Parents fight over gang ties...

[Guest Teal-y Dan]

Invader's denial that he needs to justify his existence is ironic given his obsession with making other people do just that.

 

How's everyone doin' today? Just off-topic, how are you? It's sunny, and I'm listening to Fountains of Wayne. I've been kind of mean in this thread and I feel bad about it.

[snuffbox 0]

I'm happy that Spring might have finally gotten here.

 

What if one of the Parent Test questions was: Do you believe it is ok to kill everybody in the inner cities?

[bob_barron 0]

("You may have earned it but it's not YOUR money! We're going to force you to give it to us for the COMMON GOOD!")

 

Yeah, that is part of what I was getting at. I just don't understand the tolerance some people have on this board. It doesn't compute with me.

 

Oh, and I don't need to justify my existence to anyone.

 

I think you need to justify the whole need a license thing.

[PUT THAT DICK IN MY MOUTH! 0]

I'm happy that Spring might have finally gotten here.

 

Seriously. The last few weeks has been total cock-tease city. 65 one day and 35 the next? Fuck you, Upper Midwest.

[Maztinho 0]

As for not knowing who would be good parents here's a little story.

 

I knew two twin sisters in high school, one was the wild child, the other did everything "right", the Wild one did drugs, pre-marital sex, the whole cliche rebel against the parents thing, yet managed to graduate with the rest of us.

 

Come the ten year reunion, I guess the wildone got pregnant soon after graduation went to rehab and straighten her shit out, and her kid was just running around playing and was really polite to everyone. While the good girls kids ran around knocking over the trash cans, and just causing a ruckus while their mom just stared blankly and hopelessly until her sister stepped in and took control of them.

 

Now the Good Girl would have passed Annie's exam, but when it came down to it she didn't have the skills to be a competent mother.

 

(Side note GG popped 4 kids out in like 6 years once she got married so I think she just got overwhelmed and started shutting down.)

[Firestarter 0]

I just don't understand the tolerance some people have on this board. It doesn't compute with me.

Wow. This is a subject on which I can finally agree wholeheartedly with the liberals.

 

You're nuts.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

I just don't understand the tolerance some people have on this board. It doesn't compute with me.

Wow. This is a subject on which I can finally agree wholeheartedly with the liberals.

 

You're nuts.

 

Why? I mean, when you read about a story like that, aren't you just filled with utter disdain and disgust? Instead the reaction seems to be "No! We need to help these people!" I'm not saying we should kill them, but why should my money support them? The concept is comedic.

[SuperJerk 0]

This, Invader's most recent foray into fascism, inches him ever closer to a Justify Your Existence thread like the one Agent made for EHME.

I agree, though I think that C-Bacon's knee-jerk socialist cant ("You may have earned it but it's not YOUR money! We're going to force you to give it to us for the COMMON GOOD!") and Y2Jerk's inevitable liberal bullshit ("Just educate them! We really can perfect humanity! YES WE CAN!") makes them worthy of such threads as well.

You know me too well, my dear.

[Turbo Lion 0]

The problem with many of these suggestions is that they are generated by a "if society was THIS WAY!" mentality. Which is just a wish list. For everything to work with suggestions like that, society would have to be finely tuned and balanced already.

 

And... uh, turn on the news, y'know? Putting aside the fact that it's crazy, something like kid licenses is just not feasible. Hormones alone are going to create major problems. When people wanna fuck, they probably will. That's part of the problem now! That's where single moms with 9 bad ass kids starts - poor planning and nonexistent prevention.

 

If people drive without insurance, they will fuck and get pregnant without licenses. There's no stopping it. It's been happening since that fucker with the big club nailed the chick in the leopard skins a few dozen million years ago.

 

Just sayin'. It's unenforcable. That's a word now if it wasn't.

[Firestarter 0]

Why? I mean, when you read about a story like that, aren't you just filled with utter disdain and disgust? Instead the reaction seems to be "No! We need to help these people!" I'm not saying we should kill them, but why should my money support them? The concept is comedic.

I agree wholeheartedly that I don't want my tax dollars supporting their promiscuity, but the idea of requiring the state to administer tests to determine suitability for parenthood is unworkable and downright fascist. That's one point on which I'll agree with the UNDHR as well.

[Firestarter 0]

You know me too well, my dear.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

I just don't understand the tolerance some people have on this board. It doesn't compute with me.

Wow. This is a subject on which I can finally agree wholeheartedly with the liberals.

 

Hey, we both don't like Andrew Sullivan, too.

[Firestarter 0]

Hey, we both don't like Andrew Sullivan, too.

[bob_barron 0]

Why? I mean, when you read about a story like that, aren't you just filled with utter disdain and disgust? Instead the reaction seems to be "No! We need to help these people!" I'm not saying we should kill them, but why should my money support them? The concept is comedic.

 

 

Yes, I think those two people in the story are stupid. It does not mean we should start fining and/or jailing people who don't have a license to parent.

[Firestarter 0]

Indeed,

[SuperJerk 0]

Having children is a human right. Once the state starts determining who should and should not have kids without any legal due process based on arbitrary criteria, you've crossed into the realm totalitarian social engineering.

[Firestarter 0]

Yes, absolutely.

[The Niggardly King 0]

[Matt Young 0]

How did rival gang members come to copulate, anyway? Did one or both have AIDS and hope to eliminate the other slowly via transmission of the virus?

[BruteSquad_BRODY 0]

I'm happy that Spring might have finally gotten here.

 

Seriously. The last few weeks has been total cock-tease city. 65 one day and 35 the next? Fuck you, Upper Midwest.

 

Wis. Snow, a fair amount Friday, today? 60 degrees

[The Niggardly King 0]

How did rival gang members come to copulate, anyway? Did one or both have AIDS and hope to eliminate the other slowly via transmission of the virus?

 

Mr. and Mrs. Smith in The Ghetto

[Ripper 0]

I just imagined that entire dinner scene in my head. It was pretty racist, but funny at the same time.

[The Thread Killer 0]

This story is sensationalism at it's finest. I doubt this story even happened the way it is being portrayed, but if it did, it is an aberration and not indicative of a larger problem that requires a legislative response like parental licensing. The old saying "believe none of what you read and half of what you see" comes into play here. This story only made the news to get the kind or reaction it is getting...it's fodder for talk shows.

 

There is already a system in place in North America to take care of unfit parents...the child welfare system. I know this because I worked in it for 17 years. It is inept, corrupt and totally ineffectual at the best of times. Any attempt to determine ahead of time which people should be parents would be similarly useless. Aside from the fact that it would be a fascist and unconstitutional system, (as is the idea itself) it would be run by the government which would automatically guarantee that it would be bloated, rife with bureaucratic nonsense and in other words...useless.

Tough shit. I'll explain it to you. We are all part of a community and we have an obligation to take care of each other. Without the community, you don't exist and neither does "your" money. When people are hurt, by violence or powerlessness (institutional violence), we are all diminished.

 

This parental license you speak of is so off the wall and morally abhorrent I don't know where to begin.

This statement is almost as wrongheaded as the parental licensing idea. "We" are not all part of a "community." People are individuals with free will and the right to do as they please. There is no obligation to take care of anybody. As an income tax payer and somebody who pays property taxes, I contribute to my community because that is the law...but any "obligation" I have ends there. If I choose to spend MY money to buy a piece of property for MYSELF and surround it with a giant electric fence, living there for the rest of MY life without seeing anybody else...that is MY right.

 

Conversely, if I do choose to become part of a group or community it can only work if I did it because I chose to and wanted to. I myself am part of a community and the reason my contributions to that community mean anything is because I want to improve it for myself and others, not because I am obligated. That's the whole point of democracy. The whole "it takes a village" philosophy is an ideology...not an obligation that can be enforced. There is no WE...first there must be an I and then a CHOICE to become a WE. When anybody tries to dictate the WE, at it's best it becomes Socialism. You cannot dictate or mandate a sense of community.

[AnnieEclectic 0]

1) Mathematics (again, this is SAT stuff at it's hardest) - right to your own finances

 

3) Basics of human body and mind (think intro to biology and psychiatry - really easy stuff) - Right to parent

 

K, so wait.

 

In order for me to have control of my own finances, I have to pass high-level, SAT math. Like, really hard stuff. Just so I can decide whether I want to spend $50 on food or power this week. Just to be able to decide how I spend the money that someone gave me for doing work for them.

 

But to raise kids, I only have to pass the sped Psychology class from first-year university? I think you've got things backwards here. You said that parents should need a license to raise kids, now you say that getting said license should be really easy? That doesn't make any sense to me.

 

Sorry, I realized after the fact that "SAT stuff at it's hardest" might imply actually difficult stuff.

 

I take that back - try Algebra I. High school - but early high school - math.

 

 

Because if you can't do basic algebra, how are you going to work with finances anyway?

 

 

edit: Spidey's right too - this is only a "if we started out this way" sort of thing. Of course you could never implement this now. I'm simply saying if I got the chance to start my own country this is how we'd do it.

 

Also, due to the military's feelings on this - women that pass part 1 and fail the rest are not required to join the military. Depending on personality and looks they may be eligible for the alternate President Eclectic's Bedroom Suppliment Plan. Skimpy clothes and inebriating substances supplied, inquire within.

[At Home 0]

Yeah, China fuckin' rocks.

 

Their government is run poorly and their business sector is crazy, but that one child thing is, on paper, a pretty good theory. It would be interesting to see how it would be managed in a fairly stable country, like one of the western / northern European states or America.

 

 

Also, about that teen pregnancy thing: condoms cost $1 at any store around. Pull out. Get the pill. Whatever. There are so many ways to avoid pregnancy, yet some people still gamble and pay the consequences.

[AnnieEclectic 0]

This statement is almost as wrongheaded as the parental licensing idea. "We" are not all part of a "community." People are individuals with free will and the right to do as they please.

 

Allow me to derail this argument in the quickest possible way.

 

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/n...4/mind_decision

 

Free will is not to be assumed as something humans have. I love debate but if your main tenet is in the air - it doesn't hold up. Try again please.

 

-Annie

 

[The Thread Killer 0]

Allow me to derail this argument in the quickest possible way.

 

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/n...4/mind_decision

 

Free will is not to be assumed as something humans have. I love debate but if your main tenet is in the air - it doesn't hold up. Try again please.

 

-Annie

This isn't an argument. You're quite obviously trolling...let's be serious. You are basically advocating in this thread for governmental permission for breeding. However, let's assume you actually think that people should have to apply for permission to breed, and move on from that brilliant philosophy.

 

Human beings decide on their actions. It doesn't matter if the decision making process can be followed on an MRI or CT scan...it's still YOUR brain deciding what YOU are going to do...it's not like the government controlling your brain by remote control or something. I am talking about the idealogical differences between socialism and true democracy. You're linking to an article you found on teh intranet that has pretty pictures with bright shiny colors.

 

On top of that, anybody with any sort of medical training or education can tell you that of all the major organs, the brain is the one we know the LEAST about. Just because something lights up on an MRI, that doesn't mean it proves anything. I know Wired magazine is THE medical journal of record in North America, but trust me, this story just might not be factually correct...sorry to burst your bubble.

 

[AnnieEclectic 0]

This isn't an argument. You're quite obviously trolling...let's be serious.

 

I'm quite serious, thanks.

 

 

You are basically advocating in this thread for governmental permission for breeding. However, let's assume you actually think that people should have to apply for permission to breed, and move on from that brilliant philosophy.

 

Good, because I'm serious and that IS my philosophy. I consider overpopulation the top threat facing the human race (not counting the asteroid a 13 year old German boy showed NASA has a 1:420 shot of destroying us) and something needs to be done. It's funny because I'm a liberal, but I'm completely for this. I hate McCain, but if he promised to do this I'd vote him in regardless of his GLBT and war positions. I don't think it's fair to use war as a way of thinning the herd (current method) because it's thinning more than just our own, plus somehow I see the -loss- of life as problematic.

 

So my solution is to keep life from starting in the first place.

 

Human beings decide on their actions. It doesn't matter if the decision making process can be followed on an MRI or CT scan...it's still YOUR brain deciding what YOU are going to do...it's not like the government controlling your brain by remote control or something. I am talking about the idealogical differences between socialism and true democracy. You're linking to an article you found on teh intranet that has pretty pictures with bright shiny colors.

 

to quote Slashdot - RTFA. The decision making process isn't followed - it's displayed *before* the decision is made and carried out. We don't know a lot about the brain. How do we not know that it works before it itself knows it works? Free will is something humankind just kind of made up for itself. Sort of like religion.

 

On top of that, anybody with any sort of medical training or education can tell you that of all the major organs, the brain is the one we know the LEAST about.

 

Hey, we agree on something!

 

Just because something lights up on an MRI, that doesn't mean it proves anything. I know Wired magazine is THE medical journal of record in North America, but trust me, this story just might not be factually correct...sorry to burst your bubble.

 

Do you read medical journals? If so, good for you. I don't.

 

Wired's job isn't to be a medical journal. Their job is to find interesting technological studies like this, translate it for laypeople in an interesting short article so you can get the basics. There's a ton of interesting stuff about this that I'm sure those talked to would love to go into greater depth on. All the data, results and whatnot they've carried out.

 

Because they're obviously lying to Wired to get into print.

 

 

 

 

 

*deep exhale*

 

Now that I've responded to your points - a question for you. I'm not going to get into political power any time soon. In fact, much like parenting, I realize that I'm woefully unqualified to do it. I'm simply coming up with a solution, no matter how unlikely it is to be done, that actually deals with the problem of overpopulation. Why does that bother you?

 

In fact, forget that, I have a better question.

 

Why don't the deaths of all the 18 year olds that fail the first part -not- bother you?

 

Every time I bring this idea up, everyone bristles at the "Parenting License" part. I find it interesting that society has come to accept that at the age of 18 you're expected to be cannon fodder for the state. Be it via draft or flat out execution.

 

No one ever gets the irony.

 

-Annie

 

[Ripper 0]

You are comparing the lives of thousands to the lives of Millions that you would sacrifice through your stupid ideas. Nothing on your "test" would determine if someone can be a good parent or not. you would deny the lives of millions of kids.

 

We lose HOW many to execution and war? A couple of dozen a year?

 

 

And just because a couple of guys saw something and said "SEE!!! THERE IS NO FREE WILL" doesn't make it fact.

 

And the decision making process was carried out before the decision was made....REALLY??????!?!????

[The Thread Killer 0]

I have read medical journals before, (I don't subscribe to them or anything) but when there is a medical issue the piques my interest or that will affect me personally, then yes...I research it.

 

As far as overpopulation, to be perfectly blunt...I don't care about it. It doesn't affect me personally, it's not happening where I live, and it isn't going to affect the quality of my life during my lifetime, so I don't care about any potential solutions to this problem. You can give me that whole "what about the planet and our future" crap, or people can get on their high horses and act all sanctimonious about my attitude, but in the end, my not caring and their caring have accomplished the exact same result...nothing.

 

Aside from that, my whole point is simple...in order to actually institute some sort of parental licensing system, it would have to be legislated and subsequently run by the government. The government should never EVER be given the ability to tell you if you can or can't reproduce. Are there morons out there having kids and failing to take proper care of them? Yes. Are there too many starving children out there? Probably. Should it be the government's job to do something about it? To a degree maybe, but not deciding beforehand who is allowed to have children and who isn't.

 

You missed the point in my earlier post where I pointed something out. I went to school, obtained a degree, and then spent years of my life trying to help abused, neglected and abandoned children and their families. I dedicated my entire life to it, and nothing else. After 15 years of doing that, I came to realize that (at least where I live) the government agencies that are supposedly trying to help these people are usually just as much of a problem as they are a part of the solution. In the process, they waste a shocking amount of taxpayers money...and this isn't a THEORY...I've seen it with my own two eyes.

 

I am more of a libertarian than I am a conservative, in that I strongly believe that it is the government's job to invest my tax dollars in proving public services and answering to me via the democratic process. It is not their job to use my money to form establishments which then turn around and tell me what I can and cannot do.