Personal control ain't an option in Australia right now because of thousands of dollars mothers get for giving birth. Young girls (teenagers) are having children for the PURPOSE of that money and the money they get from the government in the form of fortnightly payments. That is creating a society of purpose bred unwanted children...what percentage of those children will be able to 'survive' the experience unscathed mentally and become a productive member of society?...
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
General Debate
- Thread starter Pete
- Start date
Personal control ain't an option in Australia right now because of thousands of dollars mothers get for giving birth. Young girls (teenagers) are having children for the PURPOSE of that money and the money they get from the government in the form of fortnightly payments. That is creating a society of purpose bred unwanted children...what percentage of those children will be able to 'survive' the experience unscathed mentally and become a productive member of society?...
Personal control ain't an option in Australia right now because of thousands of dollars mothers get for giving birth. Young girls (teenagers) are having children for the PURPOSE of that money and the money they get from the government in the form of fortnightly payments. That is creating a society of purpose bred unwanted children...what percentage of those children will be able to 'survive' the experience unscathed mentally and become a productive member of society?...
I
IG
Guest
This to me the idea of this is just pushing the 'family' agenda.
What I mean by this is that somebody/some family structure who would be willing and able to adopt/have children is unable to because 'the family' which has been licensed to take care of/raise/adopt a child is the 'nuclear family' and not any of the other family structures out there.
What I mean by the nuclear family is a mother (female), father (male), and kid/s.
But I question you all this, what is a 'family' nowadays?
Is the family two parents? One parent? Gay parents? Heterosexual parents?
Lets take for instance that a lesbian couple wants to go ahead and have a child, but 'licensing' says that they should neither be in a relationship nor raise a child together. Now lets take another couple, the nuclear family, father works mother stays home and tries to get pregnant. Who is to say which will have more love for a child. Under 'licensing' the nuclear family is the perfect ideal family, but that is not always the case. Has anybody seen Kramer vs. Kramer?
Additionally you have to consider that licensing will change according to the political currents of that particular time and it's always subject to change. If suddenly a man and another man are able to adopt a child together and then 3 months later a new political agenda comes into play that could suddenly become illegal. What happens then, is the child that they've been allowed to raise suddenly taken away from them because they're gay? Despite the fact that they might be perfectly capable of taking care of, providing for, and loving a child.
And some on here, I'm sure, will say that 'licensing will be subject to capability and monetary ability' but I personally believe that would never be the case. For example sex education in schools nowadays is abstinence only, which came into effect with Bush (I believe that's when it happened I could be totally wrong though), when "xyz" comes into office that might change. I believe if we want to get rid of our problems then we need to look towards Europe, honestly. The US honestly ranks pretty low in child/adolescent well being compared to other countries according to UNICEF. <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.unicef-icdc.org/publications/pdf/rc7_eng.pdf
">http://www.unicef-icdc.org/pub...tions/pdf/rc7_eng.pdf
</a>
Did you know that people in the US have the lowest duration of annual paid leave? Did you also know that Denmark has the lowest child poverty rates after taxes and transfers? 2.4% The US has 21.9% The Netherlands heads the table of overall child well-being and the UK and US are in the bottom third? 139 countries provide paid leave for short or long term illnesses with 117 providing a week or more annually. The US provides only unpaid leave for serious illnesses through FMLA (which does not cover all workers). Did you know that the US is tied with Ecuador and Suriname for 39th place in enrollment in early childhood care and education for 3-5 year olds (nearly all of europe performs better). Also did you know that the Czech Republic achieves a higher over all rank for child well-being than several other countries (eg. US, France, UK, Austria).
As far as it being a "Brave New World" perhaps shipping the 'knowledgeable' off to an island might be a good idea. Let them sit and stew for a year and then have them come back and tell us what is messed up with our society.
What I mean by this is that somebody/some family structure who would be willing and able to adopt/have children is unable to because 'the family' which has been licensed to take care of/raise/adopt a child is the 'nuclear family' and not any of the other family structures out there.
What I mean by the nuclear family is a mother (female), father (male), and kid/s.
But I question you all this, what is a 'family' nowadays?
Is the family two parents? One parent? Gay parents? Heterosexual parents?
Lets take for instance that a lesbian couple wants to go ahead and have a child, but 'licensing' says that they should neither be in a relationship nor raise a child together. Now lets take another couple, the nuclear family, father works mother stays home and tries to get pregnant. Who is to say which will have more love for a child. Under 'licensing' the nuclear family is the perfect ideal family, but that is not always the case. Has anybody seen Kramer vs. Kramer?
Additionally you have to consider that licensing will change according to the political currents of that particular time and it's always subject to change. If suddenly a man and another man are able to adopt a child together and then 3 months later a new political agenda comes into play that could suddenly become illegal. What happens then, is the child that they've been allowed to raise suddenly taken away from them because they're gay? Despite the fact that they might be perfectly capable of taking care of, providing for, and loving a child.
And some on here, I'm sure, will say that 'licensing will be subject to capability and monetary ability' but I personally believe that would never be the case. For example sex education in schools nowadays is abstinence only, which came into effect with Bush (I believe that's when it happened I could be totally wrong though), when "xyz" comes into office that might change. I believe if we want to get rid of our problems then we need to look towards Europe, honestly. The US honestly ranks pretty low in child/adolescent well being compared to other countries according to UNICEF. <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.unicef-icdc.org/publications/pdf/rc7_eng.pdf
">http://www.unicef-icdc.org/pub...tions/pdf/rc7_eng.pdf
</a>
Did you know that people in the US have the lowest duration of annual paid leave? Did you also know that Denmark has the lowest child poverty rates after taxes and transfers? 2.4% The US has 21.9% The Netherlands heads the table of overall child well-being and the UK and US are in the bottom third? 139 countries provide paid leave for short or long term illnesses with 117 providing a week or more annually. The US provides only unpaid leave for serious illnesses through FMLA (which does not cover all workers). Did you know that the US is tied with Ecuador and Suriname for 39th place in enrollment in early childhood care and education for 3-5 year olds (nearly all of europe performs better). Also did you know that the Czech Republic achieves a higher over all rank for child well-being than several other countries (eg. US, France, UK, Austria).
As far as it being a "Brave New World" perhaps shipping the 'knowledgeable' off to an island might be a good idea. Let them sit and stew for a year and then have them come back and tell us what is messed up with our society.
I
IG
Guest
This to me the idea of this is just pushing the 'family' agenda.
What I mean by this is that somebody/some family structure who would be willing and able to adopt/have children is unable to because 'the family' which has been licensed to take care of/raise/adopt a child is the 'nuclear family' and not any of the other family structures out there.
What I mean by the nuclear family is a mother (female), father (male), and kid/s.
But I question you all this, what is a 'family' nowadays?
Is the family two parents? One parent? Gay parents? Heterosexual parents?
Lets take for instance that a lesbian couple wants to go ahead and have a child, but 'licensing' says that they should neither be in a relationship nor raise a child together. Now lets take another couple, the nuclear family, father works mother stays home and tries to get pregnant. Who is to say which will have more love for a child. Under 'licensing' the nuclear family is the perfect ideal family, but that is not always the case. Has anybody seen Kramer vs. Kramer?
Additionally you have to consider that licensing will change according to the political currents of that particular time and it's always subject to change. If suddenly a man and another man are able to adopt a child together and then 3 months later a new political agenda comes into play that could suddenly become illegal. What happens then, is the child that they've been allowed to raise suddenly taken away from them because they're gay? Despite the fact that they might be perfectly capable of taking care of, providing for, and loving a child.
And some on here, I'm sure, will say that 'licensing will be subject to capability and monetary ability' but I personally believe that would never be the case. For example sex education in schools nowadays is abstinence only, which came into effect with Bush (I believe that's when it happened I could be totally wrong though), when "xyz" comes into office that might change. I believe if we want to get rid of our problems then we need to look towards Europe, honestly. The US honestly ranks pretty low in child/adolescent well being compared to other countries according to UNICEF. <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.unicef-icdc.org/publications/pdf/rc7_eng.pdf
">http://www.unicef-icdc.org/pub...tions/pdf/rc7_eng.pdf
</a>
Did you know that people in the US have the lowest duration of annual paid leave? Did you also know that Denmark has the lowest child poverty rates after taxes and transfers? 2.4% The US has 21.9% The Netherlands heads the table of overall child well-being and the UK and US are in the bottom third? 139 countries provide paid leave for short or long term illnesses with 117 providing a week or more annually. The US provides only unpaid leave for serious illnesses through FMLA (which does not cover all workers). Did you know that the US is tied with Ecuador and Suriname for 39th place in enrollment in early childhood care and education for 3-5 year olds (nearly all of europe performs better). Also did you know that the Czech Republic achieves a higher over all rank for child well-being than several other countries (eg. US, France, UK, Austria).
As far as it being a "Brave New World" perhaps shipping the 'knowledgeable' off to an island might be a good idea. Let them sit and stew for a year and then have them come back and tell us what is messed up with our society.
What I mean by this is that somebody/some family structure who would be willing and able to adopt/have children is unable to because 'the family' which has been licensed to take care of/raise/adopt a child is the 'nuclear family' and not any of the other family structures out there.
What I mean by the nuclear family is a mother (female), father (male), and kid/s.
But I question you all this, what is a 'family' nowadays?
Is the family two parents? One parent? Gay parents? Heterosexual parents?
Lets take for instance that a lesbian couple wants to go ahead and have a child, but 'licensing' says that they should neither be in a relationship nor raise a child together. Now lets take another couple, the nuclear family, father works mother stays home and tries to get pregnant. Who is to say which will have more love for a child. Under 'licensing' the nuclear family is the perfect ideal family, but that is not always the case. Has anybody seen Kramer vs. Kramer?
Additionally you have to consider that licensing will change according to the political currents of that particular time and it's always subject to change. If suddenly a man and another man are able to adopt a child together and then 3 months later a new political agenda comes into play that could suddenly become illegal. What happens then, is the child that they've been allowed to raise suddenly taken away from them because they're gay? Despite the fact that they might be perfectly capable of taking care of, providing for, and loving a child.
And some on here, I'm sure, will say that 'licensing will be subject to capability and monetary ability' but I personally believe that would never be the case. For example sex education in schools nowadays is abstinence only, which came into effect with Bush (I believe that's when it happened I could be totally wrong though), when "xyz" comes into office that might change. I believe if we want to get rid of our problems then we need to look towards Europe, honestly. The US honestly ranks pretty low in child/adolescent well being compared to other countries according to UNICEF. <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.unicef-icdc.org/publications/pdf/rc7_eng.pdf
">http://www.unicef-icdc.org/pub...tions/pdf/rc7_eng.pdf
</a>
Did you know that people in the US have the lowest duration of annual paid leave? Did you also know that Denmark has the lowest child poverty rates after taxes and transfers? 2.4% The US has 21.9% The Netherlands heads the table of overall child well-being and the UK and US are in the bottom third? 139 countries provide paid leave for short or long term illnesses with 117 providing a week or more annually. The US provides only unpaid leave for serious illnesses through FMLA (which does not cover all workers). Did you know that the US is tied with Ecuador and Suriname for 39th place in enrollment in early childhood care and education for 3-5 year olds (nearly all of europe performs better). Also did you know that the Czech Republic achieves a higher over all rank for child well-being than several other countries (eg. US, France, UK, Austria).
As far as it being a "Brave New World" perhaps shipping the 'knowledgeable' off to an island might be a good idea. Let them sit and stew for a year and then have them come back and tell us what is messed up with our society.
I
IG
Guest
This to me the idea of this is just pushing the 'family' agenda.
What I mean by this is that somebody/some family structure who would be willing and able to adopt/have children is unable to because 'the family' which has been licensed to take care of/raise/adopt a child is the 'nuclear family' and not any of the other family structures out there.
What I mean by the nuclear family is a mother (female), father (male), and kid/s.
But I question you all this, what is a 'family' nowadays?
Is the family two parents? One parent? Gay parents? Heterosexual parents?
Lets take for instance that a lesbian couple wants to go ahead and have a child, but 'licensing' says that they should neither be in a relationship nor raise a child together. Now lets take another couple, the nuclear family, father works mother stays home and tries to get pregnant. Who is to say which will have more love for a child. Under 'licensing' the nuclear family is the perfect ideal family, but that is not always the case. Has anybody seen Kramer vs. Kramer?
Additionally you have to consider that licensing will change according to the political currents of that particular time and it's always subject to change. If suddenly a man and another man are able to adopt a child together and then 3 months later a new political agenda comes into play that could suddenly become illegal. What happens then, is the child that they've been allowed to raise suddenly taken away from them because they're gay? Despite the fact that they might be perfectly capable of taking care of, providing for, and loving a child.
And some on here, I'm sure, will say that 'licensing will be subject to capability and monetary ability' but I personally believe that would never be the case. For example sex education in schools nowadays is abstinence only, which came into effect with Bush (I believe that's when it happened I could be totally wrong though), when "xyz" comes into office that might change. I believe if we want to get rid of our problems then we need to look towards Europe, honestly. The US honestly ranks pretty low in child/adolescent well being compared to other countries according to UNICEF. <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.unicef-icdc.org/publications/pdf/rc7_eng.pdf
">http://www.unicef-icdc.org/pub...tions/pdf/rc7_eng.pdf
</a>
Did you know that people in the US have the lowest duration of annual paid leave? Did you also know that Denmark has the lowest child poverty rates after taxes and transfers? 2.4% The US has 21.9% The Netherlands heads the table of overall child well-being and the UK and US are in the bottom third? 139 countries provide paid leave for short or long term illnesses with 117 providing a week or more annually. The US provides only unpaid leave for serious illnesses through FMLA (which does not cover all workers). Did you know that the US is tied with Ecuador and Suriname for 39th place in enrollment in early childhood care and education for 3-5 year olds (nearly all of europe performs better). Also did you know that the Czech Republic achieves a higher over all rank for child well-being than several other countries (eg. US, France, UK, Austria).
As far as it being a "Brave New World" perhaps shipping the 'knowledgeable' off to an island might be a good idea. Let them sit and stew for a year and then have them come back and tell us what is messed up with our society.
What I mean by this is that somebody/some family structure who would be willing and able to adopt/have children is unable to because 'the family' which has been licensed to take care of/raise/adopt a child is the 'nuclear family' and not any of the other family structures out there.
What I mean by the nuclear family is a mother (female), father (male), and kid/s.
But I question you all this, what is a 'family' nowadays?
Is the family two parents? One parent? Gay parents? Heterosexual parents?
Lets take for instance that a lesbian couple wants to go ahead and have a child, but 'licensing' says that they should neither be in a relationship nor raise a child together. Now lets take another couple, the nuclear family, father works mother stays home and tries to get pregnant. Who is to say which will have more love for a child. Under 'licensing' the nuclear family is the perfect ideal family, but that is not always the case. Has anybody seen Kramer vs. Kramer?
Additionally you have to consider that licensing will change according to the political currents of that particular time and it's always subject to change. If suddenly a man and another man are able to adopt a child together and then 3 months later a new political agenda comes into play that could suddenly become illegal. What happens then, is the child that they've been allowed to raise suddenly taken away from them because they're gay? Despite the fact that they might be perfectly capable of taking care of, providing for, and loving a child.
And some on here, I'm sure, will say that 'licensing will be subject to capability and monetary ability' but I personally believe that would never be the case. For example sex education in schools nowadays is abstinence only, which came into effect with Bush (I believe that's when it happened I could be totally wrong though), when "xyz" comes into office that might change. I believe if we want to get rid of our problems then we need to look towards Europe, honestly. The US honestly ranks pretty low in child/adolescent well being compared to other countries according to UNICEF. <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.unicef-icdc.org/publications/pdf/rc7_eng.pdf
">http://www.unicef-icdc.org/pub...tions/pdf/rc7_eng.pdf
</a>
Did you know that people in the US have the lowest duration of annual paid leave? Did you also know that Denmark has the lowest child poverty rates after taxes and transfers? 2.4% The US has 21.9% The Netherlands heads the table of overall child well-being and the UK and US are in the bottom third? 139 countries provide paid leave for short or long term illnesses with 117 providing a week or more annually. The US provides only unpaid leave for serious illnesses through FMLA (which does not cover all workers). Did you know that the US is tied with Ecuador and Suriname for 39th place in enrollment in early childhood care and education for 3-5 year olds (nearly all of europe performs better). Also did you know that the Czech Republic achieves a higher over all rank for child well-being than several other countries (eg. US, France, UK, Austria).
As far as it being a "Brave New World" perhaps shipping the 'knowledgeable' off to an island might be a good idea. Let them sit and stew for a year and then have them come back and tell us what is messed up with our society.
Pete,
To an extent I agree with you. I agree that some people should not have kids. I, for example, had my daughter at a very young age. And at the time I had her boy I would not have passed one bit of any of those test. Financially it was horrible. I was married to a dead beat and I still had a child. Although, I knew I had CF I did not know how serious the disease was until I got pregnant with her. You might ask how did I not know? Well as a child I never got sick.
Financially, I am not wealthy by no means. I do work work a 9 to 5 job. We have health insurance. I am now remarried to a wonderful father to my daughter. And even though we are not swimming in money she is not deprived of anything. We do spend lots of time with her and make time for ourselves. We attend almost all her school events including field trips. We do have a hard time when it comes to buying her brand name clothing but she does not ask for it...not yet that is. We pay for a daycare/private school so we try to give her the best education. If you ask her if she is happy she will say yes. That is basically told to us by her teachers because of drawings that she does and little notes she writes. I think now I would pass. So I don't know if licensing someone to be a parent would be right because Circumstances do change.
Yes it's hard for my daughter to see me sick. I think that I will die sooner than I should but the same could happen with someone else. Example getting hit by a car or getting breast cancer. Although, like I said I did not know what CF was really until I got pregnant.
To an extent I agree with you. I agree that some people should not have kids. I, for example, had my daughter at a very young age. And at the time I had her boy I would not have passed one bit of any of those test. Financially it was horrible. I was married to a dead beat and I still had a child. Although, I knew I had CF I did not know how serious the disease was until I got pregnant with her. You might ask how did I not know? Well as a child I never got sick.
Financially, I am not wealthy by no means. I do work work a 9 to 5 job. We have health insurance. I am now remarried to a wonderful father to my daughter. And even though we are not swimming in money she is not deprived of anything. We do spend lots of time with her and make time for ourselves. We attend almost all her school events including field trips. We do have a hard time when it comes to buying her brand name clothing but she does not ask for it...not yet that is. We pay for a daycare/private school so we try to give her the best education. If you ask her if she is happy she will say yes. That is basically told to us by her teachers because of drawings that she does and little notes she writes. I think now I would pass. So I don't know if licensing someone to be a parent would be right because Circumstances do change.
Yes it's hard for my daughter to see me sick. I think that I will die sooner than I should but the same could happen with someone else. Example getting hit by a car or getting breast cancer. Although, like I said I did not know what CF was really until I got pregnant.
Pete,
To an extent I agree with you. I agree that some people should not have kids. I, for example, had my daughter at a very young age. And at the time I had her boy I would not have passed one bit of any of those test. Financially it was horrible. I was married to a dead beat and I still had a child. Although, I knew I had CF I did not know how serious the disease was until I got pregnant with her. You might ask how did I not know? Well as a child I never got sick.
Financially, I am not wealthy by no means. I do work work a 9 to 5 job. We have health insurance. I am now remarried to a wonderful father to my daughter. And even though we are not swimming in money she is not deprived of anything. We do spend lots of time with her and make time for ourselves. We attend almost all her school events including field trips. We do have a hard time when it comes to buying her brand name clothing but she does not ask for it...not yet that is. We pay for a daycare/private school so we try to give her the best education. If you ask her if she is happy she will say yes. That is basically told to us by her teachers because of drawings that she does and little notes she writes. I think now I would pass. So I don't know if licensing someone to be a parent would be right because Circumstances do change.
Yes it's hard for my daughter to see me sick. I think that I will die sooner than I should but the same could happen with someone else. Example getting hit by a car or getting breast cancer. Although, like I said I did not know what CF was really until I got pregnant.
To an extent I agree with you. I agree that some people should not have kids. I, for example, had my daughter at a very young age. And at the time I had her boy I would not have passed one bit of any of those test. Financially it was horrible. I was married to a dead beat and I still had a child. Although, I knew I had CF I did not know how serious the disease was until I got pregnant with her. You might ask how did I not know? Well as a child I never got sick.
Financially, I am not wealthy by no means. I do work work a 9 to 5 job. We have health insurance. I am now remarried to a wonderful father to my daughter. And even though we are not swimming in money she is not deprived of anything. We do spend lots of time with her and make time for ourselves. We attend almost all her school events including field trips. We do have a hard time when it comes to buying her brand name clothing but she does not ask for it...not yet that is. We pay for a daycare/private school so we try to give her the best education. If you ask her if she is happy she will say yes. That is basically told to us by her teachers because of drawings that she does and little notes she writes. I think now I would pass. So I don't know if licensing someone to be a parent would be right because Circumstances do change.
Yes it's hard for my daughter to see me sick. I think that I will die sooner than I should but the same could happen with someone else. Example getting hit by a car or getting breast cancer. Although, like I said I did not know what CF was really until I got pregnant.
Pete,
To an extent I agree with you. I agree that some people should not have kids. I, for example, had my daughter at a very young age. And at the time I had her boy I would not have passed one bit of any of those test. Financially it was horrible. I was married to a dead beat and I still had a child. Although, I knew I had CF I did not know how serious the disease was until I got pregnant with her. You might ask how did I not know? Well as a child I never got sick.
Financially, I am not wealthy by no means. I do work work a 9 to 5 job. We have health insurance. I am now remarried to a wonderful father to my daughter. And even though we are not swimming in money she is not deprived of anything. We do spend lots of time with her and make time for ourselves. We attend almost all her school events including field trips. We do have a hard time when it comes to buying her brand name clothing but she does not ask for it...not yet that is. We pay for a daycare/private school so we try to give her the best education. If you ask her if she is happy she will say yes. That is basically told to us by her teachers because of drawings that she does and little notes she writes. I think now I would pass. So I don't know if licensing someone to be a parent would be right because Circumstances do change.
Yes it's hard for my daughter to see me sick. I think that I will die sooner than I should but the same could happen with someone else. Example getting hit by a car or getting breast cancer. Although, like I said I did not know what CF was really until I got pregnant.
To an extent I agree with you. I agree that some people should not have kids. I, for example, had my daughter at a very young age. And at the time I had her boy I would not have passed one bit of any of those test. Financially it was horrible. I was married to a dead beat and I still had a child. Although, I knew I had CF I did not know how serious the disease was until I got pregnant with her. You might ask how did I not know? Well as a child I never got sick.
Financially, I am not wealthy by no means. I do work work a 9 to 5 job. We have health insurance. I am now remarried to a wonderful father to my daughter. And even though we are not swimming in money she is not deprived of anything. We do spend lots of time with her and make time for ourselves. We attend almost all her school events including field trips. We do have a hard time when it comes to buying her brand name clothing but she does not ask for it...not yet that is. We pay for a daycare/private school so we try to give her the best education. If you ask her if she is happy she will say yes. That is basically told to us by her teachers because of drawings that she does and little notes she writes. I think now I would pass. So I don't know if licensing someone to be a parent would be right because Circumstances do change.
Yes it's hard for my daughter to see me sick. I think that I will die sooner than I should but the same could happen with someone else. Example getting hit by a car or getting breast cancer. Although, like I said I did not know what CF was really until I got pregnant.
Just as you don't like (at least thats what I gather from your post) governmental control of your tax dollars that give the money to women who have "unwanted children", I would think that you wouldn't want governmental control over who should get to have children. It seems the more the government wants to control me the less it thinks I am capable of controlling myself. In turn it creates a society that doesn't control itself. You may argue which came first (chicken or egg thing). I maintain that once you take away governmental controls, people start to control their own lives. Take your mothers that you claim have babies for the money your government gives them. Take that away and they stop having the babies for that reason. They will see others having babies with no means to take care of them. This will make them think twice about birth control. The transition may be rough but the alternative is a government that thinks it needs to control all facets of your life. Do you really trust your government to act in your best interest?
Just as you don't like (at least thats what I gather from your post) governmental control of your tax dollars that give the money to women who have "unwanted children", I would think that you wouldn't want governmental control over who should get to have children. It seems the more the government wants to control me the less it thinks I am capable of controlling myself. In turn it creates a society that doesn't control itself. You may argue which came first (chicken or egg thing). I maintain that once you take away governmental controls, people start to control their own lives. Take your mothers that you claim have babies for the money your government gives them. Take that away and they stop having the babies for that reason. They will see others having babies with no means to take care of them. This will make them think twice about birth control. The transition may be rough but the alternative is a government that thinks it needs to control all facets of your life. Do you really trust your government to act in your best interest?
Just as you don't like (at least thats what I gather from your post) governmental control of your tax dollars that give the money to women who have "unwanted children", I would think that you wouldn't want governmental control over who should get to have children. It seems the more the government wants to control me the less it thinks I am capable of controlling myself. In turn it creates a society that doesn't control itself. You may argue which came first (chicken or egg thing). I maintain that once you take away governmental controls, people start to control their own lives. Take your mothers that you claim have babies for the money your government gives them. Take that away and they stop having the babies for that reason. They will see others having babies with no means to take care of them. This will make them think twice about birth control. The transition may be rough but the alternative is a government that thinks it needs to control all facets of your life. Do you really trust your government to act in your best interest?
Now we're cooking with gas. ;o)
ImmortalGoddezz:
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>But I question you all this, what is a 'family' nowadays?
</end quote></div>
Excellent question.
From the point of the view of the child a family SHOULD be a collection of people who care for them and the child lives in a nuturing environment. Whether they be a gay couple, hetero or single... who cares?. So long as 'we' are making an effort to create a system that helps in the raising of a child.
There was a case here recently of a young mother who left her new born child on the steps of a hospital. Everybody gasps at the horror...but at least she admitted to herself that she wasn't capable of doing it for whatever reason and put it somewhere that probably has given it a better chance.
tapia:
How about instead of licensing, we make it compulsory for pregnant women and their partners to do a parenting course?.
Beyerdug:
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>You may argue which came first (chicken or egg thing). </end quote></div>
The egg. ;o)
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>I maintain that once you take away governmental controls, people start to control their own lives.</end quote></div>
Like, the police for instance?
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Take your mothers that you claim have babies for the money your government gives them. </end quote></div>
I don't claim it, it's documented....by many young mothers themselves.
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Take that away and they stop having the babies for that reason. They will see others having babies with no means to take care of them. This will make them think twice about birth control. The transition may be rough but the alternative is a government that thinks it needs to control all facets of your life.</end quote></div>
People demand that the government act on their behalf...that's what elections and tax is all about.
If we see a policy of the government that clearly isn't the best interests of a particular section of our society, should we not act?...or at least voice our concerns?.
I'm not a teacher, and it doesn't appear you are...but from what I gather through talking with teachers (my father was one, and my missus' sister is one) and my own experiences with the worst of the youth (caus of my job) is that SOMETHING needs to be done about the epidemic of feral kids coming through the system that are 3rd generation welfare professionals with minimal hope for a future BECAUSE of the people that claim to be their parents...would you agree that something needs to happen?
I suggested to "Tapia" about the concept of compulsory parenting courses of pregnant women and their partners?...if they don't attend they will be fined...or somthing.
ImmortalGoddezz:
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>But I question you all this, what is a 'family' nowadays?
</end quote></div>
Excellent question.
From the point of the view of the child a family SHOULD be a collection of people who care for them and the child lives in a nuturing environment. Whether they be a gay couple, hetero or single... who cares?. So long as 'we' are making an effort to create a system that helps in the raising of a child.
There was a case here recently of a young mother who left her new born child on the steps of a hospital. Everybody gasps at the horror...but at least she admitted to herself that she wasn't capable of doing it for whatever reason and put it somewhere that probably has given it a better chance.
tapia:
How about instead of licensing, we make it compulsory for pregnant women and their partners to do a parenting course?.
Beyerdug:
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>You may argue which came first (chicken or egg thing). </end quote></div>
The egg. ;o)
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>I maintain that once you take away governmental controls, people start to control their own lives.</end quote></div>
Like, the police for instance?
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Take your mothers that you claim have babies for the money your government gives them. </end quote></div>
I don't claim it, it's documented....by many young mothers themselves.
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Take that away and they stop having the babies for that reason. They will see others having babies with no means to take care of them. This will make them think twice about birth control. The transition may be rough but the alternative is a government that thinks it needs to control all facets of your life.</end quote></div>
People demand that the government act on their behalf...that's what elections and tax is all about.
If we see a policy of the government that clearly isn't the best interests of a particular section of our society, should we not act?...or at least voice our concerns?.
I'm not a teacher, and it doesn't appear you are...but from what I gather through talking with teachers (my father was one, and my missus' sister is one) and my own experiences with the worst of the youth (caus of my job) is that SOMETHING needs to be done about the epidemic of feral kids coming through the system that are 3rd generation welfare professionals with minimal hope for a future BECAUSE of the people that claim to be their parents...would you agree that something needs to happen?
I suggested to "Tapia" about the concept of compulsory parenting courses of pregnant women and their partners?...if they don't attend they will be fined...or somthing.
Now we're cooking with gas. ;o)
ImmortalGoddezz:
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>But I question you all this, what is a 'family' nowadays?
</end quote></div>
Excellent question.
From the point of the view of the child a family SHOULD be a collection of people who care for them and the child lives in a nuturing environment. Whether they be a gay couple, hetero or single... who cares?. So long as 'we' are making an effort to create a system that helps in the raising of a child.
There was a case here recently of a young mother who left her new born child on the steps of a hospital. Everybody gasps at the horror...but at least she admitted to herself that she wasn't capable of doing it for whatever reason and put it somewhere that probably has given it a better chance.
tapia:
How about instead of licensing, we make it compulsory for pregnant women and their partners to do a parenting course?.
Beyerdug:
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>You may argue which came first (chicken or egg thing). </end quote></div>
The egg. ;o)
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>I maintain that once you take away governmental controls, people start to control their own lives.</end quote></div>
Like, the police for instance?
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Take your mothers that you claim have babies for the money your government gives them. </end quote></div>
I don't claim it, it's documented....by many young mothers themselves.
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Take that away and they stop having the babies for that reason. They will see others having babies with no means to take care of them. This will make them think twice about birth control. The transition may be rough but the alternative is a government that thinks it needs to control all facets of your life.</end quote></div>
People demand that the government act on their behalf...that's what elections and tax is all about.
If we see a policy of the government that clearly isn't the best interests of a particular section of our society, should we not act?...or at least voice our concerns?.
I'm not a teacher, and it doesn't appear you are...but from what I gather through talking with teachers (my father was one, and my missus' sister is one) and my own experiences with the worst of the youth (caus of my job) is that SOMETHING needs to be done about the epidemic of feral kids coming through the system that are 3rd generation welfare professionals with minimal hope for a future BECAUSE of the people that claim to be their parents...would you agree that something needs to happen?
I suggested to "Tapia" about the concept of compulsory parenting courses of pregnant women and their partners?...if they don't attend they will be fined...or somthing.
ImmortalGoddezz:
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>But I question you all this, what is a 'family' nowadays?
</end quote></div>
Excellent question.
From the point of the view of the child a family SHOULD be a collection of people who care for them and the child lives in a nuturing environment. Whether they be a gay couple, hetero or single... who cares?. So long as 'we' are making an effort to create a system that helps in the raising of a child.
There was a case here recently of a young mother who left her new born child on the steps of a hospital. Everybody gasps at the horror...but at least she admitted to herself that she wasn't capable of doing it for whatever reason and put it somewhere that probably has given it a better chance.
tapia:
How about instead of licensing, we make it compulsory for pregnant women and their partners to do a parenting course?.
Beyerdug:
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>You may argue which came first (chicken or egg thing). </end quote></div>
The egg. ;o)
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>I maintain that once you take away governmental controls, people start to control their own lives.</end quote></div>
Like, the police for instance?
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Take your mothers that you claim have babies for the money your government gives them. </end quote></div>
I don't claim it, it's documented....by many young mothers themselves.
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Take that away and they stop having the babies for that reason. They will see others having babies with no means to take care of them. This will make them think twice about birth control. The transition may be rough but the alternative is a government that thinks it needs to control all facets of your life.</end quote></div>
People demand that the government act on their behalf...that's what elections and tax is all about.
If we see a policy of the government that clearly isn't the best interests of a particular section of our society, should we not act?...or at least voice our concerns?.
I'm not a teacher, and it doesn't appear you are...but from what I gather through talking with teachers (my father was one, and my missus' sister is one) and my own experiences with the worst of the youth (caus of my job) is that SOMETHING needs to be done about the epidemic of feral kids coming through the system that are 3rd generation welfare professionals with minimal hope for a future BECAUSE of the people that claim to be their parents...would you agree that something needs to happen?
I suggested to "Tapia" about the concept of compulsory parenting courses of pregnant women and their partners?...if they don't attend they will be fined...or somthing.
Now we're cooking with gas. ;o)
ImmortalGoddezz:
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>But I question you all this, what is a 'family' nowadays?
</end quote></div>
Excellent question.
From the point of the view of the child a family SHOULD be a collection of people who care for them and the child lives in a nuturing environment. Whether they be a gay couple, hetero or single... who cares?. So long as 'we' are making an effort to create a system that helps in the raising of a child.
There was a case here recently of a young mother who left her new born child on the steps of a hospital. Everybody gasps at the horror...but at least she admitted to herself that she wasn't capable of doing it for whatever reason and put it somewhere that probably has given it a better chance.
tapia:
How about instead of licensing, we make it compulsory for pregnant women and their partners to do a parenting course?.
Beyerdug:
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>You may argue which came first (chicken or egg thing). </end quote></div>
The egg. ;o)
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>I maintain that once you take away governmental controls, people start to control their own lives.</end quote></div>
Like, the police for instance?
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Take your mothers that you claim have babies for the money your government gives them. </end quote></div>
I don't claim it, it's documented....by many young mothers themselves.
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Take that away and they stop having the babies for that reason. They will see others having babies with no means to take care of them. This will make them think twice about birth control. The transition may be rough but the alternative is a government that thinks it needs to control all facets of your life.</end quote></div>
People demand that the government act on their behalf...that's what elections and tax is all about.
If we see a policy of the government that clearly isn't the best interests of a particular section of our society, should we not act?...or at least voice our concerns?.
I'm not a teacher, and it doesn't appear you are...but from what I gather through talking with teachers (my father was one, and my missus' sister is one) and my own experiences with the worst of the youth (caus of my job) is that SOMETHING needs to be done about the epidemic of feral kids coming through the system that are 3rd generation welfare professionals with minimal hope for a future BECAUSE of the people that claim to be their parents...would you agree that something needs to happen?
I suggested to "Tapia" about the concept of compulsory parenting courses of pregnant women and their partners?...if they don't attend they will be fined...or somthing.
ImmortalGoddezz:
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>But I question you all this, what is a 'family' nowadays?
</end quote></div>
Excellent question.
From the point of the view of the child a family SHOULD be a collection of people who care for them and the child lives in a nuturing environment. Whether they be a gay couple, hetero or single... who cares?. So long as 'we' are making an effort to create a system that helps in the raising of a child.
There was a case here recently of a young mother who left her new born child on the steps of a hospital. Everybody gasps at the horror...but at least she admitted to herself that she wasn't capable of doing it for whatever reason and put it somewhere that probably has given it a better chance.
tapia:
How about instead of licensing, we make it compulsory for pregnant women and their partners to do a parenting course?.
Beyerdug:
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>You may argue which came first (chicken or egg thing). </end quote></div>
The egg. ;o)
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>I maintain that once you take away governmental controls, people start to control their own lives.</end quote></div>
Like, the police for instance?
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Take your mothers that you claim have babies for the money your government gives them. </end quote></div>
I don't claim it, it's documented....by many young mothers themselves.
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Take that away and they stop having the babies for that reason. They will see others having babies with no means to take care of them. This will make them think twice about birth control. The transition may be rough but the alternative is a government that thinks it needs to control all facets of your life.</end quote></div>
People demand that the government act on their behalf...that's what elections and tax is all about.
If we see a policy of the government that clearly isn't the best interests of a particular section of our society, should we not act?...or at least voice our concerns?.
I'm not a teacher, and it doesn't appear you are...but from what I gather through talking with teachers (my father was one, and my missus' sister is one) and my own experiences with the worst of the youth (caus of my job) is that SOMETHING needs to be done about the epidemic of feral kids coming through the system that are 3rd generation welfare professionals with minimal hope for a future BECAUSE of the people that claim to be their parents...would you agree that something needs to happen?
I suggested to "Tapia" about the concept of compulsory parenting courses of pregnant women and their partners?...if they don't attend they will be fined...or somthing.
mom2lillian
New member
well I havent read the posts yet but having experienced infertility I was wondering A-why it seems some of the women and men I know with it are the most stable etc individuals just waiting for a child and B-why the ones I know that are the most fertile are in less than the perfect spot to be havin gkids and...
perhaps it would be nice if we were all infertile until we 'applied' to be otherwise. Im not getting int owhat would be on that application--that is a while nother ball of wax! But a touch of infertiliyt to make sure those having children really wanted them wouldnt be abad idea IMO!
perhaps it would be nice if we were all infertile until we 'applied' to be otherwise. Im not getting int owhat would be on that application--that is a while nother ball of wax! But a touch of infertiliyt to make sure those having children really wanted them wouldnt be abad idea IMO!
mom2lillian
New member
well I havent read the posts yet but having experienced infertility I was wondering A-why it seems some of the women and men I know with it are the most stable etc individuals just waiting for a child and B-why the ones I know that are the most fertile are in less than the perfect spot to be havin gkids and...
perhaps it would be nice if we were all infertile until we 'applied' to be otherwise. Im not getting int owhat would be on that application--that is a while nother ball of wax! But a touch of infertiliyt to make sure those having children really wanted them wouldnt be abad idea IMO!
perhaps it would be nice if we were all infertile until we 'applied' to be otherwise. Im not getting int owhat would be on that application--that is a while nother ball of wax! But a touch of infertiliyt to make sure those having children really wanted them wouldnt be abad idea IMO!
mom2lillian
New member
well I havent read the posts yet but having experienced infertility I was wondering A-why it seems some of the women and men I know with it are the most stable etc individuals just waiting for a child and B-why the ones I know that are the most fertile are in less than the perfect spot to be havin gkids and...
perhaps it would be nice if we were all infertile until we 'applied' to be otherwise. Im not getting int owhat would be on that application--that is a while nother ball of wax! But a touch of infertiliyt to make sure those having children really wanted them wouldnt be abad idea IMO!
perhaps it would be nice if we were all infertile until we 'applied' to be otherwise. Im not getting int owhat would be on that application--that is a while nother ball of wax! But a touch of infertiliyt to make sure those having children really wanted them wouldnt be abad idea IMO!
Emily65Roses
New member
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>mom2lillian</b></i>
well I havent read the posts yet but having experienced infertility I was wondering A-why it seems some of the women and men I know with it are the most stable etc individuals just waiting for a child and B-why the ones I know that are the most fertile are in less than the perfect spot to be havin gkids and...</end quote></div>
I noticed that too!!! People who actually want kids but can't have them get screwed... and every Tom, D*ck, and Jane who have the working parts have kids, even if they are terrible parents. Drives me nuts.... <i>(Apparently they cut "d*ck" out of the vocabulary... hahaha.)</i>
well I havent read the posts yet but having experienced infertility I was wondering A-why it seems some of the women and men I know with it are the most stable etc individuals just waiting for a child and B-why the ones I know that are the most fertile are in less than the perfect spot to be havin gkids and...</end quote></div>
I noticed that too!!! People who actually want kids but can't have them get screwed... and every Tom, D*ck, and Jane who have the working parts have kids, even if they are terrible parents. Drives me nuts.... <i>(Apparently they cut "d*ck" out of the vocabulary... hahaha.)</i>
Emily65Roses
New member
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>mom2lillian</b></i>
well I havent read the posts yet but having experienced infertility I was wondering A-why it seems some of the women and men I know with it are the most stable etc individuals just waiting for a child and B-why the ones I know that are the most fertile are in less than the perfect spot to be havin gkids and...</end quote></div>
I noticed that too!!! People who actually want kids but can't have them get screwed... and every Tom, D*ck, and Jane who have the working parts have kids, even if they are terrible parents. Drives me nuts.... <i>(Apparently they cut "d*ck" out of the vocabulary... hahaha.)</i>
well I havent read the posts yet but having experienced infertility I was wondering A-why it seems some of the women and men I know with it are the most stable etc individuals just waiting for a child and B-why the ones I know that are the most fertile are in less than the perfect spot to be havin gkids and...</end quote></div>
I noticed that too!!! People who actually want kids but can't have them get screwed... and every Tom, D*ck, and Jane who have the working parts have kids, even if they are terrible parents. Drives me nuts.... <i>(Apparently they cut "d*ck" out of the vocabulary... hahaha.)</i>