the right to breed

[kasia]

should the right to reproduce--have offspring--be a *right*? or should it be a privilege? i would say 9 out 10 kids in juvenile hall/youth authority/boot camps have poor parental discipline at home or come from broken homes. there's definitely the correlation.

some have advocated creating a test that couples would have to pass before being permitted to have children. this might be unfair, however, because it may in effect keep all uneducated people from being allowed to have kids. some have suggested having some sort of mandatory class--funded by the gov't. this, in my opinion, is not a bad idea at all. but still, problems arise when we think about couples who refuse to attend the class. would it be constitutional to tell them they can't have kids unless they fulfill the condition? what about in cases where the pregnancy was unplanned? should we force them to have abortions unless they take the class?

[deez nuts]

Wouldn't doing so violate some aspect individual rights and freedoms, somehow.

How is this gonna be enforced? How is it gonna be regulated? How do we make safeguards against abuse?

As much as I would like to see some folks be sterilized because they make unfit parent like racist and ignorant parents, violent parents, irresponsible parents etc. I just don't see it happening. I don't know it's gonna be a touch subject to delve into a couple's right to breed.

I think I adopted that saying after doing rotations where I saw or experienced one too many babies come in because they were abused ie shaken baby syndrome, babies of drug addicts, physically abused babies etc etc.



<!--EDIT|Chasiubao_Boy|Sep 15 2002, 09:43 PM-->

[kasia]

well, one way to enforce it is through fines.

[deez nuts]

Ok how do you feel about then mandatory sterilization and/or incentive based sterilization for unfit parents? That would also be another aspect of Project Kasia (idea from bunboy) :P

I personally wouldn't feel right performing surgical sterilization procedures ie vasectomy and tubal ligation because the government mandated me to do it, because the couple was determined to be unfit parents.

[kasia]

it's kinda like a minority report issue.

how can we be sure about the government's predictions until we actually allow the couple to have and raise kids?

is that basically why you would feel uncomfortable?

[deez nuts]

Originally posted by kasia@Sep 15 2002, 01:38 PM
it's kinda like a minority report issue.

how can we be sure about the government's predictions until we actually allow the couple to have and raise kids?

is that basically why you would feel uncomfortable?
Yes that and the fact that I'm not about to cut someone open without their consent, but rather a mandate from the government telling me to do so.

Of course we can just leave them under x-ray till their gonads shrivel. That way I won't be a part of it.

[AliBabaIncorporated]

i would say 9 out 10 kids in juvenile hall/youth authority/boot camps have poor parental discipline at home or come from broken homes. there's definitely the correlation.
right. so what's causing all the broken homes? what happened recently to completely screw up the family structure of millions of poor kids? one damn good reason is that people would rather go to the state for assistance than their extended family. Uncle Sam isn't gonna lecture you about your drug habit or throw you out of the house and stop giving you money because you keep bringing deadbeat guys home from clubs. Aunt Irma and your older sister would.

some have suggested having some sort of mandatory class--funded by the gov't. this, in my opinion, is not a bad idea at all.
So basically, people who don't seem fit to breed should be sent to education centers until the State is satisfied that they have reformed their ways sufficiently. I hear North Korea has used this method to great benefit to their social order.

You wanna trust the Congress, the Supreme Court, and the executive branch to make that test free of political, racial, national, religious, or gender bias? I have my doubts, on grounds of competence (this is the same government which issued a student visa to a dead terrorist) and ideology (this is the same government which is perfectly willing to trample on private property rights at the behest of large corporations and monied interests, e.g. eminent domain abuses, "intellectual property," etc.).

Honestly, I have trouble understanding left-liberals sometimes: "Government is corrupt, racist, and beholden to special interests. Let's give that government even more money and power to influence our lives!"



<!--EDIT|AliBabaIncorporated|Sep 15 2002, 06:57 PM-->

[kasia]

funded by the government by no means entails that the content of the classes by created by the government.

battered women's shelters and homeless shelters are funded by the government.

[amietron]

How about that shot? (Isn't there a shot available to make women temporarily infertile or something?) Couldn't they make it mandatory or something for people who have a history of having lots of irresponsible sex, drug addicts, etc. to get the shot, so that if indeed they continue their lifestyle, it wouldn't have a foul effect on the rest of society.

[amietron]

If they require students to have the hepititis B shot, measles vaccination, etc., don't you think they could require girls to get a "not able to have babies" shot or something like that? at least until they're graduated from high school?

[angel nympho]

Originally posted by kasia@Sep 15 2002, 06:38 PM
it's kinda like a minority report issue.

how can we be sure about the government's predictions until we actually allow the couple to have and raise kids?

is that basically why you would feel uncomfortable?
Yeah, I'm not about to let "society" tell me that I'm going to be an unfit parent.

[kasia]

so what would the alternative be?

i think in making policies, we're never going to come up with the perfect policy. it's always going to be the lesser of two evils.

should just let these individuals have children who will grow up to be delinquents and then just have our criminal system take care of them?



<!--EDIT|kasia|Sep 15 2002, 08:11 PM-->

[angel nympho]

^-- We should start by focusing on educationg people. Not just kids at risk, but their parents, too. People need to realize that children are a real-time committment. This problem will NEVER be fixed, but it could be helped if everybody worked together to try to lessen the reaches of poverty and spread education and security. The youth is a reflection of society. You can't blame the amount of at-risk youth on only their parents.

[kasia]

how would we educate the parents?

[angel nympho]

^-- There are programs out there that are trying to figure this out as we speak. For some, it may be near impossible, but all we gotta do is start educating people BEFORE they become parents. Things like that don't happen overnight.

[karizma]

>> im rather grumpy today so please excuse me if i sound a little harsh....

>> im watching this documentary on under privileged kids and im looking at the parents like... wtf were you thinking?. you can barely afford to feed yourself, your house is falling apart, you hear gunshots outside your window, you work day and night so you're rarely at home....what makes you think that this is a good environment to raise your child in? and by the looks of it the people who choose to have children despite the aforementioned arent able to control their children because theyre at work or the kids have been swayed by the influence of gangs and whatnot.

>> i wouldnt oppose programs that help parents who arent seen fit to raise children...but then again who would be qualified to make this judgement? martha stewart? oprah?

[amietron]

Originally posted by angel nympho@Sep 15 2002, 02:26 PM
^-- There are programs out there that are trying to figure this out as we speak. For some, it may be near impossible, but all we gotta do is start educating people BEFORE they become parents. Things like that don't happen overnight.
so for some, that means educating them about parenting when they're 14 or 15 years old, give or take a few years.

detach all penises, and attach them again once the male shows he has control over himself and proves he has the ability to be a responsible person.

stitch up all vaginas until the female can prove she can act as a responsible mother. animals have sex primarily to produce offspring. if she wants to pleasure herself, make her buy a vibrator or something. fd.ksfjhkijdasm,

[deez nuts]

Originally posted by amietron@Sep 15 2002, 05:57 PM


detach all penises, and attach them again once the male shows he has control over himself and proves he has the ability to be a responsible person.

when will that be? :P

[kasia]

Originally posted by angel nympho@Sep 15 2002, 10:26 PM
^-- There are programs out there that are trying to figure this out as we speak. For some, it may be near impossible, but all we gotta do is start educating people BEFORE they become parents. Things like that don't happen overnight.
but then, we run into the same problem if the parents refuse to attend the classes b/c they don't have time, etc. etc.

[kasia]

Originally posted by amietron@Sep 15 2002, 10:57 PM

so for some, that means educating them about parenting when they're 14 or 15 years old, give or take a few years.

you mean like carrying out that egg or bag of flour?

[deez nuts]

Originally posted by amietron@Sep 15 2002, 02:54 PM
don't you think they could require girls to get a "not able to have babies" shot or something like that? at least until they're graduated from high school?
That's gonna open up a whole new can of worms.

[wylin]

my solution to this problem of messed up kids is mandatory military service if u goto juvenile hall ur goin into the military and your gonna learn displine, if u dont goto a university ur goin to military also and if u goto college ur goin to military after u graduate.

that should imbune society w/ displine and honor. Taiwan does something like this making every man serve for a few yrs.

[kasia]

Originally posted by wylin@Sep 15 2002, 11:38 PM
my solution to this problem of messed up kids is mandatory military service if u goto juvenile hall ur goin into the military and your gonna learn displine, if u dont goto a university ur goin to military also and if u goto college ur goin to military after u graduate.

that should imbune society w/ displine and honor. Taiwan does something like this making every man serve for a few yrs.
yes, my grandfather recommended something similar. the bush administration didn't respond to his proposal.

[angel nympho]

Originally posted by kasia@Sep 15 2002, 10:59 PM
Originally posted by angel nympho@Sep 15 2002, 10:26 PM
^-- There are programs out there that are trying to figure this out as we speak. &nbsp;For some, it may be near impossible, but all we gotta do is start educating people BEFORE they become parents. &nbsp;Things like that don't happen overnight.
but then, we run into the same problem if the parents refuse to attend the classes b/c they don't have time, etc. etc.
It's not about "classes." Who the hell can teach a class about parenting? It's about changing the way society is. It's about changing the outlook of the general public. And it's about other people helping those that are less fortunate. Providing role models, providing shelter, providing care. You learn how to be a good parent by being raised by good parents. If we could just get people to understand that parenting is not an "occupation," but a way of life and a way to change the world, maybe the world would be a better place to live.

I'm not saying I'm in favor of making people take classes before they're allowed to have children or anything, I'm saying that society should make a stronger attempt to reach kids while they're still young and help them see the good in being a role model. I'm saying that by helping children who don't have the opportunity to have the perfect family feel loved, maybe that child will grow to love his or her own children.

You don't have to educate about PARENTING, you have to educate about the importance of CARING for other people and the importance of taking responsibility for your actions.

[kasia]

Originally posted by angel nympho@Sep 16 2002, 12:08 AM
Originally posted by kasia@Sep 15 2002, 10:59 PM
Originally posted by angel nympho@Sep 15 2002, 10:26 PM
^-- There are programs out there that are trying to figure this out as we speak. For some, it may be near impossible, but all we gotta do is start educating people BEFORE they become parents. Things like that don't happen overnight.
but then, we run into the same problem if the parents refuse to attend the classes b/c they don't have time, etc. etc.
It's not about "classes." Who the hell can teach a class about parenting? It's about changing the way society is. It's about changing the outlook of the general public. And it's about other people helping those that are less fortunate. Providing role models, providing shelter, providing care. You learn how to be a good parent by being raised by good parents. If we could just get people to understand that parenting is not an "occupation," but a way of life and a way to change the world, maybe the world would be a better place to live.

I'm not saying I'm in favor of making people take classes before they're allowed to have children or anything, I'm saying that society should make a stronger attempt to reach kids while they're still young and help them see the good in being a role model. I'm saying that by helping children who don't have the opportunity to have the perfect family feel loved, maybe that child will grow to love his or her own children.

You don't have to educate about PARENTING, you have to educate about the importance of CARING for other people and the importance of taking responsibility for your actions.
okay, but if not through classes, then how? practically speaking. (though what you wrote would make a great speech for a politician :) )

[angel nympho]

^-- There's a lot of things. Mentoring programs, public outreach programs, more personal attention in elementary through high school education systems... after-school programs, extra-curricular activities... you have to reach kids somehow before they start looking down on shit like this. when they're still young enough to enjoy it.

shit, i'm not like some public servant. i don't know how this kind of stuff works.... i just think it's totally wrong to regulate who can have kids and who cannot. i think the problem is a lot deeper than a buncha unfit parents from the ghetto. making laws to regulate who's going to be an unfit parent aren't fair. who gets to cast the first stone?!? if you..know..what..i mean...

[kasia]

Originally posted by angel nympho@Sep 16 2002, 12:15 AM
^-- There's a lot of things. Mentoring programs, public outreach programs, more personal attention in elementary through high school education systems... after-school programs, extra-curricular activities... you have to reach kids somehow before they start looking down on shit like this. when they're still young enough to enjoy it.

shit, i'm not like some public servant. i don't know how this kind of stuff works.... i just think it's totally wrong to regulate who can have kids and who cannot. i think the problem is a lot deeper than a buncha unfit parents from the ghetto. making laws to regulate who's going to be an unfit parent aren't fair. who gets to cast the first stone?!? if you..know..what..i mean...
those are all good ideas. i'm actually more for that than having the mandatory classes. just thought it would be fun to debate.

[angel nympho]

Originally posted by kasia@Sep 16 2002, 01:23 AM
Originally posted by angel nympho@Sep 16 2002, 12:15 AM
^-- There's a lot of things. &nbsp;Mentoring programs, public outreach programs, more personal attention in elementary through high school education systems... after-school programs, extra-curricular activities... you have to reach kids somehow before they start looking down on shit like this. &nbsp;when they're still young enough to enjoy it.

shit, i'm not like some public servant. &nbsp;i don't know how this kind of stuff works.... i just think it's totally wrong to regulate who can have kids and who cannot. &nbsp;i think the problem is a lot deeper than a buncha unfit parents from the ghetto. &nbsp;making laws to regulate who's going to be an unfit parent aren't fair. &nbsp;who gets to cast the first stone?!? &nbsp;if you..know..what..i mean...
those are all good ideas. i'm actually more for that than having the mandatory classes. just thought it would be fun to debate.
Werd, I hear ya. I love to stir up trouble.

Anyhoo... I'm just saying that it's good to educate parents... but you don't necessarily have to edcuate them like, now. The process should be started before they become parents. It should be something that every child is raised with... Just a general sense of compassion, I guess. I have a lot of hopes for this world, I guess... But everything's gotta be done in baby steps.

[AliBabaIncorporated]

Originally posted by kasia@Sep 15 2002, 07:14 PM
funded by the government by no means entails that the content of the classes by created by the government.

battered women's shelters and homeless shelters are funded by the government.
please don't be offended when I say, that's fairly naive. basically, either the parenting classes are directly operated by the government, in which case you know they're going to feature heavily politicized content, or they're going to be operated by private subcontractors of the government, a la traffic schools. Ever been to traffic school? Do you think those classes did a damn thing to improve the worst drivers in the room who most desperately needed those classes? No, only the attentive drivers who slipped up once in front of a cop and got caught gave a damn about the content of those classes.

further there is no such thing as no strings attached with government money. look at bilingual education debate in California. Rather shady studies and rather well-conducted studies on both sides were floating around discussing benefits and drawbacks to bilingual education. Do you think anyone voting on 209 read them? hell no, it turned straight back into a political issue and the future of hundreds of thousands of kids rested on the ideological impulses of unrelated voters who wanted to use the public schools to express their own personal preferences on social engineering.

now imagine what happens if you have mandatory government classes on parenting. their content will be subject to the regulation of the Legislature. suppose someone releases a half-baked study showing that speaking foreign languages to your kids at home is related to poor school performance. lots of alarmist voters decide this content should be included in the mandatory "parenting classes." a politician with an eye on his future picks up the issue and says "If elected, I will sponsor a bill to require all operators of parenting school classes, on pain of withholding their funding, to include content on the dangers of speaking foreign languages to your kids." millions of parents nationwide go home thinking that it's their duty to speak English to their kids. minority cultures get destroyed.

parenting is a sacred expression of human individuality just like free speech and freedom of religion. why not require people to take classes on "how to use your free speech rights" or "how to choose the right religion."

[AliBabaIncorporated]

Originally posted by kasia@Sep 15 2002, 11:41 PM
Originally posted by wylin@Sep 15 2002, 11:38 PM
my solution to this problem of messed up kids is mandatory military service if u goto juvenile hall ur goin into the military and your gonna learn displine, if u dont goto a university ur goin to military also and if u goto college ur goin to military after u graduate.

that should imbune society w/ displine and honor. Taiwan does something like this making every man serve for a few yrs.
yes, my grandfather recommended something similar. the bush administration didn't respond to his proposal.
yeah, i bet such a plan would provide a big boost to the canadian economy, as bright young college-age men run the hell north to avoid having to waste 3 years of their lives away from home, friends, family, girlfriends, etc.

[angel nympho]

^-- there is nobody in the entire world who can teach a parenting class. there is no rulebook, there are no guidelines. you can't teach parenting, like, in a class. there is no method that is better than another. there are no right decisions or wrong decisions. mistakes help shape your relationship with your child... therefore, there are no mistakes. everything is a matter of decision. do you decide to be responsible for the life of your child... or do you decide to be responsible for yourself and yourself only.

[kasia]

Originally posted by AliBabaIncorporated@Sep 16 2002, 06:28 AM
Originally posted by kasia@Sep 15 2002, 07:14 PM
funded by the government by no means entails that the content of the classes by created by the government.

battered women's shelters and homeless shelters are funded by the government.
please don't be offended when I say, that's fairly naive. basically, either the parenting classes are directly operated by the government, in which case you know they're going to feature heavily politicized content, or they're going to be operated by private subcontractors of the government, a la traffic schools. Ever been to traffic school? Do you think those classes did a damn thing to improve the worst drivers in the room who most desperately needed those classes? No, only the attentive drivers who slipped up once in front of a cop and got caught gave a damn about the content of those classes.

further there is no such thing as no strings attached with government money. look at bilingual education debate in California. Rather shady studies and rather well-conducted studies on both sides were floating around discussing benefits and drawbacks to bilingual education. Do you think anyone voting on 209 read them? hell no, it turned straight back into a political issue and the future of hundreds of thousands of kids rested on the ideological impulses of unrelated voters who wanted to use the public schools to express their own personal preferences on social engineering.

now imagine what happens if you have mandatory government classes on parenting. their content will be subject to the regulation of the Legislature. suppose someone releases a half-baked study showing that speaking foreign languages to your kids at home is related to poor school performance. lots of alarmist voters decide this content should be included in the mandatory "parenting classes." a politician with an eye on his future picks up the issue and says "If elected, I will sponsor a bill to require all operators of parenting school classes, on pain of withholding their funding, to include content on the dangers of speaking foreign languages to your kids." millions of parents nationwide go home thinking that it's their duty to speak English to their kids. minority cultures get destroyed.

parenting is a sacred expression of human individuality just like free speech and freedom of religion. why not require people to take classes on "how to use your free speech rights" or "how to choose the right religion."
but i'm not speaking from a completely unexperienced point either. the asian outreach program that i started to aid battered women was funded almost entirely by the government. and nobody ever told me what i could or could not do.

[kimpossible]

Originally posted by angel nympho@Sep 15 2002, 10:34 PM
^-- there is nobody in the entire world who can teach a parenting class. there is no rulebook, there are no guidelines. you can't teach parenting, like, in a class. there is no method that is better than another. there are no right decisions or wrong decisions. mistakes help shape your relationship with your child... therefore, there are no mistakes. everything is a matter of decision. do you decide to be responsible for the life of your child... or do you decide to be responsible for yourself and yourself only.
*hands Angel some ammo*

Countering on the basis of morality and freedom is always going to be subjective. If you debate more with her on the grounds of funding and resources you might be able to sway more public opinion, or force her into the position where she has to publicly outline implementation. Much trickier than arguing the rightness of such a program.

For instance, many public programs receive a funding from more than one source and/or level of government. Many compete for large grants from foundations or gov't orgs initially. Long term, even the most sucessful programs must move their funding to local gov't sources and community support (and some private corp sponsors). You have to prove numbers, outline plans, explain benefits to the community for the dollars allocated, etc. On top of that most programs must 'match' or show how they will put up resources to match what money they will be granted. This can come in the form of donations, volunteers, fund raising.

Then there is monitoring, who will monitor the program? By what standards will it be a success? What will be the punishment for those that don't participate?

Accept her argument. Force her next move. Deconstruct.

And have fun. :D



<!--EDIT|Hello_Hapa|Sep 16 2002, 08:28 PM-->

[achtungbaby]

Originally posted by kasia@Sep 16 2002, 06:37 PM
the asian outreach program that i started to aid battered women was funded almost entirely by the government. &nbsp;and nobody ever told me what i could or could not do.
Both issues or programs are very different political animals though.

[kasia]

Originally posted by achtungbaby@Sep 17 2002, 05:23 PM
Originally posted by kasia@Sep 16 2002, 06:37 PM
the asian outreach program that i started to aid battered women was funded almost entirely by the government. and nobody ever told me what i could or could not do.
Both issues or programs are very different political animals though.
of course. but why would one necessitate government involvement but not the other?

[angel nympho]

Originally posted by Hello_Hapa@Sep 17 2002, 03:22 AM
*hands Angel some ammo*

Countering on the basis of morality and freedom is always going to be subjective. If you debate more with her on the grounds of funding and resources you might be able to sway more public opinion, or force her into the position where she has to publicly outline implementation. Much trickier than arguing the rightness of such a program.

For instance, many public programs receive a funding from more than one source and/or level of government. Many compete for large grants from foundations or gov't orgs initially. Long term, even the most sucessful programs must move their funding to local gov't sources and community support (and some private corp sponsors). You have to prove numbers, outline plans, explain benefits to the community for the dollars allocated, etc. On top of that most programs must 'match' or show how they will put up resources to match what money they will be granted. This can come in the form of donations, volunteers, fund raising.

Then there is monitoring, who will monitor the program? By what standards will it be a success? What will be the punishment for those that don't participate?

Accept her argument. Force her next move. Deconstruct.

And have fun. :D
Does my little idea for how we can better humanity really seem like it's not feasible? I mean, our tax dollars go to so much crap that we don't even care about. If it were up to me, I'd rather be financing and investing in the care and education of the nation's troubled youth.

And maybe I'm not wording this correctly. I don't mean to implement a program directed exactly for this purpose. I mean devoting more time, energy, and money into programs that are already in existence and improving on these programs. It's not a program that I'm talking about, really. It's more of... a general mission for awareness that needs to be spread. Improving on our programs for youth and our education system would do the world a lot more good than they realize. People think kids don't matter... people don't realize that kids are the parents of tomorrow. (Sorry to sound corny or whatever.) If we raise awareness nation-wide, maybe even world-wide (but I'll admit that this might not be possible on a global level), I know people have it in them to help out even just a little.

All I'm saying is that... we don't have to have like special programs for this. This should be something people already know. People should just inherently have it in them to know how to treat others with compassion. The reason some people don't do this might have to do with their upbringing. If we can affect the upbringing of today's youth in a positive way... We might slowly but surely bring about change in the world. Slowly... but surely. :P