Does this baby deserve parents like this?

[Hitcher]

Reproduction is simply part of life and there is no life without reproduction.

Thank you for snuffing out my hopes and dreams. I am indebted to caring, sensitive folk such as yourself for filling my life with purpose.

[Grahameeboy]

I really don't think Beemer was offending anyone with her opinions. I was not offended so guess it is each of our own decisions whether to feel offended or just get over it, cause it ain't Beemer causing it.

I have just read Beemers posts and cannot work out where you have got a lot of your points from. But that's cool cause you are entitled to have your opinion as are all of us but we have to be careful to avoid putting too much into what someone is saying and taking out more that there actually is.

[Bloody Mad Woman (BMW)]

I bet your mother wishes SHE had. Besides, I don’t need to be sterilised because I know how to prevent unwanted pregnancies, don’t have any peculiar religious hang ups about managing fertility issues and don’t plan to live off the State if anything unfortunate should happen.

You go girl. Precisely my sentiments. Birth control has been around for decades - sure there is the odd slip up on the pill or other forms - but not the bloody amount of unplanned pregnancies in this country!

Cannot understand the narrow mindedness re people that don't have children cannot comment - hello - we were all a child once. So a woman that has adopted a child wouldn't know about children because she hadn't physically given birth???

[limbimtimwim]

I really don't think Beemer was offending anyone with her opinions. I was not offended so guess it is each of our own decisions whether to feel offended or just get over it, cause it ain't Beemer causing it.

I'm not offended. Beemer started a discussion, I disagreed with her opinion and I am explaining why. It seemed to me her position was illogical and simplistic, and I would like some clarification as to her thinking so that perhaps the error in my thinking could be rectified. If such an error exists.

[limbimtimwim]

Thank you for snuffing out my hopes and dreams. I am indebted to caring, sensitive folk such as yourself for filling my life with purpose.

Oh well, you can always PRACTICE reproduction to fulfill any base desires you have.

[Grahameeboy]

I'm not offended. Beemer started a discussion, I disagreed with her opinion and I am explaining why. It seemed to me her position was illogical and simplistic, and I would like some clarification as to her thinking so that perhaps the error in my thinking could be rectified. If such an error exists.

"If you don't mind offending me...."

I did not know that illogical and simplistic when together but I guess you learn eh?

[Ixion]

,,

Should the law draw a line for sub optimal birth conditions? Perhaps parents should be rated on some sort of score card.

Drug dealer? -10pts
In prison? -20pts
High income? +20pts
White? +10pts
Not white? -10pts
Mother >35yrs? -10pts
Stable relationship with opposite sex? +10pts
More than 80pts on your drivers license? -20pts

Don't make the required 100pts? Oh I'm sorry, the state doesn't like you. You'll be made to take this pill every day until you score enough points.

Jolly good idea. Not a new one of course. Come the Revolution we'll implement something along those lines. Your criteria and weightings need revision, you seem hung up on issues of legality. But the general idea is excellent. Society needs strong healthy intelligent progeny . BTW , bear in mind of course that the necessary reproductive lockdown of inferior social units will apply to male as well as female. No good identifying our high grade breeding units if we're going to allow them to be inseminated by sub standard males.

Oh yes, you read that correctly. Everyone has the right to have children, it is embodied in their right to life. Reproduction is simply part of life and there is no life without reproduction. Deny someone reproduction and you effectively kill them.

What humbug . Why does "everyone have the right to have children"?. and even it were so, there is certainly no right to expect the rest of society to pick up the tab for rearing , victualling, medicating and imprisoning the resulting brats. Why should taxpayers pay a fortune to cover the cost of raising no-hopers?

Much better to prevent the breeding of inferior lines in the first place , than have to deal with the problems they and their defective parents cause later. It's no different to what every animal breeder does, why should humans be any different?

As for "Deny someone reproduction and you effectively kill them", you are spouting arrant nonsense. I have no children, and I ain't dead. Are you arguing that the childless *deserve* to be dead?

[candor]

. Everyone has the right to have children, it is embodied in their right to life. Reproduction is simply part of life and there is no life without reproduction. Deny someone reproduction and you effectively kill them.

Most of post was fine but must add my dissension to the chorus re above insert, ones life and life is not dependent on offspring or genetic transmission into the future.

My genes are not unique. They're shared in different and maybe rarely same mixes with all other humans and in part mixes with animals so if I reneg on breeding the world is none the richer or the poorer.

I would say 'give some people reproduction and you effectively kill them' not the other way around. Granted some people experience grief from inabiliy to breed but that in no way equates to death of that person. Or if it does it would judge them either pretty lacking in identity or else very egotistical.

There are certainly some people who should not have the right to have children. I know ones who think hat of themselves and so impose a ban. I know drug users who have made that choice. I have chosen not to as it would interfere with my life plans and I'm not willing to sacrifice. In that way I honor the right of kids not to get second best as Beemer is advocating.

Having kids is not a right. Or dogs as someone said. You do it only if you believe you are up for making a good job of it I say, and if you are failing or sure you will then you do whats best for the kid which could be adoption.

Thats whats missing in todays world. Not enough of a moral code to give kids up if its REALLY best, so lots of great parents have to go overseas to adopt.

[SixPackBack]

..................

[Ixion]

Their criteria were silly , and their grasp of genetics defective.

Your understanding of eugenics is antiquated. The Chinese are nowdays the leaders in this field , Google "China eugenics" for an introduction, or "Maternal and Infant Health Care Law" +China

[Biff]

In Iran a woman cannot show her face in public: If a mother walks outside in Iran without covering her head in protest and then gets arrested, has she set a good or bad example for her children?

Not true actualamy. They have to wear head scarves from the age of 9 upwards. Because at age 9 the Highertrollers believe they're of 'age'. But most ladies let them fall back over their heads anyhoo. Oh...and they must cover their arses, just in case you're into arses.

Pedant mode off, and apologies for the minor diversion in topicality.

Totally with you on the rest.

[limbimtimwim]

Your criteria and weightings need revision, you seem hung up on issues of legality.

That was a point I was trying to make, legality (Especially something so trivial as wacky-baccy) of your lifestyle shouldn't mean you can't have children.

No good identifying our high grade breeding units if we're going to allow them to be inseminated by sub standard males.

Chicks dig us sub-standard types. They love me.

What humbug . Why does "everyone have the right to have children"?.

Perhaps I was not clear enough. Because everyone has the right to life (Article 3 of the UDHR), I figure life isn't worth living on the largest scale of view if you cannot reproduce.
As long as they are not taking other's lives of course. Right to life then, I'll agree is forfeit.

and even it were so, there is certainly no right to expect the rest of society to pick up the tab for rearing , victualling, medicating and imprisoning the resulting brats. Why should taxpayers pay a fortune to cover the cost of raising no-hopers?

I have no comeback for that. I can't come up with an alternative that would be cheaper than culling them off. But I guess the luxury of being rich is that we can afford not to cull them off. Perhaps shipping them to Australia would solve this problem? That would keep everyone happy.

Much better to prevent the breeding of inferior lines in the first place , than have to deal with the problems they and their defective parents cause later. It's no different to what every animal breeder does, why should humans be any different?

Because we'd get it wrong. Although it is kinda religious to stick to idea that humans are 'worth' more than all the other species, I'll stick to it because I think it is our human nature to think such delusions. Could you, in a position of power, truncate a human bloodline for the betterment of society as a whole? Are you Spock?
"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few"

As for "Deny someone reproduction and you effectively kill them", you are spouting arrant nonsense. I have no children, and I ain't dead. Are you arguing that the childless *deserve* to be dead?

I meant from an evolutionary standpoint. Darwin would have seen a sterile organism was largely useless, correct? Okay, so there are exceptions I am sure, olive trees spring to mind.

I don't argue that the childless deserve to be dead, I would propose however that the childless are pointless in the end. Perhaps if a childless contributed something useful to society then you wouldn't be so useless, but you don't benefit humankind to it's fullest by not reproducing because you are not putting out those different genes that are required to evolve.

On a personal note, I have no plans to have children. I think I would make a good father, but right now I am enjoying living for me.

[Biff]

Your veiws echo with almost pin point accuracy those of Nazi's.

Except our red friend comes from the opposite end of the political spectrum. Like if Hitler were acid, Ixion would be alkali. It burns either way.

[limbimtimwim]

Your understanding of eugenics is antiquated. The Chinese are nowdays the leaders in this field , Google "China eugenics" for an introduction, or "Maternal and Infant Health Care Law" +China

But the Chinese government is the world biggest club of sick murdering fuckers on the planet. You can't seriously use them as an example of anything except how not to do things?

[Patrick]

Patrick,beemer your twisted sick and heartless. Imune from the hypocrisy current laws concerning alcohol and tobacco present.

Nope... hate cigarette smoke and lock up plenty of drink drivers too