Father of the year nominee.

nighttimer

No Gods No Masters
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
11,629
Reaction score
4,103
Location
CBUS
Yes, I should have specified that the programs were racially balanced "until the last five years."

Citation, please.

missesdash said:
My point was that the eugenics movement in the US wasn't driven by the desire to kill off any particular race.

You are generalizing. A little specificity would be helpful.

What drove/drives the eugenics movement in the U.S. if not the desire to kill off any particular race?
 

veinglory

volitare nequeo
Self-Ban
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
28,750
Reaction score
2,933
Location
right here
Website
www.veinglory.com
What makes this possible is the apparent male prerogative for fathering without parenting. He needs to be custodial parent for some of them and prosecuted every time and falls behind on the job.
 

RichardGarfinkle

Nurture Phoenixes
Staff member
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 2, 2012
Messages
11,138
Reaction score
3,082
Location
Walking the Underworld
Website
www.richardgarfinkle.com
What makes this possible is the apparent male prerogative for fathering without parenting. He needs to be custodial parent for some of them and prosecuted every time and falls behind on the job.

That would involve handing over custody of a child to an irresponsible lout.

Quite honestly. This is the kind of situation where there is no solution that doesn't have worse implications if instituted.

One jerk goes around acting like this and eugenics, sterilization, and parenting licenses are brought up.

Freedom of reproduction like freedom of speech involves accepting the rights of jerks.
 

Perks

delicate #!&@*#! flower
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
18,981
Reaction score
6,933
Location
At some altitude
Website
www.jamie-mason.com
He needs to be custodial parent for some of them and prosecuted every time and falls behind on the job.
I'm thinking those kiddies probably wouldn't eat their veggies, brush their teeth, or get to school on time. I don't think this imbecile is equipped to do much more than make babies and flip burgers.
 

Gale Haut

waxing digital artistic
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 1, 2010
Messages
3,057
Reaction score
574
Location
The Swamplands
Website
www.galehaut.com
What makes this possible is the apparent male prerogative for fathering without parenting. He needs to be custodial parent for some of them and prosecuted every time and falls behind on the job.

We should inject him with mind and body control nanites that turn him into robo-dad.
 

Manuel Royal

Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
4,484
Reaction score
437
Location
Atlanta, Georgia
Website
donnetowntoday.blogspot.com
It still took until the mid-1960's before the last vestiges of "genetic do-gooding" was wiped out in the U.S..
Except for the Eugenics War in the 1990s.
Admiral James T. Kirk said:

If I had the power, I'd prevent all human reproduction, not just the people I don't like, for about 40 years. When we start up again, it'd be tempting to only allow the "right" people to make babies. Maybe people should be vetted to reproduce like they're vetted for adoption. But, I wouldn't support that policy. We can live with the randomness of human genetic combinations; we just can't live with an uncontrolled increasing population total.

They're two separate issues; one is an imperative for the survival of civilization; the other is an unnecessary level of government intrusion on private matters. There are lots of social evils that I see as more tolerable than the draconian measures that would be necessary to eradicate them. Much as I hate stupid stuff, I'd hate even more to live in a society that wouldn't allow people to make really bad judgement calls.

"Freedom is messy", as Donald Rumsfeld said upon witnessing people looting and burning his home.

ETA: I've been informed that the people were looting and burning somebody else's homes, many thousands of miles away from where Donald Rumsfeld lives. That sounds more plausible.
 

Devil Ledbetter

Come on you stranger, you legend,
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 8, 2007
Messages
9,767
Reaction score
3,936
Location
you martyr and shine.
I see class and race issues here.

When an upper middle class white Christian family has 20 kids, they're mainly applauded, cheered on, congratulated and given their own TV program.

When an impoverished black male has 30 kids across 11 moms, he's mainly derided as irresponsible and people call to have him involuntarily sterilized.

Yes, I know the Duggars are taking care of their family in their way (without gov't support) and presumably at least some the offspring of the father of 30 are on welfare. But we should also consider that the parent:child ratio is much better for this guy's kids than for the Duggar's. I'd rather be one of his kids sharing my mom with a sibling or two than a Duggar competing for attention with 18 or 19 sibs.

At any rate, I don't believe government should ever be telling us when, whether and how many kids we should have and that's regardless of our earning potential or marital status.
 

Lady Goddess

*insert something epic here*
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 7, 2012
Messages
189
Reaction score
14
Location
at home
I see class and race issues here.

When an upper middle class white Christian family has 20 kids, they're mainly applauded, cheered on, congratulated and given their own TV program.

When an impoverished black male has 30 kids across 11 moms, he's mainly derided as irresponsible and people call to have him involuntarily sterilized.

Yes, I know the Duggars are taking care of their family in their way (without gov't support) and presumably at least some the offspring of the father of 30 are on welfare. But we should also consider that the parent:child ratio is much better for this guy's kids than for the Duggar's. I'd rather be one of his kids sharing my mom with a sibling or two than a Duggar competing for attention with 18 or 19 sibs.

At any rate, I don't believe government should ever be telling us when, whether and how many kids we should have and that's regardless of our earning potential or marital status.

I don't applaud anyone for having 20 kids. I don't care what race or religion they are or how they're taking care of their kids.

But I don't think the issue is with him having so many kids. The issue is he's asking for relief from taking care of them. At least the Duggars are providing for their children, and are happy to do so. They realize that they brought those kids into the world and they're doing their part in taking care of them. This man wants to be let out of paying child support because he makes minimum wage and can't take care of himself because he's paying for so many children.

His responsibility as father of those children is to take care of them. It's disgusting that he doesn't want to - or at least, by asking for relief, is making it seem like he doesn't want to. That's what the issue is.
 

Alpha Echo

I should be writing.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
9,615
Reaction score
1,852
Location
East Coast
I don't applaud anyone for having 20 kids. I don't care what race or religion they are or how they're taking care of their kids.

But I don't think the issue is with him having so many kids. The issue is he's asking for relief from taking care of them. At least the Duggars are providing for their children, and are happy to do so. They realize that they brought those kids into the world and they're doing their part in taking care of them. This man wants to be let out of paying child support because he makes minimum wage and can't take care of himself because he's paying for so many children.

His responsibility as father of those children is to take care of them. It's disgusting that he doesn't want to - or at least, by asking for relief, is making it seem like he doesn't want to. That's what the issue is.

This. He's really disgusting, this guy. It pisses me off so much to think of the poor children. And not just because of their father, but their mothers too! I know their culpability was mentioned up thread somewhere. They are just as to blame and piss me off just as much. IF they did know about all the babies this guy had - and it sounds as if they did - how could they have unprotected sex with him and then wine for financial support? Did they really think he was so much of a stand-up guy that he'd pay support without the courts getting involved? And how did they think he could adequately support all of them anyway?

Ugh.

Gross.
 

Perks

delicate #!&@*#! flower
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
18,981
Reaction score
6,933
Location
At some altitude
Website
www.jamie-mason.com
His responsibility as father of those children is to take care of them. It's disgusting that he doesn't want to - or at least, by asking for relief, is making it seem like he doesn't want to. That's what the issue is.
I don't know that he doesn't want to. It's difficult to say. But on his wages, he can't take care of thirty people. If they divide his money between the eleven caregivers of his children, then he can't feed himself either.

No sense in suggesting that he get a second job. Two minimum wage jobs wouldn't feed, cloth, and house thirty kids either. What choice has he got now?
 

Perks

delicate #!&@*#! flower
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
18,981
Reaction score
6,933
Location
At some altitude
Website
www.jamie-mason.com
Also, I'm certainly not impressed by the Duggars fecundity, but I wouldn't want their forced sterilization. Or this clown's.
 

Lady Goddess

*insert something epic here*
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 7, 2012
Messages
189
Reaction score
14
Location
at home
I don't know that he doesn't want to. It's difficult to say. But on his wages, he can't take care of thirty people. If they divide his money between the eleven caregivers of his children, then he can't feed himself either.

No sense in suggesting that he get a second job. Two minimum wage jobs wouldn't feed, cloth, and house thirty kids either. What choice has he got now?

That's why I said he's at least making it seem like he doesn't want to take care of his kids by asking for relief.
 

Perks

delicate #!&@*#! flower
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
18,981
Reaction score
6,933
Location
At some altitude
Website
www.jamie-mason.com
That's why I said he's at least making it seem like he doesn't want to take care of his kids by asking for relief.
I don't see how that's expressing a lack of desire to care for his children. It's just a fact - he can't care for them and feed himself. I don't see how 'want' plays into things in this situation.

By the numbers, he at least demonstrates a lack of foresight and restraint. I'm not sure how his wants play out to the actual children once they exist. Who knows what he'd do if he had boatloads of cash?
 

Vince524

Are you gonna finish that bacon?
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 8, 2010
Messages
15,903
Reaction score
4,652
Location
In a house
Website
vincentmorrone.com
I don't applaud anyone for having 20 kids. I don't care what race or religion they are or how they're taking care of their kids.

But I don't think the issue is with him having so many kids. The issue is he's asking for relief from taking care of them. At least the Duggars are providing for their children, and are happy to do so. They realize that they brought those kids into the world and they're doing their part in taking care of them. This man wants to be let out of paying child support because he makes minimum wage and can't take care of himself because he's paying for so many children.

His responsibility as father of those children is to take care of them. It's disgusting that he doesn't want to - or at least, by asking for relief, is making it seem like he doesn't want to. That's what the issue is.


I agree.

I try not to be too judgmental of the Duggars as they are self sufficiant. So it's not my place to judge them, although I wonder how they can deal with that large of a family. After all, raising children is more than just the $$ it's the time and love it takes to raise them.

On that note, does anyone here think that this guy does any of the feeding, reading to, playing with, teaching, changing, shopping, etc, etc, so forth and so on, that is also a part of being a parent?
 

Alpha Echo

I should be writing.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
9,615
Reaction score
1,852
Location
East Coast
I agree.

I try not to be too judgmental of the Duggars as they are self sufficiant. So it's not my place to judge them, although I wonder how they can deal with that large of a family. After all, raising children is more than just the $$ it's the time and love it takes to raise them.

On that note, does anyone here think that this guy does any of the feeding, reading to, playing with, teaching, changing, shopping, etc, etc, so forth and so on, that is also a part of being a parent?

Very doubtful.
 

backslashbaby

~~~~*~~~~
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
12,635
Reaction score
1,603
Location
NC
*Methinks* blacbird was referring to America's (especially North Carolina's) past use of eugenics to forcibly sterilize poor, mainly black, women in the early 20th century.

It was arguably driven by racism and eugenics has since carried the baggage of horrific racism with it, at least in the South.

California lead the nation in sterilizations, and it was a product of academia, among other things that are usually not thought of as redneck racist.

California is not making any amends, whereas our Democratic, female governor has done a much better job than them and I commend her for it. She's not allowing it to be brushed off or covered up. The victims are getting some monetary compensation. California, do you hear that? Come on!

One of the problems of advertising how bad it was is having people think it was just a local thing, but I'm very glad we are advertising it. Look at how common this vile practice was:

...Beginning with Connecticut in 1896, many states enacted marriage laws with eugenic criteria, prohibiting anyone who was "epileptic, imbecile or feeble-minded" from marrying.[citation needed]
The first state to introduce a compulsory sterilization bill was Michigan, in 1897 but the proposed law failed to garner enough votes by legislators to be adopted. Eight years later Pennsylvania's state legislators passed a sterilization bill that was vetoed by the governor. Indiana became the first state to enact sterilization legislation in 1907,[30] followed closely by Washington and California in 1909. Sterilization rates across the country were relatively low (California being the sole exception) until the 1927 Supreme Court case Buck v. Bell which legitimized the forced sterilization of patients at a Virginia home for the mentally retarded. The number of sterilizations performed per year increased until another Supreme Court case, Skinner v. Oklahoma, 1942, complicated the legal situation by ruling against sterilization of criminals if the equal protection clause of the constitution was violated. That is, if sterilization was to be performed, then it could not exempt white-collar criminals.[31] The state of California was at the vanguard of the American eugenics movement, performing about 20,000 sterilizations or one third of the 60,000 nationwide from 1909 up until the 1960s.[32]
...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States

eta: Europe, you have to check yourselves, too. This practice was shockingly, sickeningly, considered a good practice in many countries much more recently than you'd expect. It wasn't just the Nazis! And it was supported by people who should have known better, imho.
 

missesdash

You can't sit with us!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 5, 2011
Messages
6,858
Reaction score
1,092
Location
Paris, France
Of course it's a class issue. People with money more are better equipt to support thirty children.
 
Last edited:

Devil Ledbetter

Come on you stranger, you legend,
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 8, 2007
Messages
9,767
Reaction score
3,936
Location
you martyr and shine.
On that note, does anyone here think that this guy does any of the feeding, reading to, playing with, teaching, changing, shopping, etc, etc, so forth and so on, that is also a part of being a parent?
Meh. Plenty of people don't. That includes mom and dads, married and single parents, etc. The key difference between this guy and other under-involved parents is in the sheer quantity of kids he's probably short-shrifting.

All three of my sisters were single moms for one reason or other, for years. The amount and quality of "parenting" any of the fathers did was a joke, and financial support ranged from laughable to abysmal to downright insulting. If we're going to get excited about parents not pulling their weight, why save it for the Maury Povich headliners like this guy? It's happening all the time. Non-custodial parents are constantly asking to have their child support reduced, or working under the table to avoid paying it, but as a society we don't care until someone tips the scale at thirty kids.

Then we're outraged?
 

Chrissy

Bright and Early for the Daily Race
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 13, 2011
Messages
7,249
Reaction score
2,005
Location
Mad World
No sense in suggesting that he get a second job. Two minimum wage jobs wouldn't feed, cloth, and house thirty kids either. What choice has he got now?

Three jobs? :D
 

Chrissy

Bright and Early for the Daily Race
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 13, 2011
Messages
7,249
Reaction score
2,005
Location
Mad World
.....It's happening all the time. Non-custodial parents are constantly asking to have their child support reduced, or working under the table to avoid paying it, but as a society we don't care until someone tips the scale at thirty kids.

Then we're outraged?

+1 with a bullhorn
 

Perks

delicate #!&@*#! flower
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
18,981
Reaction score
6,933
Location
At some altitude
Website
www.jamie-mason.com
The key difference between this guy and other under-involved parents is in the sheer quantity of kids he's probably short-shrifting.
If we're going to get excited about parents not pulling their weight, why save it for the Maury Povich headliners like this guy? It's happening all the time. Non-custodial parents are constantly asking to have their child support reduced, or working under the table to avoid paying it, but as a society we don't care until someone tips the scale at thirty kids.

Then we're outraged?
I think the first part of the post speaks to the second part of the post and none of it subtracts outrage at any other parents who won't support their children.

It's just in this case, this guy has managed to make it so that, given his work-competency, there aren't enough hours in the day for it to be even possible for him to improve the lives of his thirty children.

That is an extreme case and I don't think it's any kind of moral or logical shortcoming to go slack-jawed at it. It's remarkable. And unsolvable.
 

Lyxdeslic

Laughing every time I choke.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 9, 2007
Messages
1,340
Reaction score
516
Location
Buying lies and stealing jokes.
I've not read through the posts. Just wanted to contribute a particular song lyric that sounds off in my mind every time I see or hear of a story like this:

Been around the world and found that only stupid people are breeding...

Sweeping generalization, I know. But it never fails to apply to a situation like this.

Lyx
 

mirandashell

Banned
Joined
Feb 7, 2010
Messages
16,197
Reaction score
1,889
Location
England
But Perks, he probably couldn't support 10 kids, or maybe even 5, or possibly even two. But still he's going around dipping his wick and making even more babies. And now he wants some help? Nah, sorry. His mess, he deals with it. He should have stopped a lot sooner than 30.

The kids are on welfare anyway, whether he pays his $1.48 each or not.

But it's his mess, he should deal with it.

No sympathy from me.