Taboo. Open discussion, no attitude.

[LadyAria]

Only on the East coast.

*shakes head*

Agreed.

I was remind about my black shoes the other day being "out of season".

 

[BiBunny]

*shakes head*

Agreed.

I was remind about my black shoes the other day being "out of season".

Black sandals aren't out of season. Black pumps may or may not be, depending on the style. The only things that are totally out of the question 'til wintertime are black boots.

 

[LadyAria]

Black sandals aren't out of season. Black pumps may or may not be, depending on the style. The only things that are totally out of the question 'til wintertime are black boots.

Except in the bedroom!

 

[BiBunny]

Except in the bedroom!

Of course!

 

[Betticus]

Ok, I have a thought. Let's say that we pass a new, very strict law regarding breeding in this here United States. Every baby born gets some kind of reversible birth control device implanted. At the ripe age of something to be determined later, probably the same as the drinking age the person can at that time or any time after apply for a license to breed which would include removal of the birth control device and restoral of reproductive function. The same would go for anyone immigrating to the U.S. Welcome to the U.S.A. and congrats on your acceptance as a potential citizen, now just line up for the mandatory birth control device and we'll see later if you can qualify to reproduce.

That as well as selective breeding should really curb a lot of our social problems. As well as instant and permanent sterilization for anyone convicted of a felony.

Imagine, no more unwanted babies, no more crowds of people waiting to be next on the Jerry Springer show. No more G.W. Bush's.

 

[Chris_Xavier]

No more G.W. Bush's.

You meant Bill Clinton's, right?

 

[catalina_francisco]

Ok, I have a thought. Let's say that we pass a new, very strict law regarding breeding in this here United States. Every baby born gets some kind of reversible birth control device implanted. At the ripe age of something to be determined later, probably the same as the drinking age the person can at that time or any time after apply for a license to breed which would include removal of the birth control device and restoral of reproductive function. The same would go for anyone immigrating to the U.S. Welcome to the U.S.A. and congrats on your acceptance as a potential citizen, now just line up for the mandatory birth control device and we'll see later if you can qualify to reproduce.

That as well as selective breeding should really curb a lot of our social problems. As well as instant and permanent sterilization for anyone convicted of a felony.

Yuk...the US would be the very last country on earth I would entrust with this type decision. Personally, apart from limits on how many children a person can have (and which is the same limit for everyone regardless or race, class, income, religion, colour etc,), I have a very strong aversion to controlling the right to have children to the point it makes me feel physically ill to think about.

Catalina

 

[graceanne]

Yuk...the US would be the very last country on earth I would entrust with this type decision. Personally, apart from limits on how many children a person can have (and which is the same limit for everyone regardless or race, class, income, religion, colour etc,), I have a very strong aversion to controlling the right to have children to the point it makes me feel physically ill to think about.

Catalina

I'm about to agree with you and that scares me.

I would NEVER NEVER NEVER trust any govt, but especially ours, with that kinda decision. Sounds like screwing with people's right to choose, to me. Why don't we just call ourselves China?

 

[Chris_Xavier]

I'm about to agree with you and that scares me.

I would NEVER NEVER NEVER trust any govt, but especially ours, with that kinda decision. Sounds like screwing with people's right to choose, to me. Why don't we just call ourselves China?

I can think of some differences but I won't go there.. yet..

I personally think that any sort of government control over personal desires (sexual preferences, number of kids) you are opening the door for all sorts of impingements on our personal freedoms.

 

[catalina_francisco]

I think everyone should have the right to have children, I don't think we should have the right to keep having children to whatever number we would like, or for each new partner we encounter. The world is over populated, the resources are limited, common sense needs to prevail to try and change that situation instead of breeding like rabbits because we can.

Catalina

 

[Chris_Xavier]

I think everyone should have the right to have children, I don't think we should have the right to keep having children to whatever number we would like, or for each new partner we encounter. The world is over populated, the resources are limited, common sense needs to prevail to try and change that situation instead of breeding like rabbits because we can.

Catalina

You and I've bumped heads on this particular topic before..

How can you enforce or legislate birth control? State ordered sterilization (whether temporary or permanent) has shades of Naziism all over it and state enforced child limits is what they do in China (Can you stomach the fact that just as an illegal child "crowns" they stick a syringe filled with formaldehyde into a soft spot in the skull and effectively kill the child just as it being born?).

I agree with you that this planet's resources are growing limited and we as the caretakers of this planet (whether by intelligent design, our God given right or by default by being on the top of the food chain) and therefore need to shepard our resources responsibly. How that gets done should be the debate.

 

[serijules]

you know what that reminds me of that i loathe? When people where band shirts to that bands concert. When i saw Tool, there were so many people there wearing Tool shirts...it's ridiculous. Why would you want to do that? the band already knows you like them, since you just sunk $60 into tickets, right?

Um, to show your support of the group? LOL

Doesn't seem all that dumb to me *shrugs*

 

[catalina_francisco]

You and I've bumped heads on this particular topic before..

How can you enforce or legislate birth control? State ordered sterilization (whether temporary or permanent) has shades of Naziism all over it and state enforced child limits is what they do in China (Can you stomach the fact that just as an illegal child "crowns" they stick a syringe filled with formaldehyde into a soft spot in the skull and effectively kill the child just as it being born?).

I agree with you that this planet's resources are growing limited and we as the caretakers of this planet (whether by intelligent design, our God given right or by default by being on the top of the food chain) and therefore need to shepard our resources responsibly. How that gets done should be the debate.

I do not believe in enforced sterilisation. Contrary to some people's belief that birth control through the conventional methods don't work, 99.9% of the time they do if used correctly. If people know before they begin breeding hordes that they have 1-2 shots at it and then no more, they are able to plan and make sure it is what they want, when and with whom instead of just going 'ooops, I'm pregnant again...how will I find the money to pay the rent, feed my children etc...guess the government will have to pick up the tab or get itno crime....oh, and why shouldn't I have another couple after this one too and let them pay for those too?' It never ceases to amaze me in western nations such as the US that the ones least able to afford more than 1-2 children are the exact ones who keep happily breeding and then complaining about how difficult it is to make ends meet. There are options.

BTW, Nazism had nothing to do with limiting the number of children born, just what nationality, characteristics and features they should have...vastly different idealogy from limiting the number of children born in every family (as in every one has the same limit, no special people or exceptions involved) for the sake of the planet as a whole and the survival of the human species. I actually have no problem with China's one child policy....sensible if you ask me...except there was not enough thought and effort put into preventing infanticide and the upcoming problem of too many men and not enough women in their nation.

Catalina

 

[graceanne]

To play devils advocate - - when me and K had D (our four year old) K was making 40,000 a year. Then, with the hits the economy's been taking, we can't seem to keep him employed, which is why he's going back to college. But anyway, so if you can't have children unless you can afford them, what happens when the shit hits the fan and you go from being able to afford children to NOT. Do you take them?

That said - I, theoretically, support the idea of birth control, or whatever. I mean, for God's sake, they're giving 12 year old girls the HPV shot now (and yes, when they're old enough my kids are gonna get it). Why not something to keep 15 year olds from getting pregnant?

But, if it came up for vote, I'd vote no. Why? Cause while it might start out as something good, I think that eventually the beurocrats would take ahold of it and before you know it only the rich could afford to have kids - just like the rich can only afford to adopt. (Don't get me started on that one. ) The day I trust the govt to something as important as birth control is the day Hell freezes over.

 

[graceanne]

I can think of some differences but I won't go there.. yet..

FONT]

I know their's differences, I was using a broad brush to make a point.

 

[Chris_Xavier]

Ok, I have a thought. Let's say that we pass a new, very strict law regarding breeding in this here United States. Every baby born gets some kind of reversible birth control device implanted. At the ripe age of something to be determined later, probably the same as the drinking age the person can at that time or any time after apply for a license to breed which would include removal of the birth control device and restoral of reproductive function. The same would go for anyone immigrating to the U.S. Welcome to the U.S.A. and congrats on your acceptance as a potential citizen, now just line up for the mandatory birth control device and we'll see later if you can qualify to reproduce.

That as well as selective breeding should really curb a lot of our social problems. As well as instant and permanent sterilization for anyone convicted of a felony.

Imagine, no more unwanted babies, no more crowds of people waiting to be next on the Jerry Springer show. No more G.W. Bush's.

But why stop with selective breeding? Why not go with forced euthanasia? Once a member of a society has reached a certain level of "infirmness" instead of wasting economic resources, healthcare beds and other valuable commodities we just waste on them. Why should the elderly take up the best housing? They've had their days in the sun.. move over grandpa.. you're history.

 

[BiBunny]

But why stop with selective breeding? Why not go with forced euthanasia? Once a member of a society has reached a certain level of "infirmness" instead of wasting economic resources, healthcare beds and other valuable commodities we just waste on them. Why should the elderly take up the best housing? They've had their days in the sun.. move over grandpa.. you're history.

That's a slippery slope, and you know it.

I have my own snobby views here, but I don't give enough of a damn about politics to even bother jumping into the fray. To the US government--it's fine if you refuse to step in on the too many kids problem, but don't waste my goddamn tax money supporting people who are too damn stupid or lazy to support themselves and their children. Thank you.

 

[Chris_Xavier]

I do not believe in enforced sterilisation. Contrary to some people's belief that birth control through the conventional methods don't work, 99.9% of the time they do if used correctly.

That's why education, not population control is the silver bullet. If you want population control, let's have a war or a plague. With our so called enlightened society we've done away with most wars (at least have controlled them so that they becomce total war. Plus with our advances in medical science infant mortality is down, not to mention the geriatrics are living longer.

BTW, Nazism had nothing to do with limiting the number of children born, just what nationality, characteristics and features they should have...vastly different idealogy from limiting the number of children born in every family (as in every one has the same limit, no special people or exceptions involved) for the sake of the planet as a whole and the survival of the human species. I actually have no problem with China's one child policy....sensible if you ask me...except there was not enough thought and effort put into preventing infanticide and the upcoming problem of too many men and not enough women in their nation.

First of all.. Nazism/fascism is conservative policy gone too far to the right, communism is liberal policy gone too far to the left - the outcome is pretty much the same, wouldn't you agree?

The Nazi Party was the result of an upsurge in nationalism and fear in the communist movement of the 1920s (which was brought to you as a result of German foreign policy during WWI - Lenin was in exile in Switzerland/Sweden and the Germans trucked him to Russia to get rid on the eastern front). The Nazis wanted to create a leibenstraum or living space and used their racial policies to justify that. Kinda like a Dutch driving test.. why give a license to an Ozzie when there are so many deserving Danes out there w/o a license?

 

[BiBunny]

That's why education, not population control is the silver bullet.

What kind of education are we talking here?

 

[Chris_Xavier]

That's a slippery slope, and you know it.

I have my own snobby views here, but I don't give enough of a damn about politics to even bother jumping into the fray. To the US government--it's fine if you refuse to step in on the too many kids problem, but don't waste my goddamn tax money supporting people who are too damn stupid or lazy to support themselves and their children. Thank you.

I agree.. cut back on the social welfare programs - "back in the day" before the New Deal and social security if a family couldn't make it because they had too many kids, mom and dad worked two jobs to makes ends meet NOT go stand in line to get a check and then turn around and get satellite tv and use food stamps to buy junk food at the convenience store around the corner from the trailer park.

 

[Chris_Xavier]

What kind of education are we talking here?

I would say at least high school level and not some bullcrap curriculum about the history of tv some other nonsense - reading, writing and mathematics.

 

[BiBunny]

I agree.. cut back on the social welfare programs - "back in the day" before the New Deal and social security if a family couldn't make it because they had too many kids, mom and dad worked two jobs to makes ends meet NOT go stand in line to get a check and then turn around and get satellite tv and use food stamps to buy junk food at the convenience store around the corner from the trailer park.

Oh, shit. You just agreed with me! LOL! The New Deal had its purpose, but a lot of the programs left over from that time either need a huge overhaul, or just need to be done away with altogether. It's a different world today. I'm not above helping someone who needs it, but my definition of "need" and our government's definition aren't the same thing.

 

[BiBunny]

I would say at least high school level and not some bullcrap curriculum about the history of tv some other nonsense - reading, writing and mathematics.

Two problems with that:

Number one--you can't help or change anyone who doesn't want to be helped or to change. You can force things on someone, but you can't make them give a flying fuck about it.

Number two--as far as higher education goes, there are already too many dipwads with college degrees. They didn't give a damn about their field while they were in school; they were just there because either a.) the government was paying for it because they were "low-income" or b.) the school was giving them a scholarship because they can play football/baseball/basketball/whatever. The problem with those things is that there's on overflow of total dumbasses with degrees who can spit good game, thereby making it more difficult for people who AREN'T total dumbasses to get jobs. The cream doesn't always rise to the top, either. Management, after dealing with these dipwads for so long, stops hiring people who are straight out of college or who've been out for a short period of time with minimal experience in favor of people who do have experience. How do you get experience if you can't get a job? It turns into a vicious cycle.

My opinion on higher education? Stop dumbing it down so much. The government will give anybody who can keep a 2.0 GPA on a 4.0 scale whatever amount of money they want, as long as they're low-income. A 2.0 is a freaking C average. That amounts to people who are barely competent running around with degrees just like someone who's more than competent. Employers are swayed more by a good bullshit line than anything, even if you're the most competent candidate for the job, it doesn't mean you'll be hired. In fact, you probably won't be. Make the education system be based on merit alone. If you can't keep a 3.0 (a B average) in an undergrad major in today's dumbed-down universities, you don't belong there. Stop making it hard for everyone else because YOU'RE a moron!

/jumps off soapbox

Sorry, that's my current pet peeve. Carry on.

 

[sutherngent985]

Two problems with that:

Number one--you can't help or change anyone who doesn't want to be helped or to change. You can force things on someone, but you can't make them give a flying fuck about it.

Number two--as far as higher education goes, there are already too many dipwads with college degrees. They didn't give a damn about their field while they were in school; they were just there because either a.) the government was paying for it because they were "low-income" or b.) the school was giving them a scholarship because they can play football/baseball/basketball/whatever. The problem with those things is that there's on overflow of total dumbasses with degrees who can spit good game, thereby making it more difficult for people who AREN'T total dumbasses to get jobs. The cream doesn't always rise to the top, either. Management, after dealing with these dipwads for so long, stops hiring people who are straight out of college or who've been out for a short period of time with minimal experience in favor of people who do have experience. How do you get experience if you can't get a job? It turns into a vicious cycle.

My opinion on higher education? Stop dumbing it down so much. The government will give anybody who can keep a 2.0 GPA on a 4.0 scale whatever amount of money they want, as long as they're low-income. A 2.0 is a freaking C average. That amounts to people who are barely competent running around with degrees just like someone who's more than competent. Employers are swayed more by a good bullshit line than anything, even if you're the most competent candidate for the job, it doesn't mean you'll be hired. In fact, you probably won't be. Make the education system be based on merit alone. If you can't keep a 3.0 (a B average) in an undergrad major in today's dumbed-down universities, you don't belong there. Stop making it hard for everyone else because YOU'RE a moron!

/jumps off soapbox

Sorry, that's my current pet peeve. Carry on.

Sounds like the place I work...its all perception. Whats real doesnt count for shit anymore.

 

[BiBunny]

Sounds like the place I work...its all perception. Whats real doesnt count for shit anymore.

Thank God someone else has noticed this. I was worried I was projecting, LOL.