Procreation Permit

[IisJustMe]

It's not extreme in my eyes...China is extreme. This isn't anywhere near China. China wants to explicitly limit procreation to 1 child per couple. I don't feel that is fair, just, or right at all.

But you would deny parenthood completely to those you deem unfit? You're completely inconsistent in your alleged views. This is where I bid you adieu and a nice life, because I have no desire to read your posts anymore, on anything.

 

[98cwitr]

I think you're prejudging and assuming what would be deemed "unfit" into some illogical and grossly inaccurate ball. There are no inconsistencies....not logically anyway.

How about a clinically insane person...should they have children and be allowed to have custody in your opinion?

 

[dies-l]

This thread reminds me of this famous quote:

"It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind...
Three generations of imbeciles are enough."

Eugenics in Virginia: Buck v. Bell | www.hsl.virginia.edu

 

[98cwitr]

Perfect quote.

 

[Naomanos]

Perfect quote.

So you do agree with Eugenics?

 

[98cwitr]

I agree with the quote.

 

[pgp_protector]

This thread reminds me of this famous quote:

"It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind...
Three generations of imbeciles are enough."

Eugenics in Virginia: Buck v. Bell | www.hsl.virginia.edu

Perfect quote.

 

[Naomanos]

I agree with the quote.

Then you agree with the concept of eugenics. It's as simple as that.

 

[98cwitr]

Not at all...eugenics has nothing to do with the quote. You're inferring.

 

[Naomanos]

Not at all...eugenics has nothing to do with the quote. You're inferring.

If you say so, but you're not understanding the quote then because it's plain as day to me.

 

[Naomanos]

You still have yet to answer my question.

Would you deny my wife a child because she has MS?

 

[pgp_protector]

If you say so, but you're not understanding the quote then because it's plain as day to me.

Well maybe they don't think that preventing people from reproducing is because of genetics is bad ?

 

[Naomanos]

Well maybe they don't think that preventing people from reproducing is because of genetics is bad ?

 

[dies-l]

I agree with the quote.

:o At least your true colors are showing. I sincerely hope that someone is hacking 98's account right now, but assuming that you really stand by these opinions, I sincerely hope that you repent. Eugenics has no place in the Kingdom of God. Period.

 

[98cwitr]

:o At least your true colors are showing. I sincerely hope that someone is hacking 98's account right now, but assuming that you really stand by these opinions, I sincerely hope that you repent. Eugenics has no place in the Kingdom of God. Period.

At what point did I say that I agree with eugenics? When did I ever bring genetics of any sort into the discussion?

You still have yet to answer my question.

Would you deny my wife a child because she has MS?

Is she physically capable of caring for the child? Yes or no.

 

[dies-l]

Not at all...eugenics has nothing to do with the quote. You're inferring.

The quote sums up the argument of the eugenics movement of the early 20th century. The fact that you see nothing wrong with it and that you see it as supportive of your argument confirms in my mind that you are a eugenicist. And, that I find VERY disturbing.

 

[Naomanos]

At what point did I say that I agree with eugenics? When did I ever bring genetics of any sort into the discussion?



Is she physically capable of caring for the child? Yes or no.

Right now, yes, in 10 years, only God knows the answer to that.

 

[98cwitr]

The quote sums up the argument of the eugenics movement of the early 20th century. The fact that you see nothing wrong with it and that you see it as supportive of your argument confirms in my mind that you are a eugenicist. And, that I find VERY disturbing.

I'm a eugenicist because you took one quote from 1 person in an entire movement and overgeneralized to the point of slapping a label on me.

"Well the devil likes toast"

"I like toast."

"You're a satanist!"

Now I see why people burned "witches" in Salem.... jeez

 

[dies-l]

At what point did I say that I agree with eugenics? When did I ever bring genetics of any sort into the discussion?

A) When you suggested that one requirement for parenthood is "passing a physical exam"

AND

B) When you called the quote by Justice Holmes, which was used to support and justify the eugenics movement, a "perfect quote."

It is clear from your posts that you believe that certain people ought not be allowed to have kids. Whether you frame it in terms of genetics or just in terms of keeping "unfit" people from having kids, it is evil to the core.

 

[98cwitr]

A) Physical abilities have a lot less to do with genetics than you are inferring. I'm just talking about physical ability to care for a child...not having to run a 4 minute miles here.

B) And?! See above.


Going off the deep end aren't we? Would you please realize I am taking the quote at face value?

Let me be frank and plain...because God knows it's needed right now!

I am NOT an advocate for eugenics but YES I agree with a quote that some eugenist said once.