Should parents be required to have an license in order to raise a child?
YES
Side Score: 23
|
 |
NO
Side Score: 27
|
|
|
|
|
This is a very unique issue for our day, because the world has never faced this problem before. Many people will be outraged by the idea, because they live with the motto "be fruitful and multiply". With a population of 6 billion, and an environment that has trouble sustaining our numbers, we need to begin thinking about this. Over population is beginning to become a problem in our world. Unless we begin to control our populations, we could be doomed. A licensing process would not be a bad idea, but it would have to be audited regularly, and those in control of it would have to be kept under strict checks and balances, to prevent corruption. There are other reasons this would be a good idea, aside from controlling the population. Many children are neglected, abused, and even abandoned because of parents who are not fit for the job. Making a perspective parent take a class and pass some type of exam would be a step in the right direction. Also, let me point out the Quiverfull phenomenon. If you don't know much about it, look it up on Wikipedia. If you've ever seen the show "19 Kids and Counting", with the Duggar family, you've experienced a quiverfull family. They take the "be fruitful and multiply" to the extreme. They embrace both of the ideas that I feel is wrong, overpopulation and possible neglect of children. The overpopulation is clear. Children need parental figures in their lives, and the Duggars have the older children take care of the younger regularly. I am interested to see how these children grow up, and if they felt neglected by their parents, who were more interested in popping out kids than taking care of them. Side: yes
2
points
Yes!!! parents out there give their children drugs and alchohal, raise them to be future felons, abandone them, and abuse them. Do we want parents like this? I think parents should pass a quiz, have restrictions on certain things, and be able to financially and personally be there for there children. i have tons of kids in my class who ship their kids off with nanny's. Most of them are screwed up, and one kills rabbits and stray cats he finds on the streets. Its alll because parents cant take care of them! Side: yes
1
point
Government requires licenses of lawyers, doctors, plumbers, electricians and pilots -- why not parents? Well, because we are told that protect consumers, but in reality, license laws are to protect the profession from competition and keep high rates. Everyone is always going on rants to PROTECT THE CHILDREN...why not protect the children at the source? (Satire to the idea of licenses) Side: yes
"Government requires licenses of lawyers, doctors, plumbers, electricians and pilots -- why not parents?" being a parent isn't a job, you are not employed to do it. "Well, because we are told that protect consumers, but in reality, license laws are to protect the profession from competition and keep high rates. " what so are you suggesting that anybody should be allowed become a lawyer, doctor, plumber, electrician or a pilot? "Everyone is always going on rants to PROTECT THE CHILDREN...why not protect the children at the source? (Satire to the idea of licenses)" how is paying for a plastic card going to protect children? Side: No
1
point
being a parent isn't a job, you are not employed to do it. Really, then why are there nannies, stay home moms and dads. what so are you suggesting that anybody should be allowed become a lawyer, doctor, plumber, electrician or a pilot? No, in order to become a lawyer, doctor, plumber, or electrician, there is proper schooling or experience. A license is just a test. If a doctor takes this test, and now 30 years later, it doesn't mean that he is still competent of science based on the test, his medical degree and residency says he is still competent. Side: yes
1
point
And here we go again. I support licenses to raise children Would you not consider it inevitable that Government and Corporate interests would take precedence over the actual worthiness of a person to raise children? Used correctly, one could effectively manipulate entire generations. Furthermore, how would merit be measured? Side: No
Would you not consider it inevitable that Government and Corporate interests would take precedence over the actual worthiness of a person to raise children? I stand by my statement that improper parents are the cause of many of our social problems. You'll note that I did not begin a discussion on how we could enforce such measures, however, because there is no effective means presently. Used correctly, one could effectively manipulate entire generations. Furthermore, how would merit be measured? I might start with criteria that requires parenting and psychology courses, however as previously stated I do not trust that our system is capable of regulating this sort of endeavour. Side: yes
1
point
If you think about it, chi9ldren are the second most important thing to us, ~(:the first being the planet:). If we allow children to be raised by people with criminal backgrounds, alcohol and drug problems, it increases the likelihood of them doing this. I had the pleasure of living on the same row of houses as some 'chavs' and they kept having children, and one of the older children, I quote "wanted to be a teenager because teenagers wreck things and it's cool" he also pissed down the slide in the children's playground and destroyed the fences for the grasseed in the football pitch. I fear his next brother is little better. How can people like this be allowed to raise children? Side: YES
1
point
Being a parent is a huge responsibility, you are responsible for a life, I personally believe there should be such a license and it should exist in the form of financial proof, to bring a child into the world you will need the money to raise it and support it, so I would say that a system which looked at the financial situation and proof of being able to support your child would show the thought and consideration of the potential parents and the parents would be respectable, working people, the kind of people you want children to grow up with to inspire them to work unlike today's society of uneducated common scum abusing society and raising kids on money that isn't theirs. Side: YES
|
1
point
China's one child policy has led to female infanticide, a growing gender imbalance, and forced abortions. I would not call any of these the effects of a successful policy. Additionally, there is no license necessary to have a child in China, so your example is abd one on two accounts. Side: No
2
points
Why not require licenses to own a home? Or to leave your state? Or to own a gun? They're all just ways for the feds to control people. Thomas Jefferson would be rolling in his grave at the amount of control the feds have now, let alone making up some ridiculous license to have children. Side: No
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
As nice as it would be to cut off the abusive Ahole parents before they even get to that point, it's not a viable option. Who would make the test? What type of parenting would be allowed? (There are too many different ways to parent that people don't agree with. ) Who would enforce it? What about those who passed the test initially, but then were abusive to their kids, or who raised spoiled brats? This just isn't the best way to handle things... Side: No
1
point
In theory I love it. Impossible to implement, and would only lead to human right's issues. I like the idea of tying tubes and snipping that thingy in the nuts better, until one passes a test at age 25 which would determine the number of kids they are allowed to create. Alas, democracy demands we go the hard route, and actually put forth the effort to make smarter parents, instead of determining how many kids they can have. Side: No
1
point
In theory, you would love anything in more government control. I sure that you would love if the government found it beneficial that everyone have a stick jammed up their ass. As for implementation, China already has this in their One Child policy. The idea of smarter parents is long gone with social engineers, who will do anything to protect people from harm even if it is themselves. The more laws that protect people from themselves, the stupider they will become. Side: yes
In theory, you would love anything in more government control. I sure that you would love if the government found it beneficial that everyone have a stick jammed up their ass. Typical libertarianism, "If you don't support my ideology, you must hate freedom and want more government." No wonder no one takes you guys seriously. The idea of smarter parents is long gone with social engineers, who will do anything to protect people from harm even if it is themselves. The more laws that protect people from themselves, the stupider they will become. We're stupider as a society now because crazy ideologies like creationism, libertarianism, anarchism, and blaming teachers for defective students make it really hard to teach a constructive skill set to children. Side: No
A couple doesn't need a license to raise a child simply because, we can't stop a couple from having a child. Also, to require a license a couple must have a clean record and everything. A person might have a clean record but we'll never know if they'll change their personalities in the future. Let's say that there was this criminal who wanted to change his life and in order to do that, his plan is to raise a child. Does that mean that he can't have a child just because of his record? Side: NO
1
point
1
point
|
