"Having children is a human right that should not be denied by society." Really?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 09:40:52 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate (Moderator: Torie)
  "Having children is a human right that should not be denied by society." Really?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Poll
Question: Having children is a human right that should not be denied by society? Agree or Disagree
#1
Agree
 
#2
Disagree
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 68

Author Topic: "Having children is a human right that should not be denied by society." Really?  (Read 4075 times)
User157088589849
BlondeArtisit
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 493


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: August 22, 2014, 09:07:58 AM »
« edited: August 22, 2014, 09:10:01 AM by BlondeArtisit »

A work colleague made the suggestion that "having children is a human right that should not be denied by society". I objected fairly strongly to this because there will always be a case where a famliy have more children than they can afford and demand that Government pays for it. Decision makers in Government are left with difficult decisions to make as there are children involved and are obliged to follow due process in making the decision.  I asked my colleague if a woman has 12 children and can't afford anymore, should society step in not medically but socially? He said no, she can have as many as she likes as there is no real cost to the taxpayer. Hmmm

Its incredible difficult to write a law that doesn't impact on the child due to parental irresponsibility. The cost to the taxpayer is very, very minimal but the image it creates is the most damaging as it creates resentment with people who take nothing from Government but still raise a family.

Is having children a human right..yes...is having children that you can't afford still a human right...no.

I'm to stupid to solve this problem.

I guess I'm looking to find any posters who have good ideas on how to design a policy that addresses people who think its ok to breed but can't afford it.

Logged
King
intermoderate
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,357
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: August 22, 2014, 09:20:20 AM »

No woman with basic sex ed and access to birth control wants 12 children.
Logged
User157088589849
BlondeArtisit
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 493


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: August 22, 2014, 09:24:40 AM »

No woman with basic sex ed and access to birth control wants 12 children.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2728767/Mother-eight-lives-2k-month-benefits-says-use-surrogate-TWO-children.html

she has eight and wants more. she has never worked in her life.
Logged
King
intermoderate
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,357
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: August 22, 2014, 09:47:18 AM »

She makes a profit off having more children, raising them at less cost than the benefits she gets from the government. That's called expanding your business. It's a rational decision for her.

Most women do not have those kind of margins.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: August 22, 2014, 09:58:30 AM »

Agree. What's the alternative? Eugenics? Mandatory castrations? Forcing all women to carry all pregnancies to term even in the case of the probable cause that the pregnancy was caused by a felony? Forcing women to have abortions? Even the PRC is phasing out that abomination.

Then again, maybe child protective services can find that parents are unfit if the way they fund the raising of their children is a constructive fraud upon society.
Logged
solarstorm
solarstorm2012
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,637
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: August 22, 2014, 10:51:59 AM »

Nadya Suleman approves of this.
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,806


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: August 22, 2014, 12:32:45 PM »

Voted yes because having a reasonable number of children should be a right. What the PRC does is unconscionable.

But having children ad infinitum should not. At that point, the externalities to society become significant enough that some regulation should not be out of the question.
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,097
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: August 23, 2014, 12:14:40 AM »

This is a tough one.  If a woman has 12 abortions or has given up 12 kids for adoption or has 12 but doesn't work and collects a money from the govt to feed them and such then clearly that woman shouldn't be having more kids.  It's not good for anybody.  What if it's 7?  4?  2?  It's wrong to me to have 2 kids, not work and collect money from others to survive (as a plan, not as a temporary situation), 2 abortions suck, but sometimes sh**t happens to good people, but you've got to start questioning your actions when you get above three.

But I've got issues forcing people to get fixed.  I've got less issues with paying them to get fixed, but how much? where does the money come from?  Perhaps it should be offered free to every High School dropout?
Logged
Illuminati Blood Drinker
phwezer
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,528
United States


Political Matrix
E: -9.42, S: -7.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: August 23, 2014, 01:16:50 AM »

That is the ing Daily Mail, basically the British Fox News if it were a newspaper, it is their JOB to constantly scaremonger about WELFARE QUEENS etc. so Conservative governments can slash benefits programs and impose more austerity on the British public.

Logged
Sopranos Republican
Matt from VT
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,175
United States


Political Matrix
E: 3.03, S: -8.87

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: August 23, 2014, 03:16:02 AM »

Women have the right to have as many kids as they wish with they're spouce/partner, or otherwise. Care for the children should be fully funded including healthcare. Having the state say no to the right of adults who want children is fascism. Plain and simple. And this doesn't even begin to cover the topic of how disastrously minorities would get screwed over in such a system.
Logged
🦀🎂🦀🎂
CrabCake
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,192
Kiribati


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: August 23, 2014, 07:43:54 AM »

It shouldn't be denied of course, but the state shouldn't give the usual benefits for children beyond two*. Sounds awful, but we can't deny that government should not subsidise an unsustainable population (especially in Westerners, who are a net drag on the planet's ecosystem).

* Not applying to those families already with multiple children, I'm not a monster.
Logged
User157088589849
BlondeArtisit
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 493


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: August 23, 2014, 08:30:13 AM »

It shouldn't be denied of course, but the state shouldn't give the usual benefits for children beyond two*. Sounds awful, but we can't deny that government should not subsidise an unsustainable population (especially in Westerners, who are a net drag on the planet's ecosystem).

* Not applying to those families already with multiple children, I'm not a monster.

I'm really uncomfortable with people introducing arbitary numbers like you dont get benefits for the 3rd child but only the first two. Why 2? Why not just one? What about triplets?  Why should parents with teenagers get money from the state?

Majority of state handouts for children are not spent on the child or its development.

I would be more supportive of a policy that allowed parents to receive money if they have children below the age of 10. People joke that children use to work down the mines at 10 but they did. Teenagers should be allowed to work if they want. I worked from the age of thirteen got paid in cash but it was great
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: August 23, 2014, 09:17:51 AM »

Women have the right to have as many kids as they wish with they're spouse/partner, or otherwise. Care for the children should be fully funded including healthcare. Having the state say no to the right of adults who want children is fascism. Plain and simple. And this doesn't even begin to cover the topic of how disastrously minorities would get screwed over in such a system.

Actually, fascist governments subsidized births so as to get more manpower for future wars.
Logged
TheDeadFlagBlues
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,990
Canada
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: August 23, 2014, 12:05:39 PM »
« Edited: August 23, 2014, 12:07:15 PM by TheDeadFlagBlues »

Having children is not an absolute human right, it is very circumstantial. In cases of immediate environmental catastrophe or with pregnant minors, the state should have the ability to intervene and create flexible controls (so that those who value children more can still partake in the act) that limit the number of children.

I am of the belief that very low fertility rates are as indicative of social problems as very high fertility rates and that families must be supported by the state at all costs but there are circumstances in which pro-natal Social Democracy ceases to make sense and circumstances in which aggressive pro-natal policies are necessary. Family planning is a crucial aspect of public policy like healthcare or education or macroeconomics and I distrust anyone who claims that "healthcare is a human right" because that's evading the subtleties of the issue that truly matter.

This is probably the only issue where I come off as a very conservative kind of leftist. 
Logged
Cory
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,709


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: August 23, 2014, 08:28:09 PM »

Of course not. Trashy people (yes, there is such a thing, and they are the worst) have too much kids as it is.
Logged
Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck
HockeyDude
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,376
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: August 24, 2014, 12:28:15 AM »

Really?  You suggest that the state should be stepping in and declaring what an individual's reproductive rights should be?

Scary.  Truly scary.
Logged
PiMp DaDdy FitzGerald
Mr. Pollo
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: August 24, 2014, 12:35:27 AM »

Israel while it was still liberal and Ashkenazi didn't do it, and now they are dealing with Arabs and the Orthodox Jews taking their country away.
Logged
RI
realisticidealist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,717


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: August 24, 2014, 01:20:48 AM »

lol at people who support "reproductive rights" advocating for telling women how many children they can have.
Logged
ingemann
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,226


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: August 24, 2014, 04:25:44 AM »

I'm personal of the opinion, if you're not able to take care of your children, you should not get any, and here I don't talk abort unemployment or poverty, I'm talking about not being physical or mentally able to care for your children.
Logged
Famous Mortimer
WillipsBrighton
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,010
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: September 07, 2014, 09:42:56 PM »

I think if you give birth more than 3 times while on welfare, that should be considered negligence and your children should be taken away and put in the care of the state.

That's assuming we could get universal health care including birth control first.
Logged
RINO Tom
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,002
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: November 10, 2014, 11:43:21 PM »

Agree. What's the alternative? Eugenics? Mandatory castrations? Forcing all women to carry all pregnancies to term even in the case of the probable cause that the pregnancy was caused by a felony? Forcing women to have abortions? Even the PRC is phasing out that abomination.

Then again, maybe child protective services can find that parents are unfit if the way they fund the raising of their children is a constructive fraud upon society.
Logged
Ban my account ffs!
snowguy716
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,632
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: November 11, 2014, 01:06:32 AM »

Some of the comments in this thread really scare me.  Criminalizing women for getting pregnant is scary business.

How about we focus on encouraging small families through education and provide ample benefits for small to medium size families with conditional benefits for larger families (like no more benefits after the 4th child).
Logged
SteveRogers
duncan298
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,155


Political Matrix
E: -3.87, S: -5.04

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: November 11, 2014, 01:18:11 AM »

Sooo... for all those in this thread who support placing restrictions on child birth, what enforcement mechanism are you proposing?
Logged
Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck
HockeyDude
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,376
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: November 11, 2014, 09:07:52 AM »

Sooo... for all those in this thread who support placing restrictions on child birth, what enforcement mechanism are you proposing?

Don't encourage them to share whatever dystopian, depressing measures they have in mind for dealing with this "issue". 
Logged
Indy Texas
independentTX
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,258
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: -3.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: November 12, 2014, 12:23:46 AM »

Having children is a human right. Externalizing the costs of your decision to have children is not a right.

I prefer using carrots over sticks. Suppose that a woman who is on Medicaid is giving birth to a baby in a county hospital. Tell her that if she agrees to have her tubes tied and have no more children, the procedure will be free and she will receive a cash payout and subsidized early childhood education for her baby.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.059 seconds with 15 queries.