Bitcoin Forum>Other>Politics & Society
Pages:
Author

Topic: Mother of 15 Kids: “Somebody needs to pay for all my children." - page 2. (Read 6742 times)

Hawker
legendary
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1001
Re: Mother of 15 Kids: “Somebody needs to pay for all my children."
December 02, 2011, 01:43:20 PM
#65
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 01:38:43 PM
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 01:32:19 PM
...snip...
You are saying that random strangers should be able to take kids from people's homes on their own say so.  And this improves on what we have now how?

Yes because the system can adapt, fail and improve.

On the first day that its OK for random strangers to take kids on their own say so, a lot of paedophiles will be exhausted.  So many kids and so little Viagra.  Of course you are Ok with this as it allows the system to fail and improve. 
ALPHA.
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
Re: Mother of 15 Kids: “Somebody needs to pay for all my children."
December 02, 2011, 01:38:43 PM
#64
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 01:32:19 PM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 01:20:40 PM
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 01:19:33 PM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 01:14:36 PM
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 01:13:01 PM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 01:01:56 PM
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 12:29:50 PM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 10:52:52 AM
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 10:51:23 AM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 10:40:15 AM
I'm glad she no longer has custody of the children. I'm glad people don't want her to have any more children.

Suddenly seeing why the state might have its place in child protection?

Nope. The state isn't the only one capable of providing such services. People provide services and they do so because they desire to do so. People obviously desire children to be care for: It's human instinct. They will be cared for regardless of a tyrannical state.

Only the state can forcibly take the children away from her.  Unless you are proposing a free for all in which anyone can snatch a child ?
Heh, there will never be a free-for-all where anybody can snatch a child. In the end, it will be the strongest desire of the people. People do not want undeterred child abductions.

The strongest desire of the people is that social services are provided for children such as these.  Part of that if forcibly taking the children from the family.  Only the state can authorise that.

It is not the strongest desire of the people. The government is not the people. It only happens to be the power in charge. Anything can happen as long as the might allows it, even revolution.

You are dodging the point.  We are in agreement the children need to be taken into care.  Only the state can do that - you can't be advocating a situation where private individuals can come to someone's house and take their children on their own authority, can you?

Yes, I am, if the general society allows it. I don't think there should be a monopoly on such things. Monopolies are hard to hold accountable.

You are saying that random strangers should be able to take kids from people's homes on their own say so.  And this improves on what we have now how?

Yes because the system can adapt, fail and improve.
Hawker
legendary
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1001
Re: Mother of 15 Kids: “Somebody needs to pay for all my children."
December 02, 2011, 01:32:19 PM
#63
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 01:20:40 PM
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 01:19:33 PM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 01:14:36 PM
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 01:13:01 PM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 01:01:56 PM
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 12:29:50 PM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 10:52:52 AM
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 10:51:23 AM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 10:40:15 AM
I'm glad she no longer has custody of the children. I'm glad people don't want her to have any more children.

Suddenly seeing why the state might have its place in child protection?

Nope. The state isn't the only one capable of providing such services. People provide services and they do so because they desire to do so. People obviously desire children to be care for: It's human instinct. They will be cared for regardless of a tyrannical state.

Only the state can forcibly take the children away from her.  Unless you are proposing a free for all in which anyone can snatch a child ?
Heh, there will never be a free-for-all where anybody can snatch a child. In the end, it will be the strongest desire of the people. People do not want undeterred child abductions.

The strongest desire of the people is that social services are provided for children such as these.  Part of that if forcibly taking the children from the family.  Only the state can authorise that.

It is not the strongest desire of the people. The government is not the people. It only happens to be the power in charge. Anything can happen as long as the might allows it, even revolution.

You are dodging the point.  We are in agreement the children need to be taken into care.  Only the state can do that - you can't be advocating a situation where private individuals can come to someone's house and take their children on their own authority, can you?

Yes, I am, if the general society allows it. I don't think there should be a monopoly on such things. Monopolies are hard to hold accountable.

You are saying that random strangers should be able to take kids from people's homes on their own say so.  And this improves on what we have now how?
ALPHA.
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
Re: Mother of 15 Kids: “Somebody needs to pay for all my children."
December 02, 2011, 01:20:40 PM
#62
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 01:19:33 PM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 01:14:36 PM
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 01:13:01 PM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 01:01:56 PM
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 12:29:50 PM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 10:52:52 AM
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 10:51:23 AM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 10:40:15 AM
I'm glad she no longer has custody of the children. I'm glad people don't want her to have any more children.

Suddenly seeing why the state might have its place in child protection?

Nope. The state isn't the only one capable of providing such services. People provide services and they do so because they desire to do so. People obviously desire children to be care for: It's human instinct. They will be cared for regardless of a tyrannical state.

Only the state can forcibly take the children away from her.  Unless you are proposing a free for all in which anyone can snatch a child ?
Heh, there will never be a free-for-all where anybody can snatch a child. In the end, it will be the strongest desire of the people. People do not want undeterred child abductions.

The strongest desire of the people is that social services are provided for children such as these.  Part of that if forcibly taking the children from the family.  Only the state can authorise that.

It is not the strongest desire of the people. The government is not the people. It only happens to be the power in charge. Anything can happen as long as the might allows it, even revolution.

You are dodging the point.  We are in agreement the children need to be taken into care.  Only the state can do that - you can't be advocating a situation where private individuals can come to someone's house and take their children on their own authority, can you?

Yes, I am, if the general society allows it. I don't think there should be a monopoly on such things. Monopolies are hard to hold accountable.
Hawker
legendary
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1001
Re: Mother of 15 Kids: “Somebody needs to pay for all my children."
December 02, 2011, 01:19:33 PM
#61
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 01:14:36 PM
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 01:13:01 PM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 01:01:56 PM
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 12:29:50 PM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 10:52:52 AM
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 10:51:23 AM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 10:40:15 AM
I'm glad she no longer has custody of the children. I'm glad people don't want her to have any more children.

Suddenly seeing why the state might have its place in child protection?

Nope. The state isn't the only one capable of providing such services. People provide services and they do so because they desire to do so. People obviously desire children to be care for: It's human instinct. They will be cared for regardless of a tyrannical state.

Only the state can forcibly take the children away from her.  Unless you are proposing a free for all in which anyone can snatch a child ?
Heh, there will never be a free-for-all where anybody can snatch a child. In the end, it will be the strongest desire of the people. People do not want undeterred child abductions.

The strongest desire of the people is that social services are provided for children such as these.  Part of that if forcibly taking the children from the family.  Only the state can authorise that.

It is not the strongest desire of the people. The government is not the people. It only happens to be the power in charge. Anything can happen as long as the might allows it, even revolution.

You are dodging the point.  We are in agreement the children need to be taken into care.  Only the state can do that - you can't be advocating a situation where private individuals can come to someone's house and take their children on their own authority, can you?
ALPHA.
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
Re: Mother of 15 Kids: “Somebody needs to pay for all my children."
December 02, 2011, 01:14:36 PM
#60
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 01:13:01 PM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 01:01:56 PM
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 12:29:50 PM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 10:52:52 AM
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 10:51:23 AM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 10:40:15 AM
I'm glad she no longer has custody of the children. I'm glad people don't want her to have any more children.

Suddenly seeing why the state might have its place in child protection?

Nope. The state isn't the only one capable of providing such services. People provide services and they do so because they desire to do so. People obviously desire children to be care for: It's human instinct. They will be cared for regardless of a tyrannical state.

Only the state can forcibly take the children away from her.  Unless you are proposing a free for all in which anyone can snatch a child ?
Heh, there will never be a free-for-all where anybody can snatch a child. In the end, it will be the strongest desire of the people. People do not want undeterred child abductions.

The strongest desire of the people is that social services are provided for children such as these.  Part of that if forcibly taking the children from the family.  Only the state can authorise that.

It is not the strongest desire of the people. The government is not the people. It only happens to be the power in charge. Anything can happen as long as the might allows it, even revolution.
Hawker
legendary
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1001
Re: Mother of 15 Kids: “Somebody needs to pay for all my children."
December 02, 2011, 01:13:01 PM
#59
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 01:01:56 PM
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 12:29:50 PM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 10:52:52 AM
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 10:51:23 AM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 10:40:15 AM
I'm glad she no longer has custody of the children. I'm glad people don't want her to have any more children.

Suddenly seeing why the state might have its place in child protection?

Nope. The state isn't the only one capable of providing such services. People provide services and they do so because they desire to do so. People obviously desire children to be care for: It's human instinct. They will be cared for regardless of a tyrannical state.

Only the state can forcibly take the children away from her.  Unless you are proposing a free for all in which anyone can snatch a child ?
Heh, there will never be a free-for-all where anybody can snatch a child. In the end, it will be the strongest desire of the people. People do not want undeterred child abductions.

The strongest desire of the people is that social services are provided for children such as these.  Part of that if forcibly taking the children from the family.  Only the state can authorise that.
ALPHA.
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
Re: Mother of 15 Kids: “Somebody needs to pay for all my children."
December 02, 2011, 01:01:56 PM
#58
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 12:29:50 PM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 10:52:52 AM
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 10:51:23 AM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 10:40:15 AM
I'm glad she no longer has custody of the children. I'm glad people don't want her to have any more children.

Suddenly seeing why the state might have its place in child protection?

Nope. The state isn't the only one capable of providing such services. People provide services and they do so because they desire to do so. People obviously desire children to be care for: It's human instinct. They will be cared for regardless of a tyrannical state.

Only the state can forcibly take the children away from her.  Unless you are proposing a free for all in which anyone can snatch a child ?
Heh, there will never be a free-for-all where anybody can snatch a child. In the end, it will be the strongest desire of the people. People do not want undeterred child abductions.
Hawker
legendary
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1001
Re: Mother of 15 Kids: “Somebody needs to pay for all my children."
December 02, 2011, 12:29:50 PM
#57
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 10:52:52 AM
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 10:51:23 AM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 10:40:15 AM
I'm glad she no longer has custody of the children. I'm glad people don't want her to have any more children.

Suddenly seeing why the state might have its place in child protection?

Nope. The state isn't the only one capable of providing such services. People provide services and they do so because they desire to do so. People obviously desire children to be care for: It's human instinct. They will be cared for regardless of a tyrannical state.

Only the state can forcibly take the children away from her.  Unless you are proposing a free for all in which anyone can snatch a child ?
Explodicle
hero member
Activity: 950
Merit: 1001
Re: Mother of 15 Kids: “Somebody needs to pay for all my children."
December 02, 2011, 12:04:29 PM
#56
Quote from: deuxmill on December 02, 2011, 11:26:52 AM
Quote from: Explodicle on December 02, 2011, 11:15:02 AM
Regarding the "children have potential" argument - what about the kids with little chance of significant contribution, like those born with severe mental disabilities?

This should be about children's rights, not expected futures. Children have enough to deal with without feeling indebted to society for existing.

Children are humans. They are not different. And they are not in dept to anyone , and none owes  them nothing.
That means we should help all children but not forced to.

I generally agree. The area where I think we may differ is whether or not taking away the child's right to move freely by privatizing land justifies reimbursement.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen's_dividend

You guys sensationalize "X is theft, Y is SLAVERY" all the time, and then justify stealing from every child born too late to claim scarce resources.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property_is_theft!

So yeah, we all do owe something to children. They are entitled to their share of this planet we all got for free.
cbeast
donator
Activity: 1736
Merit: 1014
Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.
Re: Mother of 15 Kids: “Somebody needs to pay for all my children."
December 02, 2011, 12:03:20 PM
#55
Quote from: deuxmill on December 02, 2011, 11:55:50 AM
See no need for slavery.

No worries, mate. Slavery has been abolished for centuries in most regions.
deuxmill
full member
Activity: 130
Merit: 100
Re: Mother of 15 Kids: “Somebody needs to pay for all my children."
December 02, 2011, 11:55:50 AM
#54
Quote from: cbeast on December 02, 2011, 11:34:30 AM
We should all take personal responsibility for the children in our community. If you are not a parent, then at least do something directly to be involved with helping children become a part of the community. I have little respect for any older adult that lived selfishly and did nothing significant to help children. I would not enter into any serious business venture with such a person because I simply would not trust someone that lives that way.

See no need for slavery.
cbeast
donator
Activity: 1736
Merit: 1014
Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.
Re: Mother of 15 Kids: “Somebody needs to pay for all my children."
December 02, 2011, 11:34:30 AM
#53
We should all take personal responsibility for the children in our community. If you are not a parent, then at least do something directly to be involved with helping children become a part of the community. I have little respect for any older adult that lived selfishly and did nothing significant to help children. I would not enter into any serious business venture with such a person because I simply would not trust someone that lives that way.
deuxmill
full member
Activity: 130
Merit: 100
Re: Mother of 15 Kids: “Somebody needs to pay for all my children."
December 02, 2011, 11:26:52 AM
#52
Quote from: Explodicle on December 02, 2011, 11:15:02 AM
Regarding the "children have potential" argument - what about the kids with little chance of significant contribution, like those born with severe mental disabilities?

This should be about children's rights, not expected futures. Children have enough to deal with without feeling indebted to society for existing.

Children are humans. They are not different. And they are not in dept to anyone , and none owes  them nothing.
That means we should help all children but not forced to.
ALPHA.
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
Re: Mother of 15 Kids: “Somebody needs to pay for all my children."
December 02, 2011, 11:16:24 AM
#51
Quote from: Explodicle on December 02, 2011, 11:15:02 AM
Regarding the "children have potential" argument - what about the kids with little chance of significant contribution, like those born with severe mental disabilities?

This should be about children's rights, not expected futures. Children have enough to deal with without feeling indebted to society for existing.

You are not the only one that cares for them. What about them? Those who want to care for them, should do so. It's very simple.

If you want something, it doesn't mean you are entitled to steal and enslave to get it.
Explodicle
hero member
Activity: 950
Merit: 1001
Re: Mother of 15 Kids: “Somebody needs to pay for all my children."
December 02, 2011, 11:15:02 AM
#50
Regarding the "children have potential" argument - what about the kids with little chance of significant contribution, like those born with severe mental disabilities?

This should be about children's rights, not expected futures. Children have enough to deal with without feeling indebted to society for existing.
ALPHA.
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
Re: Mother of 15 Kids: “Somebody needs to pay for all my children."
December 02, 2011, 11:14:13 AM
#49
Quote from: cbeast on December 02, 2011, 11:09:43 AM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 10:52:52 AM
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 10:51:23 AM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 10:40:15 AM
I'm glad she no longer has custody of the children. I'm glad people don't want her to have any more children.

Suddenly seeing why the state might have its place in child protection?

Nope. The state isn't the only one capable of providing such services. People provide services and they do so because they desire to do so. People obviously desire children to be care for: It's human instinct. They will be cared for regardless of a tyrannical state.

Even Thomas Jefferson realized that this is not so when he proposed the General Welfare clause “to lay taxes for the purpose of providing for the general welfare .”
Thomas Jefferson is rolling in his grave. It only means to act within the powers that are enumerated within the constitution: that doesn't include coercive, involuntary welfare. So, Thomas Jefferson had no such thoughts in regards to voluntary charity. Hopefully he doesn't kill you in your sleep.

"They are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to lay taxes for that purpose. To consider the latter phrase not as describing the purpose of the first, but as giving a distinct and independent power to do any act they please which might be for the good of the Union, would render all the preceding and subsequent enumerations of power completely useless. It would reduce the whole instrument to a single phrase, that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the United States; and, as they would be the sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they please... Certainly no such universal power was meant to be given them. It was intended to lace them up straitly within the enumerated powers and those without which, as means, these powers could not be carried into effect." --Thomas Jefferson: Opinion on National Bank, 1791. ME 3:148
cbeast
donator
Activity: 1736
Merit: 1014
Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.
Re: Mother of 15 Kids: “Somebody needs to pay for all my children."
December 02, 2011, 11:09:43 AM
#48
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 10:52:52 AM
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 10:51:23 AM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 10:40:15 AM
I'm glad she no longer has custody of the children. I'm glad people don't want her to have any more children.

Suddenly seeing why the state might have its place in child protection?

Nope. The state isn't the only one capable of providing such services. People provide services and they do so because they desire to do so. People obviously desire children to be care for: It's human instinct. They will be cared for regardless of a tyrannical state.

Even Thomas Jefferson realized that this is not so when he proposed the General Welfare clause “to lay taxes for the purpose of providing for the general welfare .”
ALPHA.
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
Re: Mother of 15 Kids: “Somebody needs to pay for all my children."
December 02, 2011, 10:53:41 AM
#47
Quote from: ineededausername on December 02, 2011, 10:52:33 AM
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 10:51:23 AM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 10:40:15 AM
I'm glad she no longer has custody of the children. I'm glad people don't want her to have any more children.

Suddenly seeing why the state might have its place in child protection?

Atlas sees the light!
Of course, he will defend to his death the mother's right to be free from coercion and to keep her children, probably.

The mother has the right to herself as long she doesn't infringe the rights of other individuals: the children and the slaves of the state.
ALPHA.
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
Re: Mother of 15 Kids: “Somebody needs to pay for all my children."
December 02, 2011, 10:52:52 AM
#46
Quote from: Hawker on December 02, 2011, 10:51:23 AM
Quote from: ALPHA. on December 02, 2011, 10:40:15 AM
I'm glad she no longer has custody of the children. I'm glad people don't want her to have any more children.

Suddenly seeing why the state might have its place in child protection?

Nope. The state isn't the only one capable of providing such services. People provide services and they do so because they desire to do so. People obviously desire children to be care for: It's human instinct. They will be cared for regardless of a tyrannical state.
Pages:
Bitcoin Forum>Other>Politics & Society
Jump to: