Is having children a right?
 

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/relat...en031223.html#

Conception Concern
Court to Hear Case of Man Barred From Having More Children
The Associated Press

A K R O N, Ohio, Dec. 23— The Ohio Supreme Court will review the case of a man who was ordered by a judge to avoid fathering children for five years.

Medina County Common Pleas Judge James L. Kimbler issued the no-procreation order to Sean Talty in September 2002 as part of his sentence on a felony conviction for failing to pay support to three of his seven children.

In June, the 9th District Court of Appeals in Akron upheld Kimbler's order in a unanimous three-judge opinion stating that it was constitutional because it was related to Talty's rehabilitation.

The state's Supreme Court has voted 5-2 to review the case.


**See link for full article**


Personally, I don't think that the Supreme Court will uphold the decision, but you have to admit, it does make sense. If this guy can't take care of the 7 kids he already has, he shouldn't be going around making more.

With rights comes responsibility. If you're not going to take the responsibility to raise your children then you have no right to continue to procreate.

That's just my opinion.

Throwing him in jail is fine but telling someone not to procreate is against part of what it is to be human.

Interesting how HE has a place of responsibility here, whereas, if the mother wanted to abort the child, he'd have no recourse.

That's GREAT!! Let him have kids, then throw him in jail. Those kids will be successful. Having no father figure is always the best way to grow up.

Well there are fathers that have nothing to do with their child but pay child support so same effect. You think they should not have children? How about mothers that walk out on the family?

Fathers who only pay child support are not fathers, they are
s--theads. Mothers who walk out are just as bad. Now, should you disable someone from having kids... errr... I hate to say it, but it IS a basic human right. Hard question... I would like to hear what people have to say.

I am ALL FOR this.

You know that radical and controversial thread? Well here's my radical and controversial idea.... I think people should be required to get a permit/liscense to have children. If it's an unplanned pregnancy, you still have to apply, and if you don't pass, your child goes up for adoption.

There are too many shithead parents in the world, and too many loving couples in who can't have children and can't afford the adoption process.

As someone who's ability to have children is in question, this makes me VERY ANGRY.

I guess that's why they pay the Supreme Court Justices the big bucks.

Pretty strong arguments on both sides of this one.

On the face of it, though, I agree with the present court ruling. If he can't support his present children, he shouldn't have more.

Yup, that man should get snipped. If you can't afford them, then don't have them!

But then again, it is the woman's decision that makes it final. She has the ability to CHOOSE whether it is carried to term or not. (and yes I LOVE CHOICE!)

Agreed, and very well said.......

After all, if he can't afford them, the rest of us taxpayers are the ones who will have to foot the bill and why should I?

you took the words right out of my mouth. thank you.

Ditto. Having a child should be a privilege, not a right. Hell, it's harder to get a driver's license than it is to have a child--isn't there something wrong with that?

I can see it now. The Office of Reproductive Qualification and Behavior. The Democrats dream. Another way of forcing themselves into the lives of everyday Americans. Perhaps they could issue licenses to F’ somebody, before the act actually takes place. That way, they could tax sex. Damn!

I’m sorry sir, but your license to F’ has expired, besides that you were doing someone outside the age range of your license. Miss, may I see you license?

Where did that come from. I would think democrats would fight for the right to procreate. Not make laws and Get a license to have sex. Its the republicans that have and want laws to ban oral sex and sex toys in some states.

Plus if a man that can't afford kids should be fixed so should a woman that can't afford kids only fair.

All I have to say is...stuff like this only happens in Akron, Ohio!
A-k-ronADPi represent! haha

On one hand, I do agree that there are too many idiots out there having children (who wouldn't?).

But I think that the idea of the government being allowed to decide who's allowed to have kids is frightening, given its previous history of selective sterilization.

We're kind of screwed either way.

Read the posts.

The government should not have the power to make that decision, no matter what. Male or Female. NEVER! EVER! NEVER, NEVER, NEVER!

Agreed.... I'm about as conservative Republican as you can get... and mine was the original post.

*shrug*

Edited to clarify: the original post about parental liscensing, not the original post in the thread.

Ugh. Not another philosophical political debate ;)

I see people all the time who are crappy parents and, for most of them, it's not because they cannot provide for their kids. There is so much more to raising a kid than just money. How do you quantify all of those things?

I guess I just know too many kids who live in multi-million dollar homes with absentee parents who are emotionally unavailable.

Yah I don't think gov't should regulate anything when it comes to repoduction rights. I just was saying if they were going to stop guys they should stop gals too.

I think there should be some recourse to make this guy step-up and putting him in jail will only keep him from earning a living and fathering his children.

My other point would be that any two idiots can make a baby without going to parenting classes or having bloodwork to make sure their healthy and a laundry list of other things, but the minute that a person/couple wants to take in a baby that is being given up they have to subject themselves to all of this and more. All because either they care enough to take in more children or are unable to have them on their own - which they're allowed to do without all the red tape. Seems backwards to me :rolleyes:

I completely agree, for men AND women!

Here's a little something to throw into the mix: I actually know a 4-generation welfare family who was able to get public assistance to pay for artificial insemination for a couple who were both unemployed due to "asthma"!!

You think the government shouldn't tell people they can't have kids, BUT you think it's ok for the government to tell people they must continue a pregnancy. It's amazing how Republicans scream about wanting less government interference, but think it's ok for the government to interfere in a woman's body.

NEWS FLASH: It's all still the government trying to tell us what to do..........

It's like the saying goes. If you can't trust me with a choice, how can you trust me with a child?

Having kids is a privilege and should be treated as such. You shouldn't have them and then expect those of who choose not to have them to support yours. Most people don't buy a new car if they can't afford one. The government shouldn't regulate it, but people should think through all the issues before they decide to have kids.

And for the record........I'm a Democrat.

Well, I hope the Friggen ACLU doesnt get on this theard the Commies!

Dont snip them, Kill them!:mad:

I made the decission not to have Kids, I hate Rashes around the Rear of My Buttockess area!

What is Liberal or Conservative?

Either Have Kids or dont! Who is to decide? Oh Bad Dad did not pay support, lets put him in jail! How in the hell does He if He gets a contcenious to decicde to give money for his Child! What is The womens Responsability!? Just to have a Child and say, Oh Assqwhole You owe me money for screwing me and making me pregnant?

So now except for the ACLU, the man is always at fault!

Snip and clip, spade neuter or what ever, do Like The Chinese Do, If you have to many Female Children, you Die! You cant do it it you phutz!

I actually love kids as long they are not mine! I have to many In my Chapter after 38 Years and those on GC!:D

Who the crap do they think they are to take away our blow jobs and BOBs?

Back on topic... why doesn't the government just work harder to take away children from parents who are shitty?

OR... if someone is on welfare and they have like 5 kids, then make then get tied.

ps... haven't read the whole thread

Perfect liberal comeback. Attack me and not the issue. So first I’ll deal with me. You have never seen a post where I am against all abortion. Never. I find your statement that the government should not regulate having children, but that people should think through the issues before they decide to have them to be great advice for the advocates of abortion on demand for the sake of birth control or convenience. Before a person finds herself in the position of needing an abortion for the sake of birth control or convience, perhaps she could have better thought through the issue. My position on abortion is this; the government should only regulate the killing of a child, not the disposal of fetal tissue. However, abortion is not the issue here. Do you want the government to have the power to control human reproduction by regulating who can and cannot have children?

Yeah, those are way more realistic.

I like your little signature saying...

You actually want government to have the authority to sterilize someone. That is scary. I agree with the idea of taking kids away from certain parents and improving the foster care/adoption options, but letting government force a surgical procedure on an individual is giving government way too much control.

Sean Talty is an irresponsible deadbeat dad to three of his seven children. He recently married the woman who is the mother of two children. I really don't understand this mentality: create children only to abandon them financially. It is disgraceful. He should focus on working hard in order to pay for the upkeep of these children instead of having more children in the future.

I think that the court overstepped their role, and the ruling will be thrown out. I just wish that Talty were responsible enough to limit his breeding on his own. His new wife and mother of two of his seven children is unhappy that the courts ruling "took away her option of having more children." To her I say, you are a dumbass to marry a man with seven children, three of whom he doesn't support. It reminds me of the lyrics to Flagpole Sitter, "only stupid people are breeding."

I am just sick of deadbeat parents who don't support their children. Personal responsibility: try it! :mad:

Actually I am pretty sure SmartBlondeGPhB is conservative and a republican. Maybe I am wrong, she can clarify this.

My remark may have been misplaced. However, it is the perfect liberal come back... attack the messenger. Like it really matters. In reality, I'm not really up to fighting this afternoon. I find GC to be an extremely liberal community overall, so the revelation that so many would approve of the government regulating conception and birth does not surprise me.

I agree with this and I'm not conservative.

The government has tried forced sterilization in the past for the reasons mentioned above and it was misused, badly. Giving the government the power to sterilize people is basically only a few steps away from giving them the power to wipe out every ghetto in the country. To me that's frightening, and it's not worth whatever the payoffs would be.


Although I think the idea that GC is "liberal" is laughable. :)

I agree with this to. I was just saying before if the people that did want men to be sterilized that were dead beats, I was just saying they should include the deadbeat moms too. I don't think people should be forced not to have kids, it tramples on the consitituion and Bill of rights. Yes the gov't has to help out the familys with dead beats and in foster care but its a necassary evil I think.

Well, it certainly is not conservative... oh well. If I were looking for a political place to post, I'd go somewhere else.

I think that there are some very outspoken liberals and conservatives on GC. If you are conservative, you probably notice the liberals and vice versa. GC is a reflection of the political spectrum of the United States. I actually find it interesting to read different perspectives.

Permit!!!

I think that no parents with less than 115 IQ should have kids. there is evidence that Intellegence is genetic so we can raise the IQ of the human race ina few generations. 115 isn't even high . . just higher than average.

I also think to qualify to have a parental permit you need to demonstrate an income that would be considered upper middle class so that you can easily supply the material needs of the kids. This includes a demonstrated committment to cover their college and post-grad education . . .

I'll add other stuff to the permit idea as I think of it.

Anyone--regardless of political views--with a rudimentary knowledge of American history should shudder at the idea of government-forced sterilization. In 1973, two sisters--12 and 14--were sterilized without their or their mother's consent, as the surgeries were ordered by the US Government.* This was a long line in a sordid history of forced sterilizations, which were disproprortionately given to women of color and poor TEENAGERS, none of whom have given birth or had been pregnant. As a progressive, I would hate to think that people are assuming (ahem) that "liberals" (whatever that means) are for government-enforced sterilization.



*If interested in the exact details of the case, do a simple websearch of the Relf sisters in Birmingham Alabama.