Should a permit be required to have babies?

I don't agree that everyone should have the right to have babies. When someone has a baby, they are creating a person that will be part of society. That baby could grow up to be successful in life and help society or he could be a failure and harm society. It all depends on the growth of the child. Parents are a big part of a child's future.

The child's future depends on how the parents raise him, influences of friends, society, etc. The biggest one is how the parents raise him. At a young age children are like sponges when it comes to learning. They learn from their environment and repeat what they see and hear. Logically children will learn a lot from their parents.

If you ask criminals about their childhood most will say that they never knew their father or mother, parents didn't care about them, parents were addicted to drugs or alcohol, parents were abusive, etc. Only people with a strong character are able to succeed with a bad start in life.

Children are also influenced by friends and society, which is a reflection of how people in general were raised. Children with abusive parents have a chance to repeat what is done to them to other kids in school. Children taught to respect and help others are unlikely to become bullies. Which is why bad parents can indirectly affect other children's lives, not just their own.

I would like people who want to have a baby to go to a parenting school to learn more about parenting and also evaluated to see if they are financially stable to have a baby. Children suffer when parents are financially unstable because the family is in constant stress and problems. If they qualify they are given a permit and then they can have their baby. After that society can expect a baby with a potential to be successful in the future.

Here is an example that shows why people should be taught about children psychology before having children:

I'm sure many of you have watched this video, but this time I want you to watch the children.



If anyone has a different idea or another opinion about parents being required to have a permit in order to have children, then please post them. Thank you.

Rules, rules, rules....

So many rules hindering life, liberty, and all that jazz.

This is just an idea that will spur more problems than it does good.

They could still reproduce without the permit.

The state should take eggs and sperm from everyone then sterilize everyone.

Then after a lengthy process of surveillance, testing, education, checking peoples employment, intelligence, prospects, the state would supply the couple with a test tube born embryo to carry to term.

Of course peoples positions in life may change so the state should also retain absolute abortion or conscription rights until the child is an adult.

All hail the glorious state!

Limiting children sounds all good in theory but how does this work in practice? Prude types have been trying to find new ways to regulate or just shame sexual behavior since time began and they realized they weren't as attractive as other people. (Okay..not all lord over others for that reason..but enough do for it to be notable. )

The devil is in the details though. People WILL have kids. Like it or not. Regulate or not. Permit it or not. This WILL happen.

China has discovered and proven this aspect of human nature to a fault. China also solved their problem about how to enforce and handle this. They simply murder the baby that adds 1 more than is allowed to a family. Perhaps not every one is shot or crushed under the wheels of a Government Car (see recent story on that little stunt) but the end is coming for a 2nd kid in Red China.

How would America handle permit violations? Fine them? Well...That's likely fining the people who can least afford to care for the child in the first place. Kinda self defeating there. The U.S. WILL NEVER tolerate seeing babies murdered, as happens in other nations. So..how would it have any hope to work when enforcement is required?

reply to post by MentorsRiddle


It only takes the liberty from the ones that are not qualified to have children. This would only have the children's future in mind, for a better society in the future.

Please tell me what problems you think it would cause, I want to read what everyone has in mind.

reply to post by danielsil18


It will only make others more profit.


Society requires licensing from scratching your butt to operating quantum machinery.

How has lets say getting people to to obtain a license for driving a motor vehicle actually made drivers better drivers?

All licensing is, is creating databases for corporations or governments to keep a strangle hold over society more easily with the said societies support, sad isn't it.

Very tough issue which if any measures are put forth would go against human rights one way or another.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


It's true that people would still have babies, with permit or not. My ideas are kind of radical too because I was thinking of vasectomy for males.

Maybe make them have a vasectomy after they have a child without a permit? That would be really harsh. Maybe a vasectomy when they are very young and then reverse it when they get their permit? also a radical idea but the question is if it would make society a better one in the future?

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


If it made the future a better place to live, would you accept it? a sacrifice now for a better future?

Originally posted by danielsil18
reply to post by MentorsRiddle

 

It only takes the liberty from the ones that are not qualified to have children. This would only have the children's future in mind, for a better society in the future.

Please tell me what problems you think it would cause, I want to read what everyone has in mind.

If I may, the first problem is highlighted right there. 'It only takes from the ones that are not qualified to have children'".

Okay... In MY mind, that pretty well includes every radical liberal in this nation. I'll bet to the radical, far left? The ban would MORE than include me. So who determines what is "fit to raise a child" and what is not? I'd be interested in seeing written and specific criteria on that, but then we may also get into the nightmares shown by 0 tolerance attitudes elsewhere. No room to think means evil has no challenges to overcome, IMO.

I find what you say interesting and too a certain degree I must say I agree with you.

I think there needs to be time taken too access a family prior too having a child, unfortunately I think some children are born with an unfair disadvantage in life. I dont just mean low income, because i dont think that should be a deciding factor.

The permit idea sounds just a little too much, and in time easily abused. NWO Depopulation people!


I have thought for a very long time now that charities that help children and mothers in 3rd world countries could do more too reduce the amount of children that are born, thus being able too spend more time on improving the lives of those already struggling.

reply to post by danielsil18


Coming soon!

Permits required to engage in foreplay.

Oral sex bans.

These can lead to the dangerous act of coitus which has a chance of conception.

More to come, Big Brother.

You want them to regulate your children as well? Whats next? Killing retarded baby's? This is the exact type of control they want, they love eugenics. Google eugenics, its a sinister science. Time after time, its been proven that gene's cannot tell if your going to dumb or develop certain mental traits, it depends on the environment. Change the environment to a positive environment. Its the system's fault, they miss educate us and dumb us down, you really want to put that kind of power in their hands. If they had it their way they would probably choose the dumbest people to have reproduce.

reply to post by InhaleExhale


I agree that a driving license doesn't make everyone good driver, but it prevents really bad drivers from being legal drivers.

Having babies is way too easy in my opinion, there needs to be some kind of control where not everyone is allowed to have them, only the ones that can raise them well.

Maybe a license is not the answer, but something has to control it. For a better society of course.

reply to post by danielsil18


A couple could pass all the tests and exams you would prescribe and still end up being lousy parents raising stupid kids with prejudices, anger issues, history of sexual abuse, severe mental illnesses etc., etc.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by MentorsRiddle

 

Okay... In MY mind, that pretty well includes every radical liberal in this nation. I'll bet to the radical, far left? The ban would MORE than include me. So who determines what is "fit to raise a child" and what is not? I'd be interested in seeing written and specific criteria on that, but then we may also get into the nightmares shown by 0 tolerance attitudes elsewhere. No room to think means evil has no challenges to overcome, IMO.

I haven't thought much about this but I had in mind that maybe people who know about the psychology of children. Professionals who know what can affect the life of a child. Be it living in a bad neighborhood, being financial unstable, etc.

reply to post by HTUKno1


I also think a permit could be a bit too much but I think in a world like ours there needs to be extreme measures to make it better. It's all for a better future, not for us to become enslaved.

Originally posted by Chamberf=6
reply to post by danielsil18

 

Coming soon!

Permits required to engage in foreplay.

Oral sex bans.

These can lead to the dangerous act of coitus which has a chance of conception.

More to come, Big Brother.

edit on 2/26/2013 by Chamberf=6 because: come pun intended

I think permits to make sure children have a better future has a better value than all the ones you listed.

I know that we might have a bit less freedom, but it's a small sacrifice for a better future (that's if it's not abused for someone's agenda).

Originally posted by danielsil18

If you ask criminals about their childhood most will say that they never knew their father or mother, parents didn't care about them, parents were addicted to drugs or alcohol, parents were abusive, etc. Only people with a strong character are able to succeed with a bad start in life.

This is not always true, as you have acknowledged. Even if it is true "most" of the time, it is a gross over-simplification.

Originally posted by danielsil18


Children suffer when parents are financially unstable because the family is in constant stress and problems. If they qualify they are given a permit and then they can have their baby. After that society can expect a baby with a potential to be successful in the future.

This smacks of elitism. Poverty is not the only predictive factor for criminal behavior. What you would propose would simply victimize people further for being poor. That is wrong, and socially irresponsible. Making a better life for your children is a huge motivator for many people. If you take away the reason to succeed and attempt to move up the social ladder, you will have an even worse problem with all of your "criminal poor". A huge portion of people born into dire circumstances would give up on trying to change it. Putting another road block in their way is cruel and short-sighted.

Besides there are many, many predatory criminals that are wealthy. They have simply had the luck to be born into a circumstance where they are given a social position, and a social education that allows them to prey upon others within the confines of the law, and social acceptance. They know how to work within the system, and paint their victimization with a coat of respectability. When they step outside of that confine too much they are often able to use their social status and wealth to smooth it over. There are indeed two sets of laws for the poor and the elite. Creating a circumstance where the elite chooses who breeds and who does not is inviting suffering of the worst kind.

Which brings me to my primary point. Human beings are hierarchical. The instinct will be to ensure the survival of your own, and so the people making the rules about who breeds and who does not will hedge bets in the favor of their own offspring, bloodlines, and even general social sphere. Eugenics is all well and good in theory, but in practice we are not able to acquire enough objectivity to be fair.

Besides, individual experience enriches the human tapestry as a whole. I come from a poverty plagued, abusive, alcoholic background, where the identity of my father was in question. I still think that I have something to contribute to society and to teach my children. In fact, I think that my accomplishments through adversity means that I have more to offer rather than less.

The average of replacement rate is 2.33 children, globally, per woman. Two children per woman means that the majority of women have children that replace the existence of the mother and father(s)--zero growth. In some countries, this rate is trending downward (ie Japan) so that many populations in developed countries are actually declining. For Japan, I know it's a significant crisis. I remember reading an article a while back about how approximately a quarter of young Japanese men are choosing to not have children or engage in relationships. Kind of fascinating really. As developing countries develop more and infant mortality rates drop, their fertility rates will also start to decline and they are the true root of the over the 2.0 rate that would act as a replacement rate to keep the population static. www.cia.gov...

As far as parenting goes, I do think that parents should have parenting lessons but I also question how effective that would be in regards to stopping child abuse. The cycle of abuse can be very difficult to break and a small portion of the population will probably still see their children as a meal ticket and not as a child. I'd actually be fearful if the government tried to control who could have children. That could be opening the door to eugenics.

reply to post by danielsil18


I agree mothers like that should have their children taken away from them. I doubt we could prevent idiots from having children in the first place.

Without all these poorly raised children who would fill the churches on sundays?