• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

You need a license to drive

Originally posted by: geno
But not one to bring a life into this world...

Scumbag :frown:

Yes, because the government would likely do a fantastic job deciding who can and cannot procreate, and would never abuse that power.
 
Originally posted by: daniel1113
Originally posted by: geno
But not one to bring a life into this world...

Scumbag :frown:

Yes, because the government would likely do a fantastic job deciding who can and cannot procreate, and would never abuse that power.

Can you say this guy should get to be a father again? I'm not saying the gov't should regulate parenthood, just that it's a little backward that much smaller and less significant things in life are regulated.
 
Originally posted by: geno
Originally posted by: daniel1113
Originally posted by: geno
But not one to bring a life into this world...

Scumbag :frown:

Yes, because the government would likely do a fantastic job deciding who can and cannot procreate, and would never abuse that power.

Can you say this guy should get to be a father again? I'm not saying the gov't should regulate parenthood, just that it's a little backward that much smaller and less significant things in life are regulated.
He's probably going to prison for life, it's not like he'll have the opportunity.
 
Originally posted by: geno
Originally posted by: daniel1113
Originally posted by: geno
But not one to bring a life into this world...

Scumbag :frown:

Yes, because the government would likely do a fantastic job deciding who can and cannot procreate, and would never abuse that power.

Can you say this guy should get to be a father again? I'm not saying the gov't should regulate parenthood, just that it's a little backward that much smaller and less significant things in life are regulated.

Because unlike procreating, driving and selling liquor are not fundamental rights.
 
Police put out a notice Saturday asking people to look for the boy and saying his father had told them three men with dreadlocks and AK-47 rifles had piled out of an SUV and kidnapped Ja' Shawn shortly before midnight Friday.

That's quite an imagination he has there.
 
Originally posted by: geno
Originally posted by: daniel1113
Originally posted by: geno
But not one to bring a life into this world...

Scumbag :frown:

Yes, because the government would likely do a fantastic job deciding who can and cannot procreate, and would never abuse that power.

Can you say this guy should get to be a father again? I'm not saying the gov't should regulate parenthood, just that it's a little backward that much smaller and less significant things in life are regulated.
The title of this thread belies that statement.
The incremental march towards totalitarianism takes another step anytime an emotional aspect of life intrudes into the determination of what constitutes "Fundamental Rights" wihtout due process.

there is no doubt this guy is a sociopath and should be removed from society. However, his actions should not be the tipping point on what should be the process for people who want to have children.

There is no question children shouldn't be the afterthought of a moment of sexual pleasure, but that is unfortunately the case, due in no small part to our basic human nature.
To speak of a day when the procreation process is a "Goal Oriented"process rather than the disorderly jumble of motivations and societal pressures, is to speak of Utopia and therefore unrealistic, given the way things are today.



 
Back
Top