This is the idea that to raise a child, one (or a couple) must meet a criteria of mental and financial stability; as well as sufficient temporal availability. Once it is decided that one is eligible, they would be granted a license and legal guardianship of a preselected child would be granted. This criteria would obviously be much easier to meet as a couple, but there would also be advantages to being a single parent. As a couple, the two (or possibly many) would have to sign agreements stating that they would abide by preset rules for raising a child and that upon severe violation of these rules custody of the child would be removed from offending parties. As a single parent, raising the child may be more difficult but there is no possible conflict with a spouse that may traumatize the child.
The second half, oh yes there's more, is a birthing license. This is much simpler. More money is poured into researching genetics and the genes that cause certain diseases and disabilities. To obtain a birthing license, one's genes must be analyzed and found clear of defects, or the person may have some invaluable gene or mutation that human's as a whole would benefit from. The recipient of such a license would then be free to father or mother any children.
There would only be rare circumstances in which one would be able to give birth to and raise a child. At first anyway, eventually the gene pool would become a little less adulterated and the intelligence and financial and emotional stability of the general population would increase thus letting more and more people be able to be both the legal and biological parent of their own child. Until then, children would be born from licensed baby makers, then would be raised by licensed person makers!
I don't think this is really an "issue," I don't think it is even mentioned anywhere ever, but its an idea I have so what do y'all think?
Comments?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
well i agree with one part of your argument... I only think that people should have parenting licenses, but the only problem with that is then who gets to decide what the correct way to parent children is?
ReplyDeletei don't agree with having a birthing license because that is greatly stifling people's rights. i'll leave more comments pertaining to this later.
as i was saying, having a birthing license imposes too far on our civil rights and even though it would seemingly only breed "strong" humans without diseases, who is to say what quality of life is the best. what if someone had a disease that left them completely paralyzed except for his/her head. however, that same person had an amazingly intelligent mind and what if that person preferred having a strong mind in contrast to a strong body? my point is that it is unfair for mere humans to judge what lives should be allowed and what shouldn't. i just want to clarify that i'm only saying that because everyone has the right to give birth if they want to, but they ALSO have the right to not give birth if they don't want to. it is the person's decision, so don't get confused by thinking that i am anti-abortion.
ReplyDelete