License to Breed

[Lighthouse]

Needs to be introduced IMO. Katie Price has just dropped another sprog and named the f**kin thing 'Bunny'

[bridge too far]

What criteria would YOU suggest then?

[Special K]

Ooooooh, this could be fun!

[View From The Top]

Needs to be introduced IMO. Katie Price has just dropped another sprog and named the f**kin thing 'Bunny'

 

TBF to the wench, she can afford to raise them.

[Gemmel]

What criteria would YOU suggest then?

 

Now we are talking

 

Could we set a minimum IQ? Oh and no one on benefits.

[B Rabbit]

Now we are talking

 

Could we set a minimum IQ? Oh and no one on benefits.

 

I concur.

If you're on benefits...you can't afford to raise children =) and if you have a low IQ, you aren't contributing to society. Yeah I said it!

 

Literacy tests too. No reproduction if you can't spell or construct a sentence (dyslexia victims excluded).

 

 

[Bearsy]

no u21s pls. I have no problem with dumb people or poor people or glamour birds having kids tho. I do slightly object to her calling it bunny, but only cos i had £5 on fisher

[Jonnyboy]

Bunny Wailer is a legend.

[Ludwig]

People should have to take a basic parenting course and if they pass they should then have to apply to have a child. If they are deemed suitable (basically not a paedo or nutjob) then they may have a child within the next 3 years. After that they need to sit the course and apply again. This is perfectly reasonable and the only people who would object are those who fear failing the course or who are paedos or nutjobs.

[Bearsy]

if i was a paedo, i prob wouldn't mention it in my basic parenting interview

[Jonnyboy]

if i was a paedo, i prob wouldn't mention it in my basic parenting interview

 

And nutjob?

[Bearsy]

i should betray myself every time i speak, were i genuine nutjob. Which i am not. I have however in the last few minutes developed a fool proof system for weedling out the paedos, which can easily be undertaken with things commonly found around any government building such as penile monitoring probes and photos of sexy toddlers.

[Hokie]

Assuming the above makes sense, how do you enforce the law?

 

Forced sterilization? Abortions? Confiscation of illegal children? or do you just cut benefits and let the illegals starve?

[tpbury]

Everyone is microchipped at birth which magically controls their fertility, somehow, using drugs. When the test is passed, the chip stops releasing the drugs and breeding can commence. DNA is collected and people are classified into groups, depending on the abilities, for example Alphas, Betas, right down to Epsilons.

 

In this way, we will achieve an orderly society, a new world. A brave world.

[Ludwig]

if i was a paedo, i prob wouldn't mention it in my basic parenting interview

 

There isn't an interview. Its a basic parenting course. Maybe you need to attend a basic reading course before the basic parenting course? Anyway, you wouldn't need to mention it, everyone could tell by looking at you.

 

Assuming the above makes sense, how do you enforce the law?

 

Forced sterilization? Abortions? Confiscation of illegal children? or do you just cut benefits and let the illegals starve?

 

Yes to the first three, no to the starvation.

[CB Saint]

This has merit. By preventing the thickos from breeding we can improve the gene pool. Man made evolution.

 

I reckon the family sections at football grounds would suffer a dip in demand, but hey you can't make an omelette without breaking an egg or two.

[Hatch]

I'm all for it, I would volunteer to manage the selection process for free as well.

[Polaroid Saint]

Use exactly the same process as for adoption. Job done. It checks health, wealth and happiness of the couple (or even single) prospective parent. Takes ages and can be really emotionally, mentally and physically draining but it works (and is being simplified thank goodness too).

[pap]

The only reason not to have kids is if you don't want them.

 

I know a single mum with twelve kids; she's done a very decent job - all of them have turned out okay, either decent parents to their own kids, or university grads (inc a Cambridge grad) with professional careers.

 

Some of the means-tested suggestions on here would deprive you of twelve tax-payers and very nice people.

[badgerx16]

Having read through this thread I had to double check as to whether this was The Muppet Show. If the opinions presented above are truly representative of the views of the posters, I despair.

[CB Saint]

Having read through this thread I had to double check as to whether this was The Muppet Show. If the opinions presented above are truly representative of the views of the posters, I despair.

 

This thread is slowly making its way down the sewer of the Lounge and should emerge like Excalibur clutched by the paw of bearsy in the cesspit of the muppet show before long.

[KingdomCome]

The only reason not to have kids is if you don't want them.

 

I know a single mum with twelve kids; she's done a very decent job - all of them have turned out okay, either decent parents to their own kids, or university grads (inc a Cambridge grad) with professional careers.

 

Some of the means-tested suggestions on here would deprive you of twelve tax-payers and very nice people.

 

Is that representative?

Do all single mums have kids who go to Cambridge?

 

As much as I despise the woman, Katie Price can afford to have kids and name them whatever the f*ck she wants.

Health and intelligence shouldn't come into it.

[Whitey Grandad]

The only reason not to have kids is if you don't want them.

 

I know a single mum with twelve kids; she's done a very decent job - all of them have turned out okay, either decent parents to their own kids, or university grads (inc a Cambridge grad) with professional careers.

 

Some of the means-tested suggestions on here would deprive you of twelve tax-payers and very nice people.

 

The biggest pollutant on this Earth of ours is human beings. Is it morally right to overload it with yet more?

[pap]

The biggest pollutant on this Earth of ours is human beings. Is it morally right to overload it with yet more?

 

Probably more so than playing God guided by the principles of the Daily Mail.

[pap]

Is that representative?

Do all single mums have kids who go to Cambridge?

 

As much as I despise the woman, Katie Price can afford to have kids and name them whatever the f*ck she wants.

Health and intelligence shouldn't come into it.

 

A load of crap. You're talking about denying the poor the right to breed based on cash. Used to be a time when populating the country was seen as a good thing.

 

Incidentally, I grew up in a single parent household, did the Uni thing - got kids who are doing the Uni thing.

 

Look at you. Determining life or death based on what someone has in the bank. Dooming yourself to bands like Hot Chip and Coldplay for the rest of your fúcking life

[Hatch]

anyone who wears tracksuits out in public is a good indication of an unfit parent.

[pap]

anyone who wears tracksuits out in public is a good indication of an unfit parent.

 

Did it by mistake once. Drove two miles down the road, realised I was wearing all sportswear, and was mortified

[Lorne Malvo]

anyone who wears tracksuits out in public is a good indication of an unfit parent.

 

No sports stars can ever have kids?

[bridge too far]

anyone who wears tracksuits out in public is a good indication of an unfit parent.

 

On a par with overweight men wearing football shirts in public, really.

[Whitey Grandad]

No sports stars can ever have kids?

 

It's a start...

[Polaroid Saint]

As I said, there is already a test for prospective parents. Those who wish to Adopt rather than breed (for whatever reason). It is TOO strict and is being very sensibly revised, however it exist and DOES take financial security (not 'wealth'), emotional and physically stability - yes, both physical and mental health... ...is the parent a heavy smoker, a gambler, a sportman, work 100hrs a week, have MS? And so on into account.

All comers considered, of course, and no one thing will prevent you from adopting but the welfare of the child is paramount in every case.

 

Should this be applied to prospective new parents? Possibly yes. I don't think you can say that this is some sort of fascist means test, merely applying a sensible and positive set of ideals to assist/aid the future of the individual children (and yea Pap, the nation/planet, in terms of producing decent human beans!).

[pap]

As I said, there is already a test for prospective parents. Those who wish to Adopt rather than breed (for whatever reason). It is TOO strict and is being very sensibly revised, however it exist and DOES take financial security (not 'wealth'), emotional and physically stability - yes, both physical and mental health... ...is the parent a heavy smoker, a gambler, a sportman, work 100hrs a week, have MS? And so on into account.

All comers considered, of course, and no one thing will prevent you from adopting but the welfare of the child is paramount in every case.

 

Should this be applied to prospective new parents? Possibly yes. I don't think you can say that this is some sort of fascist means test, merely applying a sensible and positive set of ideals to assist/aid the future of the individual children (and yea Pap, the nation/planet, in terms of producing decent human beans!).

 

Those tests are fine for people who can't have, or don't want their own kids. Unfortunately, nature has got fúck all respect for your little plan.

 

What do you do if people say no? Forced abortions? Sterilisation?

 

Just another ill-thought out idea conceived in the womb of inexplicable envy, imo.

[Polaroid Saint]

Those tests are fine for people who can't have, or don't want their own kids. Unfortunately, nature has got fúck all respect for your little plan.

 

What do you do if people say no? Forced abortions? Sterilisation?

 

Just another ill-thought out idea conceived in the womb of inexplicable envy, imo.

 

Not sure I understand pap, sorry! There appears to be a little spittle slurring your words! ;-) You do seem VERY angry about this !?!? it is just an argument to discuss possibilities, that is all.

 

Envy? WTF? Adoption is there to help thousands of kids without families find one. Simple as that. I am unclear as to what your colourful womb analogy is about...

 

...I hope you are using a generalised 'your' here. It's not my plan, I didn't conceive it. It exists. Should it be used to grant a 'licence to breed' as per the OP? Possibly, as I said. No abortions , no sterilisation, just NO 'licence'. (Normally if you do something without a licence it is a fine or imprisonment if you can't pay the fine, but if you want to jump straight to emotive concepts like abortion then err, okay.)

 

Hang on: Are you visiting from some dystopian future where resources are so scarce that this has actually happened? Have you been sent back in time to stop it? In which case, fair enough, you have a right to be angry!

[pap]

Not sure I understand pap, sorry! There appears to be a little spittle slurring your words! ;-) You do seem VERY angry about this !?!? it is just an argument to discuss possibilities, that is all.

 

Envy? WTF? Adoption is there to help thousands of kids without families find one. Simple as that. I am unclear as to what your colourful womb analogy is about...

 

...I hope you are using a generalised 'your' here. It's not my plan, I didn't conceive it. It exists. Should it be used to grant a 'licence to breed' as per the OP? Possibly, as I said. No abortions , no sterilisation, just NO 'licence'. (Normally if you do something without a licence it is a fine or imprisonment if you can't pay the fine, but if you want to jump straight to emotive concepts like abortion then err, okay.)

 

Hang on: Are you visiting from some dystopian future where resources are so scarce that this has actually happened? Have you been sent back in time to stop it? In which case, fair enough, you have a right to be angry!

 

Inexplicable envy refers to people who are well off themselves, thinking that those on benefits and in poverty are living the life of Riley, not those looking to adopt.

 

I fundamentally disagree with any sort of parental fitness test. For one, life will be full of dull fúcking blobs from suburbia. Enforcement would be a complete pain in the arse, and I'm sorry, but abortion and sterilisation are two possible means of enforcement, however emotive or disturbing you might find it.

 

I'd rather we spend money making sure every kid was fed, housed and educated at a reasonable cost to the taxpayer.

[KelvinsRightGlove]

As this is in essence a football forum, how about we force the mens and womens teams to breed. Take the best players and make them have babies, then take the best players of both sexes from this batch and make them breed. We'll be winning the WC in no time

[pap]

As this is in essence a football forum, how about we force the mens and womens teams to breed. Take the best players and make them have babies, then take the best players of both sexes from this batch and make them breed. We'll be winning the WC in no time

 

Born two hundred years too late, KRG.

 

Those sentiments would have gone down a storm on the plantations.

[KelvinsRightGlove]

Born two hundred years too late, KRG.

 

Those sentiments would have gone down a storm on the plantations.

 

Are you comparing me to a slave master pap?

 

TBF, I'm often told I look like this fella

 

[KelvinsRightGlove]

Whilst we're at it, I whole heartedly approve of two people this beautiful procreating. It can only be good for the gene pool, imo.

 

[KingdomCome]

A load of crap. You're talking about denying the poor the right to breed based on cash. Used to be a time when populating the country was seen as a good thing.

 

Incidentally, I grew up in a single parent household, did the Uni thing - got kids who are doing the Uni thing.

 

Look at you. Determining life or death based on what someone has in the bank. Dooming yourself to bands like Hot Chip and Coldplay for the rest of your fúcking life

 

could you point out specifically what part of my post is "a load of crap"?

 

I simply asked you a question which you chose to ignore. Fair enough, your prerogative. Or was that the bit that was crap? If so, then allow me to explain. You pointed out a specific incident in an attempt to suggest that denying the right for this person to have children would be a net loss.

Some of the means-tested suggestions on here would deprive you of twelve tax-payers and very nice people

I was asking the question to suggest that the specific incidence has little bearing on the overall situation. so the situation you described is immaterial.

 

I then said Katie Price can afford to have kids and call them what she wants.

I then said we shouldn't place requirements such as health or intelligence on the decision to have children.

 

I'm determining nothing btw. I can however empathise with people who desperately want children but can't being forced to pay for others to have children. Talk about salt in the wound. I can also empathise with children being born into poverty and would like to minimise this if possible.

 

Incidentally, used to be a time when a cane to the hand was seen as setting a boy straight. Times change.

You also seem to be suggesting that people with the ability to pay for their own lives are somehow of a lower value...

[KelvinsRightGlove]

Dooming yourself to bands like Hot Chip for the rest of your fúcking life

 

Oi, I like Hot Chip!

 

P.s. Big up the single mums. My mother bought me up on her own, with very little income of her own. Not her fault my dad was a cheating scumbag. I turned out OK(ish)

[pap]

could you point out specifically what part of my post is "a load of crap"?

 

The idea that the market knows better than nature. That financial stability should be some kind of pre-requisite for having kids. That you approve of a celebrity cum-bucket like Katie Price breeding because they've managed to accumulate enough wealth not to be a burden on the system.

 

 

I simply asked you a question which you chose to ignore. Fair enough, your prerogative. Or was that the bit that was crap? If so, then allow me to explain. You pointed out a specific incident in an attempt to suggest that denying the right for this person to have children would be a net loss.

 

I picked an extreme example.

 

The old dear wasn't financially stable when I was growing up, nor was I when I started having my kids. Neither were many families on the estate I grew up on.

 

If the poor were prevented from breeding, most of my mates wouldn't be around and neither would I.

 

 

 

 

I then said Katie Price can afford to have kids and call them what she wants.

 

Yes, and what stunning work she has done of raising them.

 

I then said we shouldn't place requirements such as health or intelligence on the decision to have children.

 

I'm determining nothing btw. I can however empathise with people who desperately want children but can't being forced to pay for others to have children. Talk about salt in the wound. I can also empathise with children being born into poverty and would like to minimise this if possible.

 

Then make sure the kids aren't in poverty and that their parents have an opportunity to escape the benefits trap, without throwing money at the problem.

 

Incidentally, used to be a time when a cane to the hand was seen as setting a boy straight. Times change.

You also seem to be suggesting that people with the ability to pay for their own lives are somehow of a lower value...

 

That'd be a generalisation too far. Some of the brightest and most driven people I know come from wealthy backgrounds, but compared to the amount of can't-be-arsed, won't-take-responsibility, dad-will-sort-it-out-anyway people I've met from the same background, they're genuinely exceptions.

 

If we are going to qualify what makes a good parent, let's identify what really works. Time, attention and the prioritisation of your kids' long-term interests. If you can't provide those things, I don't give a f**k how much dosh you've got in the bank.

[Whitey Grandad]

If the poor were prevented from breeding, most of my mates wouldn't be around and neither would I.

 

Tempting, very tempting...

[KingdomCome]

The idea that the market knows better than nature.

Where did you see that? Both are prerequisites for a good parent. I haven't prioritised.

 

That financial stability should be some kind of pre-requisite for having kids.

You haven't explained why it shouldn't be.

 

That you approve of a celebrity cum-bucket like Katie Price breeding because they've managed to accumulate enough wealth not to be a burden on the system.

Where did you see that? I've said nothing other than she can afford to do it. A mighty stretch to say I approve. Incidentally, I haven't been keeping up with my Katie Price insider info recently, care to outline her parenting failures?

 

The old dear wasn't financially stable when I was growing up, nor was I when I started having my kids. Neither were many families on the estate I grew up on.

 

If the poor were prevented from breeding, most of my mates wouldn't be around and neither would I.

Aside from the obvious joke, that's an existential pondering if ever there was one. How do we value a life that is yet to exist?

 

Then make sure the kids aren't in poverty

This thread is about one method of stopping kids being born into poverty without throwing money at it.

 

and that their parents have an opportunity to escape the benefits trap

Benefits trap? You suggest that people from poorer homes are all going to uni and paying shed loads of tax on the one hand but then say there is no way out for those same people?

 

If we are going to qualify what makes a good parent, let's identify what really works. Time, attention and the prioritisation of your kids' long-term interests. If you can't provide those things, I don't give a f**k how much dosh you've got in the bank.

Something we agree on.

[pap]

Where did you see that? Both are prerequisites for a good parent. I haven't prioritised.

 

Implied from your statement that Katie Price's wealth entitles her to have offspring.

 

You haven't explained why it shouldn't be.

 

Got no problem with rich people having kids, as long as poor people have the same rights,.

 

Where did you see that? I've said nothing other than she can afford to do it. A mighty stretch to say I approve. Incidentally, I haven't been keeping up with my Katie Price insider info recently, care to outline her parenting failures?

 

Well, let's see. She uses her kids as trophies or publicity stunts, uses the relationship with whichever father to get her plastic arse in the media. Peter Andre running around like a blue-arsed fly picking up all the shít she can't be arsed to do.

 

Aside from the obvious joke, that's an existential pondering if ever there was one. How do we value a life that is yet to exist?

 

This thread is about one method of stopping kids being born into poverty without throwing money at it.

 

Plenty of ways to do that which don't involve market-inspired eugenics.

 

Benefits trap? You suggest that people from poorer homes are all going to uni and paying shed loads of tax on the one hand but then say there is no way out for those same people?

 

Not sure if you've been around for the last couple of decades. Most of my mates are nearing forty. We had a much easier time going to Uni, our parents had it even easier. Not everyone goes (obviously) so we're not talking about the same people.

 

I'm talking about the phenomenon whereby people are trapped on benefits, because they can't afford to pay their rent without them. My solution would be to attack the housing market, not start playing God and let the state dictate who can have kids.

 

Housing costs so much that we're paying working people benefits. I'd suggest that lowering the cost of living is a more humane way to deal with poverty.

[Whitey Grandad]

Got no problem with rich people having kids, as long as poor people have the same rights,.

 

Nobody should choose to have kids and expect others to pay to support them.

 

'Rights' are not inherent, they ae bestowed by the rest of society.

[KelvinsRightGlove]

Nobody should choose to have kids and expect others to pay to support them.

 

'Rights' are not inherent, they ae bestowed by the rest of society.

 

Yeah!

 

 

Yes it's one of those days. I'm not taking this particularly seriously, sorry guys.

[KingdomCome]

She uses her kids as trophies or publicity stunts

Does she? News to me, you're obviously more well informed. I would ask for a few of the numerous examples you could no doubt provide, but frankly I don't care. To suggest we shouldn't allow her to procreate because of it is getting a little too near eugenics for my liking.

 

uses the relationship with whichever father to get her plastic arse in the media. Peter Andre running around like a blue-arsed fly picking up all the shít she can't be arsed to do.

...and this affects her ability to be a good parent?

 

 

Plenty of ways to do that which don't involve market-inspired eugenics.

Do any of these involve those who are distraught at being unable to have children paying for others who choose to but can't afford it?

 

Not sure if you've been around for the last couple of decades. Most of my mates are nearing forty. We had a much easier time going to Uni, our parents had it even easier. Not everyone goes (obviously) so we're not talking about the same people.

 

I'm talking about the phenomenon whereby people are trapped on benefits, because they can't afford to pay their rent without them. My solution would be to attack the housing market, not start playing God and let the state dictate who can have kids.

 

Housing costs so much that we're paying working people benefits. I'd suggest that lowering the cost of living is a more humane way to deal with poverty.

Why not increase minimum wage & introduce rent control?

No-one is "playing God". Merely suggesting that you shouldn't make a choice that you can't afford to take.

[bridge too far]

Sometimes, when people have their first child, they CAN afford to raise it. Then, unforseen circumstances intervene (job loss, bereavement, major accident or illness) and suddenly they're no longer in such a position.

 

What should happen to those children? Take them into care? Adoption? Workhouse?

[KingdomCome]

Sometimes, when people have their first child, they CAN afford to raise it. Then, unforseen circumstances intervene (job loss, bereavement, major accident or illness) and suddenly they're no longer in such a position.

 

What should happen to those children? Take them into care? Adoption? Workhouse?

 

They have already had the child, they don't need to have that child again.

 

To be clear, I'm saying that the "changing circumstances" situation would of course need and warrant support from the state to get through the difficult situation. It's a bit irrelevant though as I'm talking about people who choose to have children in full knowledge that they can't afford to.

Edited 17 September, 2014 by KingdomCome

[Whitey Grandad]

Yeah!

 

 

Yes it's one of those days. I'm not taking this particularly seriously, sorry guys.

 

Yes, fair point.

 

Although in this case they are providing a future head of state at a much lower price than a president would be. As for all their other relatives and hangers-on then I agree with you