Originally Posted by contracycle

By what standards?

Society's?

Quote:

OK then, so you'll be removing benefits from both the mother and father? Thats more consistent, but of course you;ve also just created a huge incentive for men not to own ujp to being the father, in which case,once again, the problem of split families is going to get worse rather than better.

Well, as you said, they left their DNA behind. It's going to be hard denying being the father with modern DNA testing available.

Quote:

No I don't. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime, etc. But there isn't any way I'm going to permit you to order someone else to go through a serious medical procedure for your benefit.

Most criminals get second chances before being thrown in jail. And if this is a 50/50 business, why is the woman's decision on abortion more important than mine?

Quote:

The only people I don't want in this society are people who who decide who they don't want in this society.

Then are you not already selecting?

Quote:

No it isn't an answer at all, becuase the problems are not genetically imherited, but social.

... and so I am saying social engineering might be an acceptable answer (while genetic engineering isn't).

Quote:

Why is it ever impossible?

It isn't in theory. These days, that would mean taking a stand against the BRICs, mostly against China. It doesn't seem to be happening.

Quote:

The problem of people having no stake in society and no reason to play by the rules won't apply if those sorts of opportunities exist, even if they are proportionally inferior.

I don't know. I mean, the poor in our societies still have more opportunities than many in the past or elsewhere. After all, there are enough "Obama-like" or "rag-to-riches" exceptions to show that you can overcome a difficult start in life. Still, they feel they have 'no' opportunity. Which is, of course, an exaggeration, as long as there are public schools still open...

I mean, this is an argument you hear often on the right - "But they still have plenty of opportunities". And, in case they are talking about the kids of immigrants "... certainly more so than in the countries their parents came from"... Which is, again, technically correct but still made irrelevant because wealth/sentiment of failure are to a meaningful extent relative...

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.

Originally Posted by Gilles de Rais

Society's?

Which often means whatever anyone wnats it to mean.

Quote:

Well, as you said, they left their DNA behind. It's going to be hard denying being the father with modern DNA testing available.

Fine, so now you need a universal DNA database to confirm paternity.

Quote:

Most criminals get second chances before being thrown in jail. And if this is a 50/50 business, why is the woman's decision on abortion more important than mine?

They do, but I'm not the one proposing such draconian measures, you are.

And as I already pointed out, its becuase it is her body. You can;lt demand a woman giove birth just you want her to, and you can;t deman she has an abortion becuase you want her to. Her womb is not yours to do with as you like.

Quote:

Then are you not already selecting?

Only for universalism.

Quote:

... and so I am saying social engineering might be an acceptable answer (while genetic engineering isn't).

But you're not resorting to social engineering, becuase you are not doing anything to change society.

Quote:

It isn't in theory. These days, that would mean taking a stand against the BRICs, mostly against China. It doesn't seem to be happening.

[

Lol. They have nothing to do with it. We'd have to take a stand against capitalism.

Quote:

I mean, this is an argument you hear often on the right - "But they still have plenty of opportunities". And, in case they are talking about the kids of immigrants "... certainly more so than in the countries their parents came from"... Which is, again, technically correct but still made irrelevant because wealth/sentiment of failure are to a meaningful extent relative...

I think you;re arguing both sides here. The fact that tiny percentage of a tiny percentage of people among the dispossessed go on to break into the big time doesn;t mean that the vast majority are not pretty effectively repressed. Thats tokenism, not an accurate apprasal of the realities that the vast majority encounter. And yes, it's used as an excuse to justify the status quo, becuase the priviliged will always like to claim that they have their privilige through merit rather than luck. So the existence of those "opportunities" is exaggerated,a nd their absence dismissed, and so the scenario perpetuates.

Originally Posted by contracycle

Which often means whatever anyone wants it to mean.

I am pretty sure that most people would bulk at the idea of sterelising people by force while most people wouldn't be so shocked at the idea of redefining how benefits are distributed...

Quote:

Fine, so now you need a universal DNA database to confirm paternity.

How were you planning to do it? I am not going to acknowledge anything if it means being slammed with extra charges.

Quote:

And as I already pointed out, its because it is her body. You can't demand a woman give birth just you want her to, and you can;'t deman she has an abortion because you want her to. Her womb is not yours to do with as you like.

Then, once I made my position clear ["I will/will not support that kid"], the responsability is hers entirely.

For the condom thing, I think a 50/50 guilt is fair enough. But the decision to use (or not) condoms is only the first step leading to pregnancy. Technology offers us a second chance to decided: The abortion/no abortion decision.

As I said, if the woman choses abortion, I am perfectly happy with slamming the guy with 100% of the bill. She gets the angst and moral suffering. He gets the financial hurt. It's as close to fair as it's going to get.

But, if, given a cost-free abortion, she wants to pass and get the kid (and, I agree, no one should possibly be able to coerce her differently) then it's her responsability.

She was offered a choice and took a particular route. Twice. The man has only 1 moment of choice. As with business, responsability without authority is not fair and thus does not lead to good decision making. Just as authority without responsability is not fair and lead to pretty atrocious decision making processes.

Quote:

But you're not resorting to social engineering, becuase you are not doing anything to change society.

Of course I am. I am trying to limitate the amount of problem people being born.

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.

Originally Posted by Gilles de Rais

I am pretty sure that most people would bulk at the idea of sterelising people by force while most people wouldn't be so shocked at the idea of redefining how benefits are distributed...

I agree, but then again I think a lot of people would object to "throwing scarlet women onto the street".

Quote:

How were you planning to do it? I am not going to acknowledge anything if it means being slammed with extra charges.

Well I wasn't planning to do it at all, so I'm not obliged to figure it out.

Quote:

Then, once I made my position clear ["I will/will not support that kid"], the responsability is hers entirely.

Rubbish. It's still your kid, and you are still responsible. You made that decision when you chose to have sex, and specifically, not to wear a condom. You could always keep your sperm to yourself you know.

Quote:

She was offered a choice and took a particular route. Twice. The man has only 1 moment of choice. As with business, responsability without authority is not fair and thus does not lead to good decision making. Just as authority without responsability is not fair and lead to pretty atrocious decision making processes.

I think that's utter nonsense I'm afraid. It's not as if we are unaware where babies come from. There are plenty of ways to fool about without penetrative sex, and even if you do go there than it is wholly within your power to prevent pregnancy from occurring. It so no lack of authority here.

Quote:

Of course I am. I am trying to limitate the amount of problem people being born.

Which smacks of class hate. I reject the idea of "problem people". You get the citizens your society deserves.