Licence to have children

[telsor]

It's a short step away from genetic standards being applied for children where parents with an unacceptable risk for genetic or birth defective children (whatever level it is set to) are turned away.

That genetic requirement could be politically motivated and target ethnic groups.

It'll start with "Think of all the money we could save if we stopped autism, or cystic fibrosis, etc etc. and all the time and heartbreak for the parents", with the 'enforcement' being largely voluntary/encouraged (maybe you only get the baby bonus if you pass the test).

Then the list of 'undesirable' traits would get longer, and the enforcement stronger. Propensity for obesity, higher risk of various diseases/cancer and of course, insurance for the 'untested' would be higher.

Then someone decides that Rangas are an abomination, or mixing races is bad, or whatever...and that gets added to the list, and enforcement becomes mandatory.


Sadly, I can see all that happening.

 

[Fire]

Good.

So you are proud of spreading misinformation?

You truly make a fine communist.

 

[telsor]

So you are proud of spreading misinformation?

You truly make a fine communist.

Don't worry, he's also blocked everyone who disagrees with him and points out his crap...another fine communist trait.

 

[Chief]

It'll start with "Think of all the money we could save if we stopped autism, or cystic fibrosis, etc etc. and all the time and heartbreak for the parents", with the 'enforcement' being largely voluntary/encouraged (maybe you only get the baby bonus if you pass the test).

Then the list of 'undesirable' traits would get longer, and the enforcement stronger. Propensity for obesity, higher risk of various diseases/cancer and of course, insurance for the 'untested' would be higher.

Then someone decides that Rangas are an abomination, or mixing races is bad, or whatever...and that gets added to the list, and enforcement becomes mandatory.


Sadly, I can see all that happening.

And even if you think "our" politicians - the people at th trough today - wouldn't do that, once you grant those sorts of powers it becomes a magnet for undesirables who see a new path towards their warped goals. IMO this happened with the School Chaplains program: nice idea to have extra people to counsel kids, but the religious nutters grabbed it with both hands making schools a new "mission field" and the politicians are too gutless to stop them.

 

[telsor]

And even if you think "our" politicians - the people at th trough today - wouldn't do that, once you grant those sorts of powers it becomes a magnet for undesirables who see a new path towards their warped goals. IMO this happened with the School Chaplains program: nice idea to have extra people to counsel kids, but the religious nutters grabbed it with both hands making schools a new "mission field" and the politicians are too gutless to stop them.

Most changes are incremental rather than revolutionary.

 

[Chief]

Most changes are incremental rather than revolutionary.

medusala is a big fan of the idea of unintended consequences.

 

[The Coup]

So you are proud of spreading misinformation?

You truly make a fine communist.

What a stupid conclusion to make from one word.

 

[medusala]

And even if you think "our" politicians - the people at th[e] trough today - wouldn't do that, once you grant those sorts of powers it becomes a magnet for undesirables who see a new path towards their warped goals.

I am in furious agreement with Chief!

 

[Fire]

What a stupid conclusion to make from one word.

I said that you run counter to reality.

you said 'good'.

And so now its stupid for me to conclude that you are proud of spreading your lies based off the response?

 

[The Coup]

I said that you run counter to reality.

you said 'good'.

And so now its stupid for me to conclude that you are proud of spreading your lies based off the response?

You didn't say I ran counter to reality, you liar.

 

[Fire]

You didn't say I ran counter to reality, you liar.

Lol. We have always been at war with Eastasia, eh comrade?

I said:
You are to reality what hipsters are to the mainstream.

Unfortunatley for you, this forum isn't a newspaper and you don't work for the ministry of truth.

 

[The Coup]

Yes that's what you said, which is different than saying I run counter to reality.

Glad you admit you lied in your previous post. Gunna say anything interesting any time soon?

 

[Track Pants]

100% agree with parental licensing. Growing up in Launceston in Tas opens your eyes to this. All those 15 y.o. mothers having kids because it's 'fashionable', then bringing up another bunch of dole-bludging thieves to screw over the community kind of pisses you off.

No wonder the Greens are so popular in Tasmania.

 

[kickazz]

Yes, it carries much greater responsibility than many things we get licenced for, but it is something we fundamentally have more of a right to than any of those things as well.

Of course it shouldn't be licenced.

 

[Catfish Alley]

Yes, it carries much greater responsibility than many things we get licenced for, but it is something we fundamentally have more of a right to than any of those things as well.

Of course it shouldn't be licenced.

Exactly. A key difference is they can confiscate a car or your fishing gear. I wouldn't want to live in a society where they do that with children simply because you don't have a piece of paper.

 

[skilts]

Years ago, I had one of these licenses. It has now expired, due to lack of activity.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Lotta wannabe Adolfs in here

 

[Pessimistic]

And that's the issue. Nobody has the balls to change the gravy train handouts that fund these morons having kids.

We've basically created a system that is tailor made for thick unemployable women to simply breed more clones of themselves.

One walk through Corio Village in my city was proof enough of that for me.

The answer is there is no answer to this issue because some moron years ago created this system that we are now stuck with forever.

Itd be good for you to experience the system before that moron came up with this one. Closest today is probably a dickens novel. Funnily enough a bigger proportion of kids were experiencing tragic conditions

 

[Pessimistic]

It'll start with "Think of all the money we could save if we stopped autism, or cystic fibrosis, etc etc. and all the time and heartbreak for the parents", with the 'enforcement' being largely voluntary/encouraged (maybe you only get the baby bonus if you pass the test).

Then the list of 'undesirable' traits would get longer, and the enforcement stronger. Propensity for obesity, higher risk of various diseases/cancer and of course, insurance for the 'untested' would be higher.

Then someone decides that Rangas are an abomination, or mixing races is bad, or whatever...and that gets added to the list, and enforcement becomes mandatory.


Sadly, I can see all that happening.

No, they wouldn't do anything meaningful, just impose more and more 'on the spot fines' for increasingly trivial matters. With an army of drones to administer it. Just like now, revenue raising where instead of monitoring the improved situation, a government budgets for a massive increase in fines.

And its a coalition government I'm talking about

 

[Gus Poyet]

Itd be good for you to experience the system before that moron came up with this one. Closest today is probably a dickens novel. Funnily enough a bigger proportion of kids were experiencing tragic conditions

What would be good is for people to take responsibilities for their own lives.

I get it that you are in no way a supporter of that mindset.

Your bleeding heart won't allow you look at parasites as anything more than tragic victims.

 

[Gus Poyet]

Yes, it carries much greater responsibility than many things we get licenced for, but it is something we fundamentally have more of a right to than any of those things as well.

Of course it shouldn't be licenced.

So you'd agree then as it's their right to breed it should be everyone else's right to refuse to put a cent towards their life style decision?

 

[Bunk Moreland]

So you'd agree then as it's their right to breed it should be everyone else's right to refuse to put a cent towards their life style decision?

The money isn't for them, it's to give the kids some sort of chance at a decent upbringing.

 

[Lebbo73]

OK, but do you agree with a parent licensing scheme?

I certainly do - seems pretty odd you need a licence, training etc to do all sorts of things but not to raise kids.

If you can't see what is wrong with your pov in this post, please seek help.

 

[kickazz]

So you'd agree then as it's their right to breed it should be everyone else's right to refuse to put a cent towards their life style decision?

No, I believe in shades of grey, im not a hardcore libertarian by any stretch of the imagination, i believe in some aspe ts of society being funded by taxes.

To answer your question pragmatically, i would suggest that things like health and education of kids should still be taxpayer funded, and we should cut back on the vote buying practice of dishing out baby bonus cash. And dont get me started on Tony's PPL scheme.

 

[Pessimistic]

What would be good is for people to take responsibilities for their own lives.

I get it that you are in no way a supporter of that mindset.

Your bleeding heart won't allow you look at parasites as anything more than tragic victims.

Someday I half wish there was some kind of rvolution and all the weedy would be redneck keyboard heros could experience some true survival of the fittest.

You know, the accountant types who quoted "the art of war" back in the eighties like it was actually something related to their pen and keycap pushing