The Big Question
Discussion
When middle class heterosexual couples with Christian views apply to adopt children and are refused on discriminatory grounds it makes my blood boil.
Rather than letting idiots keep children they can't look after or underage girls council flats they state should intervene and offer these children for adoption.
There are infertile couples all over the country desperate for families and ironically this is the easiest way to create social mobility for lower classes.
But I don't expect my views to be considered seriously as common sense dies 11 years ago in this country.
Rather than letting idiots keep children they can't look after or underage girls council flats they state should intervene and offer these children for adoption.
There are infertile couples all over the country desperate for families and ironically this is the easiest way to create social mobility for lower classes.
But I don't expect my views to be considered seriously as common sense dies 11 years ago in this country.
mark69sheer said:
When middle class heterosexual couples with Christian views apply to adopt children and are refused on discriminatory grounds it makes my blood boil.
Rather than letting idiots keep children they can't look after or underage girls council flats they state should intervene and offer these children for adoption.
There are infertile couples all over the country desperate for families and ironically this is the easiest way to create social mobility for lower classes.
But I don't expect my views to be considered seriously as common sense dies 11 years ago in this country.
Actually the debate is going beyond that to cover state enforced contraception / sterilisation.Rather than letting idiots keep children they can't look after or underage girls council flats they state should intervene and offer these children for adoption.
There are infertile couples all over the country desperate for families and ironically this is the easiest way to create social mobility for lower classes.
But I don't expect my views to be considered seriously as common sense dies 11 years ago in this country.
rhinochopig said:
mark69sheer said:
When middle class heterosexual couples with Christian views apply to adopt children and are refused on discriminatory grounds it makes my blood boil.
Rather than letting idiots keep children they can't look after or underage girls council flats they state should intervene and offer these children for adoption.
There are infertile couples all over the country desperate for families and ironically this is the easiest way to create social mobility for lower classes.
But I don't expect my views to be considered seriously as common sense dies 11 years ago in this country.
Actually the debate is going beyond that to cover state enforced contraception / sterilisation.Rather than letting idiots keep children they can't look after or underage girls council flats they state should intervene and offer these children for adoption.
There are infertile couples all over the country desperate for families and ironically this is the easiest way to create social mobility for lower classes.
But I don't expect my views to be considered seriously as common sense dies 11 years ago in this country.
My option is as stated. Don't sterilise but take the children away for adoption the laws and powers are allready in place.
The only way to stop people having kids they can't look after is to motivate them with the only carrot they understand: selfish greed. Whilst having more kids leads to more beneifts and tax credits, why wouldn't they continue to breed? I have bets that my sisters 14 year old daughter will be, as they say up north 'babed up' by the time she is 16 because her friends get flats and houses, and can carry on with their cider drinking, Sky-plus, cigarette smoking lifestyle. Her brother got his grirlfriend babed up at 15 and they now (aged 20) have a rent free council house, go out every weekend and get hammered, smoke like troopers, have Sky (but hardly any furniture)
The alternative is to make them better parents but that will be an uphill struggle.
Apache said:
The trouble is.....legislation is black and white so will need lines drawing somewhere, that's where it gets messy.....IMO
You get a conviction for abusing kids then you get sterilized in a reversible manner Sadly this will never happen due to human rights which for some reason completely ignore the rights of any potential kids they might have.
As to the other debate of sterilizing the underclass that is far more complex as that will mean the state has the power to decide who gets to breed and who don't on mass. And i really don't want idiots in power to have that kind of power as it WILL be abused
Whoooaahh just a minute here...
Parents have been accused of 'abusing' children simply for smacking them for being naughty.
Allowing any state to sterilise for whatever reason is WRONG.
Remember in a democracy EVERYONE can vote and society is shaped by the voters.
'Child abusing' parents may become the norm as modern offspring become more selfish and self obsessed and aware of their so called rights and not responsibilities.
This debate is too fraught with state engineering or downright missaplication.
Sterilising should NEVER be an instrument of stste control.
Parents have been accused of 'abusing' children simply for smacking them for being naughty.
Allowing any state to sterilise for whatever reason is WRONG.
Remember in a democracy EVERYONE can vote and society is shaped by the voters.
'Child abusing' parents may become the norm as modern offspring become more selfish and self obsessed and aware of their so called rights and not responsibilities.
This debate is too fraught with state engineering or downright missaplication.
Sterilising should NEVER be an instrument of stste control.
mark69sheer said:
Whoooaahh just a minute here...
Parents have been accused of 'abusing' children simply for smacking them for being naughty.
Allowing any state to sterilise for whatever reason is WRONG.
Remember in a democracy EVERYONE can vote and society is shaped by the voters.
'Child abusing' parents may become the norm as modern offspring become more selfish and self obsessed and aware of their so called rights and not responsibilities.
This debate is too fraught with state engineering or downright missaplication.
Sterilising should NEVER be an instrument of stste control.
Perhaps for some types of offences after conviction, in some circumstances, for some people.Parents have been accused of 'abusing' children simply for smacking them for being naughty.
Allowing any state to sterilise for whatever reason is WRONG.
Remember in a democracy EVERYONE can vote and society is shaped by the voters.
'Child abusing' parents may become the norm as modern offspring become more selfish and self obsessed and aware of their so called rights and not responsibilities.
This debate is too fraught with state engineering or downright missaplication.
Sterilising should NEVER be an instrument of stste control.
Persona;lly I say offer them 200 bennies and a Sky package and you wouldn't need legislation.
mrmaggit said:
Actually they're not proposing sterilisation, just a two year contraception period to enable a sense or order/breathing space.
Which some people can get nowadays anyway, if they want to.
But lets not let mis-reading/hearing the original proposal stop us going away on a tangent.
...and how do they intend to administer this contraception?Which some people can get nowadays anyway, if they want to.
But lets not let mis-reading/hearing the original proposal stop us going away on a tangent.
Obviously not by trusting someone to wear condoms or take an oral pill surely in which case you must mean by appointed administered injections.. Ok so if its only for two years who says it won't be stretched to four or indefinately??
You can't get away from it being sterilisation by claiming a temporary aspect since that is an open ended period.
Wasn't a similar program of eugenics run in Sweden until fairly recently (mid-80s IIRC)?
Again, going from memory, it was enforced sterilisation of anyone with genetic abnormalities at birth, with sterilisation of certain criminal types as well...
Anyone know how this went, as it was running since at least the '40s?
Again, going from memory, it was enforced sterilisation of anyone with genetic abnormalities at birth, with sterilisation of certain criminal types as well...
Anyone know how this went, as it was running since at least the '40s?
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff