License to Breed Human Babies
Big government. Small government.
Whether or not if it has gone out of control, governments are formed and will always form exactly to regulate itself. We're on planet Earth after all. It's a place where no actions are truly isolated - we're in shared space, and lucky us, it's not crowded at all. Not yet.
While everybody's truly a sovereign, free-agent, I think the concept of licenses initially came about as a market reaction to a growing need for social accountability. What if there are (influential) bad apples in the market purposefully putting out dangerous stuff? On the flipside, you may also say that regulators themselves are supporting / delivering dangerous stuff themselves - like the case with big pharma and such.
One may argue that it's up to everybody's personal responsibility to be an all-knowing consumer, and rightly so! Don't be an idiot and buy something that you know nothing about. Even if you think you know about it, don't put your life on the line by relying on the work of chemists / scientists / manufacturers / whatever. The situation quickly turns into a bubbleboy scenario. I hope you get the point - life is a little more complicated than just people being 100% responsible for every single thing that they do.
Regulation is just like any device, tool, or technology.
Just like technology, the best kinds of regulations are probably the most invisible and non-intrusive.. whatever that may be.
So I've been wondering about this matter for a long time now. The subject almost seemed all too forbidden, because it sounds so absurd. See, we have so many kinds of tests and licenses, even permits to sell something as simple as chewing-gums. But there's nothing to stop "idiots" from breeding babies to no end. It's not like it's going to stop people anyway even if there's such a crazy regulation in place.
Some thoughts about this matter.
What's wrong if there's mutual consent between adults? It's their body afterall. "Idiots" have all the right to breed like everybody else, sure.
What if these baby-owners are abusive as hell and know next to nothing about taking care of babies? Still a difficult task for regulation, if any. Different people have different ideas about what's good and bad when it comes to taking care of children.
What happens if there are actual baby factories? Arguably, some families already resemble something similar - very industrious and laborious. With sex not being the only way to make babies, real baby factories are not that far-fetched an idea.
What people do with their babies isn't anybody's problem? Okay, so what if mass manufacturing ends up producing plenty of dead baby bodies from irresponsible disposal, clogging up the rivers and drains? Well that's an extreme situation, which I brought up just to make a point. The coming-into-existence of babies are perhaps the very definition of why social taxation exists in a world of scarcity.
Back to #1: babies are the work of mutually-consenting adults. Is that really true? Yes, undeniably. But I think society has a major blind-spot here. As impossibly-absurd as it may sound, what about consent from the baby itself? Adults think it's all fun and games.. and then, a baby comes into life. I hope you can agree it's both a beautiful and (maybe) terrible thing to do. Babies are all unwilling recipients of the beauty and burdens in life.
Based on my argument in #5, I'd say that all yet-to-exist babies may deserve such a regulation to compensate for their inability to consent. It would suck to be born into absolutely crappy conditions. But everything considered, it's just a very draconian and complex matter. How dare I even think of such an idiotic idea, right? For one, I just happen to think that it's extremely rude to force babies into life without any form of consent. But that's just how it is.
All said, it's still absolutely nonsense to stop people from wanting to breed. Baby breeding ensures mankind's progress through time and space.
What do you think about the subject matter? Screw all governments / regulations, and let things be truly Darwinian?
To be able to drive a car you need to take a course, learn, pass exam, quite difficult in some countries. To vote on who is going to be our next overlord you only need enough IQ to survive until 18. To have a baby generally you need one thing that does not require IQ at all. Then again, to adopt a baby if for any reason you can't "just make it" you have to take course, pass exams/evaluations, prove that you are rich, educated, and willing to take humiliating legal procedures.
My point: this world is truly insane and devoid of logic.
Lol probably the best response ive seen on the matter. The inconsistencies are mindboggling indeed. Thanks @macius.
Interesting topic. I've heard this joked about a few times before but haven't really thought about it. I would think it would come down to how much consent was truly left to the people. If there was a law or regulation passed that disabled anyone from having more than one child, I think there would be a public and swift backlash against it.
I understand that when individuals have a child that child goes on to effect society as a whole, but regulating an aspect that is so innate to human beings would be very tricky.
I am gonna have to say that currently, I cannot see myself in favor of any type of regulation regarding breeding. But as things evolve and we as a species continue to advance maybe it would be logical to enact such a measure. I don't think something as big as "breeding restrictions" would have any success without either the consent of the people or use of extreme force on those people.
Well it happened in China.. (I read that the reg has been lifted recently).
I guess logical would only mean a very desperate time that if such a reg failed to be implemented, somethings really bad's gonna happen?
I guess so, it is really tough to even consider what the world may be like in 50 years, but lets imagine 500 years from now. Who knows which direction humanity will go? A breeding ban is a fundamental breach of human rights, but if that type of regulation is needed for the survival of a species maybe individuals in the future will have the capacity to grasp and understand that.
Of course currently the idea sounds completely ludicrous, but in reality who knows what the future has in store for us? Of course im not in support of such a ban right now or at any point in the near future, but that's not to say that in 500 years such a law would become theoretically necessary.
I have thought about this before. In fact there's always news of some baby factories being exposed in some parts of Nigeria.
Countries where there seems to be endless breeding of babies cannot successfully put in place legislation to curb this (in my opinion) because these people will argue that it's all part of their rights.
When a person has the 'right' to marry four wives, there's nothing stopping each wife from having five kids (and this is on the modest side). These folks rarely have the means to sustain the kids and so they resort to street begging thereby constituting a nuisance to the general public all in the name of "culture".
The only legislation I feel can be done is one that takes care of the kids after they have been born. This has the capability of putting a strain on whoever is financing it too.
It looks like a complicated venture.
I'm not too sure what to think of this. It's just something that happens to people, whether intentional or not. Indeed it's quite a complicated venture. Thanks for your insight @fisteganos
This is not a govern-cement matter, this is a societal matter.
Govern-cement regulations fall into two camps
So govern-cement regulation of babies will just be stupid. And will be something as horrible as killing all "unwanted" babies, or it will be worse, STRIP THE CHILD FROM ITS PARENTS.
If you don't know, the single biggest indicator if a child will be successful in life is if there is a father in the home.
Statistics for children from a foster home are even worse.
What govern-cement regulations would do, in baby management, would be really, really bad or worse.
This is interesting, never thought about the differences in this way before. Any short / mainstream names for these two camps?
Not that I know of.
The usual thing for the MSM to do is trot a view of regulations in the first camp, and say see how nice and orderly this is? And then assume to make an argument for a second camp regulation.
So, the mainstream has a desire to keep the waters muddied.
If you want to tax me to pay for the medical care, feeding, education, supervision, etc. of your children - then you are damn right that I would want a say in whether or not and how many children you are allowed by regulation to have. If you have the energy, desire and ability to handle all those criteria yourself or as a member of some family or other grouping, then have at it.
In the past, famine disease and war were unconscious methods by which population was kept in check. The next step for humanity is to learn to live consciously.
Oh well, you know the situation in the country I'm in..
Whats an unconscious method btw?
I mean that death by war, famine, disease etc. were not consciously chosen by humans. They are Nature's way of keeping things in balance.
There are people who consciously choose the time and manner of their death. One example is the Tibetan practice of "phowa"
Practice of Phowa in Tibet
Justice for me means equality, but regulations and deregulations are always made in the point of view of the power elite interests.
Like you say regulations are a social control device
"Where love rules, there is no will to power; and where power predominates, there love is lacking. The one is the shadow of the other."
Carl Jung
And I don't resist to quote Frank Zappa
"The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced."
Isnt it pretty much the same anywhere haha? If you have to choose, which country would you rather be owned by?
Yes, of course, is all over :)
Well, one of the best countries to live it is Portugal, but only under the condition that you don't have to go to work in the morning.
If I had money to retire and no kid I would like to live in East Timor, where I had been during 2 months.
But If I have stayed there, I would have to fight every day the dominance of the informal regulations of the church over people.
I love Africa, but if I stay too long I feel the itch to fight totalitarian powers there because the people is so beautiful that they deserve much more than those puppeteers empowered by the so-called civilized countries that are sucking all the Nature resources and poisoning that fertile land ate the cost of wars and blood.
So that we get cheap stuff without paying for spoiling the native populations.
But no doubt the best country to live is the small country communities on the "e-eco-nomics" of the blockchain. :)
I've never been a nationalist or patriotic but know I feel like one in relation to the blockchain.....
You're heading into scary Orwellian territory here! Some kind of bizzare dystopian over populated future :o
Lol - it is! Someone should write a scifi that goes along this line..
This sounds to me like satire. Making fun of people who fear the truly sovereign individual(People saying this will make a bubble boy scenario).
The satire is; consider the alternative it is baby factories.
It is impressive how people who advocate "regulation" so easily forget the stories of Utopia.
Thanks, I've added a #maybe-satire tag ;)
Oh, cool...
Glad I could help.
Just My Two Cents
Haha, thanks! That's quite an interesting wiki entry..
bit laugh out on the babies factory families.
some years back had the lunch discussion that this is more so in the past when there is less technology - no internet, no sports tv, no tv even and why do you need much lights then, so turn off the lights and what happens.
Now, with all the distractions of technology, we have less time ironically.
This sums up how I feel about it, I think those who have a calling to raise children would be better off adopting instead.
I think ill be one to adopt when the time comes, but still perfectly understandable to want to continue one's genetic lineage..
The want is understandable, the chart explains very well.