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: 17
22
<< 14  15  16    18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 05:29 PM
link   
reply to post by PurpleChiten
 





And something needs to be done about the blatant abuse of that particular "right" which isn't a right at all, it's a biological process. Now either participate in the thread or go pull the wings off flies. Your hatefulness and self righteousness is very unbecoming.


Living is a "biological process", speaking is a "biological process", are you now going to argue that living and speaking are not rights at all?

You chose to make this argument with me, sport. No one made you pick a fight with me, that was your choice, so stop your crying and either step up or back down.




posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 05:30 PM
link   
If someone is unable to have a discussion and does nothing but attack and insult, use the alert feature and let a moderator handle it. 99.9% of them are excellent.
edit on 17-6-2012 by PurpleChiten because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 05:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by NuclearPaul

Originally posted by Idonthaveabeard
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.


They will never do this for one simple reason. Children are a very important tool for TPTB to control people.

It's sort of like an economic version of holding a gun at someone to threaten them, but they don't care if you shoot them. You can then aim it at their kids instead.

A single person can always bug out and be free, but if you want to see your kids eat three meals a day, you better be good and do as you're told...


This is precisely why I don't want to have children at this moment in time. Thank you for summarising it so elequently.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by kaylaluv
 





Speaking of valid arguments, where's yours? What is your solution to child abuse (in ALL its forms), and too many children creating a burden on us all?


This thread isn't about finding solutions to child abuse, it is advocating the licensing of procreation. My argument is in defense of unalienable rights. I have consistently made this argument throughout this thread. You can dismiss the unalienable right of procreation all you want, it is nothing more than ill informed opinion. As I've stated in this thread all read: Long before governments existed humans were procreating. No one granted early humans this right to do so, they simply just did so, and by right, just as parents do so today.




No, the thread IS about finding solutions to the problem of irresponsible parents - the OP's proposed solution was licensing the right to have children, and making people prove they are capable and responsible. Can you contribute another solution? What about the unalienable rights of the child to be treated with love, dignity and respect? What about the unalienable rights of everyone in society to not have to take care of the children of irresponsible parents? Why are you only concerned with the unalienable rights of irresponsible parents?



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by kaylaluv

Originally posted by muzzleflash
reply to post by PurpleChiten
 


Exactly education is the key to solving our problems.
Thinking about them in depth and sharing ideas.

That is exactly why we have so many major problems right now, our approach to general education isn't serious enough I am afraid.


I'm not against educating kids in school about responsible sex and responsible parenting, but so many conservatives get their panties all twisted up about that - "Schools should only be for teaching math and grammar. Let the parents teach their kids everything else. We don't want the nanny state involved in this."


The problem is, the parents don't know it, so they can't teach it. That's usually most apparent in the extreme conservative groups. They have the stereotype of being "stupid rednecks" at times because so many of their members are exactly that.
Anytime a stereotype exists, there was something that caused it and in this case, it's the extreme population found on that end of the spectrum. (not all conservatives are stupid rednecks, but all stupid rednecks are conservatives).
We have to begin by educating everyone, then either delegating it to the schools or the parents after everyone is intelligent enough to comprehend that there are responsibilities involved in being a parent.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by kaylaluv
 


Perhaps it hit too close to home for him? That's the usual cause for reactions such as that as dictated by Ockham's razor.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 05:41 PM
link   
reply to post by kaylaluv
 





No, the thread IS about finding solutions to the problem of irresponsible parents - the OP's proposed solution was licensing the right to have children, and making people prove they are capable and responsible.


You play too fast and loose with words. You go from pedophilia to child abuse, not to insisting this thread is about "irresponsible parents", and this is precisely why so many are alarmed at the suggestion of licensing parents. The government is not and cannot be the arbiter of who is a responsible parent and who is not, what is responsible parenting and what is not.

If you don't want to have any children and think that responsible, more power to you. The moment you take that stance and demand it must be imposed on the rest of us, you are nothing more than a petty tyrant. I took the time I did to quote and link all those scandalous foster home and child protective services incidents to illustrate precisely what is wrong with placing this kind of power in an institution ill equipped to handle the problem.

Licensing procreation is not a solution to "irresponsible parents", it is tyranny.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by kaylaluv


No, the thread IS about finding solutions to the problem of irresponsible parents - the OP's proposed solution was licensing the right to have children, and making people prove they are capable and responsible. Can you contribute another solution? What about the unalienable rights of the child to be treated with love, dignity and respect? What about the unalienable rights of everyone in society to not have to take care of the children of irresponsible parents? Why are you only concerned with the unalienable rights of irresponsible parents?


I agree with licensing and limiting children.

I think unalienable rights is a poor argument - - - when Need takes priority.

I think a parent or parents should provide a plan in how they will provide for a child's every day needs (food/clothing/shelter) and education until they are of legal age.

IMO - - few people plan their lives at all - - let alone the lives of children - - beyond having them.

If parents had to actually confront the cost - years - necessities of raising a child - - they might have second thoughts.

There is not ONE unselfish reason for bringing another child into this world. There are plenty of unselfish and intelligent reasons not to.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by PurpleChiten
reply to post by kaylaluv
 


Perhaps it hit too close to home for him? That's the usual cause for reactions such as that as dictated by Ockham's razor.


It is Occum's razor, genius, not "Ockham's razor" and you not only know how to spell the principle correctly, you know nothing of the law of parsimony. Or perhaps you really do mean Ochkham's Razor and you are under the impression a theatrical group dictates law.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by PurpleChiten

Originally posted by kaylaluv

Originally posted by muzzleflash
reply to post by PurpleChiten
 


Exactly education is the key to solving our problems.
Thinking about them in depth and sharing ideas.

That is exactly why we have so many major problems right now, our approach to general education isn't serious enough I am afraid.


I'm not against educating kids in school about responsible sex and responsible parenting, but so many conservatives get their panties all twisted up about that - "Schools should only be for teaching math and grammar. Let the parents teach their kids everything else. We don't want the nanny state involved in this."


The problem is, the parents don't know it, so they can't teach it. That's usually most apparent in the extreme conservative groups. They have the stereotype of being "stupid rednecks" at times because so many of their members are exactly that.
Anytime a stereotype exists, there was something that caused it and in this case, it's the extreme population found on that end of the spectrum. (not all conservatives are stupid rednecks, but all stupid rednecks are conservatives).
We have to begin by educating everyone, then either delegating it to the schools or the parents after everyone is intelligent enough to comprehend that there are responsibilities involved in being a parent.


The problem is, the parents either think they already know it, or they could care less. How do we get past the know-it-alls, like Jean Paul Frenchie over there, and the people who really don't give a hoot about how they raise their kids? How do we make them care?



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 05:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 





I think unalienable rights is a poor argument - - - when Need takes priority.


That's a Marxist argument, and Marx was no big fan of unalienable rights either. He was, however, a big fan of bringing about a "stateless society" by way of surrendering all power to the state, and all in the name of "Need".



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by PurpleChiten
 





And something needs to be done about the blatant abuse of that particular "right" which isn't a right at all, it's a biological process. Now either participate in the thread or go pull the wings off flies. Your hatefulness and self righteousness is very unbecoming.


Living is a "biological process", speaking is a "biological process", are you now going to argue that living and speaking are not rights at all?

You chose to make this argument with me, sport. No one made you pick a fight with me, that was your choice, so stop your crying and either step up or back down.


No, you are twisting things, as you usually do. I refuse to fall into your little game. Grow up and discuss the topic instead of attacking people.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 05:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by kaylaluv

The problem is, the parents either think they already know it, or they could care less. How do we get past the know-it-alls, like Jean Paul Frenchie over there, and the people who really don't give a hoot about how they raise their kids? How do we make them care?


It's just a shame we can't make it retroactive


Ignoring and using Alert when appropriate are usually the best approaches with situations like that.

No audience = no show
edit on 17-6-2012 by PurpleChiten because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by kaylaluv
 





How do we make them care?


Who do you think you're kidding? You don't care and you don't want to care, you want to prevent the birth of children and call that caring, but that is the laziest sloppiest caring I've ever seen.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by kaylaluv
 





No, the thread IS about finding solutions to the problem of irresponsible parents - the OP's proposed solution was licensing the right to have children, and making people prove they are capable and responsible.


You play too fast and loose with words. You go from pedophilia to child abuse, not to insisting this thread is about "irresponsible parents", and this is precisely why so many are alarmed at the suggestion of licensing parents. The government is not and cannot be the arbiter of who is a responsible parent and who is not, what is responsible parenting and what is not.

If you don't want to have any children and think that responsible, more power to you. The moment you take that stance and demand it must be imposed on the rest of us, you are nothing more than a petty tyrant. I took the time I did to quote and link all those scandalous foster home and child protective services incidents to illustrate precisely what is wrong with placing this kind of power in an institution ill equipped to handle the problem.

Licensing procreation is not a solution to "irresponsible parents", it is tyranny.





You are such a broken record. Are you an autobot? Done with you, because you have no solutions. Buh - bye.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 05:52 PM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 





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.


What is the planet other than " self sustainable " Annie ?

The only thing ruining the planet is man and his sciences. Which are an obvious goof with out the wisdom of his Heavenly Father. In other words people like you.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by PurpleChiten
 





No, you are twisting things, as you usually do. I refuse to fall into your little game. Grow up and discuss the topic instead of attacking people.


I am not twisting a thing, I am pointing out your whimsical view of what is and what is not a right. You've whimsically declared that parenting is not a right, simply a "biological process".

If you refuse to "fall in my little game" why did you pick the fight with me to begin with? If you can't stand the heat little bird get out of the kitchen. The kitchen is for adults.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by Annee
 





I think unalienable rights is a poor argument - - - when Need takes priority.


That's a Marxist argument, and Marx was no big fan of unalienable rights either. He was, however, a big fan of bringing about a "stateless society" by way of surrendering all power to the state, and all in the name of "Need".


You can choose what ever label you want for common sense.

Doesn't change the fact it is still common sense of a current need.



edit on 17-6-2012 by Annee because: DAMN QUOTES!



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 05:55 PM
link   
reply to post by kaylaluv
 





You are such a broken record. Are you an autobot? Done with you, because you have no solutions. Buh - bye.


Don't know what can be said about the sanity of someone who makes the time to tell an "auto-bot" they are "done" with them. Not sure who really wants to trust the governmental policies of procreation in the hands of someone that actually makes a post to say "Buh-bye" to an "auto-bot".



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 14  15  16    18 >>

log in

join