What is the matter with some parents these days? they are so selfish, they smoke, take drugs, abuse their children both physically and sexually.

They impose their own damaging wicked lifestyle on their own babies without a second thought to their welfare, have they got a concience? I doubt it!

Do they care what they are doing to someone who depend on them for everything, untill they get to the age when they can look after themselves.

Should these monsters be sterilised by the state? to stop them imposing suffering on someone who is helples? I say a resounding YES
because this is cruelty at it's most basic level and the government should ACT sooner rather than later.

A responsible parent. Sheffield.
l

mmm, need more medication....

Hal, I agree with you. It's pretty scary to think that todays children will be tomorrows parents. With each generation there seems to be less responsibility and commitment to child rearing and all that it entails.

Sorry to say this but too many people see having children as a meal ticket what with family allowance, points on the housing list etc.

Originally posted by halevan
What is the matter with some parents these days? they are so selfish, they smoke, take drugs, abuse their children both physically and sexually.

They impose their own damaging wicked lifestyle on their own babies without a second thought to their welfare, have they got a concience? I doubt it!

Do they care what they are doing to someone who depend on them for everything, untill they get to the age when they can look after themselves.

Should these monsters be sterilised by the state? to stop them imposing suffering on someone who is helples? I say a resounding YES
because this is cruelty at it's most basic level and the government should ACT sooner rather than later.

A responsible parent. Sheffield.
l

...any Chill Pills around for this one.....?

Hm, sounds like you're having a go at people who send their children to public schools where all these things happen. If you are, then I'm all for sterilising them.

Originally posted by Mo
Hal, I agree with you. It's pretty scary to think that todays children will be tomorrows parents. With each generation there seems to be less responsibility and commitment to child rearing and all that it entails.

Sorry to say this but too many people see having children as a meal ticket what with family allowance, points on the housing list etc.
Mo, you agree with sterilising people who smoke, take drugs and hit children? That is what Halevan was suggesting in his post, amongst other things...

Originally posted by Mo
Hal, I agree with you. It's pretty scary to think that todays children will be tomorrows parents. With each generation there seems to be less responsibility and commitment to child rearing and all that it entails.

Sorry to say this but too many people see having children as a meal ticket what with family allowance, points on the housing list etc. Only the one parent mothers do that Mo, and it should be banned.

*ahem* I was a one parent mother at one point Cycle :D I wish I had, had time for a long soak never mind drinking! But in general I getcha!

I have a 'friend' and I use the term loosely. As a person in general she is okay - but she spawned.
Initially it made her a more 'normal' person but now she has split up with the childs father and is living alone.
However she is polygamous and bi-sexual which leeds to very interesting relationships with various people from all over the net. Her little one is around 3 1/2 and my 2 year old speaks better than he does - being that there are very few words that do come out of his mouth. He is a lovely little boy and comes across as backward and I can assue you he is not.

I really don't think she should have had kids. I don't think she should be allowed to keep her son and I would love to know what daddy is doing.

Moon

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
Mo, you agree with sterilising people who smoke, take drugs and hit children? That is what Halevan was suggesting in his post, amongst other things...

Ok perhaps Hals solution was extreme, but I do agree that something should be done about people who just 'breed' and don't give a toss for what happens to their kids.

If you are caught neglecting a dog you can be banned from having another for life if you are found neglecting/abusing your child what happens? The child may go into care but you are free to continue producing more children. A cruel analogy you may think but true.

Well said Mo, the social divide is just get wider and wider as these sprogs just keep popping out.

If this country is to prosper we need the whole society pulling in one direction, not those who have and those who dont.

I know occasionally young girls get caught out, but sometimes they are just getting pregnant because its the done thing and it may get them a house.

But with the exception of Halevan, is there anyone else who thinks state sterilisation of people before they have had children is acceptable?

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
But with the exception of Halevan, is there anyone else who thinks state sterilisation of people before they have had children is acceptable?

Yes - The Government.

Why are they so keen to put flouride in the water ...

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
But with the exception of Halevan, is there anyone else who thinks state sterilisation of people before they have had children is acceptable?
All depend on the mental health of the individual concerned. It may not be PC where Human Rights are concerned, but if someone has a mental condition where they are likely to harm / kill their child then these people shouldn't be allowed to have children IMHO.

In that instance then Bouncer - what about people who have been commited and then found later to be perfectly well of mind??

I supose we are back to the 'bring back hanging' debate on this one.
I have to agree to a degree with Mo on the child abuse - the problem there is I have a pagan friend who's child is on the protection register - because she is pagan and they fear devil sacrifices and abuse *sigh*.

Moon Maiden

Originally posted by DaBouncer
All depend on the mental health of the individual concerned. It may not be PC where Human Rights are concerned, but if someone has a mental condition where they are likely to harm / kill their child then these people shouldn't be allowed to have children IMHO.

Look sterilising the mentally ill and other undesirables may be attractive in the short term, but setting that precedent may be very unwise in the long term.

You are talking about the state (the beloved government) making decisions about whether you are fit to have children. And if they decide you are not fit, they can have you sterilised - irreversibly.

Is it just me, or is their something faintly totalitarian about such an ideology?

You are talking about the state (the beloved government) making decisions about whether you are fit to have children. And if they decide you are not fit, they can have you sterilised - irreversibly.

Didn't the Nazi's do that??

Moon Maiden

No Phanny, it's not just you. It scares the sh** out of me too.

Assuming it becomes acceptable you would start with sterilising the blatantly abnormal then those with not so obvious disabilities until eventually you end up with a race of white, right-handed christians. Or black left-handed pagans depending on who is given the power to decide.

It would probably be decided by a poll in The Sun.

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
Look sterilising the mentally ill and other undesirables may be attractive in the short term, but setting that precedent may be very unwise in the long term.

You are talking about the state (the beloved government) making decisions about whether you are fit to have children. And if they decide you are not fit, they can have you sterilised - irreversibly.

Is it just me, or is their something faintly totalitarian about such an ideology?
I agree with you and I am not saying MY suggestion is the correct one. If someone is found to be seriosuly menatlly disturbed then sterilisation is one option. What would you do, allow these people to have children knowing full well that there is a 70% chance they may harm / kill their child?

I don't know the correct answer... maybe there isn't one.
Human rights to be able to have children versus the argument that as soon as that child is born they may harm / kill it.

I'm just not 100% sure!

Originally posted by Moon Maiden
Didn't the Nazi's do that??

Moon Maiden

Not just the nazis. The swedes were at it until 1976. See this BBC article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/background_briefings/international/290661.stm

Scary. :o

All the scandinavian countries tried it, including castration of rapists and other, irreversible procedures on mentally ill and disabled patients. And it does stem from a belief in 'we know best what's good for you' as government policy. And the teutonic folk myth of racial purity comes strongly into play when we are talking about Germany, Prussia, and the Baltic & Scandinavian states

It's eugenics.

Just because the nazis did it doesn't necessarily mean it is wrong, I merely think that it is a totalitarian and unecessarily extreme way of dealing with the problems that Halevan outlined.

There are perfectly good laws to stop people from abusing their children sexually and physically (although IIRC halevan is all for physical abuse for disciplinarian purposes).

Also, if you want to stop abusive parents from having children, you have one big problem. How do you know they are going to be abusive parents if they haven't had any children yet?

And how will those in power be able to discriminate? Maxt is right - it would become (even if it didn't start out as one) a political tool.

I think that the state does have a right to have a say, after all it's the state thats keeping them.

I think there should be a test to take to determine whether a person is allowed to "breed". How to police this is another matter. My son Richard has Down Syndrome, and should not be allowed to breed, but there is no legal way to stop him (he`s not yet 2 , so no panic yet!) I do think there a certain criteria to meet before anyone is deemed a suitable parent, which the whole population could agree on.

This thread is starting to scare me.

Stop reading it then:P

Originally posted by si@guisborough
I think there should be a test to take to determine whether a person is allowed to "breed". How to police this is another matter. My son Richard has Down Syndrome, and should not be allowed to breed, but there is no legal way to stop him (he`s not yet 2 , so no panic yet!) I do think there a certain criteria to meet before anyone is deemed a suitable parent, which the whole population could agree on.

Um, does the whole population include people who are likely to be deemed unsuitable for parenthood? I'm not sure that they would agree and therefore you could never reach consensus. Unless you're suggesting a committee be set up to determine who chooses who breeds and who doesn't. Who selects the committee? Politicians, Rupert Murdoch, Conrad Black, experts in the field of eugenics. Perhaps we could get the whole population to vote on who sets up the committee.

Gets a bit dodgy the more you look at it.

Totalitarian selective breeding. Erm... no.

I don't even know where to start on this...

Originally posted by Hodge
Totalitarian selective breeding. Erm... no.

I don't even know where to start on this...

Precisely the thought that were running cold through my synapses.

DaBouncer - ignoring things that one is scared of can be a particularly bad life tactic in general.

This thread seems to indicate a number of our members would support the idea of government intervention in reproduction - to the point of sterilising 'undesireable would-be parents'. I am not the only one who finds this a bit shocking and distasteful.

I think 'scared' might be the wrong word to use, since I half doubt the seriousness with which the posters are treating the issue.

Originally posted by Phanerothyme

DaBouncer - ignoring things that one is scared of can be a particularly bad life tactic in general.

Don't bring my name into your post... I wasn't being serious with my 'then don't read it' comment!

The fact is... no British Government would do this anyway... so why f****** worry about it!
I may feel that sterilizing a 'minority' of people who are deemed extremely mentally unfit to be parents, but that is MY opinion, whether that scares you or not!

So please bear this in mind for the future!

I like the idea that people who have complained about the government on other threads seem happy for them to decide who should breed or not.

Originally posted by DaBouncer
Don't bring my name into your post... I wasn't being serious with my 'then don't read it' comment!

The fact is... no British Government would do this anyway... so why f****** worry about it!
I may feel that sterilizing a 'minority' of people who are deemed extremely mentally unfit to be parents, but that is MY opinion, whether that scares you or not!

So please bear this in mind for the future!

Whoa there. You sound offended. I'm sorry about that but that wasn't my intention - let me explain:

Bringing your name into it - you replied to my post, and I to yours. I used your name so that if another post ended up between yours and mine, it would make the connection bewteen the two clearer. What is wrong with that?

I realise you weren't fully being serious - when I said originally posted by Phanerothyme

I think 'scared' might be the wrong word to use, since I half doubt the seriousness with which the posters are treating the issue.


The only thing that worries me is the kind of support an idea like Halevan's (which started the ball rolling on state sterilisation of undesireables) has got on this forum. I'm not worried that this UK govt is about to start sterilising undesirables just yet. But I wouldn't put out of the realms of possibility - it could happen here!Especially when Halevan is appointed leader!

Fair enough, glad we understand each other :? (or at least you understand me):D