Morality Games
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2009
- Messages
- 3,733
- Reaction score
- 1,156
- Location
- Iowa
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
No way. Educational programs do almost nothing to reduce social programs like this, because the people who need it most are the people who don't care about it, take it seriously or pursue it. I love education, but that's because I want to learn things and so I pursue education and information.
The thing about child licenses is NOT that they would be ineffective, it's that they would be controversial/unethical/immoral/unconstitutional, or so many would feel.
Personally though, I think children's rights not to be raised in pathetically substandard environments should supersede people's reproductive rights. The primary challenges are to 1) defeat people's emotional objections to this idea, and 2) regulate it cost-effectively.
Some people are serious about it and trying to do something about it. Exhibit A: Sterilize for Cash: Paying Drug Addicts to Not Have Kids - TIME
Your confusion is simply too much for me. I believe I've been clear enough, logical enough and plain enough in my presentation of the facts. If one cannot follow what I have presented and, for some reason, it is beyond grasp, then there's not much more I can do.
"Animals are imaginary"? hahaha wtf Talk about lost without hope. I get the feeling I've been here before, with you.
Good day.
We couldn't even effectively ban alcohol or drugs in this country. Trying to regulate sexual activity is like a dream within a dream. Overwhelming number of logistical challenges, all of which have terrible synergy with our culture.
Given that you have simply made up arguments that no one has ever made, no, you are not in the least bit clear.
What's with your animals kick today?
Your ideology blinds you. Here, let me help you out...It would be voluntary. If they want a check, get sterilized. That is not coercion. They don't HAVE TO take the check.
Who said that (the bold)?
Your ideology blinds you. Here, let me help you out...
(snip)
governments often condition the provision of ordinary benefits on the satisfaction of unrelated demands (such as making highway funding conditional on states' passing particular laws). Given the potency such offers possess, one might suspect that there are many offers that one cannot reasonably refuse, possibly reflecting great imbalances in power or prior historical injustices between the bargaining parties. (See, for instance, O'Neill 1991; and Berman 2001.)
Should people be required to qualify and obtain a license to have children? If so, what should be the standards to qualify and why?
People need a license to drive, hunt, fish, etc and society is inundated with government regulations as it is, and yet people can breed freely without regard for their ability to provide for their children and regardless of genetic health. Personally, I think it would be disastrous to give the government control over reproduction, especially considering the lousy job it does with everything else. And yet, it is illogical for unhealthy and/or poverty stricken people to breed.
I don't care about fine semantic distinctions that you think are important, particularly not as bait. Reproduction is a sexual activity that involves sex.
That is coercion. Needy people trading their fertility for food is coercive.
Your ideology blinds you. Here, let me help you out...
Coerce - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
co·ercedco·erc·ing
Definition of COERCE
1: to restrain or dominate by force <religion in the past has tried to coerce the irreligious — W. R. Inge>
2: to compel to an act or choice <was coerced into agreeing>
3: to achieve by force or threat <coerce compliance>
— co·erc·ible adjective
Examples of COERCE
A confession was coerced from the suspect by police.
<was coerced into signing the document>
-and-
Coercion (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
2.4 Coercive Offers?
While the dominant strand in recent theory has associated coercion with threats, and denied that offers can be used to coerce, this sharp differentiation of these two sorts of proposals has come in for some criticism. The parallel structure of conditional threats and conditional offers has led some to deny that there is a deep distinction to be made between them. Others have focused on the role of both in the broader political and economic context, and found that these broader conditions make coercive offers a live possibility. Dealings in capitalist markets are often highly exploitative; governments often condition the provision of ordinary benefits on the satisfaction of unrelated demands (such as making highway funding conditional on states' passing particular laws). Given the potency such offers possess, one might suspect that there are many offers that one cannot reasonably refuse, possibly reflecting great imbalances in power or prior historical injustices between the bargaining parties. (See, for instance, O'Neill 1991; and Berman 2001.)
-and-
What is COERCION? definition of COERCION (Black's Law Dictionary)
What is COERCION?
Compulsion; force; duress. It may be either actual, (direct or positive.) where physical force Is put upon a man to compel him to do an act against his will, or implied, (legal or constructive.) where the relation of the parties is such that one is under subjection to the other, and is thereby constrained to do what his free will would refuse. State v. Darlington, 153 Ind. 1, 53 N. E. 025; Cliappell v. Trent, 00 Va. S49, 19 S. E. 314; Radicli v. Ilutohins, 95 U. S. 213, 24 L. Ed. 409; Peyser v. New York, 70 N. Y. 497. 20 Am. Rep. G24; State v. Boyle, 13 R. I. 53S.
"One might suspect the offer cannot reasonably be refused, reflecting power imbalances" does not mean "definite coercion."
Do you consider Workfare to be coercion too?
How about employment in general? I'm "forced" to work for others if I want to have money to pay bills and feed my family? My worker places contingencies of our arrangement on my successful performance of the things it wants done. Is this coercion? Does my employer therefore "have all the power imbalance" just because he's the one cutting the checks?
Thanks for your citations, but the idea that a welfare contingency is automatic coercion is ridiculous. Thinking of coercion that way casts doubt on the validity of all sorts of otherwise completely valid contractual agreements.
There is a simple solution. All males born must have a reversible vasectomy at birth.
Then all children must begin parenting classes at about 7th grade and continue till 12th grade.
All couples who want to have children...must pass a written or verbal parenting skills test. If they pass, then the male can have a vasectomy reversal.
If at anytime a couple (or as an individual - whichever applies) is found guilty of abuse, neglect, or abandonment...the guilty parent or parents must be permanently sterilized.
Sound cruel? It's no more cruel than millions of abused, neglected, and abandoned children have had to endure over the ages.
Sorry, but no. Cherry-picking the semantics of three words... which could just as easily be interpreted opposite of what how you choose to interpret them... does not equate to disproval. Legal lessons of definition from Bill Clinton ("It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is.") were ridiculed then, and are still ridiculous now. Taken overall, the points and citations stand."One might suspect the offer cannot reasonably be refused, reflecting power imbalances" does not mean "definite coercion."
Do you consider Workfare to be coercion too?
How about employment in general? I'm "forced" to work for others if I want to have money to pay bills and feed my family? My worker places contingencies of our arrangement on my successful performance of the things it wants done. Is this coercion? Does my employer therefore "have all the power imbalance" just because he's the one cutting the checks?
Thanks for your citations, but the idea that a welfare contingency is automatic coercion is ridiculous. Thinking of coercion that way casts doubt on the validity of all sorts of otherwise completely valid contractual agreements.
I don't care about fine semantic distinctions that you think are important, particularly not as bait. Reproduction is a sexual activity that involves sex.
There is a simple solution. All males born must have a reversible vasectomy at birth.
Then all children must begin parenting classes at about 7th grade and continue till 12th grade.
All couples who want to have children...must pass a written or verbal parenting skills test. If they pass, then the male can have a vasectomy reversal.
If at anytime a couple (or as an individual - whichever applies) is found guilty of abuse, neglect, or abandonment...the guilty parent or parents must be permanently sterilized.
Sound cruel? It's no more cruel than millions of abused, neglected, and abandoned children have had to endure over the ages.
Sorry, but no. Cherry-picking the semantics of three words... which could just as easily be interpreted opposite of what how you choose to interpret them... does not equate to disproval. Legal lessons of definition from Bill Clinton ("It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is.") were ridiculed then, and are still ridiculous now. Taken overall, the points and citations stand.
Sorry, but no. Cherry-picking the semantics of three words... which could just as easily be interpreted opposite of what how you choose to interpret them... does not equate to disproval. Legal lessons of definition from Bill Clinton ("It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is.") were ridiculed then, and are still ridiculous now. Taken overall, the points and citations stand.
:lol: My type of ideology, eh? You haven't grasped anything I've said, have you? If you had, you would realize that I'm actually not that far off from you, but you... because I am not in strict lock-step with you... choose to see any deviation whatsoever as being diametrically opposed.LOL it's your type of ideology which keeps the rest of us paying for other people's children.
The definitions you posted did not demonstrate that benefit contingencies equal coercion. Further, my examples highlight the absurdity of calling voluntary agreements coercion just because the person doesn't really want to make the trade, but feels compelled to. I don't really want to go to work many days, compared to how much I'd like to stay home, but I'm compelled to go because I need the income. You didn't answer my questions. Is employment coercion, according to what you shared? What about workfare?
:lol: My type of ideology, eh? You haven't grasped anything I've said, have you? If you had, you would realize that I'm actually not that far off from you, but you... because I am not in strict lock-step with you... choose to see any deviation whatsoever as being diametrically opposed.
You're wrong, but you seem to enjoy it, so I'll leave you to it.Somehow, this concept is beyond comprehension for some people.
You argue that it's coercion and it's not.
It's really that simple.
The definitions you posted did not demonstrate that benefit contingencies equal coercion. Further, my examples highlight the absurdity of calling voluntary agreements coercion just because the person doesn't really want to make the trade, but feels compelled to. I don't really want to go to work many days, compared to how much I'd like to stay home, but I'm compelled to go because I need the income. You didn't answer my questions. Is employment coercion, according to what you shared? What about workfare?
I see alot more potential problems than solutions here. The overwhelming numbers in which immigrants will overtake citizens for one. Religious debates by Catholics, Muslims, and Evangelicals among others. The at home births and hiding of children from the government as has happened in other countries with such laws. Lawsuits for wrongful death (youre putting millions of babies under a surgical procedure you're bound to have deaths). Has any research taken place on the liklihood of reversal/ damage to the reproductive abilities of males whove had this procedure before a certain age? Its not feasable and even if it didnt break several natural laws and go against several constitutional rights would you be paying for it? How about the funerals of the boys who dont make it? The wrongful death suits? The suits later on when these boys prove capable fathers but the reversal doesnt work?
I see alot more problprobl
Well, I'm basically playing devil's advocate. I don't necessarily agree with mandatory sterilization. I would like to hear some GOOD reasons why we shouldn't do it though.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?