Total Motorcycle Community Forums

Johnj wrote:Hitler wanted a master race to control all the lesser peoples, to impose rules as to who could breed and when. You would have to have the same kind of powers to make your plan work. I think you haven't thought your plan out very well.

Really? Because restricting births and creating actual standards for people who want to raise a child doesn't create a master race. There's no restriction on who can raise a child, except those who are incapable of doing so. If you can't raise a child without being on welfare, then you don't get one! Your comparison is flawed, because in this case everyone has an opportunity to become a parent (only in this case you actually have to...shucks, work for it!). What this does is weed out the ones who have more babies than they can afford, weeds out those who depend on the state to survive...those people should not be having kids.

If someone can't feed themselves, just having a child is an act of child abuse.

But okay, since you say the 'power' would be there to corrupt the system, let me ask you this. We require a license and testing to get a driver's license and to drive. You even have to pay money to register your car every year. Has the DMV produced a 'master race' of ideal drivers?

Not that I can see but look, most of those who do own cars know how to operate them. You'd think it would be downright strange if we handed the keys to a 14 year old with no experience and let them out on the freeway. IMO, same with procreating.

I'd still like to hear your alternative. How do we stop teens or the destitute from having babies, leaving them starving or stranded in the adoption process until they are 18, only to get out and be homeless? How do we stop people from walking into hospitals, having babies, and walking out at the taxpayers expense? Or how do we stop people from having babies and living off the taxpayers? Should we get rid of these programs? The ones who then suffer are once again the children. What's the solution?

camthepyro wrote:It's something China has come up with... They're only allowed 2 children.

UNLESS you have a twin after your first-born. I think you either get to keep said twin with a fee, or the "state" "takes" it and "puts" it in a "safe" "environment" .

CNF2002 wrote:I'd still like to hear your alternative. How do we stop teens or the destitute from having babies, leaving them starving or stranded in the adoption process until they are 18, only to get out and be homeless? How do we stop people from walking into hospitals, having babies, and walking out at the taxpayers expense? Or how do we stop people from having babies and living off the taxpayers? Should we get rid of these programs? The ones who then suffer are once again the children. What's the solution?

Education is seriously at the heart of this matter. Take a look at the statistics for countries like Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlands. Since their sex education/contraceptive services for young people started, they have some of the lowest teenage pregnancy rates in europe, and teens tend to start having sex later in life as well. Last I checked they weren't having any population or supply issues either.

Here in the US people want to protect kids so much that they really do most teenagers an injustice by not educating them.

Either way, I would never support a government forcing a surgical procedure on everyone until some arbitrary set of rules are met. Usually the people making rules like that aren't the people affected by them anyway.

You guys realize that America tried this in a few cases back in the early 1900's right? The eugenics movement ring a bell?

Hell hitler came to Virginia, toured the facilities in Lynchburg and we trained him how to run a movement. If that wasn't enough we gave him an award for the "good works" he started back in Germany.

So it's been done and proven to be a poor system b/c it mainly targets the lower classes. It causes irreparable harm.

camthepyro wrote:It's something China has come up with... They're only allowed 2 children.

Actually, China's policy (begun in the late 70s) was 1 child per couple. Back then it was easy to do the math and the government knew they'd be screwed if population trends continued.

The policy was not enforced anywhere near as drastically as CNF proposes. It only applied to urban couples (kids still needed on the farms). No forced sterilizations at puberty (and only sterilization for the most flagrant violaters). Their enforcement was based more on the loss of perks (better jobs, housing, etc..) for those that didn't abide by the policy, and peer pressure. Although there were some abuses, overall the plan was fairly successful in meeting its goals. It's estimated that China would have an extra 1/2 billion people today if not for the policy.

What CNF proposes is more like Hitler's eugenics (and what was proposed by many American Eugenics organizations). The main difference between the Chinese policy and what CNF and the Eugenics folks propose is basic. China says anyone can have kids, but only one per couple. The Eugenics model would propose to have someone decide whether people have satisfied a set of criteria (determined by whom?) before they can reproduce. It's a big and very fundamental difference.

CNF, I read your reply to JohnJ and it's not really clear who exactly gets to decide whether one can reproduce. It also assumes that rules are applied fairly and equally to all, without regard for individual prejudices. That's just not realistic. The world doesn't work like that today and it won't work like that tomorrow. The potential for abuse in a system like that is huge when compared to the Chinese system (which is, IMHO, pretty repressive in itself).

I understand the problem, but your proposal is dependent on a world that doesn't exist.

BTW - Don't get upset if people point out the Hitler parallels. Nothing against you personally, but your proposal has a very close historical match.

Well, I would think that 'no one' would be the ones deciding who gets to have children. It wouldn't make sense to have a committee somewhere deciding who gets the cut and who doesn't.

But statistics don't lie. For example, if in America we can average a minimum cost per child per household, we can determine whether a family can support said children. With a 2 per couple cap (or rather a 2 per male cap, since a male can divorce and marry another woman, thus becoming another 'couple').

I'm saying we adopt China's policy. I'm also saying there needs to be some kind of regulation on childbirth. Not a eugenics-type-thing, but rather I think having children should have an application process.

Like a mortgage .

Any chance this might be a "modest proposal" by CNF?

In one of your earlier posts, referred to "...restricting births and creating actual standards for people who want to raise a child". Someone must decide what those "standards" are and must also decide who meets the standards. If someone has to fill out an application to reproduce, someone else must review that application and accept or deny it.

Do you trust the impartiality of the decision makers? Do you trust legislators to not create loopholes that are only accessable to a certain group? If you want politicians (i.e. government) involved in something as basic as the decision to reproduce, you're asking for trouble.

Take something as simple as the old Selective Service (draft) system. The rules appeared to be very straight forward and fair to all participants. In practice it was a farce.

The Chinese system only worked there because in a communist dictatorship, the government controls most aspects of a person's life. They can make it very unpleasant for those who don't go along, without having to resort to extreme measures.

You also have to consider how many peoples lives were changed by having kids. Like me, after my mom was killed in a car accident I was going down a road of alcohol and serious depression. And my dad was going with me. But as soon as I found out I was about to be a daddy I quit drinking and doing drugs and went to collage, got a job. my son also helped my dad get out of his depression.

So I say there is more to having children then whether or not some panel of judges says its ok or not.

Sometimes it is just meant to be.

Kids are a spiritual experience, not just a political and monetary one.