• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

Reporter, Cameraman Shot While On-Air

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
Soooo....my idea about psych evals before being allowed to procreate is good?

@spydy13

There's no way to stop losers from breeding. In fact, the losers breed at a higher rate because they don't self-check themselves on consequences like unplanned children.

Then they abandon the kids or spend their lives subconsciously punishing the kids for interrupting their self-centered wants and needs.

Then the kids spend their life sub-consciously punishing the parents by rejecting rules and authority, struggle to love themselves so seek it in others that harm them or take the challenges that life throws at them as personal affronts that they can't recover from.

Like 1/1,000 parents are qualifies for the job.
 
Last edited:
Soooo....my idea about psych evals before being allowed to procreate is good?

@spydy13

I don't think there is a problem with people who are literally crazy having kids like there is with those people getting access to guns.

Solving the unwanted kids problem has more to do with actually educating people about sex, making contraceptives readily available, and when a pregnancy occurs not having abortions demonized for people who realize that they are unfit to raise a child.
 
I don't think there is a problem with people who are literally crazy having kids like there is with those people getting access to guns.

Solving the unwanted kids problem has more to do with actually educating people about sex, making contraceptives readily available, and when a pregnancy occurs not having abortions demonized for people who realize that they are unfit to raise a child.

Ooohhhh K then.
 
Ooohhhh K then.

Do you really think there are mentally ill people having kids left and right? A lot of those people are homeless and are complete outcasts in society.

Poor people are the ones having the vast majority of unwanted kids. Being poor doesn't require a psych evaluation. If you're gonna argue for some sort of requirements to have a kid then it should be about having some sort of amount of money before you're allowed to do so.
 
Do you really think there are mentally ill people having kids left and right? A lot of those people are homeless and are complete outcasts in society.

Poor people are the ones having the vast majority of unwanted kids. Being poor doesn't require a psych evaluation. If you're gonna argue for some sort of requirements to have a kid then it should be about having some sort of amount of money before you're allowed to do so.

All I'm saying is maybe we should mandate those psych evals.....just in case.
 
Poor people can and do often raise good kids.

It's about instilling morals and accountability. If you lack those things- and the vast majority of people do- your kid has no chance unless they find role models elsewhere. It's also about being caring and involved and building your kid's self-esteem.

You don't have to be rich to do those things.

I'd venture to guess the vast majority of those who commit gun violence are lacking in most or all of the things I mentioned.
 
Poor people can and do often raise good kids.

It's about instilling morals and accountability. If you lack those things- and the vast majority of people do- your kid has no chance unless they find role models elsewhere. It's also about being caring and involved and building your kid's self-esteem.

You don't have to be rich to do those things.

I'd venture to guess the vast majority of those who commit gun violence are lacking in most or all of the things I mentioned.

It all comes down to this.......

image.jpg
 
Do you really think there are mentally ill people having kids left and right?

Yes. There are mentally ill women out there, often substance abusers, who have multiple kids. The mental illness and/or drugs impair theor ability toake intelligent decisins about sex and having kids. The kids are often born with fetal alcohol syndrome, or addicted to drugs, and often inherit the mental illnesses as well.

Exactly how many, who knows. But they absolutely exist.
 
Yes. There are mentally ill women out there, often substance abusers, who have multiple kids. The mental illness and/or drugs impair theor ability toake intelligent decisins about sex and having kids. The kids are often born with fetal alcohol syndrome, or addicted to drugs, and often inherit the mental illnesses as well.

Exactly how many, who knows. But they absolutely exist.

I never said they didn't exist. Maybe it's a bigger problem then I realize, but I didn't say that it doesn't happen.
 
All I'm saying is maybe we should mandate those psych evals.....just in case.

Maybe we should. Maybe those people would actually get the help they need then, just like if they were trying to buy a gun to harm themselves or others.

But it's okay, I've accepted that this will be a running joke.
 
I never said they didn't exist. Maybe it's a bigger problem then I realize, but I didn't say that it doesn't happen.

I honestly don't know either. I know it's not rare, but I don't know exactly how common, either. Maybe there's some data out there somewhere.

I mentioned it because I've seen it personally, and know that it is a multi-generational problem.
 
I honestly don't know either. I know it's not rare, but I don't know exactly how common, either. Maybe there's some data out there somewhere.

I mentioned it because I've seen it personally, and know that it is a multi-generational problem.

I have a family member that is a NICU nurse. I've heard stories. She deals with several drug addicted infants daily. It's a very big problem.
 
Really?



So in the three scenarios above; the man in scenario A shares an equal degree of freedom as the man in scenario B?

I think we're delving on the verge of double-think if you honestly believe this.



That's silly.

Do free speech zones not impede or infringe upon my ability to assemble and speak?

What if that zone only encompasses my own property? I still have the right to say what I want on my own land - so, since this freedom is a binary property, I must still be free.



Standing on concrete my movement is not impeded; I am free to move.
Standing in molasses, my movement is impeded; I am less free to move.

Your opinion makes no logical sense. Freedom is not black and white; there is a spectrum of how free we are at any given moment to do any given act. You cannot describe freedom as a boolean.

Don't really want to get into this debate again, but I just want to clarify where I'm coming from.

In both scenarios A and B the end outcome is the person is able to exercise their right to get a gun. Yes, B is harder and more inconvenient, but in my opinion doesn't make you any less free to obtain a gun. If you are a mentally ill person, then yes I am making you less free, but do you believe that mentally ill people should be allowed to obtain a gun because it's their constitutional right?

If I was arguing for C then I would agree that I am making you less free because obviously a right you used to have is no longer available to you.

I really am not trying to rile you up or deliberately avoid your question. Call me whatever or think whatever about me, but the above is how I feel. Either way, my suggestion is clearly far fetched and has met with wide spread ridicule so it clearly isn't a good idea and I'm not gonna die on that hill.
 

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-14: "Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:14: " Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey."
Top