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.
Originally posted by deepankarm
There are some women without the mental power to balance a checkbook, and yet they are trusted to raise kids properly? It's absurd.
Originally posted by deepankarm
Can you describe the qualities of those groups of people???
Originally posted by kaylaluv
Originally posted by RealSpoke
reply to post by kaylaluv
So now all prospective parents are child abusers?
Of course not. I don't think I said that. I'm saying that child abuse and child neglect is a real problem, and not just in my "stupid little ole' head". I'll bet that looking closer at the statistics, we could probably get a good idea of who is doing the abusing and neglecting. It is this group that probably shouldn't be allowed to have children.
Even a murderer, rapist, uneducated, poor,alcohal addict,,,,,,,can be a good parent.
Parenting is a different thing altogether and you can't predecide who will be a good parent.
Even if this is made into law, can the state give guarantee that the qualified people will turn out to be good parents??
I can't stress out the dumbness of this concept.
It's just pathetic.
And what dictates those means???
Originally posted by mwood
reply to post by VoidHawk
I disagree again,
I would say MOST people are "poor" because they live outside their means.
Originally posted by kaylaluv
You want a child to starve just to teach the parent a lesson? I guess it's the kid's own fault for being born into the wrong family. Stupid kid - he deserves it.
A Tennessee man's problems paying child support aren't so surprising: He has 30 children with 11 different women.
Desmond Hatchett, 33, of Knoxville, is pleading with the state to help him pay for child support, citing the fact that he earns minimum wage. Hatchett made national news in 2009, when his tally stood at 21 children.
“I had four kids in the same year," he said. "Twice.”
The mothers of his children are supposed to get anywhere from $25 a month to $309 a month for help raising the children. The state takes half of Hatchett's paycheck to divide among the mothers of his children, but now Hatchett has petitioned the state to help him meet his obligations.
The children range in age from toddlers to 14 years old.
Read more: www.foxnews.com...
This is your best argument!!!
Originally posted by kaylaluv
Originally posted by deepankarm
Can you describe the qualities of those groups of people???
Originally posted by kaylaluv
Originally posted by RealSpoke
reply to post by kaylaluv
So now all prospective parents are child abusers?
Of course not. I don't think I said that. I'm saying that child abuse and child neglect is a real problem, and not just in my "stupid little ole' head". I'll bet that looking closer at the statistics, we could probably get a good idea of who is doing the abusing and neglecting. It is this group that probably shouldn't be allowed to have children.
Even a murderer, rapist, uneducated, poor,alcohal addict,,,,,,,can be a good parent.
Parenting is a different thing altogether and you can't predecide who will be a good parent.
Even if this is made into law, can the state give guarantee that the qualified people will turn out to be good parents??
I can't stress out the dumbness of this concept.
It's just pathetic.
If a person is a known heroin addict - do you think they would be allowed to adopt a child? Do you think they SHOULD be able to adopt a child? After all, who's to say they won't be a good parent just because they're a heroin addict? Let's hand over an orphan child to a heroin addict, shall we?
By that logic someone who uses pharmaceutical drugs shouldn't be aloud to have children either.
Originally posted by kaylaluv
Originally posted by deepankarm
Can you describe the qualities of those groups of people???
Originally posted by kaylaluv
Originally posted by RealSpoke
reply to post by kaylaluv
So now all prospective parents are child abusers?
Of course not. I don't think I said that. I'm saying that child abuse and child neglect is a real problem, and not just in my "stupid little ole' head". I'll bet that looking closer at the statistics, we could probably get a good idea of who is doing the abusing and neglecting. It is this group that probably shouldn't be allowed to have children.
Even a murderer, rapist, uneducated, poor,alcohal addict,,,,,,,can be a good parent.
Parenting is a different thing altogether and you can't predecide who will be a good parent.
Even if this is made into law, can the state give guarantee that the qualified people will turn out to be good parents??
I can't stress out the dumbness of this concept.
It's just pathetic.
If a person is a known heroin addict - do you think they would be allowed to adopt a child? Do you think they SHOULD be able to adopt a child? After all, who's to say they won't be a good parent just because they're a heroin addict? Let's hand over an orphan child to a heroin addict, shall we?
Originally posted by HumanCondition
Originally posted by kaylaluv
If a person is a known heroin addict - do you think they would be allowed to adopt a child? Do you think they SHOULD be able to adopt a child? After all, who's to say they won't be a good parent just because they're a heroin addict? Let's hand over an orphan child to a heroin addict, shall we?
By that logic someone who uses pharmaceutical drugs shouldn't be aloud to have children either.
Both pose serious possible health risks to the child.
Originally posted by kaylaluv
Originally posted by HumanCondition
Originally posted by kaylaluv
If a person is a known heroin addict - do you think they would be allowed to adopt a child? Do you think they SHOULD be able to adopt a child? After all, who's to say they won't be a good parent just because they're a heroin addict? Let's hand over an orphan child to a heroin addict, shall we?
By that logic someone who uses pharmaceutical drugs shouldn't be aloud to have children either.
There's a difference between someone who takes a pharmaceutical drug responsibly and someone who abuses something like oxycodone to the point of not being able to maintain a job or prepare a meal, or keep their eyes open more than 3 minutes at a time. Do you think an adoption agency should hand over a kid to an oxycodone abuser?
Originally posted by HumanCondition
Both pose serious possible health risks to the child.
Originally posted by kaylaluv
Originally posted by HumanCondition
Originally posted by kaylaluv
If a person is a known heroin addict - do you think they would be allowed to adopt a child? Do you think they SHOULD be able to adopt a child? After all, who's to say they won't be a good parent just because they're a heroin addict? Let's hand over an orphan child to a heroin addict, shall we?
By that logic someone who uses pharmaceutical drugs shouldn't be aloud to have children either.
There's a difference between someone who takes a pharmaceutical drug responsibly and someone who abuses something like oxycodone to the point of not being able to maintain a job or prepare a meal, or keep their eyes open more than 3 minutes at a time. Do you think an adoption agency should hand over a kid to an oxycodone abuser?
Do you know that in a well known experiment most rats will choose drugs over food till the point of starvation.
But..
If you increase the rats cage to a certain larger size they will almost always pick the food, many will never pick the drug at all.
You can give babies to the 'best' people and if the environment is the same the same problems will always occur.
What you guys are suggesting is a cure to a problem, not prevention which is what we need.
Originally posted by kaylaluv
Originally posted by HumanCondition
Both pose serious possible health risks to the child.
Originally posted by kaylaluv
Originally posted by HumanCondition
Originally posted by kaylaluv
If a person is a known heroin addict - do you think they would be allowed to adopt a child? Do you think they SHOULD be able to adopt a child? After all, who's to say they won't be a good parent just because they're a heroin addict? Let's hand over an orphan child to a heroin addict, shall we?
By that logic someone who uses pharmaceutical drugs shouldn't be aloud to have children either.
There's a difference between someone who takes a pharmaceutical drug responsibly and someone who abuses something like oxycodone to the point of not being able to maintain a job or prepare a meal, or keep their eyes open more than 3 minutes at a time. Do you think an adoption agency should hand over a kid to an oxycodone abuser?
Do you know that in a well known experiment most rats will choose drugs over food till the point of starvation.
But..
If you increase the rats cage to a certain larger size they will almost always pick the food, many will never pick the drug at all.
You can give babies to the 'best' people and if the environment is the same the same problems will always occur.
I'm sorry - I'm not sure what you're saying. Are you saying that we could eliminate drug addiction by enlarging the homes the drug addicts live in?
Originally posted by KingDoey
I personally loathe children. I do not find them cute or 'funny' when they harass you at restaurants, or let off deafening screeches every few minutes, and why do people with kids think they have priority over others?
What I am saying is on a smaller more localised scale why should I pay for something that I despise so much?
Originally posted by EyesWideShut
Originally posted by biggmoneyme
Originally posted by EyesWideShut
reply to post by biggmoneyme
Really, people don't have a "RIGHT" to have children? Do you have a "RIGHT" to breathe? The fact that you're breathing affects all of us as well. The way some people think is scary. I'm hoping this thread is some sort of "group think" experiment & adult rational humans don't really think like this.
no it isn't, you just think it is because it's always about ME ME ME ME ME. children are starving, we don't have enough work for everyone, over population has the potential to take down the whole world. but oh it's your right to destroy the planet/society
People like you are the problem. How am I thinking it's about Me? You've yet to learn that YOU can only control YOU. You can't control others. You're speaking in terms of "we" which means that you're speaking for me, but "we" don't agree. I have work & my kids aren't starving. please explain how I'm trying to destroy the planet/society?
As a matter of fact I'm a Nurse & a Firefighter... I'm pretty much "of service to others" not of self.