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: 14
22
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 12:43 PM
link   
My first reaction to this was 'ARE YOU CRAZY!!!' There is no such thing as 'temporary castration'. Plus where does dominion over one's own body sit within this. You would be happy to give up the right of your own body to the whims of the state?

Let's reverse this - say the world's population was hitting rock bottom, would you be happy to play stud - every day - 7 days a week and would you be happy to see your spouse or teenage daughters (or any female that menstrates and that can be as young as 10 or 11) used as brood mares for the good of the state - churning out babies every ten months - with all the inherent medical issues that that entails - not withstanding the emotional and mental problems that would entail?

I've taken a look at population graphs and birth rates and it would seem that the 1st world birth rates are falling and the 3rd world birth rates have increased - wonder why?

Nature will curtail excessive growth - one way or another. It always has in the past. Plague, famine, floods, the odd asteroid. ;-)




posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Idonthaveabeard
 


Soo is there a right to wear a protector?



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 01:24 PM
link   
I can play this game too.

You don't have a right to speak, think or even live on my planet.

I win.

Now I suggest going to China where your politics will fit in.
Unless your just trolling for fun of course, than you don't even believe in what you say.
But if you do really believe, I think you will find China to be a "Utopia" in your political paradigm.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Idonthaveabeard
 


A great idea that will never get anywhere so maybe not a license but surely a test.
You should have to answer a few questions and get some counseling before being allowed to take your child home with you. Parenting classes should be mandatory and some mental and physical health counselor should interview both parents and vouch for the safety of the child. This is a naturally born citizen with inalienable rights and it should not be returned to a mother (or father) who intends to sell it, abuse it, or neglect it.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 01:35 PM
link   
people calling for 'castration' and management of human life, should lead by example.
go on snip off those testies ! inject yourself with gardasil vaccines and other heavy metal crap

but thats not gonna happen is it ?
noooo its not! cuz this only applies to 'untermenschen' and 'useless eaters' or 'goyim' as our zionazi friends like to call the CO2 puffers....
oh the humanity...lol

traitors to the human race is what you are...plain and simple...



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 01:42 PM
link   
Oh and here is the ultimate folly of the whole silly idea.

You need licences for a lot of things, but it doesn't stop you from doing them.
It just means if you get caught, you pay a fine.

So actually people would still have kids under this silly system (unless he throws them in the furnace - forced abortion). It would just be a new way for the govt to tax poor people who have the most kids.

Pretty dumb. Doesn't actually stop people from having sex at all.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Idonthaveabeard
 


Good thread but your only telling one side of the story.

Whole governments have welfare kids by the hundreds of thousands. They let their poor starving citizens make babies without any thought as to how they will feed the child when they themselves cannot find food. Yes, i'm talking about 3rd world countries like Ethiopia. Then the Gov asks for aid from other countries and guess what - they keep most of the food and store it!

These governments are criminal, their citizens are criminal bringing kids into this world when they know it's inhumane to do so. It's cruelty and evil to allow this to continue. Stop the suffering! It's an endless cycle that has been going on in these countries for decades.

Genocide might be a good idea here. To stop the cancer from spreading, you have to cut off the head. If someone did this 100 years ago there would not have been billions of people born to suffer down through the ages. Whats more inhumane.. kill millions of people now to stop billions from suffering through the next hundred years, or let those billions suffer because their parents and governments were too stupid to act? Think about it.

If you knew someone was going to hurt someone - wouldn't you do everything to stop it? This is the same thing just on a larger scale.


edit on 17-6-2012 by JohnPhoenix because: sp



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 01:47 PM
link   
You cannot castrate people without the license!
What if they are applying to get the license right now?

How could they get the license in the first place if they are castrated? What good is a license to procreate to those who are castrated?

Obviously castration cannot be automatically applied, because you aren't born with a "license" you have to apply for it later on in adulthood.

Unless you just wanna have pure genocide? If you just want pure genocide than a license is useless in that sense as well, since bullets work better.

Point is, you cannot logically create any way to enforce celibacy or castration, because it will make it impossible for anyone to get licenses in the first place because they would be castrated without the license.

It's totally illogical, impractical, and poorly thought out.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix

Genocide might be a good idea here.


You first please.
Otherwise, you are talking hot air.

It's easy to talk about the mass murder of others and what "good" it may bring. Until it's you in the cross hairs.

If you really believe that, you first.
If you ever post again I will take it as an admission that you were wrong, and that life is better than death.

Genocide might be a good idea? You folks are scaring the crap out of me!!!

That's completely psychopathic...to even consider it.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 01:53 PM
link   
Look I gave up trying to explain, people are not reading what im saying properly amd jumping to conclusions and going off on a rant about something I never even said. 3 times I said its not about rich or poor and still people are going on about it.

Id love to see some of the threads on here if a government allowed a kid to be adopted by a waster family. "HOW COULD THEY, THESE PEOPLE DONT DESERVE KIDS IM SICK TO MY STOMACH bla bla bla look at me im a hypocrite on a high horse..."



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 01:56 PM
link   
The only reason you people want to get other's out of the way is so you can have more of the pie to yourself. It's really selfish, you need to learn to share Earth with your fellow humans.

If you really believed this crap, you would do your part, and knock yourself off right now.

The reason you don't suicide is because you don't believe in yourself dying, no, you consider yourself more important and superior to other humans. You want the "inferiors" to be eradicated.

So you can have their land, their food, their wealth.
Their kids are in your way of you having more stuff.

The levels of selfishness and conceit never cease to amaze me.

You know that's why the Holocaust happened? Lebensraum? Living space??



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Idonthaveabeard
 





What I think should happen is (for example) temporary castration at birth.


Man I can't believe you're actually someone I cqn't help but judge. You're a psychopath. I love how you are immune to all that you prescribe.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Idonthaveabeard
Look I gave up trying to explain, people are not reading what im saying properly amd jumping to conclusions and going off on a rant about something I never even said. 3 times I said its not about rich or poor and still people are going on about it.

Id love to see some of the threads on here if a government allowed a kid to be adopted by a waster family. "HOW COULD THEY, THESE PEOPLE DONT DESERVE KIDS IM SICK TO MY STOMACH bla bla bla look at me im a hypocrite on a high horse..."


Dude people are promoting "maybe genocide is good" in this thread.

It's not out of context. We are perfectly in context here.

Licensing birth IS GENOCIDE, it is EUGENICS.
Who decides who gets licenses? They wont' be impartial?

Please google Aryan licenses in WW2 Germany, and the "breeding programs" they were constructing.
This is exactly the topic we are discussing here, State control of eugenic policy.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 02:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by Idonthaveabeard
 





What I think should happen is (for example) temporary castration at birth.


Man I can't believe you're actually someone I cqn't help but judge. You're a psychopath. I love how you are immune to all that you prescribe.


They obviously believe they are superior to other humans in many ways.
Otherwise it wouldn't make sense to suggest this crazy stuff.

We may need to show these people some basic Biology facts like how all humans are homo sapiens sapiens and we are actually the same technically.

But the way these folks talk, half the human race are insects and are in the way of the "superior humans" who will get licenses to procreate.
edit on 17-6-2012 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Idonthaveabeard

Id love to see some of the threads on here if a government allowed a kid to be adopted


Incorrect technically.

According to the base laws of the land, parents have the legal right to contract with someone to adopt their child. If those parents die, than relatives have the right to adopt, and if none do, than the community has that right.

If there are no guardians for the children, the state will serve as temporary guardians until a fit family can be located.

The government does not grant adoption rights, they facilitate and protect that right.
Every human already has these rights even if no government existed.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


I only read the OP and immediatly came to my conclusive response. Which I can see by this last page, should have included a few other detached diabolicals, who seem to have been born about 70 yrs to late in history. And was pretty much dead on.

Castration at birth= A very sick mind Flash. I got you're back brother.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 02:23 PM
link   
Opinions be damned, all of you nullified what rights you thought you had by saturating the planet with offspring. Organized religion = Cancer upon the Earth. Now it's so crowded you can't climb Everest to escape your spawn, and you wonder why the drive for depopulation? Doesn't matter anyway when you see the monsters women will be popping out as a result of Fukushima!



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Star128
Opinions be damned, all of you nullified what rights you thought you had by saturating the planet with offspring. Organized religion = Cancer upon the Earth. Now it's so crowded you can't climb Everest to escape your spawn, and you wonder why the drive for depopulation? Doesn't matter anyway when you see the monsters women will be popping out as a result of Fukushima!


Your problem may be a bit diffeerent. Over population is an illusion that is part of a much more grand illusion.



You have not one shread of evidence that there is anything at all happening at fukushima. and yet you believe there is.
edit on 17-6-2012 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by randyvs

Your problem may be a bit diffeerent. Over population is an illusion that is part of a much more grand illusion.


The position that over population is an illusion - - - is pathetic.

Just because there is physical room for every physical body - - - does not mean the planet is self-sustainable.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by kaylaluv
 





You're right - child abuse is so rare, it's not even worth a second thought. We've got more important things to do, like protecting the rights of child abusers to have children.


Now you're just backpedaling going from pedophilia now to child abuse, and all in the name of denying and disparaging the unalienable right to procreate. Of course, you want to prevent children from being born, so your mock outrage at child abuse is obvious. However, you want to play the statistics on child abuse game? Let's play!

Foster Care:


One study by Johns Hopkins University found that the rate of sexual abuse within the foster-care system is more than four times as high as in the general population; in group homes, the rate of sexual abuse is more than 28 times that of the general population.[97][98] An Indiana study found three times more physical abuse and twice the rate of sexual abuse in foster homes than in the general population.[98] A study of foster children in Oregon and Washington State found that nearly one third reported being abused by a foster parent or another adult in a foster home.[99] These statistics do not speak to the situation these children are coming from, but it does show the very large problem of child-on-child sexual abuse within the system. There have been several notable lawsits concerning sexual abuse and negligence that caused review of the foster care system in some states:


There's your precious big government at work.

More Abuse in Foster Care:


One of the most comprehensive surveys of abuse in foster care was conducted in conjunction with a Baltimore lawsuit. Trudy Festinger, head of the Department of Research at the New York University School of Social Work, determined that over 28 per cent of the children in state care had been abused while in the system.

....

In Louisiana, a study conducted in conjunction with a civil suit found that 21 percent of abuse or neglect cases involved foster homes

....

Stephen Berzon of the Children's Defense Fund explained the shocking findings of the court before a Congressional subcommitte, saying: "children were physically abused, handcuffed, beaten, chained, and tied up, kept in cages, and overdrugged with psychotropic medication for institutional convenience."

....

In Missouri, a 1981 study found that 57 percent of the sample children were placed in foster care settings that put them "at the very least at a high risk of abuse or neglect."[4]

A later report issued in 1987 found that 25 percent of the children in the Missouri sample group had been victims of "abuse or inappropriate punishment."

Children's Rights Project attorney Marcia Robinson Lowry described the findings of the Missouri review before the Select Committee on Children, Youth and Families:

The most troubling result of the Kansas City review was the level of abuse, undetected or unreported, in foster homes. 25% of the children in the sample were the subject of abuse or inappropriate punishment. 88% of those reports were not properly investigated.


But wait, there's more:


SEXUAL ABUSE A recent class action lawsuit filed on behalf of foster children in the State of Arizona serves well to indicate the extent of sexual abuse of children in state care. The suit alleges that over 500 of an estimated 4,000 foster children, a figure representing at least 12.5 percent of the state's foster care population, have been sexually abused while in state care.

....

The sexual abuse of children in government custody would appear to be a particularly widespread problem.

In Maryland, a 1992 study found that substantiated allegations of sexual abuse in foster care are four times higher than that found among the general population.

....

Perhaps the most significant indicator of the true extent of sexual abuse in foster care was a survey of alumni of what was described as an "exemplary" and "model" program in the Pacific Northwest, argues University professor Richard Wexler.

"In this lavishly-funded program caseloads were kept low and both workers and foster parents got special training. This was not ordinary foster care, this was Cadillac Foster Care," he explained.

In this "exemplary" program, 24 percent of the girls responding to a survey said they were victims of actual or attempted sexual abuse in the one home in which they had stayed the longest. Significantly, they were not even asked about the other foster homes in which they had stayed.


But wait, there's more. Let's continue to the next post to see how wonderful government mandated foster care systems are.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join