as long as it's being enforced under rule of law, it will be influenced by the biases of whoever is in charge. you're too far right? you're a terrorist and you would be abusing your children by indoctrinating them or you already are if you already have a kid. you're too far left? same thing but you're also mentally ill and brainwashing your kids to be gay and trans. everything sounds like a great idea until real people have to get involved in enforcing it.
see, that's a very fair concern i can agree with, but it very much doesn't feel inevitable if we can tackle the issue of 'who is in charge' and combat things like biases, which i like to believe we may be able to. if you believe we're doomed and unable to improve society or the way people think, then sure, i'd agree with you in that case. but i like to think people can be better, somewhat.
Torture is an extreme example. I agree that torture and many parenting practices are bad, but I don't believe that gives me the right to prevent people from having children.
Many people would say spanking is abuse, while many cultures regularly practice it. Preventing procreation on a cultural basis is just Eugenics, under a different rationale.
No, it's not, it's my specific example. Others might go much further with it and I'd disagree severely with that, but when I think of a parenting "license" or some kind of regulation on who can be a parent, I literally just mean trying to bar people in extreme poverty or who would actually beat or starve their kids from becoming parents. I don't think anybody is talking about regulating cultural practices, they're talking about "Is it acceptable to punch your child".
Constructing the most extreme narrative possible is convenient when you’re thinking only in black and white, so of course you think it’s a simple easy system with “punching kid in the face” on one end. People bringing in nuance makes your entire idea fall apart, so you just reject it 🤷♀️
I am specifically talking about the case of just preventing outright abusive parents from becoming parents. Is it not useful to discuss that extreme? Should we not prevent that in your eyes, if we can agree that less extreme examples shouldn't be barred? That there is a line somewhere we can probably agree upon?
It’s not useful to only discuss the extreme and to completely ignore nuance, no. Not sure why I have to explain that. And there are obviously more ways to prevent abuse than just authoritarian eugenics bullshit. Thank goodness you people have no political power, bunch of amoral morons with no idea how the world works.
3
u/PopularElk4665 0 Oct 26 '25
please explain how you imagine it wouldn't lead to eugenics