Does anyone have lotion?
*Raises hand*
Is mayonnaise a lotion?
Posted by: Safran888
Posted by: ICanHazRecon911
Posted by: Safran888
Posted by: ICanHazRecon911
Posted by: Screamo Luvr
No. Impossible to enforce.
Saw this reply a lot already. Perhaps a hefty fine could be placed on those who had unlicensed children, and have possible rights taken away. The children, as previously said, could be taken to government-owned foster homes.So let's say a poor person has a baby (many people listed moderate-high income as a requirement to have a baby). So now, instead of trying to help them take care of the baby they love, which they created, you want to take away their baby and fine them?
Obviously if they had a baby without the correct documents, they are irresponsible and inconsiderate, especially if they are bringing a child into the meager world of the lower class, rendering as them unable to be decent parents for a child.
Also, define poor. Poor people can actually be rather well off to support a child or two, but I'm thinking you are talking about very poor, like living in a run-down house in a crime-filled neighborhood barely surviving.For the sake of this argument, I am defining poor as having $1 less than whatever arbitrary value you happen to have assigned as the cutoff.
And what if the child isn't found to be "illegitimate" until he or she is about 10 years old? Will the child's wishes have any impact on whether or not they get to stay with their family?
And if I have a child, and later lose eligibility to have more kids, will I lose my first child as well?
I had no cutoff, but just wanted to know the basic conditions of what "poor" life you imagined.
Plus, your two questions are the point of this thread. You state the conditions you believe are righteous.