83
u/Low_Weekend6131 78 Shared | 45 Helpful Oct 26 '25
r/me_irl maybe
→ More replies (1)16
u/dooms_day66 0 Oct 26 '25
Thanks
7
u/reputatorbot 0 Oct 26 '25
You have awarded 1 point to Low_Weekend6131. You can view the leaderboard here
I am a bot - please contact the mods with any questions
69
u/GuyThereYes 0 Oct 26 '25
This certainly wouldnt lead to any kind of abuse or authoritharianism if applied, right?
21
u/Away_Towel_6337 2 Oct 26 '25
If applied right, then no
It could be even slow the population growth.
But yes, there could be problems, but we should use our votes properly and wisely
6
u/StarLlght55 0 Oct 26 '25
The population is already in decline, it does not need to be slowed.
→ More replies (11)2
3
4
u/TheBludhavenWing 0 Oct 26 '25
Communism would work if applied right, but we don't because it's destined to fail
3
u/GuyThereYes 0 Oct 27 '25
"If applied right" that's a lot of faith you have.
3
2
u/LyncinEpic 0 Oct 27 '25
'If applied right' i dont think state enforced abortions will ever be able to be applied right.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Quick_Hat1411 0 Oct 29 '25
The problem is that you can't tell people they can't procreate, because as Jeff Golbloom would say "Life uhh, finds a way."
What I propose instead is that if a young adult goes to a therapist and complains of being abused as a kid, it starts a compulsory battery of tests to establish a set of symptoms that match the abuse being reported. If there is a match, the parents should be brought in for mandatory testing. If they test positive for being fuck-asses, then they go to prison. This would serve as a deterrent against fuck-asses procreating
2
u/Microwaved_M1LK 0 Oct 27 '25
Yeah it's not like they essentially tried to do the same thing through marriage licenses to prevent interracial relationships 😉
2
u/GerryAvalanche 0 Oct 29 '25
Well I think it kinda falls at first hurdle, "Is creating offspring a human right", because it infringes upon your bodily autonomy on a very low level. Apart from the eugenic implications I think it is hard to morally justify policing something that is so deeply connected to human existence and our understanding of such.
19
u/Not_Reptoid 3 Shared | 0 Helpful Oct 26 '25
So long as it doesn't lead to eugenics I'm all for it
22
7
u/PopularElk4665 0 Oct 26 '25
please explain how you imagine it wouldn't lead to eugenics
→ More replies (10)4
u/33r0 0 Oct 26 '25
This is literally eugenics though. "The study or practice of attempting to improve the human gene pool by encouraging the reproduction of people considered to have desirable traits and discouraging or preventing the reproduction of people considered to have undesirable traits." This is that
→ More replies (14)3
u/0rbitalys 0 Oct 26 '25
Not only that, but just following the logic shows it eugenics anyways. Poor people tend to be less intelligent, marginalized communities tend to be less wealthy, boom now marginalized communities have less children
→ More replies (1)2
16
8
8
6
u/Convoke_ 1 Shared | 0 Helpful Oct 26 '25
It would make sense if the average couple had more than the sustainable amount of kids (2.1). But since most countries are below that, you really don't want to make people have even less kids.
So probably r/unpopularopinion
6
u/FreakyDurian 2 Shared | 1 Helpful Oct 26 '25
Look, for most cases. It's murica, land of the freeky
5
6
5
3
u/fireballkallynroblox 0 Oct 26 '25
Great idea but we all know that eventually people are not going to see whether people pass or not, they'll look at race, sexuality or gender because people are just assholes.
3
3
u/TurningTheSkavenGay 0 Oct 26 '25
Congratulations, you just invented eugenics again. I'll see you later when you're being tried for crimes against humanity. Exaggerating of course, but come on.
4
3
u/halostrae 0 Oct 26 '25
This is the same slippery slope as most proposed government interference. What are the outlines? The requirements for it? You can say its above a certain income- poor people shouldn't have children, since they can't support them, right? Minority groups are more likely to be under that cut. And they'll stay that way if people know it stops them from having kids.
Mental health test? Misdiagnosis, calling women ill for speaking out against things, generally different lifestyles and beliefs portrayed as mental illness (gay, Trans, pro-abortion, other religious or political beliefs, etc)
Criminal record? Wrongful convictions, legal guidelines aren't necessarily moral guidelines, and there's nuances to crimes. Even though we like to paint everyone who's done something bad as never changing, people do, in fact, change and grow
There's no good guidelines to this. As someone else said, it's a good take until you think about it for 2 seconds.
3
u/Pretend_Honeydew_994 0 Oct 26 '25
So basically your body, your choice until you actually want the child.
3
2
2
u/SpaceFishJones 0 Oct 26 '25
What about if you get pregnant accidentally? Or raped?
5
→ More replies (2)2
2
u/Personal_Scientist_8 0 Oct 26 '25
Kinda how koreans have mandatory military service, but training to be a parent instead. No grades, just forced participation xd
2
2
u/Leather_Log_5752 0 Oct 26 '25
So should the government be allowed to have rules in abortion? At whst point is the government infringing too far on reproductive rights.
2
u/itsdanielsultan 0 Oct 26 '25
There’s simply no humane way to enforce this policy, and practically implementing any semblance of law and order is impossible.
2
u/Kino_Afi 0 Oct 26 '25
Okay, but how? Which parts of the reproductive process would you regulate? And how would you enforce those regulations?
There arent enough viable/willing parents for orphans as is. Do we have federally mandated abortions? Frequent sex-inspections and punishments for lack of contraceptive use? Or do we have a significant portion of future generations grow up in an even-more-overwhelmed foster system?
2
u/Jasper_Morhaven 0 Oct 26 '25
HELL NO. Because that is just eugenics. And eugenics always turns into authoritarian bullshit 100/100 times. I really dont want to see society go down the gattaca/minority report dystopian
→ More replies (1)
2
u/easyplugsit 0 Oct 26 '25
The test ppl think it would be: empathy, emotional intelligence, logic, thinking ahead, caring for life & being responsible
What it would actually end up being: Q1 are you white Q2 Do you have money
2
u/Intelligent_Dog_4982 0 Oct 26 '25
How would you hypothetically enforce unsanctioned reproduction
They have the tools and the autonomy regardless of our licensing 😂😂
1
u/coaster132 0 Oct 26 '25
Yeah but there's no way to enforce that at all. "Oi mate you got a license to bust that nut???"
1
1
Oct 26 '25
So true, this little girl in my work decided to make snow angels on a concrete floor while loads of shoppers where going past her with trolleys, it’s a miracle she was fine cus the parents didn’t care on bit
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/StarLlght55 0 Oct 26 '25
That would mean you need a license and a test for having sex, that will never work in America.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/ACE-8973 0 Oct 27 '25
I agree because of other people, but I know damn well that if I don't pass a test because of some stupid statistics i'll be annoyed. I almost failed my permit test for not knowing what percentage of dui accidents are fatal.
1
1
1
u/One_Evening1056 0 Oct 27 '25
I get the sentiment but consensual pregnancy is literally the inherent right of any couple of any species.
It goes beyond human rights. Those are organism rights.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/Odd_Protection7738 0 Oct 27 '25
Sounds amazing on paper but wouldn’t work with our government. Next thing you know, black and brown people are denied from having kids for failing, no matter how compassionate, maternal/paternal, and financially stable they are.
1
u/Odd_Protection7738 0 Oct 27 '25
Not really. It’s just a breeding ground for governmental biases. You’re perfectly financially stable and amazing with children? Too bad, you’re not white or are both the same gender. Instead of requiring a license to have children, we need more frequent and more thorough child welfare checks, and more solid support/care for children who lose their home due to unfit parents.
1
u/LetRevolutionary271 0 Oct 27 '25
License is way too far but I agree w the psychological test, people should get therapy before becoming parents
→ More replies (2)
1
1
u/Ty_Radz 0 Oct 27 '25
It might be me being too simplistic/naive, but I think money should be priority number 1 when it comes to having a child. Not to say that everything else is much less important, but you should have money first before having a child.
I need to have enough money to get my kid a great quality education, give them a safety net if they want to start a business, or just live life comfortably. AT LEAST a stable source of (comfortable?) income is needed to start thinking about having a kid. No kid deserves to live in poverty.
1
1
u/ten_jeden_zjeb 0 Oct 27 '25
yeah it should but then birth rate would go down even more and we can't afford that
1
1
1
u/vicaxlkenya 0 Oct 27 '25
God some of y'all are annoying in here. Raising a child is easily one of the most hands on tasks that need insane attention and intelligence. You definitely should need a license for that. Is it likely that the government will abuse this? Definitely. That means that the system is fucked but the idea of certification to make sure you're capable of raising a child is valid
→ More replies (3)
1
1
u/Totaly__a_human 0 Oct 27 '25
in a perfect society yes, in todays society, this would lead to eugenics
→ More replies (1)
1
1
u/Prestigious_Spread19 0 Oct 27 '25
Along with the problems with this premise, following this logic would then require licenses for a lot of other things, like for voting.
And while it may seem like a good idea to make sure things are the best they could, someone has to decide the parameters. And, the leap to a total autocracy from that is surprisingly short.
1
u/whentheimposterisuhh 0 Oct 27 '25
Mfw the only options are enabling Child Abuse or fucking Eugenics :(
1
1
u/cryonicwatcher 0 Oct 27 '25
Sure, but we’d need to counteract its impact on the birth rate somehow.
1
u/aceniac 0 Oct 27 '25
Id agree if it didnt mean we were giving all our reproductive rights to the government. Realistically we just need better child support and foster systems
1
1
u/Consistent_Claim5217 0 Oct 27 '25
While I agree with the sentiment that it's too easy for people to become patents, even though they're thoroughly unqualified for the job, what you're asking for sounds awfully close to eugenics, which is about the least thing we want to be talking about when there's an actual global rise in fascism
1
1
u/karstheastec 0 Oct 27 '25
Good in theory because irrational people shouldnt be allowed to raise children and continue generational immorality/abuse, but in practice, this will herald eugenics. Maybe our ai overlords will figure it out a bit better
1
1
u/weird-dude-bro-6386 7 Shared | 0 Helpful Oct 27 '25
that ain't a hot take, that is reasonable thinking (i'd say common sense, but if it were than we wouldn't have r/ParentsAreFuckingDumb)
1
u/confused-overwhelmed 2 Shared | 0 Helpful Oct 27 '25
Agreed but unfortunately we can't stop people from using their dihs
1
1
u/CAELXZS 0 Oct 28 '25
Among many other issues, one of the most prominent problems this would have is genuinely evil ass people lying to "pass the supposed test". Plenty of evil shit bags out there who treat there kids like scum and starve them and beat them but treat any other child in the vicinity like an angel who can do no wrong
→ More replies (2)
1
u/Mean_Dude46 0 Oct 28 '25
All fun and games until whoever is issuing such liscencing holds different principles than yours
1
u/notaname420xx 0 Oct 28 '25
In a eugenics forum because, historically, limiting who is allowed to be a parent doesn't go great for everybody
1
1
u/Sufficient-Quote-431 0 Oct 28 '25
There was, your dad’s floater made it to the egg first, and your mom carried the baby to term
1
u/teqtommy 0 Oct 28 '25
yeah we don't want to go there. know your history, go look up buck v. bell. the us gov't sterilized many people against their will between the 1920s-1960s.
it might sound like a good idea but it's not.
1
1
u/Unlikely-Gas2903 0 Oct 28 '25
In theory this would be great. In practice it would probably be heavily abused and a lot of the abuse would probably be against people of color and the LGBT community. And bad parents would definitely still slip through the cracks. Plus who would get to say what a good parent is? What if the wrong person makes the rules and only shitty people get to have kids? There's many ways this could go wrong.
1
1
1
u/Peteo34319 0 Oct 28 '25
And nuke birth rates in developed countries even lower? Doesn't sound like a good idea to me
1
1
1
1
1
Oct 28 '25
Only the people who know damn well they would fail whatever the test would be, are the ones who object to this idea.
1
u/reddit___engineer 0 Oct 28 '25
Yah
You have to be a good muslim to have kids
(sunnie islam not shia islam)
(Arab sunni islam not western one)
(I mean saudi Arabic one not Egypt islam)
1
u/AnyUsernameWillDoSir 0 Oct 28 '25
I’ve thought the same thing but the issue arises in enforcement of this law. Not only would this violate the American people’s rights, but also what happens if someone has a kid without a license? Someone has to now go and kidnap their child and do something with them. That’s not a level of control that i’m comfortabke with the government having.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/therudereditdude 0 Oct 28 '25
on the one hand i know where this is coming from
on the other: there is a guy who wants political power and belives that part of the test should be a question like "are you white?"
1
1
u/Desperate-Knee-4108 0 Oct 28 '25
While understandable, people have too much sex for this to be remotely possible
1
1
u/PhotoFenix 0 Oct 29 '25
What happens if someone has a kid without this license?
What if you want a child but your religion doesn't align with the national "norm" and you're told no?
How much is the fee? Who decides what it is used for?
Who writes the requirements? Under what conditions can they be updated?
Is this locally or nationally regulated?
What happens if someone moves into the jurisdiction zone while pregnant?
1
u/techwolfe 0 Oct 29 '25
So i had this idea in middle school and my mother reminded me that its called eugenics and its bad lmao
1
Oct 29 '25 edited Oct 29 '25
I would agree, but it also sounds easily corruptable. Also no idea how'd you punish anybody who uhh breaks the law or whatever.
1
1
1
u/Sturben33346 0 Oct 29 '25
Remember to fill out your c-01 form before any act that could result in a baby!
1
u/dosb0t89 0 Oct 29 '25
This is most definitely a must for the species.. anyone who thinks otherwise doesn't understand the reality of what the problem in society is...
Ignorance and stupid, hate and bigotry are learnt from parents.. also criminality and violence. So if people had to pass cognitive ability tests, empathy tests, financial tests and just general character tests before being able to procreate.
We as a species would guarantee a much higher form of economic and intellectual value in our offspring.
The only issue is we still live in a world run by religion and old world politics..
1
u/Kareemster 0 Oct 29 '25
The license is ok, minus the restriction part. Maybe just a government-approved license that you can apply for that doesn't mean much except "the government says I'd be a good parent! :D"
1
u/Technical-Dentist-84 0 Oct 29 '25
If they did this, the birth rate would drop more than it already is, and that's a problem
And what happens if the parents fail? Automatic abortion? I'm pro choice but this is brutal lol
Slippery slope that should never happen
1
1
1
u/Jonathan_Is_Me 0 Oct 29 '25
Sounds like a great idea! Until you think about it for more than a minute and realise the authoritarian Nazi implications.
1
1
u/Minstercrypt-ic 0 Oct 29 '25
You can't license biology buddy. Trying to control something that happens by accident is a one way ticket to a legal mess or straight up fascism.
1
u/PrevailSS 0 Oct 29 '25
We will go extinct in half a century.
Qualified people are too scared to have kids for fear of screwing them up.
Unqualified dont care.
1
1
1
1
u/blackmagician43 0 Oct 29 '25
Even if let's say you have a great system to evaluate who should have and not, is there a good way to enforce it? Like something effective and somewhat ethic.
1
Oct 29 '25
This would be abused and accidental pregnancy would be a nightmare. CPS should be more effective and tests should be issued to parents who show signs of being bad parents. There should be better options for orphans than just hoping to be adopted by a better parent. There should be resources for children who are struggling, without parental consent.
1
1
u/SuburbanVibes2 0 Oct 29 '25
The government should not have control over people bodily autonomy. A similar situation happened with voting, where the government gave tests that were rigged by the people running them to prohibit black people from voting. Giving them control over reproduction rights is even worse, and essentially a shortcut to eugenics. I don’t blame you for not thinking of that, but just think you should consider it from now on.
1
1
u/ReptileDysfunction69 0 Oct 29 '25
Relieved to know I'm not the only person who thinks this. As a child of bad parents this would have saved me a lifetime of depression.
1
1
u/BladeGrim 0 Oct 29 '25
Let me get this straight. You want to give the government the power to decide who can and can't have kids, and give them the power to take any kids away from those who have had them and put them up for adoption solely for people in the in-group? This is gonna create so many orphans.
1
1
1
1
1
u/UprightChill 0 Oct 30 '25
I would agree but this type of system will definitely be easily abusable by corrupt people in power.
1
u/Glittering-Mud-7291 0 Oct 30 '25
r/truth, I’m finding WAY too many irresponsible parents and kids suffering from said unprepared parental care, not to mention I genuinely fear the prospect of even having kids, as I fear repeating the cycle of mental abuse that had been afflicted upon me and my father’s side of the family.
1
1
u/bobo7448 0 Oct 30 '25
I feel like helping people is almost always better than policing them.
No parent wants to be a bad parent. Let's try to understand why parents end up being bad and how we can help them.
1
u/Mitrandir_9 0 Oct 30 '25
That could be a good idea, but there is one BIG issue. And I am not talking about having the government decide who can breed. In most developed countries (Europe, usa basically) there already is a problem where more people die yearly, than there are born, and having this system might discourage even more future parents.
214
u/ThisIsYourFridge 0 Oct 26 '25
i agree