Parental license

A point I agree with in fact. Travis, do you also think that tests should be given to prove maturity rather then relying on society's arbitrary age limits (usually 18)?

The correct Truth-based answer is clearly that societies current arbitrary limits are false and lie-based. They are designed to be malevolent and harmful.

So yes, inferior, tests and other observations, input from the child all go towards maturity acknowledgement. Most humans are adult at 28 years or so, not 18, and so this would be the standard legal age for car license, parental license, and house-of-worship entry license.
By standard I mean average, and by no means would this be set in concrete, but variable via outcome of evalutions. It may be 22, or 56.

I have to disagree, lack of life experiences may limit a person's wisdom but most people I know are 'adults' mentally at around 15-20. Biologically, around 24.

No. You are just seeing them through your eyes, what society taught you to see.

Teenagers, even 18 year olds, are not fully mature, not always able to make decisions. Of course, there ARE 17 year olds who may be adults.

All societies worldwide sustain their emotional homeostatis by using children as poison containers.

What is a poison-container? The term can be found at the History of Child Abuse essay at The Institute for Psychohistory.

Important note : I do NOT agree with Lloyd's claim that modern western societies have reductions in child abuse. The Forbidden Truth is that child abuse is more rampant, and more societaly sponsered than ever before. It is often the case that current societies cannot be critisized by experts, and it may well be that Llyod has refrained from revealing the Truth on western cultures.

Child abuse sustains society, it runs society. At the same time, society is desperately trying to create an illusion of decency.
It does this via various child-protection "stunts" where a tiny percentage of children are "saved" (i.e. deliberately abused, then have a break in said abuse) and that is broadcast all over the media, as a morbidly false "proof" of the societal claim of benelovence towards children.

1. You need a licence to drive a car, fly a plane and so on.
2. One of the most important and difficult task is raising a whole new human being.
3. Children should not be subject to mass child abuse.

A. Society, if it was legitimate, would order that all parents undergo a rigerous parental-suitability test, where it would have to be proven that they can properly raise a child.

Any parent failing to meet the needs of the child, would result in the child being removed by society, and being placed in specially built benelovent child-raising centres.

Currently, all foster-home and boys-home type systems are deliberatly designed to be unreliable and unstable. They are made to be as bad or worse (on average) than the family unit abuse prisons that alternatively house children. This is to falsely lend legitimacy to the family unit structure, which is one of the primary core building blocks of society.

This structure is designed to give legal adults a child-slave, to abuse and mould into their own graven image.

You think society is corrupt and evil yet you want society and government to determine whether YOU can raise a child?

So our persecution of murderers is wrong but telling people that that can't have kids is perfectly okay?


You're a riot travis.

You cannot recognise Truth.

I never said people could not have kids. They just need to prove they are suitable to raise them.

Your avoidance of the OP and your immature responses proves that you cannot find legitimate fault with the OP.

Generally it's assumed that a person is an adequate parent unless proven otherwise, we have systems in place such as "child protective services".

I really can't advocate the state having such direct control over people's lives on such a massive scale.

Child-protective services are malevolently inadequate. So, we can "assume" that children are not being abused.....thats really going to protect them.

What about fork-lift drivers? They need a licence. We dont presume that they will just be adequate unless proven otherwise.

Your stance screams "give Me the legal right to abuse children".

And how do you propose that we prove that a parent is not inadequate?

Really dodgy wording on that question. Another cheap tactic by FF.

The mandatory parental competency tests of any Truth-based society would determine that. They would be nearly perfectly accurate.

Further, we would see child-protection stations on every street block.

We would have a special number, like 777, as an emergency number like fire, ambulance, that all children had to know. Ringing this number would summon immediate assisstance. The Child-Protection-Agents would be like police, and arrive as fast as possible.

If you want more details, let your Superior know.

So an individual like you self who abours any type of control from the government.

No prisons,

people not to be persecuted for murdering,

all abortions banned.

But advocates a specially devised system for controling parenting by haveing child services stations on every street corner and a specific emergancy number for kids to call.

This a wind up? must be.

Really dodgy wording on that question. Another cheap tactic by FF.

The mandatory parental competency tests of any Truth-based society would determine that. They would be nearly perfectly accurate.

Further, we would see child-protection stations on every street block.

We would have a special number, like 777, as an emergency number like fire, ambulance, that all children had to know. Ringing this number would summon immediate assisstance. The Child-Protection-Agents would be like police, and arrive as fast as possible.

If you want more details, let your Superior know.

We already have a special number it's called 911. We don't have separate numbers for police, fire and ambulance, do we?

You want the government to do a rigorous evaluation of every single parent and every single expecting parent. And what exactly are we testing for?

We can't tell that a person is a bad parent until they screw up, when that happens CPS (child protective services) is called. Without any evidence of abuse there is nothing to do, we can't punish parents simply for having different parenting techniques.

We already have a special number it's called 911. We don't have separate numbers for police, fire and ambulance, do we?

Quote:

You want the government to do a rigorous evaluation of every single parent and every single expecting parent. And what exactly are we testing for?

The tests will be on numerous levels. Basic scenarios, poison-container directional-path tests and so on.

The Superior document The Manifesto of Forbidden Truth: A devastating dissection of the evil and insane societal myths, lies, rituals, and perversions of early 21st century humanity. outlines such proposals under the child-abuse essay. Read it.

Quote:

We can't tell that a person is a bad parent until they screw up,

That is where you are also wrong. A parental licencing test would be able to determine exactly who is likely to abuse children. Your inadequate "screw-up" term betrays your total personal support for child-abuse.

Although some failed parents would NOT have abused their children, it is neccesary to do this to prevent child abuse. There is no legitimacy in Truth to child-ownership / family unit structure.

Quote:

when that happens CPS (child protective services) is called.

Very rarely are they called, and even much rarer do they do anything about it.

Quote:

Without any evidence of abuse there is nothing to do, we can't punish parents simply for having different parenting techniques.

Strawman. There is no suggestion of punishing parents in the OP.

Your suggestion that "without evidence" there is nothing to do is simply a dishonest form of creating a rigged system to child-abuse can occur. There is plenty to do, and that needs to be done, to both protect children and investigate parents.

Yo have to admit, under the current system child-abuse is rampant. It is at plague propertions. Simply google "USA child abuse rampant" or any other ountry, and you will see how rampant it is.

Agreed.