What is Digg?165 Comments
- dilpil1, on 11/08/2008, -5/+44BLLLOOOOODO I WANT BLOOOOOD LOOK AT ME IM SO RIGHTEOUS
- manzplan, on 11/07/2008, -7/+36sounds great to me!!!
sadly it isnt always the women abusing the kids.. but all too often they are aware of it if its the man doing it.. and tollerate it simply to keep a man in their life. - glockman69, on 11/07/2008, -10/+36"We, as a society can do better than that." - I certainly hope so! Forcing Women to take birth control and castrating men ^ for child abuse? We have a plan for the scumbags in society, it's called JAIL people!
- johnwoo32, on 11/08/2008, -2/+27This bill is mostly targetted at mentally disabled people. The current laws in the Netherlands actually forbid their caretakers from giving them birth control, which is quite crazy since their is no chance of them taking care of their own children. So often their caretakers do apply birth control pills on the women, but that is a legal risk.
There was one documentary that showed two slighly retarded people and a baby. They got some emergency bottles of food for their baby, which they gave right away. Then they couldn't figure out what to feed a 2 months old. He wouldn't eat potato chips.... That got many people thinking and was a very sad sight. - adt41287, on 11/08/2008, -0/+22and they waste time putting pot heads in the slammer, sheesh!
- MSUKate, on 11/08/2008, -1/+20What about people who are accused of hurting their kids, but don't.
There are a lot of false allegations out there, should a woman suffer because her husband/boyfriend whomever lied about her smacking her kid? - Equinamin, on 11/08/2008, -2/+17Address the root causes, of why men or women are abusing children in the first place.
Many contributing factors, are socio-economic challenges as many are single mothers, multi-generational trauma and lack of resources, related to healthy options for change.
Just medicating woman to Non-produce, is not the answer. Health education, Community Support Services and Healing Circles, always a better route, than another pill...
Abuse is a Cycle, that can be Stopped. - julielynn1009, on 11/07/2008, -2/+16I agree, but what is to be done to the men if the law is going to require women take birth control? Sorry but fair is fair and since both sexes are responsible not only for the life of the child but also the abuse then men should be forced to get a vasectomy in order to prevent them from abusing any future children. Right?
- Alegoo92, on 11/08/2008, -2/+14We don't live in archaic society, castration is cruel and unusual.
- Berry, on 11/08/2008, -0/+11I read the Dutch source article: it's a member of Parliament working on a law proposal. It's not a law being thought up by the government that subsequently has to be approved by the parliament. It's just a proposal by 1 MP, making it more a PR stunt than a law that has any chance of passing.
Move along please, nothing to see here. - jtsai256, on 11/08/2008, -2/+12Quite frankly I'm rather surprised that so many people here on digg support what essentially amounts to reproductive eugenics.
No, I do not support child abuse, but clearly there are much tamer and ethical ways to attack the problem than by having the GOVERNMENT forcefully and selectively take away the reproductive ability of a subset of the population. Two 'wrongs' don't necessarily make a 'right', people! - allthewhile, on 11/08/2008, -3/+13I have a major problem with the government making decisions in this arena. No one, in their right mind, wants child abusers to have an opportunity to abuse more. However, I'm not convinced that this will:
1. Stop sickos from finding kids
2. Rehabilitate those with problems
3. Stop the government from sweeping up the innocent in this dragnet of righteous anger
The government (foreign or domestic) does not have a very good record at actually punishing the guilty and exonerating the innocent.
Furthermore, what about those who have TRULY rehabilitated and served their debt to society? Are we saying that they're permanently punished? - metapop, on 11/08/2008, -4/+14the government forcing a person not to have children is called eugenics, and violates basic human rights, regardless of their history. it is inherently evil and sets a precedent which is a very slippery slope to population control...
- derang, on 11/08/2008, -0/+9Buried as emotive poppycock. Is unlikely to pass the parliament here, plus it is illegal under Dutch and EU law. Be more concerned about the repetitive proposals to close the coffee shops by the conservative right... :D
- iceperson, on 11/08/2008, -3/+11" I am not necessarily opposed to this, but what about the men?"
In most western countries men already don't count as real parents... - ShyGuy91284, on 11/08/2008, -1/+9Your comment does make me think. I have no idea what prison is like, but I'd be curious to see studies of how people that were put in jail for fairly minor and/or non-violent offenses for a few years end up afterwards. I wouldn't be surprised if some of their habits and attitudes change for the worst.
- metapop, on 11/08/2008, -1/+9"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety"
-Benjamin Franklin
When people make rash decisions like that to combat something which is abhorrent (like child abuse or terrorism), they tend to end up with a result which is worse than what they were trying to prevent. If we open the door to forced eugenics, it will be a pandora's box of population control. It is a human right to have children, not something a government can decide to take away from anyone. - sodade, on 11/08/2008, -5/+13Jail = criminal creation farm.
- oldhick, on 11/08/2008, -0/+8Child abuser = already criminal.
- nedev, on 11/08/2008, -2/+9Because of freedom of speech. We have to tolerate people like that.
- inactive, on 11/08/2008, -0/+7Convicted would be the key word.
But the imperfection of the justice system is a great argument. In fact, it's the best argument.
However, since we can't come up with anything better, and since we have to address injustice as it happens (otherwise: anarchy), we have to accept the result of the justice system for current cases while working in order to make it more perfect. - affiliatebroker, on 11/07/2008, -16/+23child abuse? CASTRATE the people who do this... As simple as that.
Stay the ***** away from children.
No matter what country. - Oldsmobile, on 11/08/2008, -3/+9The problem with this is, that the women will just hide their pregnancies and give birth at home leading to numerous new problems.
- HaSatan, on 11/08/2008, -1/+7I just woke up and kept reading "Neanderthals". Oh you crazy cavemen!
- johnwoo32, on 11/08/2008, -3/+9That's called a democracy. Pedo's, nazi's and all kinds of crazy people can start political parties. The trick is that this bill will stop them from having children!
- ssfwestlife, on 11/07/2008, -3/+9"it isnt always the women abusing the kids"
Of course, but something has to be done for the women who Do abuse their kids. - kimbja98, on 11/08/2008, -1/+6Actually, rights are granted TO the government BY the people, not the other way round (see Bill of Rights). People, by default have rights. Governments can only (theoretically) take those rights if the people agree to grant them to the govt.
- frazw, on 11/08/2008, -0/+5Interesting and what of the falsely accused? Would you be willing to sacrifice your penis, testicles and one eye and have paedo branded on your forehead for the sake of the protection of others if a social worker falsely accused you? You can have it one of two ways, protect 99% of the innocent and face the fact some guilty will slip through or you can punish 99% of the guilty and accept that you will harm some innocents.
I would only condone such measure as these and the death penalty if guilt were 100% provable. It isn't and I think protecting innocents is more important than punishing the guilty.
I also find it troubling that you see child abuse and immediately make the jump to paedophile. One does not follow the other. There are plenty of people out there who beat up their kids. I'm not excusing it but it isn't in the same league as paedophilia. - BooLag, on 04/23/2009, -0/+5So they can live the rest of their lives on welfare...
- tamman2000, on 11/08/2008, -0/+4no, vasectomy...
Or were you trying to be funny? - inactive, on 11/08/2008, -1/+5I've heard too many instances of children, after becoming adults, admitting that they lied about abuse. I'm not saying that child abuse isn't rampant, it is. But time and again innocent people land in prison because little Suzy was mad about getting her cell phone taken away, so she told the police that she was abused.
- rbk303, on 11/08/2008, -0/+4"why aren't men included in this bill? "
men can't have chidren. - else7en, on 11/08/2008, -1/+5@rJackValder
so all a government has to do is claim child abuse and they get a carte blanche to write the rules?
thats dangerous grounds right there
competency hearings yes
forced eugenics no - cgm1985, on 11/08/2008, -1/+5Your enthusiasm for this is sending a chill down my spine.
- Typhoon2009, on 11/08/2008, -0/+4I was never hit as a child. I've turned out alright.
- Opiatus, on 11/08/2008, -1/+5That's always an issue and it's unfortunate that people falsely accuse others of serious things. How many men are sitting in jail for being falsely accused of rape? How many men get off who did rape but there was no proof?
You need to make a choice of either sending innocent people to the chopping block or setting guilty people free. - cran, on 11/08/2008, -0/+4So, then, to control population, say for example to curb the growth of Muslim communities, all you need to do is start convicting them of child abuse and you get a free pass to trim them down as you see fit?
Hmm.
Child abuse is terrible, but I don't think any state has any business in procreational rights issues.
What's next? Chopping off hands for stealing? Cutting out tongues for speech crimes?
Here's a thought: stop giving governments more and more control over people. - Natitude, on 11/07/2008, -3/+7You make an awesome point, that I don't think many people are thinking about... or talking about at least. While I understand the intentions behind such a law, I agree - we can do better than this.
- spoonchucks, on 11/08/2008, -5/+9The definition of child abuse is VERY speculative.
IMO, smacking a child in the face for no better reason than you had a bad day at work? Abuse. Smacking a child in the face for mouthing off? Discipline. Obviously, not everyone is going to cosign to this belief.
Maybe I just grew up in less of a pussified era. Either that, or my parents were a bunch of savages. FYI, my aunt subscribed to the "dont hit a child" ***** and never beat my cousin. He "grew up" to be the biggest D-Bag ever. - redgiemental, on 11/08/2008, -0/+4This is for woman who are convicted of child abuse. As in they are the abusers!
It sounds like you are assuming all child abuse is done by men. Which is bigoted and incorrect. - nikki2300dk, on 11/08/2008, -0/+4hitting a child in the FACE qualifies as abuse in my book.
- jerbaker, on 11/08/2008, -0/+4WTF is right. WTF is wrong with you? It's if the MOTHER is convicted of child abuse. That makes the mother and the abuser the same person.
- gobbleplex, on 11/08/2008, -1/+5You don't know the definition of eugenics. It's not forcing people to have children or not to have children period, it's selecting based on race and physical 'genetic' traits who should have children and who shouldn't. That's a far cry from deciding whether child abusers should be allowed to have more children.
- digghasnoethics, on 11/08/2008, -1/+5Well that's a pretty stupid bill.
Since people can move around the EU at will, these potential mothers will simply skip across the border to Belgium or Germany. Typical far right 'solutions' to complex problems. - Snappysnap, on 11/08/2008, -0/+3Men already have their children taken off them. It's routinely done in the family courts and they don't have to be abusers to have it happen. They just have to be fathers. They also have their wallets routinely removed during the same process.
- brandita, on 11/08/2008, -1/+4Something needs to be done but I'm not sure about this. I do think that people that are convicted of child abuse should not have the right to have more children.
- sodade, on 11/08/2008, -0/+3Now, a pragmatic argument like that is worth considering.
Some counterpoints (that are less about tearing down your argument and more about finding rational agreement):
1. We currently a ton of legislature in place that promotes breeding. Based on your argument, I'd assume that you are against that as well? I sure am.
2. I fear that our infant-like culture will require a sewer world before the cultural shift is made. Example: China. Don't the people who see the train coming have the obligation to scream "get the ***** off the tracks you silly monkeys?"
It seems these days that culture is determined in a broad fashion by the media. That media bounds the argument by defining what the sides are about and marginalizing views that exceed their parameters. While you and I (being internet savvy) might be able to get around those lame limits, the masses generally don't. And when the masses do start getting their culture feed from the net, how likely is it that they will self channel to culture that promotes their cult. Focus on the family indeed. - redgiemental, on 11/08/2008, -0/+3Forced castration =/= optional birth control pills!
The bill gives the woman the option of either taking the pill or having the child taken off them. See the choice there?
Castration would stop natural hormone release in the body. This is not comparable to Birth Control.
Vasectomies can cause reasonable serious side effects that often aren't reversible. Birth Control Pill can have side effects but the effects of the medication can be monitored and you can always stop taking pills.
Also keep in mind the woman could CHOOSE not to take the birth control pills and simply use a contraceptive of their choice. I'm not in favour of the new law just pointing out the hyperbole being spouting here. - oldhick, on 11/08/2008, -1/+4Child abuse happens in rich, dual parent homes, with access to health resources and community support. Abuse will NEVER be stopped. In fact I don't know that I've ever seen statistics to backup anything you said.
- bizzywho, on 11/08/2008, -0/+3there's a word for this....ummmm....social engineering???
-
Show 51 - 100 of 166 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is