22 July 2005

Parenting Licenses

Yet another argument has come to light leading me to believe that people should have to apply for parenting licenses. For some reason, this idiot thought it was a good idea to teach his three-year-old son how to fight, by putting him through "brutal boxing bouts, which ultimately caused him to fall into a deadly coma, with microscopic brain tears and subsurface bruising." What I find just as disturbing is that said-same jerk "instructed his wife not to hug their son" -- and she accepted this judgment? WTF???

Government requires people to be licensed to drive a car, to own a gun, or to fish or hunt. People are barred from some of the basics in life -- rental housing, vehicle ownership, financing -- because they cannot or will not sign a contract. Why is it that ANY MORON can go ahead and raise kids? Actually, I take that back. Government agencies routinely force same-sex couples and other adoptive parents (esp. unmarried singles) to jump through a zillion hoops and then only maybe let them become parents... but the average heterosexual can raise a kid as they see fit, with little if any intervention. And if there is intervention, same-sex couples are often barred from fostering kids who are removed from unfit homes. Again, WTF?

OK. 'Nuff ranting.

3 comments:

Mike DeWolfe said...

The government gives licenses to SUV and Mustang drivers. Don't trust government people to do anything worthwhile. At their best, they only cause a little bit of damage. At their worst, they run the Province of BC.

This is why I like Starship Troopers so much: Citizens and Civilians.
Citizens are resposnible for society. They have to defend it with their lives and shape it with their actions.
Civilian are the regular schmoes. They have to do what their told, including when they're allowed to have children. Given how few people vote in our society, I would lump many people into the civilian category because they wish to be there now.

People have the realize that they have civil rights and civil responsibilites. The ASBO contracts in the UK do this (in a lousy way). People today expect stuff to be given to them. It's why unions are such a hot button issue for me. Sure people deserve good wages and good working conditions; but if you're bad, out you go. The union should have to cancel the membership of bad members. Unions don't do that. Quantity is more important than quality.

Good society starts at home. I think families should be responsible for their geneline. Bad kids would drag down a family. If you can't afford to have bad kids, you won't have any at all. I don't care if it's econmoic eugenics. We're breeding for quantity, not quality. All it means is that we're a generation away from more camaro driving tards and $2 beer night patrons.

The gene pool needs some chlorine.

Tim said...

Mike, I just finished reading The Unconscious Civilization, and interestingly it raised a similar thought about citizenship in my own mind. I don't think that's what JRS had in mind, but his proscription for citizenship is much like that of Heinlein's -- without the crypto-fascism. I agree with him inasmuch as I think everyone who wants to benefit from society has an obligation to it.

We could implement Socrates' idea of removing all children entirely from their parents, and having them raised by the state. Of course, the nightmare scenarios abound at the thought, and so it's not hard to see why it's not such a hot idea. A licensing scheme is really a weak, ineffective version of Socrates' solution.

We really have to just accept that this is part of living in a society where everything is private, there is no duty to others beyond that which benefits ourselves, and people are actually empowered to see their children as their personal property (until they kill them, that is). Mr. Paris was acting entirely within his rights until the point where he physically abused the kid. He can create any kind of warped, dysfunctional reprobate in his own image, and is in fact protected in his right to do so. His mistake was merely in actualizing that violent hatred of women and weakness when he saw it in his son. He could have done what millions of fathers do with impunity -- simply taught his son to hate and to fear by behaving hatefully and fearfully -- and his rights would have been unassailable.

Cheryl said...

Mike: I can always count on you to kick things up a notch. ;)

Tim: I can always count on you to depress me with reality.

Sigh.