating is still death.

You ARE the elitist death cult you claim to be fighting.

[edit on 2010/4/21 by Aeons]

Dont have time right now to read through the thread but has anyone answered what is to happen to the children born of unlicensed parents?

Of what I have read it seems people assume a license is like a magic key and without said license the relative act would suddenly become an impossibility.

I can drive down the road without a license. I'm pretty sure I could knock some chick up without one.

So what happens to that "illegal" kid?
Government confiscation? Forced abortion?

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Dont have time right now to read through the thread but has anyone answered what is to happen to the children born of unlicensed parents?

Of what I have read it seems people assume a license is like a magic key and without said license the relative act would suddenly become an impossibility.

I can drive down the road without a license. I'm pretty sure I could knock some chick up without one.

So what happens to that "illegal" kid?
Government confiscation? Forced abortion?

Obviously sterilization would become required by law. Then any children born would be required to be "made" and implanted in a lab. Every baby born would require surgery before the age of six to sterilize them.

[edit on 2010/4/21 by Aeons]

reply to post by Hardstepah


Well I see a the requirement to Childbearing as a follow off of the HCR, after all if we are "mandated" into buying insurance I guess we could now be "mandate" by law into anything.

See the sky is the limit for now on . . .

I remember an old Start Trek episode that dealt in this realm. An Alien planet had become so over-populated that people were practically glued together and Kirk asked them why they didn't use various methods like I think if I remember correctly sterilisation and the response was, "Because we hold life sacred." or something like that. Eventually I think they decided to infect themselves with a virus to create a die off so that their population levels would once again be inbalance with their planet. The very freedom they held sacred became the very thing that jeopodised what they cherished most...life.
We need to regulate ourselves like the rest of nature but what makes this so difficult is that people won't do that and then there are those who might have a good idea but it eventually becomes draconian. Yet if nothing is done...
Regulating reproduction through licensing does sound tempting though, though I wonder if it is a real solution because as many of the posters here have noted, it would be difficult to implement without something to ensure it's effectivity and it is that part where people seem to freak out the most. Hehe.
So how does one regulate and implement and ensure? And would it be such a terrible thing if one considered sterilisation a possible method for those that are not licensed? Who ought recieve a license and what should the criteria be for gaining a license? It would atleast adresse the issue of those who attempt to have children unlicesned.
Could a method be implemented while young as one poster mentioned, yet be reversible if they qualify for a license?
And what about caste systems?
(waits for Nazi comments heh)

[edit on 21-4-2010 by Arles Morningside]

LOL simple pretentiousness is always blind. most are arguing more for "big brother" telling us what to do and how to live rather than thinking about the quality of life for the humans brought into this world.

if any of you think that i am rich in any way, you are completely ignorant. no i am the farthest thing from rich, which is why in the OP i clearly state that me and my woman are waiting until we finish school and/or establish a decent paying career due to the fact that if we reproduced now, we wouldn't have any time to raise our child(ren) because we'd be working 3 jobs each to pay for their living. it's called being responsible. if we didn't have a 6 to 1 unplanned to planned birth we wouldn't have nearly as much crime, quite possibly get better funding for schools (who wants to dump money in a school district most don't even attend or graduate?), and best of all; keep children out of pedophile infested foster homes. this all boils down to the quality of life a parent gives their child and the simple right and wrongs that they teach to them. i guess it's just easier to let lady gaga and kanye west raise our future. YEAH! good call.

all of you who deem me a "commie fascist" keep posting replies such as "who gets to say who is a fit parent" and replies like "oh that's because these people haven't the time or the resources to raise a child" are just left wing wackos. if you don't have the resources then no you shouldn't be able to have kids. this society is the way it is because of the endless spiral of everybody getting to breed and reproduce without having to take responsibility for the future serial killer, child molester, rapist etc... in the world. i think raising a child takes a little bit more then spending uncle sam's money on it. it's common sense, it's not rocket science, we're born with the instinct unless it is stripped from us by gee.....an UNFIT PARENT.

i am no bill o'reily, i am simply an independent. when you have seen the things i have seen and experienced maybe you might feel differently when you see a mother put a cigarette out on her child's chest, the same cigarette that was paid for with grocery money supplied by your knight in shining welfare. these people you defend so dear also love to bitch and moan and vandalize in the name of "just anger" because "nobody's helping me enough".

if i'm a delusional, dis-info, spook, etc... agent here then great sign me up for real. let's see how many of these people's rights you defend when their gangbanger son or daughter sees a rival gang member (in a "place where people have resources to raise a child correctly") and kills your child because they were "in the wrong place at the wrong time" or when a family member gets carjacked or addicted to heroin because mom and dad taught the easy way out.

but hey why not let these people reproduce as many offspring as they choose (and keep in mind there's somewhere between 2-10 million more parents like this out there in the US) and let your kids go hang out with theirs.

Originally posted by Hardstepah

thoughts?

Aside from the fact that if a government ever took control of my womb I'd self emolate on the steps of parliment..some of the most inventive creative people have been born to 'dysfunctional' homes. Some of the best understandings in and about the world physical and spiritual were written by those same children of "bad" parents, who were considered ' unkept' unclean' diseased' and came from unwanted remnants of society.

Its also true that some of the worst crimes in the world have been commited in the name of God Law Mercy and Love, by people who thought themselves anothers better...
ditto their 'superior'...
ditto "more worthy"...
ditto " more acceptable than"....
ditto people who thought they were "right".

I feel that the idea of utilizing a system of licencing to judge who is acceptable to raise children was born from the Eugenics dream of utopia which in turn has permiated the fields of Psychiatry, politics and social engineering groups and so filtered down through the years to everyday eutopia fantasties....that dream is something I consider a false reality....a lie of convenience...an engineered snake.

Imo, licencing parents will not only remove God's will from the equation of life, which is something I personally wouldnt want to do...we as a species would risk loosing most if not all of our ability to BE human in a very few short years. We would loose randomness, we would loose spontenaity, creativity and innovation, we would loose our ability to overcome hurdles and problems and complexities..we would risk loosing free thought, loose our mechanism of attaining humility, grace via our service to one another. Politically we would face 'gattica' in a very short while...socially, we'd face moral imprisonment, intellectual imprisonment etc...

I was rasied by a drunk biological father and a mentally Blitz traumatised mother..I spent my early existance out there on the streets from 11yrs old facing the worst of it.. I went through the gamit of drugs grog pain and all forms of violence horror and abuse...and not only did I survive..I now *live* an amazing life and participate fully in the world around me.
I have gone on to have two healthy sons..not affected by parental abuse in any form..who also contribute to the planet in lovinig meaningful and creative ways..

I overcame...and I am not 'special' so I feel so to can others even those who like me, were not given anything but abuse, pain and confusion from our parentals. And I overcame not just society but my own self as well.....and if people had decided my parents were not fit..I would not, no one would ever have known or believed that was possible. So if only for the chance to stand here and say it is and was - it was worth it. *Freedom* is important.

Without those experiences of hardship..I wouldnt be who I am today..my enemies and my friends both assisted me to be me today. To have earned and learned those skills and ways of coping, of learning, thinking, living and growing is my treasure today....you can keep money and property..these are my posessions.
And no I am not advoicating abuse..as it wasnt the hardship itself that made me..it was though, what was within me that came out and I redisscovered as a result of overcoming those hardships that defined me.

My mother recently asked me forgiveness and I wrote back hurridly giving it in fear she may die and not be at peace - that, even though she had never been my 'mother' in any sense I know the word today. Later though, and in light of what I know now..I realised that she had nothing to be forgiven for..she was just being the best human being she could be. It was a profound moment of realisation.

....and if you knew my situation, knew what happened back then..you'd comprehend how big a deal and leap over anger fear and hurt that is...but that realisation was necessary if I was to remove judgement, my jdgement from my mother before her death - to finally accept I didnt have 'bad' or 'good' parents..I just had the ones I had....human ones. " Good and Bad" are just judgements...ones I couldnt afford to cling to if I was to grow any further.

Yes..my mother was not some socially generated view or emotionally engineered wishful idea of what a parent ought to or should be...she was just 'human'...and I am grateful for that....and for the freedom that permitted that.

We do not know - what we do not know..not about ourselves or the world let alone any single individal other than ourselves. Licencing parents is a specious reasoning..in that it sounds pleasent..sounds like it might 'fix things'..but ultimately..that is the point..when you cpmrehend better, when you grow, you suddenly understand that some things dont need 'fixing'.

That eutopia dream is just that, a dream..its not the truth..and its ultimately a bitter end...sure it sounds good..but in reality..it would end life as we know it on this planet and we would no longer be humans..we would be an socially engineered and easily moderated and herded cattle class....held to law by people who cannot be held to law...berefit of the processes of forgiveness and growth.

Roses grow in #..and while too much # can kill the plant..a balance of good soil and # is required for growth...and on the whole..we parents do get that balance right..instinctvly and intuitivly...even the worst of parents.


A tad dystopian in my view, yes..but look at what is..what was..and you soon find a friend in the active mistrust of such a power in the hands of men.



Rosha.