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.

 

License to have children

page: 11
22
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 08:04 AM
link   
I can't believe there are so many stars and flags on this thread on a board whose members supposedly support individual freedom. I wonder how many of those stars represent people who support Ron Paul...

A license to breed? What a sick and extreme anti-freedom idea! :shk:




posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by SyphonX
reply to post by Mclaneinc
 


Try to feign sympathy all you want. Go ahead and pander to the "SAVE THE CHILDREN" nonsense.. and go on and bring up your own daughter to try and bolster your position. Thing is, it won't stop the reality that you're not for "lessons on upbringing", that's not what this thread is about. The thread title is clear.. "License to have children".

You're welcome to continue supporting this position, but you can stop with the obfuscating. It's rather obvious. If you don't want the heat, then don't support absurd practices.

People keep saying, "It's for the children, for the children, I love children." but you always append your ramblings with "Out of my pocket" nonsense, that allows people to clearly identify who you all really are.



To be fair its out of every tax payers pocket...

As for the thread, yes maybe I took the title a little too simply, I don't support special licenses for giving birth as I keep saying, I simply supported the idea of mass births just for the sake of it or as an excuse to call the children a mistake.

If people have presumed by my unclear position that I am supporting a special license or anything of the sort then I should apologise, my position is that I actually do care about the kids, there's no feigning going on thank you.

Yes I feel some people are a drain on society when they just have the children as uses while secretly not wanting them but that's as far as I go. I just wish people would actually give the child's life some thought before making a mistake for that child by being unwanted.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 08:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj

Originally posted by stanguilles7
Sounds kinda "Big Government-ey" to me.


I don't know. Maybe it should happen. Mr. intelligent man capable of supporting a family will probably have two kids. Mr. dumb guy who can't support a family will have 5 or more kids.

There are some women without the mental power to balance a checkbook, and yet they are trusted to raise kids properly? It's absurd.


And why do you have to be highly intelligent to love your children, Banks are overrated anyway.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 08:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by deepankarm
reply to post by jiggerj
 


In my country, the number of students from poor families beating reputed competition exams is almost ten to one as compared to rich ones.
I am an Indian,MIT Cambridge post-graduate with an uneducated mother and a matriculate father.
Do you know what is the driving force for me?
It's the hardship of my parents for me i have seen through my childhood.
I want to serve my parents for their remaining life and when i see people abandoning their parents more so in the so called civilized western world, i don't know what to say or feel.

Maybe it's the broken society which uses chilldren as toys whose authorship is decided in courts.
I think we have a situation of girlchild abortions in my country and on the other hand depiction of abortion as a form of progress in your world.
This proves to me that IQ isn't the deciding factor of the morality of a society.


Bumping good post,



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 08:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lannister


I have never said that..ever...

Poor people have every right to have a child but at least have the ability to look after it emotionally at the very least, people who choose to have sex, get a child as a by product and then blame every one else about their situation are the people I despise. There was a woman on the news lately who had 13 kids (?) who was screaming at the camera that its yours and my responsibility to look after and pay for her children.

That is the person I'm hoping never had kids, she might well love them but clearly her attitude is that she just did the having bit, its societies turn to do the real important work. Btw, I'm not rich, we prepared for the birth and some to one side but I'm as poor as a church moose now, but a happy one.
edit on 17-6-2012 by Mclaneinc because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-6-2012 by Mclaneinc because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 08:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Mclaneinc
 


It comes down to educating people. The problem is our society and that's where the change needs to take place. The idea of freedom and liberty is based on personal responsibility. What do you think created that mother of 13? People being given things their entire life think that they deserve a hand out. I don't want to pay for someone else's child either, and we shouldn't have to. True freedom means you stand on your own 2 feet. Educate people and eliminate the safety net. Reduce Government. That is the solution. When people see that Government isn't there to bale them out when they fail, they will become more responsible. I see the problem you're talking about, you're just not looking at the right solution.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 08:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Idonthaveabeard
 


You have to have a license to have a dog, drive a car, get married - why not have kids???

BTW: What do you suggest happens if two people violate this?



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 08:41 AM
link   
Right that's my lot, had enough hatred for the day thank you...

To those who I may have given the wrong idea, my apologies..

To those who still think I want special licenses to have kids, no I don't...I'm a kind parent who loves his daughter so who would hardly want to ban having children, I just call for responsibility from those seeking or unwantedly having kids, if you don't want kids use protection, if you cannot be bothered then at least look after the child, you owe them that.

To those that think I'm part of some special abuse ATS ideal, please get a life....

To those that hate me still, never mind eh, there will be another person you can hate and blow your ego at in a minute, just remember, coming on to ATS, giving yourself a fancy name and cool avatar does not automatically make you clever, correct, or important. I'm sorry you are just the same as me in the real world, an unknown average person hoping to get through life as easily as possible.

If that annoys your ego then I've done some good after all..



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by ofhumandescent
reply to post by Idonthaveabeard
 


You have to have a license to have a dog, drive a car, get married - why not have kids???

BTW: What do you suggest happens if two people violate this?


You are given a permit to drive a car, own a dog or a gun or get married. All of which, exept for maybe driving, are in violation of the US Constitution which trumps both Federal and State law. A permit is nothing more than PERMIssion to do something that would otherwise be illegal. If owning a dog is otherwise illegal without the permission of the state, what does that say about the overall freedom of the nation? Are we as human beings too stupid to own a dog now? Choose who we want to marry? The problem is, the state wants to control every aspect of your life. And people let them do it.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 08:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Mclaneinc
 


No one hates you Mclaneinc, have a wonderful day.


Happy fathers day



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 08:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Lannister
 





Are we as human beings too stupid to own a dog now?


Why yes, yes we are, and don't forget to buckle your seat belt.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 08:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by CosmicEgg
reply to post by kaylaluv
 


That's not how Nature works. If you think it is, you most certainly don't belong in it.

Perhaps you should get off the computer and risk your life for a walk in the woods. Breathing some fresh air and finding out that - shock! - you'll make it home safely again.

Nature provides all we need - medicines included. I personally wouldn't go to a hospital if I were sufficiently conscious to object. My family know this and would never dare allow doctors to treat me. But this is the choice of every person alone, or at least should be.

You go on and have yourself a nice day serving Big Brother. I'll probably go hang some more laundry to dry outside. I'll have to fight off bears and mosquitoes in the process, but somehow I'll muster the courage to brave Nature.


What? There's no laundry in nature. What are you doing with laundry? Maybe you should get off your computer - there are no computers in nature. There should be no choice involved. If it's not in nature, then no one is allowed to have it.


Life expectancy increased dramatically in the 20th century, especially in developed nations. Life expectancy at birth in the United States in 1901 was 49 years. At the end of the century it was 77 years, an increase of greater than 50%. Similar gains have been enjoyed throughout the world. Life expectancy in India and The People's Republic of China was around 40 years at midcentury. At century's close it had risen to around 63 years. These gains were due largely to the eradication and control of numerous infectious diseases and to advances in agricultural technology (such as chemical fertilizers).

Basic life expectancy numbers tend to exaggerate this growth, however. The low level of pre-modern life expectancy is distorted by the previous extremely high infant and childhood mortality. If a person did make it to the age of forty they had an average of another twenty years to live. Improvements in medicine, public health, and nutrition have therefore mainly increased the numbers of people living beyond childhood, with less effect on overall average lifespan.


www.spiritus-temporis.com...

If we go back to living in nature, we'll go back to high infant mortality rates - that solves all our problems!



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 09:13 AM
link   
for everyone in this thread who has the audacity to say certain people shouldn't be allowed to breed.

ill take it one step further and say , you're parents shouldn't have been allowed to breed.

you people can think you are above others but you fail to realize there are certainly people above you.

do you think they would want you having children? no



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 09:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Idonthaveabeard
 


I have a tendency to agree somewhat with your statement, and here's why, Not only would it decrease the strain on the government for having the kids just so they get benefits, and earned income credit but right next door to me is a young woman who has three kids and not a one nearing the age of 10. She is a poor mother, no abuse, unless you count having her children outside, one ime was 1:30 am (yes that's am, and the other times 3:00 am) the youngest sill wears diapers. She has men "friends" coming and going a different times of the day and night too.

Someone, Not Me reported her to DCF and they were out with the police one Sunday, she hasn't let the kids out that late since then, ( I will admit to thinking about reporting her, but never found the time to do so.) Other than the late hours here were no other signs of abuse on the kids.Obviously someone else got tired of hearing her kids playing outside at that hour of the night. Happened on the weeknights too.

It would be a good idea for these states to get extra money if they wanted to have kids pass a parenting course, if they had them without the parenting course, then a nice sized fine that gradually goes up for each time they do this, without the license. Not only would the states make money for the license there would by the fines too, because there's always some that would ignore mandatory course.

PS. Here they don't have you take anyhing to adopt an animal, maybe that should be here also, some people should never have pets, either. Unfortunately.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 09:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mclaneinc

Right that's my lot, had enough hatred for the day thank you...

To those who I may have given the wrong idea, my apologies..

To those who still think I want special licenses to have kids, no I don't...I'm a kind parent who loves his daughter so who would hardly want to ban having children, I just call for responsibility from those seeking or unwantedly having kids, if you don't want kids use protection, if you cannot be bothered then at least look after the child, you owe them that.

To those that think I'm part of some special abuse ATS ideal, please get a life....

To those that hate me still, never mind eh, there will be another person you can hate and blow your ego at in a minute, just remember, coming on to ATS, giving yourself a fancy name and cool avatar does not automatically make you clever, correct, or important. I'm sorry you are just the same as me in the real world, an unknown average person hoping to get through life as easily as possible.

If that annoys your ego then I've done some good after all..


What I would condone for someone with your perspective is to remove yourself from the social
system where you are forced to pay for other people to live. That's probably impossible to
accomplish, but that is the root of the "I shouldn't have to be responsible for another person"
argument. It is the tax the that we all pay to society....and it is often abused.

There should be no tax collected and redistributed to the poor. That is the purview of charity. Tax should
used to pay for shared community resources only.

To be fair I thought you were the OP, my bad....and this is what got my dander up...



What I think should happen is (for example) temporary castration at birth. Then if you want kids later in life you apply for a license to have your castration reversed. To have a baby (weather rich, poor, black, white or whatever) you must prove your home is a stable loving environment that has the means to support, love and raise a child.


The OP's idea (for example) is to exercise control over another human life AT BIRTH. When I read that
I went ballistic...

And to clarify who I am (I hate stereotypes) I'm a gun-toting, religion hating, Paul supporting, free-thinking,
libertarian...with a chip on my shoulder for bullies and anyone who tries to control me or anyone
weaker.

We can have a difference of opinion without dislike or disdain...as I pointed out, I'm on your side
as to the belief that the world is facing an impending population crisis...



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 09:21 AM
link   
reply to post by kaylaluv
 


Not much prone to hyperbole, are you?


So you think that because I believe in the power of Nature that I cannot hang laundry. Hmm. I wonder how our forebears ever got a thing done. But at least they had control over their natural functions.

You go right along with your wildly exaggerated and strangely imbalanced viewpoints and I'll go my "the way Nature intends it to be" way of mine. Let our worlds never again meet. With any luck, yours will be off-planet.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 09:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Lannister
 


Where I live if you are pulled over and do not have a valid driver's license, proof of car insurance and car registration you can get fined and (with no license) taken to jail.

Where I live if you do not have a valid Village license and rabies tag on your dog and a cop comes by or someone reports you, you can be fined and possibly your dog taken away from you.

If you do not pay your taxes, you will either have to pay back taxes, loose your house and or go to a federal prison.

A lot of people say other wise, but we have two lawyers in the family and I know our Village President.

Not saying these are right or just laws, they are ways to steal more of the working person's money.

But, if you live within the "system" that is the way it is.

Want to live off grid then you risk, particularly if you are older, being preyed upon.

I choose to live in a nice suburb, where if someone breaks into my home or threatens me I can dial 911 and have a policeman at my side within usually under 1 minute.

With divorce rates over 45% now, people are not planning out their lives before having kids.

IMO: People should make sure their marriage is stable, they are financially secure, really want children and are prepared to put aside the hardy party life in place of diapers, midnight feedings, soccer, PTA, kissing boo boos and giving their child(ren) a lot of love, supervision and access to both parents.

Every child born, deserves to feel loved and cherished.

So many kids now are born and raised in households where the parents are perpetual Peter Pans (big kids that never grew up).

Wonder why so many of our youth are messed up? Besides pollution, radiation and our entire planet being mucked up big time......................the parents aren't home half the time, let the TV babysit their kid(s) and decent humane values are not taught.

We tried to give our three sons a Leave it to Beaver family and while we have had our share of problems, for the most part, all three of our sons are decent, good, people.

Again I ask, how would one enforce this law?

Take the kids away and put them up for adoption?

Then you are looking at a whole other set of problems.

FYI: Some rich people can't have kids, I know because I was offered $50,000 for my oldest son and $50,000 for the one I was carrying (son #2).

A law like having to have a license would give the elite more rights over our flesh and blood.

While again, I agree, most people should wait, mature and try to give their children a good home environment, making people having a license I don't think would work, it would create more problems and again give people with money and power the ability to take a child that wasn't licensed.

God, aren't we micro managed enough already?

Now that I think about it you're right, licensing for kids would suck.


edit on 17-6-2012 by ofhumandescent because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 09:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Mclaneinc
 


It's actually not. Your beliefs are your own. I respect that. My beliefs are my own. Respect that too. I have raised my children with very little assistance that wasn't legislated by the state. In fact, I would have been much happier if they had kept out of our family life completely. But we live in this kind of world, for now. Changes are afoot, and bless us all. No government is my aim. I suspect I might just have my way too. You and your kind can have yours.

Live and let live.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 09:29 AM
link   
reply to post by CosmicEgg
 


I agree with you up to a point.

If there were no government or laws, a group of young thugs could break down your door and rob, rape and kill you.

Nice being able to dial 911 and have a cop in under a minute there to protect you.

But too much is too much.

Moderation.

Our government has become too bureaucratic.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 09:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Idonthaveabeard
 


If its free, sure! Im all for it, but if it is not, then no, absolutely not, it is a bad idea, and will further suppress us into even more controlled robots and hinder us in our pockets. So stop giving the elites more ideas on how to flatten our wallets.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join