Why it's a bad idea to require a license to have children.

This thread is in reply to one Here.

Just when I thought that I couldn't find a scarier thread. Here's the problem I see. Yes, there are plenty of people that shouldn't have children, but unfortunately you or I shouldn't have the right to choose who can or cannot have kids. On my best day I'm pretty objective in deciding things, but I'm human & I couldn't say that I couldn't be swayed by emotion or personal gain.

Let's say you're a caseworker in the "who get's to have kids department". An outstanding citizen that has two brilliant and well adjusted kids wants to go for a 3rd, you have a serious personal problem with this citizen. You decide not to stamp their paperwork. You might be thinking to yourself "I would NEVER let personal issues get in the way of my official duties" and that might be true, but swap positions... now you're the person with two great kids and someone that holds your 3rd childs fate in their hands doesn't like you, can you be sure that they'll be able to put aside personal differences and uphold their duty? Would you bet your childs life on it?

Alternate situation, A top 1% wealthy family has a history of making poor parental decisions (Think Paris Hilton) but they offer you $5,000,000 for you to rubber stamp their "have a kid" paperwork. Would your moral compass be true enough to do the right thing? If so, do you think most people would do the same?

Here's the thing, If I can't trust myself to make the right decision regarding others & I'm a pretty stand up guy. Knowing the corruption in government that we currently have, there is no way in hell that I'd trust some bureaucrat to decide If I can or can't have children.

If you can't see the endgame, this is how it ends up. First it starts with "If you're on welfare, you can't have kids" Now in theory, that kind of makes sense, If you can't afford the kids you have now, why should you be allowed to have more? Judging by the replies in this forum, there are many "Shortsighted" folks here that play checkers instead of chess that would be in favor of that plan. They would rejoice in their victory! "We finally got em!"

But soon the income cut off level keeps rising, (kind of like the social security retirement age) and it's getting close to and is about to surpass what you and your wife gross yearly. "There's no way that could happen" you'd say. Yes it can, and in fact YOU voted for it and were in favor of it! The infrastructure would already be in place, the only thing changing is the gross combined income.

BIG BROTHER IS NOT LOOKING OUT FOR YOU! "We the People" must look out for ourselves. The day the government passes something like this is the day that I'll be thankful that we have a 2nd Amendment, because on that day I'd be forced to use the 2nd Amendment for the purpose that our founding fathers inteneded it to be used. To fight against a tyrannical government.

It has been used tremendously in the past years, but I want you to really think about the intent of this poem.

"First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me."

-Niemoller

It's blatant government controlled eugenics.
One of the founding platforms of Progressivism.

reply to post by EyesWideShut

I agree with you. While I realize there are many people in this world who shouldn't make more unfortunate babies that grow up to be unfortunate adults, we couldn't POSSIBLY be capable of making such a life changing decision. Instead I feel we as a society need to educate and inform the public WHY they shouldn't have more children if they aren't able to support the existing ones; why they shouldn't have any children if they aren't capable of even trying to raise them to be productive citizens.

I think we should make a law that says when a person goes on government help, any future children would not increase the charity they receive. That way, we are not telling them they are not allowed to have more children, we are simply making it so that it's not profitable for them to do so.

maybe not so much a license, but more of a test.

what would happen if someone without a "license" had a kid....a fine? or take the kid away?

reply to post by BadBoYeed


good point. People break laws every day. Just because there is a law in place doesn't mean they will follow it.

I read the other thread and cannot believe people want the government to take control of their right to have children, and tell them when and if they qualify to have one. maybe we should have licenses to be allowed to be in a relationship instead, that would stop kids being born to the 'unworthy' (usually means low income) parents, and have the government decide for us if we are worthy and who we are allowed to be with or better suited to be with.

All of this "proving to be fit to be a parent" garbage are things that eugenicists previously implemented. It led to forced sterilizations in the US and the Nazi regime.

Since poverty was associated with prostitution and “mental idiocy,” women of the lower classes were the first to be deemed “unfit” and “promiscuous.”[25] These women, who were predominately immigrants or women of color, were discouraged from bearing children, and were encouraged to use birth control.

For example, in 1972, United States Senate committee testimony brought to light that at least 2,000 involuntary sterilizations had been performed on poor black women without their consent or knowledge. An investigation revealed that the surgeries were all performed in the South, and were all performed on black welfare mothers with multiple children. Testimony revealed that many of these women were threatened with an end to their welfare benefits until they consented to sterilization.[55]

en.wikipedia.org...

In the words of Joe Walsh:

Take all the trauma, drama, ........guilt, and doubt, and shame.

"What if's" and "if only's"; the shackles and the chains.

Violence and aggression; the pettiness and scorn.

The jealousy and hatred; the tempest and discord........And give it up.

Some people seem predisposed to such things. There is nothing political or monetary about my views when it comes to this. Medicine and science have proven that some people are pre-disposed to violent or otherwise destructive behavior. Like peadophilia for example. Everyone knows you simply can't “cure” people of that mental defect. People with defects in their DNA or certain temporal lobe regions in their brain that make them genetically defective, should not be allowed to add to the human race. It's just that simple.

A persons social status shouldn't determine who should have children and who doesn't. That's too subjective and there are too many variables involved. I'm talking about behaviour that is not conducive to a productive and peaceful life. There are people out there who you just can't help; who are detrimental to the human race evolving. It's just that simple and science and medicine are making great strides in proving just that.

For all of you worried that the government is too involved in such things, like government grants that help fund the studires that prove these sorts of things; the government isn't the only entity that helps fund these types of research projects. What we need are more “independant” type studies to see which of these types of defects are incurable. Of those, the people with the destructive ones shouldn't be allowed to have children.

Determining this would be part of the “licencing” process”. ( For lack of a better term). It would start, say, when a female is starting to show signs that her body is physically capapble of bearing children. Same with males. In short, in needs to be determined to the best of our abilities who will be having offspring that will add positive qualities to the human race. Not negative one's. We have more than enough of those already. Which, really, is why we're having this discussion in the first place. Another part would be parenting classes to determine if you have what it takes to raise a productive member of society. Whether that production is on an assembly line, in a bank, on a farm, or anything. There are many ways of being productive and too many people who just don't seem to care what those ways are.

For those of you who say “variety is the spice of life”...... get up off your keyboard, or that hometown you've been shetered in all your life, and sample some of those spices yourself. You'll come back with pretty much the same conclusion that I have. That there are some people who just shouldn't be breeding, and it has nothing to do with how much money they may or may not have. It has everything to do with the fact that some people just can't be “fixed” to where they're productive and peaceful.

And for those of you who say “But it's our right as humans to procreate”, No, but it's not. Just because you're physically able to have children doesn't mean you should. That's like saying it's our right to do ANYthing that we're physically capable of doing. I know people who are physically capable of playing football, but since they're not good at it, they don't do it.
“But you're comparing apples to oranges TD, it's only football, what we're talking about here is having children.”

Right.

What we're talking about is having children. The biggest responsibilty and most important job anyone can have. Something that shouldn't be taken lightly, but yet it is when people say that EVERYONE has a right to have children.

For those of you who think it's the right of everyone to have a child, you obviously haven't run across anyone in your lifetime that has proven that statement wrong. Trust me, they're out there.

In a nutshell, there are bad people who can't change because of genetics. It's in their DNA. It's a fact, not a judgement call. Some people say “That's right, it's not our job to judge. That's God's job”. Assuming there is one, he does it after the fact. It doesn't do us a lot good in the here and now. But then again, there are bad people who just weren't raised right. Those are the people you can get to, and it's going to take some very technical analysis, a lot of common sense and in some case, love, ( Some people call that God) to make that determination and make that change. This isn't an easy issue to find answers to and deal with, but it has to be done IMO. Beaurocrats in Washington aren't qualified for this job. Unbiased scientists, medical professionals and people like you and me, are.

Now, I could've just posted this song and been done with it but, you know me.....I like to write stuff.

youtu.be...

I say keep our numbers high, crazy nut cases, and poor alike. We have numbers on our side, unlike the 1%. The minute those numbers drop, they will have the full control. Why would they want our population decreased? For control, and only control.

I don't understand why people would want to give up their reproductive rights to the state, would these same people who say "keep your hands off my body" when it comes to abortion, say the same when it comes to procreation?

Another note, some people are unfit parents, agreed. Some parents are abusive, narsicisstic, whatever. Sometimes through those hardships come amazing people, they want to snuff out the different variables, based on two underprivilaged people. The state could make any rule they wanted involving procreation, what if they find any reason under the sun to deny people? What if they see you as a permenent problem an sterilize you? Its horrible, every person should be free to carry on their genes.

I read that other thread and I was disgusted beyond words at some of the postings I had read there. In a certain twist of irony, looking at the stupidity of those responses- most of those posters never would have been born themselves

Please post your opposing thoughts in this earlier thread on the topic:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

**Thread Closed**