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.
I think they should be sterilized if found abusive or neglectful.
Nah, we already tried that back in the bad ol' days - in the 1920s CE, I think it was. Indiana, some of the Southern states, a couple of progressive states, too. This was during the temporary rage for eugenics, & where Hitler & the Nazis (& maybe the UK, too) picked up the ideas & ran with them.
The Nazi attempts soured the World on the notion & even the name, for a very long time.
Let's see - feeble-mindedness, a family history of insanity, crime, violence, general indolence, being uppity, Black (in the South, mostly), habitual criminals, habitually on the dole - it was a very long list. Basically, if you were the wrong kind of person, or just inconvenient for someone. & some of the prison docs didn't bother to wait for enabling legislation - it was a real mess. Either NC or SC - I forget which - was just in the news, settling some of the sterilization claims dating back to God-knows-when.
Last edited by southwest88; 01-11-2017 at 08:04 PM..
Your argument concerns eugenics, which I am NOT in favor of. The issue with eugenics was sterilizing people whom many would consider "defective". My stance concerns people who show that they are unfit to be parents because of their behavior , not because of their intelligence, income, etc.
If people have proven that they are truly unfit to be parents, then why should they permitted to have more children. (And to be clear, I am talking about willful and extreme neglect and abuse, not just because they were ignorant in some way or had allowed their child to go to school by herself or because one of the neighbors reported them for spanking their child on his covered bottom!)
While the debate began and revolved around eugenics, the statues for forced sterilization were often vague and broadly applies. The laws as applied in Puerto Rico were widely used for population control with often little or nothing to do with mental capacity, but more about poor persons having "too many" children. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compul...on#1940s-1950s
Furthermore:
"The inability to pay for the cost of raising children has been a reason courts have ordered coercive or compulsory sterilization. In June 2014, a Virginia judge ruled that a man on probation for child endangerment must be able to pay for his seven children before having more children; the man agreed to get a vasectomy as part of his plea deal.[SIZE=2][68][/SIZE] In 2013, an Ohio judge ordered a man owing nearly $100,000 in unpaid child support to "make all reasonable efforts to avoid impregnating a woman" as a condition of his probation.[SIZE=2][69][/SIZE] Kevin Maillard wrote that conditioning the right to reproduction on meeting child support obligations amounts to "constructive sterilization" for men unlikely to make the payments.[SIZE=2][70][/SIZE]"
To me or you (normal people), a "dinky" section 8 voucher and a "measly" $200/month EBT food stamps card seems like nothing or "not worth it".
But the perception of a lower class "hoodrat" type person might be VERY different. To them getting a govt-subsidized apartment with bullet holes in the walls, an EBT card, and maybe some "free" Medicaid is "living large" according to their (low) standards
While most of the guys they have these "welfare babies" with are losers/broke guys themselves.... ocassionally they may "snag" a guy with a good job/salary and collect child support ON TOP of the welfare, so there's also that angle or "motivation". To some of these lower-class women, getting a professional/salaried man on the hook for child support is their mini-version of "winning the lottery".
As the OP mentioned, there are women out there that literally make a "business" out of having multiple kids (to get welfare, child support, etc).
I'm not normal haha but I guess I'm not messed up in the head enough to think that way but I mean how do they handle the pain of childbirth? Even with an epidural it seems like it'd still be painful and you would think ANYONE wouldn't want to go through that again for money. I don't see how they tolerate the childbirth and pregnancy while it's happening. Doesn't every human being want to avoid physical pain?
I guess maybe you'd have to a have really high pain tolerance but for 9 months of hell and then a big climax at the end I would think you'd have to have superpowers to go through that over and over again. I can see one time but continuously and I'm guessing that they do it all pretty fast? The pregnancies aren't spread apart are they?
And then what do they do with the kids? They have to deal with the babies crying day in day out and smelly diapers....
I'm not normal haha but I guess I'm not messed up in the head enough to think that way but I mean how do they handle the pain of childbirth? Even with an epidural it seems like it'd still be painful and you would think ANYONE wouldn't want to go through that again for money. I don't see how they tolerate the childbirth and pregnancy while it's happening. Doesn't every human being want to avoid physical pain?
I guess maybe you'd have to a have really high pain tolerance but for 9 months of hell and then a big climax at the end I would think you'd have to have superpowers to go through that over and over again. I can see one time but continuously and I'm guessing that they do it all pretty fast? The pregnancies aren't spread apart are they?
And then what do they do with the kids? They have to deal with the babies crying day in day out and smelly diapers....
They get government/welfare vouchers for daycare too! So they don't even watch over/raise their own kids while they're sitting at home on their arse
I have a relative or two that work in daycares as teachers, they've told me about these "welfare parents" They'll come in, pay with their govt-issued daycare "voucher", leave, and come back later to pick up their kids around 5:30 - 6:30 PM.
On a few ocassions I've stopped by the lobby around this afternoon time-period and caught a glimpse of these parents. They seem rather well-fed, well-rested, and seem to drive fairly new cars despite being "poor"
People should be thanking Planned Parenthood, not vilifying them.
Yah. Be sure to mention it to your congressmen &/or -women. Congress has the notion in its mind to cut off all monies to PP - they seem to think that that would be the popular thing to do. (Wait 'til they start seeing the bills for more prisons, more prison staff, education/job training for when the parents serve their terms & come back into the World, more TANF, Food Stamps, child abuse/neglect cases, healthcare for indigent children & on & on. & of course, Congress & then the various states have to pass enabling legislation to get the ball rolling. Figure 1.5 to 2 years for the federal legislation, another 1.5 to 2 years to get the state enabling legislation. They could do it simultaneously, but that's not how it usually works. The feds usually go first, especially if they're going to foot most of the bills.)
Ah, one can hear the gnashing of teeth already. Not to worry, though, folks. Congress has the very best health/dental/pension plan that money can buy ...
Rather then spending so much more on all these welfare benefits why just throw parents in jail who can't provide for their children?
The parents who can't provide and have alienated their social networks because of wreckless behavior should in silver-colored handcuffs and not getting gold-plated welfare benefits.
So many low-IQ people who can't care for themselves, let alone a small army of children are having baby after baby because they get a luxury lifestyle, thanks to middle-class hard workers paychecks.
The perfect solution to parents who don't feed their children and have a healthy, nice home for their children in my opinion is silver handcuffs for the parents.
The perfect solution to heroin crisis and children being born on heroin and to throw heroin women behind bars and throw away the key. They will have 5 to 6 kids if they aren't imprisoned after 1st heroin baby they have.
So many poor, unfit parents have 5 or 6 kids because they aren't imprisoned after having 1 kid.
1. IQ has nothing to do with this problem.
2. If we put all of them in jail we would need to build lots more jails.
The children could be used at regional agri-farms until age 18. No TV or internet.
Their labor would help defer the costs incurred by their parents to the State.
Their parents could visit and even get a discount on vegetable purchases.
When they reach age 18 they would be given a modest stipend and released.
This would alter the behavior of the ones that perpetuate the cycle.
Any thoughts?
Children used at farms without tv or internet and then released at 18?? This sounds like being in prison. And they didn't even do anything wrong. So why would you want them to be punished. I love the discount on vegetables for the parents though
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.
They'll come in, pay with their govt-issued daycare "voucher", leave, and come back later to pick up their kids around 5:30 - 6:30 PM.
Stand on Zanzibar?
