CreateDebate


Debate Info

11
10
Yes, Children Would Be Safer. No,everyone should be a parent
Debate Score:21
Arguments:22
Total Votes:21
Ended:10/08/16
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes, Children Would Be Safer. (9)
 
 No,everyone should be a parent (9)

Debate Creator

ShortScot(58) pic



This debate has ended. You can no longer add arguments or vote in this debate.

Should there be a test to be a parent?

There have been many incidents in which a child has been in danger because their parents have not been adequate. Would the world be more efficient if there was a test parents-to-be and aspiring parents had to pass to decide if they are mentally sound and whether they would be a good parent?

Yes, Children Would Be Safer.

Side Score: 11
Winning Side!
VS.

No,everyone should be a parent

Side Score: 10
2 points

Children would indeed be safer.

But good luck with that. Breeding is one of the most basic of animal urges. You might as well say cockroaches should pass a test before breeding. Yep, odds are most of them are going to fail the test, but that isn't going to stop them from breeding.

Side: Yes, Children Would Be Safer.
1 point

I agree with you. In an idealistic world it would work perfectly, but realistically even with an official and efficient test there would still be ways around it and it would be almost impossible to monitor.

Side: Yes, Children Would Be Safer.
2 points

You bet there should be.

I have been saying this for years.

In my hometown of Detroit, I see the consequences every day of the deleterious consequences of unfit parents.

There should be a psychological as well as a "parenting knowledge" test. As in infant care. And classes made available or even mandated is some cases.

Also....the 'rents must pass a financial adequacy means test to show they are also financially capable of raising kids and providing adequately for them.

People on welfare, or retarded people should be banned from procreating.

The way the welfare system is set-up, lazy and practically retarded minorities are rewarded financially for momma spurting out another kid. This is unacceptable and actually contributes to the poverty problem.

I want my country back, motherfuckers. I am sick to death of the "Browning of America." I lived in Canada for four years in my teens; played hockey there; and visit it about three to four times a year. I am seriously considering moving there for good after I finish my doctoral program here at UM.

SS

Side: Yes, Children Would Be Safer.
DBCooper(2194) Disputed
1 point

You bet there should mandated classes in the hell hole of Detroit where you exist. Problem is you Democrats want to impose that on all of America because Democratic rule in that pusshole you call home is made of their creation. Rules and mandates show you are the Classic Progressive.

Side: No,everyone should be a parent

I think there should be a financial responsibility test to make sure the parents can afford to have kids. If they can't, no dice.

Side: Yes, Children Would Be Safer.
IAmSparticus(1516) Clarified
1 point

And if an accident happens?

Are you going to have the government punish them?

Side: Yes, Children Would Be Safer.
HighFalutin(3402) Clarified
1 point

No accidents allowed.

------------------------

------------------------

Side: Yes, Children Would Be Safer.
2 points

This simply could never be enforced. It is ideal that the world should be without abuse to children but it simply cannot ever happen, there's just too many adults.

Side: No,everyone should be a parent

and let those without a brain die.

Side: No,everyone should be a parent
1 point

The test for being a parent I find once again that would be a huge mistake. It seems to me somehow someway we have this notion that if we make everybody, everything the same been things will improve, maybe in the short term but we clearly are not thinking clearly. It is as a result of diversity that we are able to make huge strides forward in life because Everyone Does Not Think the Same! Just look back at successful companies when they've produced a product that has done well for a period of time then becomes commonplace and it no longer produces the financial growth they were used to seeing so what might we hear an executive say, "We Need to Get Some Fresh Blood in Here." When he's talking about or when she's talking about fresh blood they're not talking about the same kind of blood. They are talking about a different kind of blood, one that can breathe new life into this business and that is not likely to happen if all we ever do is make everyone the same.

We enjoy I diverse selection of foods, Chinese foods, Mexican foods, Soul foods, Italian foods. We enjoy these things because they are different, because they are diverse but we unfortunately keep thinking we have to make everything the same, I can assure you if we take that route we will most certainly see a limitation in medical progress, future innovations as well as artistic creations.

Side: No,everyone should be a parent
ShortScot(58) Disputed
1 point

I share the same views as you about diversity and differences. It is one of the best things in the world, and one of the reasons I enjoy this website; I enjoy reading other people's opinions.

However I think that the point you are making about forced similarities is unnecessary here. There was no argument that suggested making people all the same. The test, I imagine, would be making sure the parents meet a basic criteria rather than having them forced to be a certain way or having them have specific parenting methods. Everyone would still have their differences.

The idea behind the original question posed was that if anyone who wanted to be a parent took a test to show they are adequate (mentally sound etc.), there would be a reduction (however big or small) in tragedies with children and childhoods that are troubled.

Your argument is very well written and you make some good points about society in general, but it is mostly irrelevant in this debate.

Side: Yes, Children Would Be Safer.
wisegrip(132) Clarified
1 point

This is the wrong side for me. I meant to place my comment against the idea of parents needing a test.

Side: Yes, Children Would Be Safer.
1 point

I'm afraid we differ on this issue Shortshot. The reason one establishes tests is to meet thge a standards we've laid out, we use standards to make us the same. When a job set up a standard people have to qualify to make sure that following those standards so the reality is test do make us the same.

Your issue about establishing mental competency falls to the question whose mental competency? Are people who live in rural areas more competent than people who live in inner cities? We live in a society where mental competency can be question every day, people fighting on public transportation, store clerks fighting with customers, bullies in the school system and adult reluctant to do anything about it. Mental competency is a much larger issue then we are addressing.

Side: No,everyone should be a parent
ShortScot(58) Disputed
1 point

Think of it like a driving test. You have to be able to do certain things and not crash your car, but you can still use whatever car you like in the end up. The 'standards' would be there to ensure the child is safe not to change the parents themselves or alter their parenting methods.

Everyone's mental competency. Again there will be no way that you have to think or be, just as long as there are no red flags. All those things that you mentioned do not mean you lack competency, only that they are argumentative and or make silly mistakes.

Side: Yes, Children Would Be Safer.
wisegrip(132) Disputed
1 point

No I don't agree. The things you are explaining exemplifies people being the same or at least behaving the same. We have rules on the road people have to follow people need to follow those rules the same way. One cannot say today I think I'll drive this way rather than follow the standards that have been set down for everyone to follow (exemplifying the same). They don't seem to be argumentative since we do them every day and have done so for years.

Frankly I don't follow your second paragraph at all. Of course we have to think were considered dead if we don't think.

Side: No,everyone should be a parent
1 point

It's like asking, "Should there be a test to be a human?"

Part of life is about risks, learning from mistakes, and doing the best you can

with what you have.

Side: No,everyone should be a parent
ShortScot(58) Disputed
1 point

Not really because you can be a human without being a parent but can't be a human without being a human.

I agree wholly that the quality of life would be lessened without the challenge of risks and mistakes. However I do not agree that a young person's life should be gambled with for the fear of failing a risk or making a tragic mistake. No-ones life should be compromised, let alone a child's.

I imagine that the large majority would meet the basic criteria, but hopefully the test would weed out the people who would be totally irresponsible.

Supporting Evidence: Examples of Incompetent Parents (www.therichest.com)
Side: Yes, Children Would Be Safer.
logicaljoe(529) Disputed
1 point

This is not like applying for a job. Being able to give birth to children is a god-given right that nobody should be allowed to take away from you. Now of course, if you are guilty in doing something heinous to your children, then yes, you can imprison them or punish them, but I'm saying that you can't test people and assume that you know they will commit some crime or be a bad parent. That's like pre-crime. That's like profiling someone because they are this this this, that means, they will be a bad parent. That's the same thing as racial profiling. You can't judge someone, arrest someone, punish someone, until they've actually done something wrong. I know it seems to lenient and too easy to allow for bad things to happen, but that's part of life. There will be bad parents and maybe after the fact, they can be discipline or corrected, but I don't believe you can judge someone before they've ever committed to any action.

Side: No,everyone should be a parent
1 point

Unfortunately you can't take rights away, if people are unstable it is difficult because kids can be born at risk in their environments.

Possibly if there is a conviction that is deemed to be unfit for children, or if there are convictions with drug abuse that is chronic, there can be a mandatory probation term for limiting reproduction.

Like if heroine addicts are put in probation for a crime related to that drug abuse, or if a parent births a Crack baby they can be prosecuted for child endangerment.

It's a slippery slope though and this society we live in is unresonable pretty much in every aspect.

But yeah of we could be reasonable there are implants that last 3 years, or 3 month injections. So if there are related charges a stipulation of probation could require a term where reproduction is mandated as a halt for a term related to a convicted crime that is related to child endangerment.

.

Side: No,everyone should be a parent