loraward Posted April 1, 2015 Share Posted April 1, 2015 The suffering of his children is caused by him not providing for his children. Are you going to means-test everyone before they're allowed to have children? So the suffering of any of his future offspring can be prevented by taking away his freedom to reproduce, its a no brainier, his freedom to reproduce verses the suffering caused by giving him that freedom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw47 Posted April 1, 2015 Share Posted April 1, 2015 So you believe people have the right to reproduce as often as they like without the consequence of supporting their brood just because the government wastes billions every year. It's not a reasonable state of affairs I'll grant you but unfortunately I can't see a way of preventing it without infringing on peoples basic freedom. My point being that government waste is ongoing and doesn't appear to attract the same level of hyperbole as this situation has. Whilst fully agreeing that it's a disgrace so are many things which cause us more trouble than this yet they are conveniently let slide by. Sad fact, life ain't fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retep Posted April 1, 2015 Share Posted April 1, 2015 His kids may be paying for your pension, it evens out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loraward Posted April 1, 2015 Share Posted April 1, 2015 His kids may be paying for your pension, it evens out. More likley that his kids, grand kids and great grand kids will be taking that much out of the system that no one will get a pension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted April 1, 2015 Author Share Posted April 1, 2015 The suffering of his children is caused by him not providing for his children. With the mothers being at least 51% responsible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loraward Posted April 1, 2015 Share Posted April 1, 2015 It's not a reasonable state of affairs I'll grant you but unfortunately I can't see a way of preventing it without infringing on peoples basic freedom. My point being that government waste is ongoing and doesn't appear to attract the same level of hyperbole as this situation has. Whilst fully agreeing that it's a disgrace so are many things which cause us more trouble than this yet they are conveniently let slide by. Sad fact, life ain't fair. The government infringes on peoples basic freedoms all the time and mostly for very good reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted April 1, 2015 Author Share Posted April 1, 2015 There were other fathers on the same TV show. One black fellow that seemed quite a good weekend dad, he had 12 kids, he chose good mothers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw47 Posted April 1, 2015 Share Posted April 1, 2015 The government infringes on peoples basic freedoms all the time and mostly for very good reasons. Well in my view government interference in peoples freedom should be kept to an absolute minimum and restricted to areas of absolute necessity. " Those who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty " Benjamin Franklin. The situation which is the subject of this post does not fall into that category and the government - other than education - should take no action which would effect the majority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loraward Posted April 1, 2015 Share Posted April 1, 2015 Well in my view government interference in peoples freedom should be kept to an absolute minimum and restricted to areas of absolute necessity. " Those who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty " Benjamin Franklin. The situation which is the subject of this post does not fall into that category and the government - other than education - should take no action which would effect the majority. The action they currently take affects the majority, the action I have proposed would only affect a minority and afford the majority more freedom to do as they please with the money they earn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw47 Posted April 1, 2015 Share Posted April 1, 2015 The action they currently take affects the majority, the action I have proposed would only affect a minority and afford the majority more freedom to do as they please with the money they earn. That is not how it works though is it? When the government brings in legislation for a certain thing it has a tendency to then get used for an unrelated thing if it suits their purposes. For example, legislation was enacted making it easier to extradite people between the UK and the USA. The image in everyone's minds was of some bloke with a long beard, a hook for a hand and long flowing robes being sent for trial in America. What did the legislation get used for? To extradite three English businessmen for ' pulling a swift one ' as regards to some business practice which would only have got them a 'slap on the wrist ' in this country but got them jail time in the US. The legislation was supposed to be reciprocal but was thrown out by the US congress as an infringement of freedom of American citizens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now