General Discussion

MH1

(18,939 posts)

50. Content of my alert *** Jurors please note ***

Sat May 5, 2012, 10:50 AM

May 2012

because I spent some time on writing it, and while I am sure other alerters could have easily made the case as well, in case they got there first and didn't make the case, here's mine:

Calling the poster a "eugenicist" and implying the poster is racist, is extremely over the top. They imply racism in asserting that the targeted poster wants to "sterilize all those irresponsible poor (black and Hispanic) people". Nowhere did the targeted poster remotely make any statements like that. Suggesting that a "one child" policy might be a good thing, and that population needs to be limited in some way does not in ANY way propose a racist or genetic based policy. To accuse the poster of that is an extreme personal attack. I have checked TOS violation on this because it is bigoted to impose a racist view on another person based on an expressed opinion which itself has nothing to do with race.

Edited to add: I'm posting this because currently only the text of the first alert is considered, as I understand it. It would be nice to have the system show other alert comments that come in during the jury consideration of the first alert.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

217 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Personally I think China's 1 Child Policy to be socially responsible policy [View all] FreakinDJ May 2012 OP

Forcing people to do the right thing is not the right thing to do. baldguy May 2012 #1

Forcing Children to be born into deplorable conditions is not the right thing to do FreakinDJ May 2012 #4

where do you see this "6,7, 10 children" being born with no means? CreekDog May 2012 #119

Either you are living an extremely sheltered life or ..... FreakinDJ May 2012 #144

I'm asking you to say where you see it --I didn't post it in AN OP CreekDog May 2012 #150

Do you think that people should be required to vaccinate their children JDPriestly May 2012 #8

Do we levy fines against & imprison those who don't? baldguy May 2012 #21

Don't imprison them but certainly fine them. GoneOffShore May 2012 #136

What about taxes? Isn't that forcing people to do the "right thing" and help the country? nt ZombieHorde May 2012 #140

I read somewhere that a wealthy Chinese family had several children. China supposedly southernyankeebelle May 2012 #2

As I said I don't agree with the implementation of the policy FreakinDJ May 2012 #5

I don't think anyone has a right to tell people how many children they should have. I only southernyankeebelle May 2012 #7

I don't think anyone has the RIGHT to have children just so they can Starve to Death FreakinDJ May 2012 #11

Good for you southernyankeebelle May 2012 #90

Just my mother wished to remain in her home FreakinDJ May 2012 #97

Your right. But a one child solution isn't it. People should have if they want at least 4 children southernyankeebelle May 2012 #99

Math lesson: if everyone has 4 kids - bhikkhu May 2012 #120

Simple for me. I have what I could afford. I don't think people should have 10 kids. But southernyankeebelle May 2012 #143

Listen to God some time - he is telling you act responsibly FreakinDJ May 2012 #145

Who are you to judge? I only have one child. That was all I ever wanted. If god didn't southernyankeebelle May 2012 #149

Sad thing when people believe sex is only for procreation FreakinDJ May 2012 #157

I have to say am different for sure. I never had sex before marriage and I married at 29. southernyankeebelle May 2012 #158

I don't know why "Lust" became so distorted FreakinDJ May 2012 #163

I never said lust. I think when your married you should have sex as often as you want. southernyankeebelle May 2012 #166

You sound so ... so ... normal FreakinDJ May 2012 #174

Saint Reagan ruined this country. I totally agree with everything you said. What bothers southernyankeebelle May 2012 #177

Your arguments are right in line with anti-choice rhetoric. Way to go! Zalatix May 2012 #171

I don't either. But its an authoritian government. Left Coast2020 May 2012 #194

The reason why I recommended this OP JonLP24 May 2012 #216

Well I can't disagree with you. But you can't legislate some things in life. southernyankeebelle May 2012 #217

I'll flame. It'll burn hot so stand back: cali May 2012 #3

I'll stand right here and warm my hands varelse May 2012 #65

both parents go on record... happerbolic May 2012 #79

Absolutely not! varelse May 2012 #98

Oh fuk that. Way cheaper to just be a dictatorship and elehhhhna May 2012 #141

100% Free will is a novel idea... happerbolic May 2012 #153

Octomom and the Duggars Ichingcarpenter May 2012 #6

"People with no means to support them". Nye Bevan May 2012 #9

Not the parents. The planet. NYC_SKP May 2012 #16

And if they refuse? hack89 May 2012 #181

there's a big difference between "NO means to support" and people who can but aren't rich MH1 May 2012 #38

Providing freedom, education and healthcare to woman .... etherealtruth May 2012 #10

7 billion people on the planet. randome May 2012 #12

Finally - some one who gets it FreakinDJ May 2012 #15

Frankly, their post was very much the opposite of yours. noamnety May 2012 #22

+1 etherealtruth May 2012 #24

see post No. 14 FreakinDJ May 2012 #28

I don't think that really refutes the assertion etherealtruth May 2012 #87

You've made quite a lot of assumptions on my behalf FreakinDJ May 2012 #25

Are you suggesting a policy with no means of enforcement? noamnety May 2012 #36

You are the only one distinguishing between "White and Nonwhite" FreakinDJ May 2012 #39

I'm just the only one stating the obvious: noamnety May 2012 #45

It doesn't have to be about 'poor versus rich'. randome May 2012 #49

I completely agree with that. noamnety May 2012 #56

I made no such reference FreakinDJ May 2012 #52

Who do you think is to blame more? noamnety May 2012 #58

Mr Ignorance FreakinDJ May 2012 #64

Is there a concern that we will run out of "entertainment" due to overpopulation? n/t hughee99 May 2012 #27

No, I meant our entertainment demands. randome May 2012 #116

You are using logic. Stop that! No one here wants logic. They just want to complain!! n-t Logical May 2012 #29

People will die regardless. How do you implement such a policy cali May 2012 #31

Maybe it depends on how it's framed. randome May 2012 #42

Do you support forcing women to only have one child...to enforce your will on their bodies? n/t cynatnite May 2012 #44

Not everything involving women has to do with taking away their rights. randome May 2012 #47

I think there would have to be a global consensus... cynatnite May 2012 #51

I don't see how you can force women not to have kids without taking away their rights 4th law of robotics May 2012 #127

We have all sorts of limits on freedom now, of course. randome May 2012 #130

Access to BC, education, and a retirement system seem to do it 4th law of robotics May 2012 #131

If you don't take away their rights, then your population control plan is dead on arrival. Zalatix May 2012 #169

I wish I could rec your response. And hope you and the OP will consider elaborating on it in the coalition_unwilling May 2012 #67

We could treat people like stray cats 4th law of robotics May 2012 #126

Give more reproductive control to women, and also parents in general, Quantess May 2012 #13

Agree. The idea that popping new people out in this world is some God-given right is fucked up. NYC_SKP May 2012 #14

DU has certainly changed! BlancheSplanchnik May 2012 #80

145 replies so far telling me to Shut the Fuck Up about the obvious FreakinDJ May 2012 #146

like teabaggers.....same kind of willful misinterpretation BlancheSplanchnik May 2012 #156

Because any effective implementation of such a policy has no place in a free society? hack89 May 2012 #183

Actually, having children *is* a right CreekDog May 2012 #203

So you admit it's a Ponzi Scheme? NYC_SKP May 2012 #205

who are you talking to? CreekDog May 2012 #206

"...children that you are suggesting not exist will be paying for (social security)..." NYC_SKP May 2012 #207

You called Social Security a Ponzi scheme? CreekDog May 2012 #208

No, you did. (nt) NYC_SKP May 2012 #210

But YOU called Medicare a ponzi scheme CreekDog May 2012 #211

I accept your apology. NYC_SKP May 2012 #212

Social Security has disability CreekDog May 2012 #213

by the way, if someone becomes disabled, did they fully fund their SS and Medicare? CreekDog May 2012 #209

Socially and ecologically responsible, but not economically responsible. DCKit May 2012 #17

Why is it economically responsible? Because we insist people retire at a young age? MH1 May 2012 #41

I don't see how you would enforce it quinnox May 2012 #18

Trade and economic treaties are made all the time without a world government. randome May 2012 #26

No flame here. I agree with you 100 percent. Glorfindel May 2012 #19

American Representative to the UN Calls for Worldwide Depopulation Ichingcarpenter May 2012 #20

this is a tough one for me fascisthunter May 2012 #23

I'm with you, my friend. LAGC May 2012 #78

There is a way Marrah_G May 2012 #178

If you could separate the policy from it's implementation, it still involves more than live births HereSince1628 May 2012 #30

The Governement has no business telling people what they should do with their bodies, hughee99 May 2012 #32

Why focus just on the birth rate? frazzled May 2012 #33

China has deep cultural issues. randome May 2012 #35

I see no benefit in spiting out children so they can die in the streets FreakinDJ May 2012 #37

Oh my, you really are a dyed-in-the-wool eugenicist frazzled May 2012 #40

You certainly like to make assumptions on little or no fact FreakinDJ May 2012 #46

Now, now. randome May 2012 #53

Personally I believe "Unattended White Children" have just as many problems FreakinDJ May 2012 #55

Sure, but I don't think this needs to be framed in economic terms. randome May 2012 #63

Well, 4 out of 6 random DUers think it's a-ok to attack someone as being racist MH1 May 2012 #60

Content of my alert *** Jurors please note *** MH1 May 2012 #50

If they promote a policy noamnety May 2012 #59

How do you know which countries? Why not the U.S.? MH1 May 2012 #62

I think you're being disingenuous noamnety May 2012 #69

Really? Do you actually think that the US can independently sustain its population? MH1 May 2012 #73

I sure don't think that. noamnety May 2012 #82

In this case, I'll take a hidden post as a badge of honor frazzled May 2012 #61

The post you seem to be referring to, did not imply any racial component to me. MH1 May 2012 #66

The OP is a eugenicist AngryAmish May 2012 #200

I must disagree with that awful accusation you made here Zalatix May 2012 #185

One child for some, death panels for others Capt. Obvious May 2012 #48

Hey, population growth has many mothers. Igel May 2012 #70

Picture of the earth and the amount of water as spheres Ichingcarpenter May 2012 #34

Another view jberryhill May 2012 #111

I remember reading that to my daughters. randome May 2012 #115

Five Chinese Brothers jberryhill May 2012 #118

So we vomit? Ichingcarpenter May 2012 #121

It's from a children's book which has been popular for decades jberryhill May 2012 #123

Personally, I find China's policy of forced abortions and forced sterilizations horrific... cynatnite May 2012 #43

I suppose. sendero May 2012 #54

Ya - thanks Mom and Dad FreakinDJ May 2012 #57

There is a better way to achieve a very similar result nadinbrzezinski May 2012 #68

Hey you, common sense lady, scoot, get outta here! Zalatix May 2012 #104

Nothing shocks me anymore nadinbrzezinski May 2012 #107

This is the only thing that will ever work LadyHawkAZ May 2012 #114

yours is not a popular opinion, but I agree with it tnvoter May 2012 #71

Real world example of unintended results, is the 120male to 100 female ratio. CK_John May 2012 #72

The world is going to pay for over-population either way. nt MH1 May 2012 #75

An old wive's tale was that when many boys were born there was war coming. Mnemosyne May 2012 #162

Not just an old wives' tale, it's pretty much historical fact. Zalatix May 2012 #170

Thank you for that, Zalatix. I still have much to learn. I'm not an old wife, but Mnemosyne May 2012 #173

The way to do it is to increase the education, rights, and economic well-being of women worldwide, drm604 May 2012 #74

I agree with this whole heartedly. MH1 May 2012 #76

Agree that this is the answer. n/t kiranon May 2012 #92

Key: Socially responsible RobertEarl May 2012 #77

Yeah. China: Where "The War On Women" starts at conception. cherokeeprogressive May 2012 #81

Let's play Jeopardy! I'll take population dynamics for a thousand. Zalatix May 2012 #135

Here on the other hand is some Actually Educated Information on the subject FreakinDJ May 2012 #187

Youth Bulge is actually quite correct and proven. Zalatix May 2012 #188

Your assuming Gender Selection would be legal or condoned under such drastic measures FreakinDJ May 2012 #191

Even China cannot control gendercide against girls, what makes you think you can? Zalatix May 2012 #192

I agree on all points. magical thyme May 2012 #83

A socially responsible policy in this case Skelly May 2012 #84

And thank you. randome May 2012 #85

Thats is biased against men FreakinDJ May 2012 #96

No more bias Skelly May 2012 #103

A sterilization lottery? Nolimit May 2012 #106

Oh... Skelly May 2012 #109

Has anyone read the short story "The Lottery"? Quantess May 2012 #134

We're gonna need some more stones. randome May 2012 #137

YES. Because what's more liberal than involuntary sterilization? (nt) Nye Bevan May 2012 #108

Or accepting the anti-choice position for the sake of population control? Zalatix May 2012 #110

There is always SOMEONE Skelly May 2012 #112

That's not a good solution 4th law of robotics May 2012 #128

Edit. Didn't see your post downthread. Union Scribe May 2012 #161

Of course our top military and government men would be automatically exempt from the policy slackmaster May 2012 #196

Mother Nature will take care of us if we won't police our own numbers. CrispyQ May 2012 #86

Yes, yes, yes -- But does every single wild species of animal have to die first? aint_no_life_nowhere May 2012 #89

'7 Billion Miracles is Enough!' randome May 2012 #91

That's another interesting math problem: bhikkhu May 2012 #122

57 billion people. Thanks for the link. randome May 2012 #124

As a concept, yes, but its the implementation that causes problems. prefunk May 2012 #88

China holds 1.3 billion people. Rex May 2012 #93

If you see the human race as a 'herd', that may be part of your dilemma. randome May 2012 #95

No, Rex correctly sees humans being TREATED as a herd Zalatix May 2012 #100

Thank you Rex May 2012 #132

I strongly support the concept. silverweb May 2012 #94

I'm pro-choice not anti-choice but to each his/her own cabot May 2012 #101

Education, opportunity and access to birth control for women are what brings down birth rates. Marrah_G May 2012 #102

Trust women with their own fertility! Quantess May 2012 #129

Really Old Codger May 2012 #105

OR... Skelly May 2012 #113

Personal policy- maybe loyalsister May 2012 #117

I think it's awful. A more acceptable policy would be . . . 4th law of robotics May 2012 #125

i dont. i am pro-choice arely staircase May 2012 #133

Eliminating all tax deductions for spawning would be a start. Egalitarian Thug May 2012 #138

I concur!!! nt and-justice-for-all May 2012 #155

You think forced abortion is "socially responsible policy"? former9thward May 2012 #139

I wouldn't worry about it too much. roamer65 May 2012 #142

Or the Biblical Prophecies FreakinDJ May 2012 #147

I can't believe I see support for such an Authoritarian, misogynistic policy like forced abortion chrisa May 2012 #148

I don't see a need for a policy, just distribute birth control and teach people how to use it Hippo_Tron May 2012 #151

And how are you different than the anti-choice crowd? Skidmore May 2012 #152

Yeah, I find 19 kids and counting to be irresponsible and-justice-for-all May 2012 #154

How about Skelly May 2012 #160

unregulated human population growth and-justice-for-all May 2012 #214

Perhaps not Skelly May 2012 #215

It's worth a real discussion. Skip Intro May 2012 #159

thanks FreakinDJ May 2012 #164

Good post aint_no_life_nowhere May 2012 #167

Places with famine and starvation rarely have education or opportunity for women Marrah_G May 2012 #195

You can't have a one child policy..... musical_soul May 2012 #165

This is offensive Fort Minor May 2012 #168

Welcome to DU! LAGC May 2012 #172

And your answer to all that is totalitarianism? Daniel537 May 2012 #175

Don't worry - Soon you won't have a choice FreakinDJ May 2012 #176

You are offering apologia for a horrible human rights abuse. Warren DeMontague May 2012 #179

Then you're not a Democrat Ter May 2012 #180

Between Global Warming and diminishing Oil Production FreakinDJ May 2012 #182

You are not a Democrat. Your views are anti-choice. Zalatix May 2012 #184

Don't worry - your children won't have a choice FreakinDJ May 2012 #186

Post removed Post removed May 2012 #189

Except for one slight problem -- there is no 1 child policy in China. Major Hogwash May 2012 #190

Have you read Ishmael by Daniel Quinn? Son of Gob May 2012 #193

Families deciding to limit themselves to 1-2 children would be socially responsible policy slackmaster May 2012 #197

In the US we have a $1000 per child tax credit Bill McBlueState May 2012 #198

Social responsibility? How about a country that has something like 5% of the world's population and raccoon May 2012 #199

The only problem China has with that MissHoneychurch May 2012 #201

Men who can afford to will import brides from other countries slackmaster May 2012 #202

Of course, actual achievement of your vision would ultimately require these enforcement mechanisms apocalypsehow May 2012 #204