Reply With Quote
Does that mean you would have never been born in your rightwing dystopia?
What if...
What if we changed the laws so that anyone getting pregnant that didn't have a proper financial future could be subject to legal recourse?
I'm thinking something along two basic ideas. First of all, those who depend on the state to raise their children, that they were irresponsible to have to begin with. Would it be too much to mandate both the man and women have their tubes snipped if they cannot attempt and make their own finances work? If they cannot support one child, why should society bear the cost of a second? Wouldn't two operations be cheaper than another child?
The second idea has to do with abortions. Same basic idea though. If the government is to pay for an abortion, why not tie the woman's tubes too? We can make the normal rape and incest exceptions, but legal papers must be signed, and if later proven wrong... Well perjury is a crime too!
Let the flames begin!
Does that mean you would have never been born in your rightwing dystopia?
I thought you wanted less government and more personal freedom...
I also have a few other questions while I was entertaining this cluster for the last 3 mins....
If a middle class family has kids then has a reversal of fortune and end up poor, do they forfeit the kids?
Who decides who's qualified to have kids?
If, during the tube tying operation, the tube or ovaries become damaged, though luck for the rest of their lives? Even if they end up being rich?
Isn't this thing of limiting reproduction something out of authoritarian countries like China?
Ain't we better than them?
I have no interest in such obvious attempts to pick a fight.
lol libertarian
ok good to know
As I explained in another thread, I am liberation short of anarchy. I believe in personal responsibility. When the lack of personal responsibility affects others in a negative way, I agree with making laws to reduce it from continuing.
I think it took you that long to be derail my thread.
Of course not. At the time, they had the means. happens. My idea is primarily to deter those who cannot finance the start of a family from starting one.
If you need government assistance or not. Isn't that simple enough?
happens.
As a tax payer,I should have say over who makes use of my finds, at least to some extent. Refer to my two previous posts in other threads about believing libertarianism needs to be tempered with responsibility. Without forcing responsibility on some, we have anarchy.
how bout dat nowitzky dawg? Doin blonded haireded people proud
Not quite. I posted that I wouldn't be taking the obvious bait dangled in Wild Cobra's opening post, but I'd never be so shortsighted as to prematurely announce my departure from a thread with such a high win potential.
If by derailing you mean actually entertaining your deranged proposition, then yes.
Well, you never mentioned what that 'legal recourse' would be. I mean, they're poor so you can't extract money from them, and you won't be able to stop them from y y either. So, what recourse do you have in mind that would be legal?
Not really...
If you skip a month of aid while delivering the baby, then go back to them, are you in the clear?
2 months?
3 months?
If one of the parents is receiving aid but the other isn't, how would it work then?
Wouldn't it be unfair to the one that's not receiving help?
How do you harmonize this scenario with the current legal framework?
Does people with disabilities are SOL?
What happens to somebody that doesn't need aid when they begin the pregnancy, but because of an act of god, they do when they're supposed to deliver?
Who gets to decide how this all work?
Please, be specific.
Except that the government, and by extension, the taxpayer (you) are liable. After all, if you didn't force your Nazi mandate, they wouldn't have had to go through surgery.
Not really, no. Maybe at the State or sub-state level, where there still some vestiges of direct democracy from the colonial days. Even then, you're subject to the will of the majority.
In general, the US is a cons utional republic, meaning, as a taxpayer you get to choose who is going to represent you, who, in turn, will have a vote on where your tax money goes.
If you want a direct hand at deciding you should run for office. Otherwise, you're SOL.
Goebbels would be proud of you.
You can obtain the same results by getting rid of certain aid and/or being more stringent in the qualification process for it. And you wouldn't need to force anything into anybody.
Attempting to mutilate people under the guise that's for their own good is truly a staple of authoritarians.
I smelled blood first
But, please proceed...
I fail to see how a thread that you started with the specific intention of positing a bat ridiculous approach to reproductive "rights" and inviting people to flame you could possibly be derailed by another poster disagreeing with you.
So deep, it isn't even shallow. Miracle of non-depth.
Bravo, maestro!
You are no libertarian. Quit using that word.
Define personal responsibility when dealing with this law.
Darrins: Well..... if your a drunk chick at HH who hooks up for the night and gets knocked up I will pass legislation to have your tubes tide. You see your lack of personal responsibility harms me.
^^^
Or you can put up a billboard...
If you don't have "proper finances" and personal responsibility, then the WC's Big Bad Libertarian Eugenic Govt is gonna tie you down and give you some "free" responsibility. It'll be For Your Own Good.
How about these ideas:
-Educate adolescents about pregnancy instead of abstinence-only education
-Pass out condoms at schools
-Remove welfare provided per child as to prevent popping out babies for profit
-Abortions
Thank you Glen Beck for repeating the nonsense and brainwashing conservatives into believing that they are really libertarians because they say they believe in personal liberties.
Libertarianism apparently means "Freedom for some."
I think what WC really wants is an official class system.
being raised on welfare has taken its toll. wc's self hate.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
