CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
License to Parent
We agree people should pass some sort of test to do most things that protect society like drive, practice medicine, charge for skills, etc etc. why in Hell do we have no screening process what so ever to be a parent. The tech is there to control birth, technology that we choose to ignore and allow degenerate s to have kids
We were at one time licensed to have children, the license of Constitutional separation was called marriage. As a man and woman are licensed, and witnessed before the public in consideration of contributing to the Society of a Nation to which the couple lives.
The question is the Right to contribute to a Nations population without registration. This is also the underlying issue which incriminates the general public into criminal act by creating public witnessing of Same Gender Unions. The adage any publicity is good publicity was being tested and found false by Constitution. A crime of fraud is organized and directed upon the public by unconstitutional legislation of law.
Yes. I support this. Children poorly raised suffer greatly. I'm not fit to be a mother, so I chose toi be sterilized. Anyone with neurological diseases should be sterilized.
Children poorly raised suffer greatly. I'm not fit to be a mother, so I chose toi be sterilized. Anyone with neurological diseases should be sterilized.
Smart.
KIND.
Neurological diseases are brutal, without exception.
The mom of my best friend growing up had Huntington's Chorea. She suffered even more than her family, who suffered while watching her suffering. Both my friend and his brother got the gene. My friend killed himself a few years ago, and his brother is locked up for trying to kill himself multiple times.
I got a vasectomy because cancer runs strong in my family (3 grandparents had cancer, and both my parents died early of cancer.) It just did not seem kind to pass that on to countless generations.
As someone who was born with three mental illnesses, I support the forced sterilization of anyone with a neurological disease. I will not change my mind, so check your privilige, little child.
As someone who was born with three mental illnesses, I support the forced sterilization of anyone with a neurological disease. I will not change my mind, so check your privilige, little child.
Did you actually read my post? I supported your position both as smart and, more importantly, as kind.
So why tell me you will not change your mind? I don't think you should.
Why the unwarranted condescension in the "little child" comment?
Why on earth would you assume I have any privilege to check?
Why on earth would you assume I have any privilege to check?
Marcus, nobody thinks like you do without being over-privileged. Normal people aren't arrogant enough to believe they know more about the climate than climate scientists.
Don't be stupid. I have no way of knowing what your privileges in life have been. I only know that they exist because your attitude and belief system give them away.
Don't be stupid. I have no way of knowing what your privileges in life have been.
You insist I must be privileged with "no way of knowing" but think I am the one being stupid? I only know that they exist because your attitude and belief system give them away.
What specific beliefs indicate privilege, and how do they indicate privilege? It looks to me like you disagree with me, and rather than provide an argument, you just throw out an ad hominem that is too vague even to address directly.
Normal people aren't arrogant enough to believe they know more about the climate than climate scientists.
Do you mean like geologists?
I don't claim to know more about climate than climatologists, but, as a normal, thinking person who understands the scientific process, I am completely capable of seeing that the climatologists have not demonstrated scientifically that the changes are not the results of non-human causes like Solar activity, volcanic release of greenhouse gasses, etc., etc., etc.. Shallow data sets, readings that only go back 150-175 years, and margins of error all matter.
Demonstrating that people COULD be the cause does not in any way demonstrate that people ARE the cause.
Knowing that hypotheses should be proven before being believed implies normal cognitive function (distinct from religious fervor).
Demanding that hypotheses be proven before being believed is the antithesis of arrogance.
Yes, you idiot. I mean like geologists. Geologists study rocks. Climatologists study climate. The opinion of a geologist about climate is as relevant as the opinion of a historian about which way the wind is blowing, you stupid straw-chewing twat.
Geologists study rocks. Climatologists study climate. The opinion of a geologist about climate is as relevant as the opinion of a historian about which way the wind is blowing, you stupid straw-chewing twat.
As I told you about a week ago:
"Geologists study the earth and how it changes over time.
Geological study also includes study of the history of life and living conditions on the earth, as revealed in the fossil record.
Geological study includes atmospheric content and conditions as revealed in the geologic record.
Geological study also includes the effects of volcanism, and the content and effects of volcanic eruptions, including the release of massive amounts of carbon into the atmosphere.
Geological study also includes the study of global climate over time as revealed in the geologic record through fossil evidence and evidence of glaciation.
Geological study also includes the effects of both tectonic activity and glaciation on what land is or is not below sea level, and whether and when it has been in the past.
Geological study also includes study of past rates of these changes, as revealed in the geologic record.
Geological study also includes study of both internal and external factors that impact the conditions and processes of the earth, including rates of change."
So, yes, like a geologist, because historical geologist actually do study climate, climate change, and geological causes an effects of these.
"The opinion of a geologist about climate is as relevant as the opinion of a historian about which way the wind is blowing, you stupid straw-chewing twat."
just because one specializes in a certain area doesn't mean that he is completely unknowledgeable about other subjects. for example, just because one student excels at math doesn't mean that that same student knows nothing about science.
We might as well throw in a license to "live". So why is it that everything would require a license to do but no license to be born/to live?
You see, the problem with too much control and too many rules is that you basically strip life down to nothing which isn't life anymore. I'd rather live with the inconveniences of too much liberty than the inconveniences of too little.
We should have it and I think someone should have to be 28 years old before they have children. Maybe even 30.
Although in one sense I understand your rational here, how would such a policy be enforced? That is, if a person had a child when they were 22, would the child be put up for adoption? Please expand on your position in this respect
Rationally the child would be put in a foster home. A 24 year old should gain some wisdom before having kids. Not enough life experience. I purposely am not gonna have kids until I am 30 and honestly that's a good age. Most people my age nowadays are not much different from being kids.
A lot of people today that are my age act like teenagers, myself included to some degree. I'm 22, almost 23. I know most of my peers are not ready to have kids yet. Some of them might get away with it.
I tell that to any girlfriend I get when I first meet them.
By then the kid will have grown to love their adopted parents and/or parent just like any other adopted child. Also safer imo based on how I profile people who have kids before 30. Usually sluts and thugs would have a kid at age 22.
If you make a rule at school that says "don't use the computer lab during recess" but then one kid use it during that time, then you aren't really enforcing the rule.
Obviously, for examples like the previous one, a few slip ups are ok. But a rule about something serious like having a license to parent and then allowing a slip up for a few million people is not enforcing the rule.
A 24 year old should gain some wisdom before having kids. Not enough life experience. I purposely am not gonna have kids until I am 30 and honestly that's a good age.
I am with you in principle. People change more in our twenties than in our teen years.
That means that marrying before 30 increases the likelihood the couple will change divergently, thus decreasing the odds of staying together.
It is a bad idea to have kids outside of marriage (or a similarly committed and permanent relationship). It decreases the odds the kids will finish high school, and increases the odds of prison, addiction, and premarital pregnancy.
That means that people should not have kids until after 30.
.
Having made that point, I want to point out that it is not always smart to have laws that require people to do things that are a good idea, or that prohibit thing that are a bad idea.
You cannot legislate smart, and no law can prevent stupid.
Government does nothing efficiently or effectively, and is prone to excess and abuse.
Whenever possible, bad ideas should be discouraged by ensuring people have to deal personally with the costs and consequences of doing things that are bad ideas.
In the case of having children, people would be less likely to have them young if they knew that nobody else is going to pay for raising the kid. That means no SNAP, WIC, TANF, CHIP, etc. Social welfare programs have had the unintended consequence of encouraging unwed motherhood and teen pregnancy.
Drugs should be legal because they only affect the person buying and taking the drug. As soon as it affects someone else, that's where I think law enforcement should come in. One example of this is the child.
Just an answer to the description of the debate: I believe we dont need to have a license for parenting because
(1) having children is inherent to our condition of human beings (2) moral "skills" cant really be taught , while driving a car, being a doctor etc are learned
there are so many different ways of parenting. It is ridiculous to tell people how to take care of their kids. People have different values, and making people get a license will only make people teach their kids the same values. It will make this country a heck of a lot more boring, and there is no need for it.
A license is not a test, it is a registration only. A test of some form of basic skill is not unheard of as reasonable for many events which effect the general welfare of a nation. The need is a lower cost in data collection and assessment of population.
I am not confrontable with the idea but it has been going on for some time.
t is ridiculous to tell people how to take care of their kids. People have different values, and making people get a license will only make people teach their kids the same values.
Yep.
The likelihood is that there will be no actual test of preparedness for objectively measurable parenting requirements, but rather a push for whatever set of values prevails at the time in government social services agencies.
The need is for people to become parents only when they are ready and have made an informed commitment to two decades of hard work and sacrifice. People generally make better decisions when they know and understand potential risks and consequences, and that there is no easy out.
I think a better way than licenses is to ensure people are actually prepared to parent, and to ensure they actually do the work of raising their kids, is to make sure they know in advance what is actually involved in parenting.
We need explicit sex education in biology classes. The ridiculously oversimplified and moralized BS taught in "sex education" courses is nearly useless for providing kids with the understanding they need to make informed decisions about sex, pregnancy, and parenthood. Most sex ed programs leave out the biological basis of the long term health costs of pregnancy, for example. Though it is hard to believe, there is widespread misunderstanding about the mechanics of getting pregnant, how long sperm can live in the female body, etc..
There should also be financial education in public schools about things like mortgages, 401k plans, and the expenses of parenting. NOTHING is more expensive in time and resources than raising a child.
Moreover, people need to know the government will not take over their responsibilities for providing for the kid. That needs to be a reality ensconced in law. All those welfare programs (SNAP, CHIP, Section 8, etc. need to have a LIFETIME maximum (associated to the PARENT, not the child) of 6 months emergency assistance.
If parenting becomes a personal responsibility, NOT a societal one, and people go into it aware of what they are committing to, we will end up with fewer unprepared and irresponsible screw-ups raising their kids badly.
Informed personal accountability will be more effective than government meddling and bailouts.
It's a very risky concept, which borders too much on dystopian control of people's personal lives.
What would the screening process be? If you earn under a certain amount, you can't have kids? In that case, wouldn't it mean we're attempting to cull the working class?
And what would happen to the children if a couple had a baby without getting a license? Would they be put up for adoption? Both America and the UK already have ridiculously high rates of children who have been left orphans.
It's something I wouldn't be surprised to read about in a Margaret Atwood novel.
Marriage has always been voluntary license to have children. The United State set by Republic adopted it from religion and separated from religious context, by the formation pf basic laws regarding witness, account, and sexual acts that long came into play publicly. Consummation. There is only one justifiable reason a person at liberty can be asked to make a claim against another in regarding to sex. It creates a Citizen of a Nation, Country, and State.
I’m inclined to agree with you. But what if there was a not a test for positive traits, but rather a flag for egregious negative traits such as popping out child after child in a drug den or appealing conditions amounting to abuse? I know we have thiese flags now, and it triggers a child services investigation, but I’m asking about going further. What if we force sterilized the mom who literally has multiple children taken at birth and put into the system because of her prostitution fueled drug habit? What if we force sterilized the mother who is about to pop out a 5th when the first four suffer from the toxic fumes of their own piss and shit that has saturated the floor of the one room and bare mattress they all share? Would force sterilization in these cases be immoral or fruitless?
Well, we don't have a "license to parent" policy--however, there is child-protective services in place (and such) in an effort to deal with issues that tend to arise. That is, there is understanding in society that parents are obligated to meet certain basic standards or else they lose the privilege of raising their child(ren).
There are many flaws with the current model, I am just "putting on the table" that the general Philosophical concept you are promoting already is sort of in societies conscious
Well, we don't have a "license to parent" policy--however, there is child-protective services in place (and such) in an effort to deal with issues that tend to arise. That is, there is understanding in society that parents are obligated to meet certain basic standards or else they lose the privilege of raising their child(ren).
I worked for a year as a Child Protective Services (CPS) investigator in Texas. I investigated and enforced laws having to do with abuse, neglect, and neglectful supervision.
NONE of these laws have anything to do with raising kids to become responsible adults capable of healthy participation in society. They are only about the physical safety of the child. In reality, parents only lose custody (temporarily or permanently) in much less than 5% of the cases.
My year of working for CPS taught me some basic things.
1-Pretty much everybody loves their kids.
2-Reproducing is not sufficient to make people capable of being self-sufficient, or participating productively in society.
3-Loving your kids is not sufficient to make you a good parent.
4-Keeping your kids safe and fed is not sufficient to raising people capable of participating productively in society.
5-It is impossible to fix somebody else's family.
6-More than 90% of CPS activities are a complete waste of taxpayer money. It is just closing the barn door after the horses have run out.
NONE of these laws have anything to do with raising kids to become responsible adults capable of healthy participation in society.
I never made an argument/statement that these laws (and such) function in this way. In fact, I have argued elsewhere about this at great length (concerning the abysmal failure of the Adult population generation after generation toward the Young--as a whole, that is). My statement was in reference to minimum standards of health (and such)--That is, you must feed your kids, you can't severely physically abuse your children, ect. ect.
I never made an argument/statement that these laws (and such) function in this way.
I did not mean to imply that you did.
I was just pointing out that CPS cannot fix the problem.
In fact, I have argued elsewhere about this at great length (concerning the abysmal failure of the Adult population generation after generation toward the Young--as a whole, that is).
Agreed.
The BabyBoomers were the first generation to suck. They were idealistic, unrealistic, and selfish.
They raised Generation X, which sucks even more because they have the same weaknesses, and tendencies toward irresponsibility, but my generation thinks technology can solve problems that result from impatience, laziness, and lack of personal accountability and self-control.
My generation then raised the Millennials, a bunch of weak, entitled, snots, who have never even heard of rugged individualism.
You are right. Dismal failure, compounding generationally.
I assumed the implication (erroneously, evidently) due to the "dispute" function (as it was not clear to me what you were "disputing")
I was just pointing out that CPS cannot fix the problem
Agreed. Not even in theory. All CPS can really do is step-in when obvious, extreme, community agreed upon abuses are occurring (such as what I listed before, amongst others)--which is very helpful & a needed "emergency" resource, however it doesn't really help the type of problems we are discussing here
My generation then raised the Millennials, a bunch of weak, entitled, snots, who have never even heard of rugged individualism.
I always find these Forums interesting in that we can have conversations like this--bridging generational divides (that don't even appear to be there until brought up, in many cases). I am a Millennial, and also have notable contact with your generation (Gen X, I'm assuming(?)) as they were my parents, friends parents, teachers, ect. ect.
I largely agree with the broad statements you're making, I would like to add a few remarks.
(1) There were some significant shifts that occurred that the Gen X'ers could not have foreseen when raising children (e.g. the internet, social media, constant surveillance, ect.). This raised many unforeseen both benefits & negatives (depending upon how it is utilized) for their Young (my generation). However, it has largely went unregulated/managed by the X'ers (who largely appear to be happily oblivious to these significant shifts, & are just "going with the flow" without stepping back & considering possible negative ramifications of these "advancements").
(2) My generation (Millennials) are the product of this "hands-off" experiment (discussed above, in brief) which has caused Millennials to challenge "traditional" societal structures/norms for both the better & worse. Also, the assimilation process into society is taking longer as the process itself is beginning to be challenged, people's worldviews are no longer as limited to their family/community--which is causing kids to grow up with one worldview (based upon how they were raised) & then shifts due to contact with the "outside world" sometime in their later teens to twenties with a need to "start-from-scratch" ideologically (thus the "failure-to-launch" matter)
Note: These are just a few thoughts. There is obviously a lot more to discuss in regards to this topic to do it any real justice
These are just a few thoughts. There is obviously a lot more to discuss in regards to this topic to do it any real justice
There are hundreds of books about the Baby Boomers, so I am sure we won't exhaust the topic of Gen X and the Millennials on this site.
There were some significant shifts that occurred that the Gen X'ers could not have foreseen when raising children (e.g. the internet, social media, constant surveillance, ect.).... However, it has largely went unregulated/managed by the X'ers (who largely appear to be happily oblivious to these significant shifts, & are just "going with the flow" without stepping back & considering possible negative ramifications of these "advancements").
Actually, we (Xers) have not at all been oblivious, nor have we failed to consider the ramifications of much of the technology. The problem is that too many in my generation refused to manage or regulate how our kids used the OLDER tech and methods while learning the new. The technological changes became subtractive, rather than additive because we let our kids focus only on the new. This, however is not the source of the global problem I see with the Millennials.
My generation (Millennials) are the product of this "hands-off" experiment (discussed above, in brief) which has caused Millennials to challenge "traditional" societal structures/norms for both the better & worse.
The weakness of Generation X parenting of Millennials manifested not as a "hands-off experiment" but in being to concerned in our kids' private affairs and as "helicopter parenting" that was oriented toward too much control and protection.
When I was a kid by contrast with when the Millennials were kids:
- We had much less homework, two hours less school per day, and much more time for self-directed activities.
- We were kicked out of the house on weekends, and told to be back "before the streetlights came on." At 10 years old, I went to the beach by myself. We had lots of unsupervised time wherein we figured out how to deal with interpersonal problems, a skillset that too many (not all) Millenials don't get until late in their 20s.
- In general, it was up to us to deal with bullies and interpersonal conflicts, and we learned multiple ways to deal with assholes.
- We learned how to argue, fight, and make up afterward. We grew up knowing that conflict is normal, and that people saying things we dislike does not make them evil. Not agreeing was not conflated with not being friends.
- Masculinity and masculine concepts were not automatically assumed to be evil and destructive. It was understood that boys are more rambunctious than girls, and that sometimes boys fight, and nobody pathologized or criminalized this. As a result, we grew up knowing that conflicts could get violent, but we learned how to limit the violence, and as we grew up, how to avoid it. We learned how to struggle for dominance, earn respect (win or lose), establish the order, and move on. We had no mass school shootings because there was a release valve.
- Our feelings were not sacrosanct. We were taught to suck it up when we didn't like what somebody said. "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me," was a standard.
- Actions counted more than words.
- Being a victim did not confer virtue. Weakness and dependence were flaws that the weak and dependent were responsible for working past. Most people still derided cowardice as an inexcusable flaw.
Generation X parents were often lazy and cowardly, so we changed most of these things by coddling and overprotecting your generation. "Just stay inside on your computer where I can protect you, dear," and "Was someone mean to you? I will talk to your teacher so someone will make sure you are not sad or afraid." "Here, play with the smartphone so I don't have to teach you to sit quietly in the restaurant by dragging you to the restroom and beating your ass."
Translated, this all means, "I think you are weak and fragile, and I don't want to do the work of forcing you to confront things you don't like, or make you do hard and unhappy things."
This is why the average age of millennials reaching adulthood (having your own apartment and being self-sufficient) is on average not happening until 27-28 years old.
My generation was so weak and cowardly and incompetent as parents that we delayed adulthood by 8-10 years for your generation.
Actually, we (Xers) have not at all been oblivious, nor have we failed to consider the ramifications of much of the technology. The problem is that too many in my generation refused to manage or regulate how our kids used the OLDER tech and methods while learning the new. The technological changes became subtractive, rather than additive because we let our kids focus only on the new. This, however is not the source of the global problem I see with the Millennials.
Here, my point was that there was/has been no direct parental monitoring of activity (i.e. lazy/neglectful parenting). When we're young--Day Care. When we are in the k-12 system--no attempts of reasonable oversight nor explanation (e.g. watching MTV Rappers (which is much, much different than Bruce Springsteen music), Reality TV, pornography, no challenge to the ever increasing superficiality/shallowness of the culture (e.g. the Superman, Spider-Man, ect. movies display this nicely--in Superman, there are bigger muscles & less personal strength of character--i.e. our culture is devolving into an embrace of Hedonism & shallowness).
The weakness of Generation X parenting of Millennials manifested not as a "hands-off experiment" but in being to concerned in our kids' private affairs and as "helicopter parenting" that was oriented toward too much control and protection.
Its both--as the priorities are tremendously backward. Below is a copy-paste excerpt of one of my previous posts in an exchange with another member here, in regards to an overlapping topic:
I was a Security Guard for several years and I always found the High School sporting events mind-boggling. The kids (i.e. High Schoolers) would come out to rap music blasting with obscene lyrics (e.g. here is a link to a song that used to be highly popular (I apologize in advance for subjecting you to this, it is rather informative as to the kind of mind-space the kids are being brought up into--if you are not already familiar with it, that is): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X98HX5nbsCI )
Meanwhile, the adults were overwhelmingly encouraged it, and I was put in the position of knowing that these kids were essentially being so misled by their parents/adults in their life/ect. that they were being deprived of intellectualism (by design--although the adults may not/probably aren't cognizant of it) and what I can only describe as the psychological abuse of the young. This put me in quite a difficult ethical situation (from my perspective) since my job was to enforce/maintain the system and thus the status quo (which needs to be fundamentally reformed) however if I didn't do it, then I wouldn't be able to pay for rent, college fees, ect. ect.
Now, the above is not an example of "Hellicopter Parenting", rather it is highly indicative of Neglectful/Lazy Parenting even when the massive issues are hitting them directly in the face--which is all I & my friends/peers (with very few exception/aberrations) ever saw from our parents & adults.
When I was a kid by contrast with when the Millennials were kids:
- We had much less homework, two hours less school per day, and much more time for self-directed activities.
Exactly; It is an extension of the Day-Care system in which they essentially don't want the responsibilies of being parents even though they have children. Thus, they push it off on Pre-Schools, then k-12, then push their kids into massive College Debt immediately following High School--avoiding the responsibilities of parenting all together, and then wonder why the Kids have a bit of a hard time finding their own way when in their 20s. If they would have simply been parents all along, then the kids would have some direction & not needed to start from scratch (which has happened to all of my (sane) friends/peers at some point in our late teen to early-mid twenties)
In general, it was up to us to deal with bullies and interpersonal conflicts, and we learned multiple ways to deal with assholes.
Here, this hits on a good point (that I generally agree with) however it really depends on who you are calling the "bullies". The Rap music & Celebrity Pop culture coupled with the Athletes has been an absurdly bad influence in the Childrens lives and the parents remain silent, stand by as it goes down (as if everything is fine). Your generation had stricter controls of social/cultural values & "respectable" behavior--much of which has been completely lost by now (have you ever seen the way kids "dance" these days?--note, I'm not joking and would be happy to discuss such matters with you if you're interested)
Masculinity and masculine concepts were not automatically assumed to be evil and destructive. It was understood that boys are more rambunctious than girls, and that sometimes boys fight, and nobody pathologized or criminalized this. As a result, we grew up knowing that conflicts could get violent, but we learned how to limit the violence, and as we grew up, how to avoid it. We learned how to struggle for dominance, earn respect (win or lose), establish the order, and move on.
I completely agree with this and you can blame it on Neo-Feminism which has been an incredibly destructive force in our culture/society.
Actions counted more than words.
But yet this didn't follow through in parenting/raising the young?
Generation X parents were often lazy and cowardly,
Yes
This is why the average age of millennials reaching adulthood (having your own apartment and being self-sufficient) is on average not happening until 27-28 years old.
It is more complex than that. I have discussed my thoughts about this in outline here and in a previous post. To sum up:
(A) There is a Biological reality that occurs when a human reaches their early to mid twenties that was/is just as inevitable as Puberty (although it has long been ignored by Society)
(B) The parents, as you say, are Lazy & were hoping to get by without ever actually parenting. Thus, the kids are crippled with no information and/or rampant misinformation about how to "play the Game" and assimilate into society
(C) The "Marshmallow" conditioning you were referring to
My generation was so weak and cowardly and incompetent as parents that we delayed adulthood by 8-10 years for your generation.
There are Biological realities relating to Human Development that have long been ignored/unacknowledged. True Adulthood doesn't occur to one is roughly 30. The problem here is that "Adulthood" is being used as a synonym with "Maturity", which is quite problematic. (Side Note: I always find it quite amusing when most adults state this, as the overwhelming bulk of Adults are simply Children in fully developed bodies--that's what passes for "Maturity"(?). Also, now that I am in my mid-twenties, it is patently obvious that 19 years old are still Kids by essentially every metric--again, the problem is the conflation of the term "Adult" with "Mature")
By how much we agree, I can tell that your parents did a better job than the average Gen Xers. ;)
Seriously, you make some cogent points, some of which I agree with, and some of which I disagree with (partially.)
For example, you wrote, "Reality TV, pornography, no challenge to the ever increasing superficiality/shallowness of the culture (e.g. the Superman, Spider-Man, ect. movies display this nicely--in Superman, there are bigger muscles & less personal strength of character--i.e. our culture is devolving into an embrace of Hedonism & shallowness)."
While I think the hedonism and shallowness are problems, the prevailing failure in development of strength of character is a much more impactive issue.
This is the result of a major problem I did not address previously because it really started with the Baby Boomers, was compounded in Generation X, and is an obvious disaster in the Millennials. It stems from the increasing focus on rights and the decreasing focus on responsibilities.
Dr. Jordan B. Peterson often addresses this in his classes and videos on YouTube. (Any of his videos are more than worth your time.)
Our military is a bright spot in instilling a belief in duty and fulfilling responsibility. Those millennials I know who have served in the military have virtually none of the flaws I have discussed. This indicates either:
-That the Millennial problem is not as pervasive as I may have feared.
or
-That the general problems of Millennials truly are related to the loss of the primacy of the value of responsibility.
Regarding my observation that "This is why the average age of millennials reaching adulthood (having your own apartment and being self-sufficient) is on average not happening until 27-28 years old" you wrote, " There is a Biological reality that occurs when a human reaches their early to mid twenties that was/is just as inevitable as Puberty (although it has long been ignored by Society)"
I think you are conflating completion of neurological/biological development (which never actually ends) with adulthood. Adulthood is not a function of biology, but of social growth and taking on responsibilities. I consider adulthood to be officially marked by reaching the level self-sufficiency that one supports oneself.
There was a time when teenagers were not only self-sufficient, but also taking care of their families, often including their parents.
That sort of adulthood is what many are delaying until their late 20s and early 30s.
By how much we agree, I can tell that your parents did a better job than the average Gen Xers. ;)
Although I understand why you would be tempted to make this statement at Face-Value, you should know as a Philosopher & former CPS worker that you really don’t know what is happening “behind-closed-doors”. I have expressed to you before my objection to the statement you just made, and am curious why, as a person that believes strongly in personal responsibility regardless of background, you would jump to the conclusion that my upbringing provided by my parents was “strong”, “healthy”, “functional” rather than thinking I may have taken some personal responsibility for my actions and personal initiative (regardless of my parents or lack-there-of)?
My parents made all the same faults that I discussed in my previous post, a former exchange we have had on the topic, as well as other issues not discussed (I have simply rejected their worldview and behavior in nearly every way—I’d be a completely different person if I accepted my parents Worldview & example). My father is/was an alcoholic in denial, even though we lived “under-the-same-roof” I mostly only saw him in passing perhaps a couple times a month or not for a couple months at a time (sort of like a Divorced family dynamic actually)—we rarely ever talked, certainly not about anything serious. My mother was/is essentially perpetually depressed because of this (and other reasons), he self-confessed “Checked-out” of parenting (and his marriage) from the time we (my brother and I) hit puberty—and my Mother was “shut down” out of her own depression, apathy, ect. (much like in the movie “The Hunger Games” mother of Katniss). In short, they were far too self-absorbed with their own problems to be concerned with Parenting. Also, their Worldview was very much confined to the Mammal Snow Globe of most—which offers very little indeed. There were many other issues I care not to discuss here, but I would maintain that your presumption/assertions in this regard are really out-of-line—particularly for a former CPS who should cognizant of such issues. To be fair, my parents did get a few matters right (A) holding a steady income to be part of the Middle-Class (B) move to the Suburbs (i.e. a physically safe environment) (C) in collaboration with my Grandparents, save a bit of money toward College Fund.
While I think the hedonism and shallowness are problems, the prevailing failure in development of strength of character is a much more impactive issue.
I agree, although I view it as highly-interconnected. That is, the wholesale embrace of Hedonism is the product of a “failure in the development of strength of character”.
It stems from the increasing focus on rights and the decreasing focus on responsibilities.
Dr. Jordan B. Peterson often addresses this in his classes and videos on YouTube. (Any of his videos are more than worth your time.)
Yes. Also, I am familiar with Jordan Peterson’s work and often learn from him.
Side Note: I think you will find, even though I identify more with the Left on the spectrum (for reasons I have explained elsewhere), there are many “Conservative Values”/positions on the Right that I align with in various areas. To list a few (and you can correct me if you see something off):
(A) Against Affirmative Action
(B) Contend that it is relatively easy for a reasonably savvy person to enter the Middle Class or above in America (and if they don’t manage to do it by the time they are 40 , then they went wrong somewhere (assuming they want to enter the Middle Class or above, that is)) as well as pursue essentially any field they are interested in (with a real opportunity at success)
(C) Against Neo-Marxism
(D) Although there are a few “Safety-Net” programs I support (Stafford Loans is the chief one), most I think can be either highly cut-back, abolished, or have strict time constraints on them
(E) Against making men less Masculine and more Feminin
(F) Against most of Neo-Feminism generally
(G) Against much of the “Progressive” agenda
(H) Agree with much of what you were saying regarding dealing with Bullies yourself (do physical training, mma, ect.—build yourself, both mentally & physically. Also, peers should learn to look out for each other in this respect, strength in numbers. The only time I disagree with this is if the person being Bullied is truly defenseless, as in they have a notable disability, ect. Essentially, generalize the model of sports to social behavior with “self-refereeing”—rather than calling the police, ect. and trying to permanitely f’ck up the persons life based on a relatively minor, temporary dispute/social ill
(I) Opposed (as in, I think it is objectionable) to highly promiscuous sexual behavior—and the effort afoot to de-couple sex from genuine Romanticism of any sort
(J) Contend that most “Liberal Tolerance” is fake tolerance bullsh’t that they don’t really believe when it comes down to it (people are generally just as moral (or lack thereof) on both sides of the aisle—it comes down to individuals & personal character)
(K) Ect. ect. ect.
Our military is a bright spot in instilling a belief in duty and fulfilling responsibility.
We very much disagree about the nature of the Military—you are promoting a “Captain America”-type view of what the Military is and does for the individual. This is an entirely separate topic though, that we can explore elsewhere at a later point, if you wish
I think you are conflating completion of neurological/biological development (which never actually ends) with adulthood. Adulthood is not a function of biology, but of social growth and taking on responsibilities. I consider adulthood to be officially marked by reaching the level self-sufficiency that one supports oneself.
Baby, Childhood, Young-Adulthood, Adulthood, Middle-Age, Old-Age, ect.—these are the Biological stages of life for Mammals. The Human social concept & responsibilites accompanying an individual of a certain developmental stage/bracket is “Maturity”—as defined by their ability to contribute to society and/or (expected to) be successfully independent
"By how much we agree, I can tell that your parents did a better job than the average Gen Xers. ;)"
Although I understand why you would be tempted to make this statement
It was a self-deprecating joke, signaled by the wink face ( ;) ) meant to mock the superior attitude so many of us Gen Xers have regarding you Millennials. There was NOTHING more to it than that.
We very much disagree about the nature of the Military—you are promoting a “Captain America”-type view of what the Military is and does for the individual. This is an entirely separate topic though, that we can explore elsewhere at a later point, if you wish
I was only referring to the ex-military Millennials I know, and only in regard to their attitudes toward responsibility and duty. I think there are lots of problems with military thinking. Chief among them is that to a hammer, EVERY problem looks like a nail.
The Human social concept & responsibilites accompanying an individual of a certain developmental stage/bracket is “Maturity”—as defined by their ability to contribute to society and/or (expected to) be successfully independent
In biology, generally adult means capable of reproduction, and mature means not growing bigger. These are not how the terms are used when discussing social development. Problematically, we are unsure about the connection between physiological development and social development.
We started with discussing independence (social development) and added in the continuation of brain development into the mid-20s. We did not even begin to address the effects of economic pressures. I am not sure where that leaves us on the topic.
What if we force sterilized the mom who literally has multiple children taken at birth and put into the system because of her prostitution fueled drug habit?
What if we force sterilized the mother who is about to pop out a 5th when the first 4 suffer from the toxic fumes of their own piss and shit that has saturated the floor of the one room and bare mattress they all share? Would force sterilization in these cases be immoral or fruitless? Would you be opposed?
Because there would be no legitimate way to enforce that law at this point in time. Let's say that someone doesn't have a "license to parent", and the woman gets pregnant. If they don't get approved for a license, what's the government going to do about it? Forcibly kill the unborn child? That sort of operating is significant of borderline government tyranny.
Look. The guy is a fucking Nazi. What difference does his criteria for genocide matter?? If it’s the Jews, is that ok? If it’s black people, is that ok? If it’s stupid people, is that ok ??
Isn’t the answer to genocide that it’s wrong no matter who is on the list? Dude!
Couldn't say "if it's white people" could ya con? Look. I get it. You think that no brown people are Nazi-like because libs have brainwashed you into feeling icky about calling out anyone that isn't white. You'll lose your country to despotism that way, but who gives a shit, eh con?
Your clan infected us with diseases, kicked us off our land, and brought us the Democrat Party. They called people japs, coloreds, redskins, and now use terms like uncle tom, fence jumper, and race traitor. Now they are pandering to brown and black people for votes. Sure, I wish white Democrats would quit bs'ing around and actually pay us reperations, but we both know Schumer can't swim that far.
Being Nazi like, and BEING a Nazi aren’t the same thing. One may WANT to murder millions of Jews, and one DID murder millions of Jews. See the difference??
Well they did fight in the Nazi SS with the Nazis, so it's impossible that it's not true. They also slaughtered Jews in mass during the Muslim conquests. Muhammed even tells about several of his own mass slaughtering of Jews during his military campaigns in the Quran, the hadith and the Sunna. In one battle he mentions the capture of thousands of Jews and beheading 600-900 of them after the battle.
I have to ask Con. What did Islam and the Nazis have in common? Race? No. Religion? No. Culture? No.
I understand what you are saying and of course I view it as highly-alarming & problematic (to say the very least). I am more interested in finding out his reasoning and attempting to discuss/debate the matter with him
Then we should make everyone have a license to live. According to that logic, we should say then that not everyone deserves to live and should have to pass a test to see who deserves life and who doesn't. Now we are getting into pre-crime, pre-destination, and the whole purpose of life becomes a mute point.
