Unplanned Children Reduction Act 2009

[Sofisa]

Whereas a number of unplanned for babies are born each year;

Whereas the associated cause and costs are sometimes avoidable, they result in a critical strain on the the public's healthcare system, among others;

Therefore Be It Resolved that any female having at least three children, any of which was born using the public's assistance, shall be subjected to mandatory tubaligation.

Be It Further Resolved that any female having at least three children and requires the assistance of the state in enforcing or obtaining support for any of them, shall be subjected to mandatory tubaligation.

Be It Further Resolved that any male that is determined to be the father of at least three children, any of which was born using the public's assistance, shall be subjected to mandatory vasectomy.

Be It Finally resolved that any male having at least three children and is determined by the courts to be negligent in providing support for at least one of them, shall be subjected to mandatory vasectomy.

[julie*mango]

Re: Unplanned Children Reduction Act 2009

say what?

[Dr.Dudd]

Re: Unplanned Children Reduction Act 2009

I hope you find enlightenment from the darkness thats clouding your lack of intelligence,...you dont know anything about me,..<span style="text-decoration: line-through">so shut your big mouth you silly cow </span>
Unlike you,I wouldn say you should shut your mouth, but rather that not all statements are not worth valuable effort od a response. Your statement above is one such.
You are certainly a product of your society.

[Bizzy]

Re: Unplanned Children Reduction Act 2009

[Wahalla]

Re: Unplanned Children Reduction Act 2009

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dr.Dudd</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I hope you find enlightenment from the darkness thats clouding your lack of intelligence,...you dont know anything about me,..<span style="text-decoration: line-through">so shut your big mouth you silly cow </span>
Unlike you,I wouldn say you should shut your mouth, but rather that not all statements are not worth valuable effort od a response. Your statement above is one such.
You are certainly a product of your society. </div></div>

Doc by their acts you shall know them....

I must admit when I read that I recalling a statement by the US Houmorist PJ O'Rouke as he pointed out that the liberal attitude towards birth control.. It is not that there are too many people. Its just that there is too mant of the wrong sort of people..They complain about Bangladesihi being too over crowded but not the Netherland.... But I am getting bogged down in technicalities here...

[julie*mango]

Re: Unplanned Children Reduction Act 2009

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dr.Dudd</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I hope you find enlightenment from the darkness thats clouding your lack of intelligence,...you dont know anything about me,..<span style="text-decoration: line-through">so shut your big mouth you silly cow </span>
Unlike you,I wouldn say you should shut your mouth, but rather that not all statements are not worth valuable effort od a response. Your statement above is one such.
You are certainly a product of your society. </div></div>


hahah Doc..Doc...hold up....before you go chastising me...that was a quote from my signature...it was a quote of what a certain member of the board had said to me....

[britisha]

Re: Unplanned Children Reduction Act 2009

Wha did mi miss?


nutt'n nah change aawn yah eh?

<span style="font-style: italic">btw, when was this act passed, and in which countrie</span>

[mountaingal]

Re: Unplanned Children Reduction Act 2009

this thread is confusing with the potential to be interesting.

[britisha]

Re: Unplanned Children Reduction Act 2009

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sofisa</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Whereas a number of unplanned for babies are born each year;

Whereas the associated cause and costs are sometimes avoidable, they result in a critical strain on the the public's healthcare system, among others;

Therefore Be It Resolved that any female having at least three children, any of which was born using the public's assistance, shall be subjected to mandatory tubaligation.

Be It Further Resolved that any female having at least three children and requires the assistance of the state in enforcing or obtaining support for any of them, shall be subjected to mandatory tubaligation.

Be It Further Resolved that any male that is determined to be the father of at least three children, any of which was born using the public's assistance, shall be subjected to mandatory vasectomy.

Be It Finally resolved that any male having at least three children and is determined by the courts to be negligent in providing support for at least one of them, shall be subjected to mandatory vasectomy.

</div></div>

As far as I can see [philosophically,] there are no planned children, other than those who are &quot;conceived&quot; in a dish by invitro fertilization....and those children can end up being wards of the state as well.

Operative word, philosophically. ::


Many of these IVF's can result in up to four or five children, and most of the time, the parents need help to nurture and financially support them. so what's your point?


Ahh, I know, multiple offsprings can be a burden to the State and the parents if they have no financial ability to care for them. I do agree, but I don't know about the foreced sterilization thing...in some countries, the cost of one such procedure, can feed, clothe and educate one such child for a lifetime.

NEXT !!

[Gen]

Re: Unplanned Children Reduction Act 2009

ah weak suh till


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dr.Dudd</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I hope you find enlightenment from the darkness thats clouding your lack of intelligence,...you dont know anything about me,..<span style="text-decoration: line-through">so shut your big mouth you silly cow </span>
Unlike you,I wouldn say you should shut your mouth, but rather that not all statements are not worth valuable effort od a response. Your statement above is one such.
You are certainly a product of your society. </div></div>

[Sofisa]

Re: Unplanned Children Reduction Act 2009

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: britisha</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sofisa</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Whereas a number of unplanned for babies are born each year;

Whereas the associated cause and costs are sometimes avoidable, they result in a critical strain on the the public's healthcare system, among others;

Therefore Be It Resolved that any female having at least three children, any of which was born using the public's assistance, shall be subjected to mandatory tubaligation.

Be It Further Resolved that any female having at least three children and requires the assistance of the state in enforcing or obtaining support for any of them, shall be subjected to mandatory tubaligation.

Be It Further Resolved that any male that is determined to be the father of at least three children, any of which was born using the public's assistance, shall be subjected to mandatory vasectomy.

Be It Finally resolved that any male having at least three children and is determined by the courts to be negligent in providing support for at least one of them, shall be subjected to mandatory vasectomy.

</div></div>

As far as I can see [philosophically,] there are no planned children, other than those who are &quot;conceived&quot; in a dish by invitro fertilization....and those children can end up being wards of the state as well.

Operative word, philosophically. ::


Many of these IVF's can result in up to four or five children, and most of the time, the parents need help to nurture and financially support them. so what's your point?


Ahh, I know, multiple offsprings can be a burden to the State and the parents if they have no financial ability to care for them. I do agree, but I don't know about the foreced sterilization thing...in some countries, the cost of one such procedure, can feed, clothe and educate one such child for a lifetime.

NEXT !! </div></div>
It is not just a philosophical idea that a child should be the result of a planned pregnancy where both parties made a conscious decision after having considerations for the child's future. And where one parents as many as three children with even one at the public's expense, such person need not be allowed to wantonly continue to be produce babies. To what end?

There will always be if this and if that. I seriously doubt that the cost of any contraceptive can ever be more expensive than taking care of a baby through adulthood. Remember an ounce of prevention........ ?

IVF calls for a separate debate, but I am sure such persons had to think about it long and hard.

While sex may be casual, conception should never be. Regardless of the cost to the unthinking adult, another defenseless baby need not be born in such a haphazard fashion. If the adult can't see that, then the state should take action, at least on its potential citizen's behalf.

[mountaingal]

Re: Unplanned Children Reduction Act 2009

fascism. state has no business in the reproductory organs of its individuals.

besides, where would states get their cheap labour from if not from unplanned children?

[julie*mango]

Re: Unplanned Children Reduction Act 2009

and how do you suggest that the state take action?
by sterilization?
that sounds like nazi germany to me.
and under what criteria do ou determine that the birth giver be sterilized?
what about those who have a mess of kids and still manage to take care of them without burdening the state?
and how do you know that ones financial situation today might not change tomorrow?
Couples who may be able to take care of their children today may lose their jobs and become unable to financially care for their offspring.
too many holes in this...

[Sofisa]

Re: Unplanned Children Reduction Act 2009

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 2009_Skelly</div><div class="ubbcode-body">say what? </div></div> Anybody, man or woman, whe have 3 pickiney and goverment affi a help them, should be cut / tie-off.

[britisha]

Re: Unplanned Children Reduction Act 2009

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sofisa</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: britisha</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sofisa</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Whereas a number of unplanned for babies are born each year;

Whereas the associated cause and costs are sometimes avoidable, they result in a critical strain on the the public's healthcare system, among others;

Therefore Be It Resolved that any female having at least three children, any of which was born using the public's assistance, shall be subjected to mandatory tubaligation.

Be It Further Resolved that any female having at least three children and requires the assistance of the state in enforcing or obtaining support for any of them, shall be subjected to mandatory tubaligation.

Be It Further Resolved that any male that is determined to be the father of at least three children, any of which was born using the public's assistance, shall be subjected to mandatory vasectomy.

Be It Finally resolved that any male having at least three children and is determined by the courts to be negligent in providing support for at least one of them, shall be subjected to mandatory vasectomy.

</div></div>

As far as I can see [philosophically,] there are no planned children, other than those who are &quot;conceived&quot; in a dish by invitro fertilization....and those children can end up being wards of the state as well.

Operative word, philosophically. ::


Many of these IVF's can result in up to four or five children, and most of the time, the parents need help to nurture and financially support them. so what's your point?


Ahh, I know, multiple offsprings can be a burden to the State and the parents if they have no financial ability to care for them. I do agree, but I don't know about the foreced sterilization thing...in some countries, the cost of one such procedure, can feed, clothe and educate one such child for a lifetime.

NEXT !! </div></div>
It is not just a philosophical idea that a child should be the result of a planned pregnancy where both parties made a conscious decision after having considerations for the child's future. And where one parents as many as three children with even one at the public's expense, such person need not be allowed to wantonly continue to be produce babies. To what end?

There will always be if this and if that. I seriously doubt that the cost of any contraceptive can ever be more expensive than taking care of a baby through adulthood. Remember an ounce of prevention........ ?

IVF calls for a separate debate, but I am sure such persons had to think about it long and hard.

While sex may be casual, conception should never be. Regardless of the cost to the unthinking adult, another defenseless baby need not be born in such a haphazard fashion. If the adult can't see that, then the state should take action, at least on its potential citizen's behalf. </div></div>

I know the &quot;philosophical&quot; part would fly over your head...anniways...

I'm a stickler for scrutinizing what people write, because that is the only way I can understand what they are saying... and with you talking of &quot;one parent<span style="font-weight: bold">s</span>&quot; for starters, I'm confused about what you mean in that entire paragraph..


...then this <span style="font-weight: bold">I seriously doubt that the cost of any contraceptive can ever be more expensive than taking care of a baby through adulthood. Remember an ounce of prevention........ ?</span>

did you stop to read what I wrote? If you did, how do you equate &quot;sterilization&quot; with &quot;contraception?&quot;


I seriously believe you have NO idea what you are talking about.


If you are saying that children produced by poor parents might be a burden on the State, then make the argument, but don't talk rubbish about MANDATORY STERILIZATION...

...it seems that there are more poor children than children from richer families, therefore, one can say, the cost TO STERILIZE alllllll of these poor parents could be used to feed and clothe the children they produce....calculate the cost, especially in poorer countries....got it? (Or) are you saying your mandatory sterilization is restricted to only a particular country? What if the sterilization procedures have adverse meddical consequencies for the parents, then what? How many thousands of dollars will it take to provide medical care for them indefinitely?

<span style="font-weight: bold">casual conception; haphazard birth?...the state should take action on IT'S POTENTIAL CITIZENS BEHALF? keep it simple...noh</span> LOL

..and; a child can be &quot;planned for&quot; [to follow your thinking] and still become a ward of the state. HELLO !!!