Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Is "not likely" synonymous with "will not"? There are many people who do beat their addictions. Yes, some don't do it until after they have children but that is the catalyst they needed.
Even drug addicts and child abusers are Americans and entitled to their fundamental right to bear children.
If you want to have a child badly enough, that should be enough of a catalyst in itself. If it's not, you shouldn't be having the child. Letting a heavy addict reproduce while still using in the wild hope they'll suddenly have a drastic change of heart is child abuse. If that wasn't the case, you wouldn't have so many families where addict parents are severely neglecting and/or abusing their kids because getting high is their first and foremost priority.
You know, it took me three tries to get my driver's license, I failed the road test twice. But I'm glad that I wasn't able to go out and drive alone after the first time, because clearly I wasn't ready to be a good driver. Was I bitter that I saw horrible drivers on the road, breaking rules left and right, while I was merely unsure of myself, overly cautious and not confident on the road, yet probably a safer driver than they were? Sure, but that doesn't mean that the licensing program is crap and shouldn't be in place at all.
No system is perfect; look at our legal system: tons of criminals go free every day while innocent people end up in jail - does that mean we shouldn't have a legal system to begin with and have complete anarchy? Of course not. Just because there is always room for flaws and corruption doesn't mean the other viable alternative is to eliminate control altogether - just means it should be continuously improving.
I wrote earlier, which no one commented on - in Saudi Arabia, for instance, people believe the gov't shouldn't have the power to defend women and prevent husbands from killing their wives. The husbands consider it their god-given right. Does that make it right? Is it different than a parent having a child only to subject them to a life of suffering and misery?
If you want to have a child badly enough, that should be enough of a catalyst in itself. If it's not, you shouldn't be having the child. Letting a heavy addict reproduce while still using in the wild hope they'll suddenly have a drastic change of heart is child abuse. If that wasn't the case, you wouldn't have so many families where addict parents are severely neglecting and/or abusing their kids because getting high is their first and foremost priority.
Life is far from perfect and things happen that we many not expect.
Many abused/neglected children come from stringently non-drug homes BTW.
I wrote earlier, which no one commented on - in Saudi Arabia, for instance, people believe the gov't shouldn't have the power to defend women and prevent husbands from killing their wives. The husbands consider it their god-given right. Does that make it right? Is it different than a parent having a child only to subject them to a life of suffering and misery?
That's because there's no separation between religion and government in Saudi Arabia. Another reason I oppose a parent license. Too much of a chance that an individual's right to practice their religion could be taken away by the government. Too much of a chance that one religion's values would take precedence over another's when the laws and guidelines for the license are written. Prospective parents could be denied a license because of their religion
Do we deny a license to the Jews who carry the genetic mutation for Tay Sachs? Would that be religious discrimination? Total nightmare in the making.
Last edited by DewDropInn; 07-02-2012 at 07:38 PM..
Ok, this thread is disturbing. I know it's true that history repeats itself, but it is scary to see how little humans have learned from the mistakes of the Nazis. Requiring parenting licenses is a form of controlling populations. The Nazis sterilized thousands of people that didn't fit their ideal for reproducing. Sure, we see terrible stories in the news and make off-hand comments about how some people shouldn't breed. But seriously, who decides what groups of people aren't good enough to have children?
Should we ban people from having children based on religious beliefs? Does it matter if they are Satanists or the Westboro Baptist Church? Should we ban people based on drug addictions? Where do we draw the line between frequent drinker and alcoholic? How about banning obese people from children? After all, their children are likely to be overweight too, and isn't that abusive? What about banning people with mental disorders? Do we only ban people with schizophrenia or serious personality disorders, or do we throw in anyone with ADHD and any history of depression too (after all, a depressed person might hurt their child)?
The idea of licensing parents is ridiculous. It is not comparable to driving rules. Driving is almost always black and white. You are either speeding, or not. You either hit the other car, or you didn't. You are either above the threshold for alcohol or you aren't. You ran the red light or you didn't. Even the grey areas aren't life altering. Deciding whether someone can get a parenting license is not comparable to arguing over whether or not you rolled through the stop sign.
That's because there's no separation between religion and government in Saudi Arabia. Another reason I oppose a parent license. Too much of a chance that an individual's right to practice their religion could be taken away by the government. Too much of a chance that one religion's values would take precedence over another's when the laws and guidelines for the license are written. Prospective parents could be denied a license because of their religion
Do we deny a license to the Jews who carry the genetic mutation for Tay Sachs? Would that be religious discrimination? Total nightmare in the making.
That is a very good point. When you look at it from that perspective, this whole idea of a parenting license could possibly be seen as an affront against the Amendment I of our Bill of Rights.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Of course - the counter-argument there is... no one would be keeping them from having a busload of kids so long as they went and got the license. As long as they got the license they would be free to breed...
Yes. You need a license to drive a car, cut hair, give a massage, and catch a fish....but we let any dumba$$ take on the most important job that exists...bringing another life into the world. And it seems the people that are least qualified to be parents are the ones who breed the most.
I think all parents should have to undergo the same scrutiny and preparation as adoptive parents. Afterall, any mammal with a womb and fertile eggs can spawn. It takes someone special to be a mom.
Wow I just noticed a couple of more current posts in this thread (I responded only to the first few posts including the OP)...
Y'all DO realize that legal adoptive parenting *requires* all kinds of hoops the parents are -required- to jump through - psychological counseling and testing, financial counseling and testing, aptitude counseling and testing, credit checks, criminal checks, personal background info, medical info...
If parenting is a constitutionally protected "right"...then why can't anyone just go to the adoption agency and tell them "I'll take three" and walk out with a brand new set of siblings?
Answer: Parents must QUALIFY to prove that they are worthy of being parents.
Followup: I feel that ALL parents should qualify to prove they're worthy of being parents. Not that they need to be proven worthy of reproducing..but if they want to actually raise that kid, they'd best be qualified to do so.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
