Which one of you is this?

[Wonkie]

Originally Posted by ScaringChildren [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Planned Parenthood was started by a woman who wanted to eliminate black babies from society.

Prove me wrong

spoiler: that's the same thing "birth licensing advocates" want. a large portion of the country has internalized the Reagan dogwhistles.

[Patriam1066]

Originally Posted by Wonkie [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

spoiler: that's the same thing "birth licensing advocates" want. a large portion of the country has internalized the Reagan dogwhistles.

It isn’t just them dude. Kentucky, West Virginia, and Florida should be barred from reproduction as well

[Patriam1066]

Also the Chinese. PLA scum

[maskedmelon]

Originally Posted by misterbonkers [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

what exactly is the issue? growing up fatherless? the difficulty the mother faces? what is so horrible that you would consider taking away people's fundamental right to reproduce?

A lot of things like:

Increased risk of poverty
Increased risk of abuse and neglect
Increased risk of suicide
Increased risk of substance abuse/dependency
Increased risk of criminality
Increased risk of impaired emotional development
Increased risk of behavioral problems
Increased risk of teen pregnancy

also note that I specifically referenced EXTRAMARITAL behavior. Sex isn't always about reproduction. Your average 17yo girl isn't looking to make a baby when she hooks up with her boyfriend and your average 17yo boy isn't either and NEITHER is likely to be mentally or emotionally equipped for that journey in the event they inadvertently succeed in creating life.

Very few people engaging in sexual activity outside of marriage are looking to reproduce as consequence of the activity. Even within marriage that is seldom the goal, but at least within marriage the basic framework exists for better outcomes. There are plenty of other sexual activities besides coitus allowing for intimacy and fun between partners.

I just think failing to regulate parenting in an environment exalting independence and liberty while pooh-poohing traditional values is a betrayal, not unlike issuing speeding tickets to individuals and then kicking their children in the face when there is no law regulating speed and the prevailing ethos is that we are all racers.

we don't all have to be prudes or stiffs, but prudishness protects people from potentially disastrous results. If we are going to dispense with traditional governors it is imperative that we replace them with contemporary ones, whether it is law or new uplifting mores.

[Ahldagor]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

A lot of things like:

Increased risk of poverty
Increased risk of abuse and neglect
Increased risk of suicide
Increased risk of substance abuse/dependency
Increased risk of criminality
Increased risk of impaired emotional development
Increased risk of behavioral problems
Increased risk of teen pregnancy

also note that I specifically referenced EXTRAMARITAL behavior. Sex isn't always about reproduction. Your average 17yo girl isn't looking to make a baby when she hooks up with her boyfriend and your average 17yo boy isn't either and NEITHER is likely to be mentally or emotionally equipped for that journey in the event they inadvertently succeed in creating life.

Very few people engaging in sexual activity outside of marriage are looking to reproduce as consequence of the activity. Even within marriage that is seldom the goal, but at least within marriage the basic framework exists for better outcomes. There are plenty of other sexual activities besides coitus allowing for intimacy and fun between partners.

I just think failing to regulate parenting in an environment exalting independence and liberty while pooh-poohing traditional values is a betrayal, not unlike issuing speeding tickets to individuals and then kicking their children in the face when there is no law regulating speed and the prevailing ethos is that we are all racers.

we don't all have to be prudes or stiffs, but prudishness protects people from potentially disastrous results. If we are going to dispense with traditional governors it is imperative that we replace them with contemporary ones, whether it is law or new uplifting mores.

Yeah, the Catholic church has tried that for centuries and failed hilariously. People are gonna fuck for whatever reason, and this just makes you sound freightened of intimate human contact.

[Wonkie]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

A lot of things like:

Increased risk of poverty
Increased risk of abuse and neglect
Increased risk of suicide
Increased risk of substance abuse/dependency
Increased risk of criminality
Increased risk of impaired emotional development
Increased risk of behavioral problems
Increased risk of teen pregnancy

also note that I specifically referenced EXTRAMARITAL behavior. Sex isn't always about reproduction. Your average 17yo girl isn't looking to make a baby when she hooks up with her boyfriend and your average 17yo boy isn't either and NEITHER is likely to be mentally or emotionally equipped for that journey in the event they inadvertently succeed in creating life.

Very few people engaging in sexual activity outside of marriage are looking to reproduce as consequence of the activity. Even within marriage that is seldom the goal, but at least within marriage the basic framework exists for better outcomes. There are plenty of other sexual activities besides coitus allowing for intimacy and fun between partners.

I just think failing to regulate parenting in an environment exalting independence and liberty while pooh-poohing traditional values is a betrayal, not unlike issuing speeding tickets to individuals and then kicking their children in the face when there is no law regulating speed and the prevailing ethos is that we are all racers.

we don't all have to be prudes or stiffs, but prudishness protects people from potentially disastrous results. If we are going to dispense with traditional governors it is imperative that we replace them with contemporary ones, whether it is law or new uplifting mores.

Sorry Melon, but I'm a pro-life libertarian.

[maskedmelon]

Originally Posted by margatroid [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

put this wafer on you're tongue kid

makes u sterile too.

licensure is dumb. simply create economic pressure for ppl for not to pollute with children. say NO to kavanaugh.

it doesn't have to be parent licensing, it could be free contraceptives, tax credits for not having children, whatever works. the problem with each of those though is that it relies on responsible planning from populations struggling with that. the point I was underscoring is the problem of unplanned and unwanted pregnancy. i don't know what the solution is, but what we are doing is not working.

Originally Posted by Wonkie [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Sorry Melon, but I'm a pro-life libertarian.

you're a goober too.

[Patriam1066]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

it doesn't have to be parent licensing, it could be free contraceptives, tax credits for not having children, whatever works. the problem with each of those though is that it relies on responsible planning from populations struggling with that. the point I was underscoring is the problem of unplanned and unwanted pregnancy. i don't know what the solution is, but what we are doing is not working.




you're a goober too.

This doesn’t make sense in a consumer economy based on a stock and real estate market. Do what you suggest and (((they’d))) import 3 million subhumans per annum as opposed to 1.5 mil

We should incentivize blondes to have 3-5 children per woman and send everyone else to die in Afghanistan

[mickmoranis]

Chose solution to humanities ills:

a. take care of everyone so every life gets an equal opportunity

pro: life of leisure and love and happiness for all
con: protection of the weak leads to deviancy corrupts and destroys all

b. eugenics and genetic engineering

pro: the strongest survive and the weak are humanly erased from existence
con: soulless vapid shadow of what life once was

c. imperialism, war, cull the weak, expand and conquer

pro: life is at a balance, the strong and lucky survive, growth
con: the weak are sad

d. ???

[Wonkie]

d. suck mine, mick.