Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4
Results 61 to 63 of 63
  1. #61
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,274
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A Licence to Have Children

    Quote Originally Posted by Spartacus View Post
    All I am proposing is closer scrutiny of and mandated education and monitoring for people with characteristics statistically associated with people who abuse and neglect children.

    Apparently, you think there is sufficient enforcement of existing laws. As a father of three, and Perm. Legal Guardian of one -- I could not disagree more. I think I am also safe in betting that the vast majority of Child Protective Investigators in my county would disagree too.
    Not at all. I do believe that more could be done but only within the legal structure that we have in place. The only thing I'm disagreeing with is having to have a license to have children or to raise one's own children. It is saving the odd child at a severe inconvenience and loss of liberty to the 99.9999% of the children that it does not apply to.

    Those children that have slipped through the net will be memorialized in having tighter standards and allowing us to learn about potential abuse. That knowledge though should still be used for monitoring and not as fodder for a license.

    Besides, we already have a religion that guarantees to practice infanticide through faith healing. These are people conditioned to let their children die. Do we ban the religion somehow? Do we have the parents renounce those parts we don't like? Or do we forbid the parents from keeping any children as soon as they have a sniffle, assuming they won't try to smuggle themselves to Canada or Mexico to kill their child?

    And we even have laws absolving them of the responsibility when their child does indeed die so that's pretty much explicit permission as far as I can see.

    The reality is though, that they have not really committed a crime until they have done the damage. We just need to detect these things sooner and get the child to safety sooner. But licensing is not the solution.

  2. #62
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Where every life is precious
    Posts
    2,157
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A Licence to Have Children

    Quote Originally Posted by SharmaK View Post
    I won't retract "nature will ensure that there is no harm"
    Very well then.....if you won't retract it, you MUST support it.

    I again Challenge to support a claim. you to support this claim, and also remind you that it is a violation of ODN rules to continue to make a claim that cannot, or will not, be supported, if you are asked to do so.

    That being said, I am politely requesting that you provide at least one valid link that supports your claim that "nature will ensure that there is no harm".

    Quote Originally Posted by Sharmak
    I didn't say NEVER! Of course parents kill their children
    Yes, you did.....by claiming that "nature will ENSURE that there is no harm", in which you implied that a biological parent will NEVER harm their child.

    If you agree that parents do sometimes kill their children, then logic dictates that you must retract said claim.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sharmak
    It actually provides zero guarantee because, and this is why it is not a strawman, 18 years is a long time to look ahead. It's a completely useless idea because not only is it impossible to implement but there are massive holes in the system.
    Does the possibility of human error in the implementation of any law or policy mean that we should not have said law?

    Name some current policies or laws in which the possibility of human error does not exist at all.

    Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe there are any.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sharmak
    Besides, you haven't mentioned any standards, so it's hard to properly answer this question.
    I'm currently working on a list of possible standards.
    .
    Last edited by Scarlett44; January 4th, 2010 at 08:47 PM.
    "As long as I have a voice, I will speak for those who have none".

  3. #63
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,274
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A Licence to Have Children

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarlett44 View Post
    Very well then.....if you won't retract it, you MUST support it.

    I again Challenge to support a claim. you to support this claim, and also remind you that it is a violation of ODN rules to continue to make a claim that cannot, or will not, be supported, if you are asked to do so.

    That being said, I am politely requesting that you provide at least one valid link that supports your claim that "nature will ensure that there is no harm".
    There's a class of theories called Attachment that describes the bond between and parent and child, both ways. This is a good article that introduces it. I'll try and find more because it is interesting how humans, especially go against nature for tribal or religious reasons.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarlett44 View Post
    Yes, you did.....by claiming that "nature will ENSURE that there is no harm", in which you implied that a biological parent will NEVER harm their child.

    If you agree that parents do sometimes kill their children, then logic dictates that you must retract said claim.
    This is a link about attachment disorder and there are already examples of parents causing harm. 'Ensure' can mean 'guarantee' but it is more of intention rather than a result.

    So I will retract 'ensure' and change it to 'mostly ensure' but that just loses the flow - . The argument still stands though, is that the tiny percentage of cases does not justify massive changes in rights.

    This also argues against the modified OP in that removing a child from birth will harm that bond even if you intend to return it later.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarlett44 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by mwt
    It actually provides zero guarantee because, and this is why it is not a strawman, 18 years is a long time to look ahead. It's a completely useless idea because not only is it impossible to implement but there are massive holes in the system.
    Does the possibility of human error in the implementation of any law or policy mean that we should not have said law?

    Name some current policies or laws in which the possibility of human error does not exist at all.

    Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe there are any.
    No, laws and their implementation are not perfect and indeed there are oppose laws to that go against my claim, namely that children dying due to faith healing is not illegal so it's worse than you state.

    However, even with the death penalty there is an enormous period before the sentence is executed to ensure (or mostly ensure) that the punishment is just. Even then our current Texas Governor is getting some heat over a potentially unjust execution.

    You are proposing that parents are monitored until the child is at adult-hood! The system is just unworkable, though that is another set of arguments that hasn't been explored. I Challenge to support a claim.back to demonstrate the resources required to get this done.

 

 
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4

Similar Threads

  1. Is nudity harming children?
    By Aspoestertjie in forum General Debate
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: October 25th, 2009, 10:13 PM
  2. Marriage better for children
    By chadn737 in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: July 5th, 2009, 04:19 AM
  3. Parents and Children: Who has control?
    By Diver in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: May 14th, 2009, 09:39 AM
  4. Heavy Metal Music = Violence
    By Aspoestertjie in forum Shootin' the Breeze / Off-Topic
    Replies: 92
    Last Post: December 8th, 2008, 10:26 AM
  5. Is sexual orientation determined at birth?
    By sylouette in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 69
    Last Post: January 28th, 2006, 01:04 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •