100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: UNWED MOTHERS - POLL | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
he has offered himself as a sacrificial lamb, he wouldn't pass by his own standards
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Blanket statements like "Children thrive best when an involved father and mother share responsibility. Children in homes without fathers are more likely to be poor. Fathers help young men to control their anger and young women to obtain self-confidence. " are ignorant and will improve nothing. What if the father is a screw up, a rapist, a drunkard, or a tweaker? Even if the father is not part a part of their life his child, a resourceful mother could find a positive male role model for the child in an uncle, grandfather, family friend, etc.
Bill Clinton, Bill Cosby, Tom Cruise, Barak Obama, Eminem, and Jamie Lee Curtis to name a few are all of single parent households. Like them or not they are certainly successful. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Unknow
on
Mon 05/18/09 08:14 AM
|
|
7 make it a privilege to have children not a right. make i.q. a determining factor for birth rights. that way there will be a) less stupid people, which will lead to b) lower crime rate, which will end up at c) a higher standard of living. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
oh, and germany wasn't the only country pushing for eugenics, it has been used in the united states as well, before germany. the majority in "liberal" california. it was adopted as a cost saving strategy to relieve the tax burden for rapidly expanding public facilities for the "feebleminded" and "socially inadequate" virginia law recognized that heredity played and important factor in the transmission of , insanity, idiocy, imbecility, epilepsy, and crime. also forced sterilization of criminals who committed violent or sexual crimes, and this was a law that was in place and supported by 13 states. sterilization for the mentally retarded continued through the 1970's in the usa, and 33 states had statutes under which over 60,000 Americans endured involuntary sterilization.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 make it a privilege to have children not a right. make i.q. a determining factor for birth rights. that way there will be a) less stupid people, which will lead to b) lower crime rate, which will end up at c) a higher standard of living. And what of the people who reproduce outside of these prescribed regulations? Will you lock them away? And what of the children? They are not products of the prescribed gene donors, so they should be euthanized right? Or you solve this problem by sterilizing all those unworthy individuals? Those of low IQ. Those of less than stellar looks. Those of less than perfect health. This is nothing new, it was called eugenics many years ago and was to be controlled by the social elite not the average person. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
oh, and germany wasn't the only country pushing for eugenics, it has been used in the united states as well, before germany. the majority in "liberal" california. it was adopted as a cost saving strategy to relieve the tax burden for rapidly expanding public facilities for the "feebleminded" and "socially inadequate" virginia law recognized that heredity played and important factor in the transmission of , insanity, idiocy, imbecility, epilepsy, and crime. also forced sterilization of criminals who committed violent or sexual crimes, and this was a law that was in place and supported by 13 states. sterilization for the mentally retarded continued through the 1970's in the usa, and 33 states had statutes under which over 60,000 Americans endured involuntary sterilization. And yet, you're here... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
oh, and germany wasn't the only country pushing for eugenics, it has been used in the united states as well, before germany. the majority in "liberal" california. it was adopted as a cost saving strategy to relieve the tax burden for rapidly expanding public facilities for the "feebleminded" and "socially inadequate" virginia law recognized that heredity played and important factor in the transmission of , insanity, idiocy, imbecility, epilepsy, and crime. also forced sterilization of criminals who committed violent or sexual crimes, and this was a law that was in place and supported by 13 states. sterilization for the mentally retarded continued through the 1970's in the usa, and 33 states had statutes under which over 60,000 Americans endured involuntary sterilization. there was a show on either discovery or history channel about that a while back and what was the reason for the repeal of said laws i dont remember |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
oh, and germany wasn't the only country pushing for eugenics, it has been used in the united states as well, before germany. the majority in "liberal" california. it was adopted as a cost saving strategy to relieve the tax burden for rapidly expanding public facilities for the "feebleminded" and "socially inadequate" virginia law recognized that heredity played and important factor in the transmission of , insanity, idiocy, imbecility, epilepsy, and crime. also forced sterilization of criminals who committed violent or sexual crimes, and this was a law that was in place and supported by 13 states. sterilization for the mentally retarded continued through the 1970's in the usa, and 33 states had statutes under which over 60,000 Americans endured involuntary sterilization. And yet, you're here... [/quote  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
anybody willing to debate should read this first
http://www.eugenics.net/papers/caseforeugenics.html |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i am still here i must be reasonably intelligent, or not born to criminals, retards, or other social parasites
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i am still here i must be reasonably intelligent, or not born to criminals, retards, or other social parasites Not necessarily... you're only 26... you said it stopped in the 70's... Just think if they had continued... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The thing with eugenics is that it was not the average person who made the decision only those high social stature. One big flaw of is that there will always be a lower class of people. Two people of amazingly high IQ's could still give birth to a child of very low IQ.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting quote on your profile too...
"our past does not define us, what defines us is how we rise after falling" Yet you'd condem women who for whatever reason had children for reasons you think aren't right (falling from grace in your eyes). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i am still here i must be reasonably intelligent, or not born to criminals, retards, or other social parasites whose standards are you comparing yourself to?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Unknow
on
Mon 05/18/09 08:27 AM
|
|
i am still here i must be reasonably intelligent, or not born to criminals, retards, or other social parasites whose standards are you comparing yourself to? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Blanket statements like "Children thrive best when an involved father and mother share responsibility. Children in homes without fathers are more likely to be poor. Fathers help young men to control their anger and young women to obtain self-confidence. " are ignorant and will improve nothing. What if the father is a screw up, a rapist, a drunkard, or a tweaker? Even if the father is not part a part of their life his child, a resourceful mother could find a positive male role model for the child in an uncle, grandfather, family friend, etc. Bill Clinton, Bill Cosby, Tom Cruise, Barak Obama, Eminem, and Jamie Lee Curtis to name a few are all of single parent households. Like them or not they are certainly successful. You're right. I am a single mom with a fantastic, gifted, well rounded child. There are other people involved in my child's life. My child has Grandparents, Uncles, Aunts, teachers, Pastor, sports coaches, scout leaders and more. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eugenics has always been about class. And will always be about class.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Two people of amazingly high IQ's could still give birth to a child of very low IQ.
although true it is much less likely. and alternativa who taught you how to debate, this isn't the sand box, argumentative fallacies will get you nowhere. and why should the average person be allowed to decide what is best for the whole? if that was the case there would be no electoral college, but that is a whole other point. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Improving mankind as a whole. Teach men and women morals. And teach people how to be parents before the deed is already done. Who wants to stay with a guy who is smoking crack in the closet and yelling at the kid to shuttup all the time???
Improve people..... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 make it a privilege to have children not a right. make i.q. a determining factor for birth rights. that way there will be a) less stupid people, which will lead to b) lower crime rate, which will end up at c) a higher standard of living. Like smart people don't have kids that don't do crimes.
|
|
|
|
|
