When a woman gets pregnant, her fetus is given a unique ID number, and an entry is created for it in the People database. That ID number is the only number we need to identify ourselves. Nobody needs additional numbers for drivers licenses, pilot's licenses, telephones, or addresses.

When we want to make a phone call, we use either the person's ID number or name, not a phone number. This assumes that we develop a generic phone system, as described in here.

Likewise, if we need to send a package to somebody, we send it to his ID number or name, not his address. The city's computer knows where everybody is, and people can specify where they want packages to be delivered

The People database will have information about whether a person has a valid license for flying airplanes, driving industrial vehicles, or doing dentistry. When somebody wants to drive an industrial vehicle, or get access to restricted substances or industrial areas, the computer will check that database to determine whether he has the authority to access that equipment, area, or supply. Nobody will need keys, badges, or any other type of identification in order to get access to the restricted items and locations.

Both men and women have such intense cravings to take care of their children that we often risk our life to protect our children. Although a man's craving to protect children is not as extreme as it is for women, our cravings are too powerful for our modern era. Some examples of how our attraction to children is causing trouble in our modern era are:

•		Parents become nurses Some parents waste a lot of their life, and society's resources, on taking care of defective children. Their home becomes a hospital, and they become nurses rather than parents. The reason for this problem is that our emotions have no concern about the quality of a child's life, and this results in us using modern technology to keep children alive who will never have a pleasant life, and even if they are begging us to put them out of their misery.
•		Parents treat their children like slaves We regard children as our personal possessions, and some parents go to an extreme in trying to control their children's lives and beliefs, such as pressuring them to get involved with certain sports, religions, or music activities, or to get certain types of jobs. Some of the most extreme parents, such as Joseph Fritzl, treat their children as sex slaves.
•		Adults use children as entertainment We are titillated by the giggling and smiles of children, and we become upset by their frowning and crying. In prehistoric times this resulted in parents doing something beneficial for their children, but today many parents, and especially grandparents, frequently give children excessive amounts of candy, praise, or gifts. They do this to entertain themselves, not to improve life for the children. Many women complain that men treat women as toys or sex objects, and they want men to exert some self-control. However, women treat children as "entertainment objects", and they should exert some self-control over themselves and push themselves into treating children as young adults.
•		Adults pander to children Many people believe that they will give their child the best life when they protect him from problems and disappointments, and when they keep them ignorant about sex, digestion, childbirth, and many other issues, but pampering children and keeping them ignorant causes them to become adults who have trouble dealing with people and life's routine problems. When a child is upset, our emotions want to do something to make him feel better. During prehistoric times, children tended to cry for sensible reasons, such as hunger or thorn poking their skin. Their parents reacted to the crying by doing something beneficial for the child, such as providing him with food or removing the thorn. Today, however, children cry for a wide variety of reasons, such as they are upset at the thought of going to school or a dentist, or because they failed at something they were trying to do, or because they want a particular candy bar or clothing item. Unfortunately, rather than help the child learn to analyze his problems, exert self-control, and find a way to deal with his problems, many adults react by pampering the child, which makes it difficult for a child to learn how to deal with problems.

This constitution regards children as belonging to the human race, not to their parents. Parents are required to raise their children to become productive members of society, not to treat them as toys or pets.

When a child is born, the Database Ministry of the Quality Division, not the parents, will choose a name for the child. The reasons are:

•		To give children sensible names. Most parents choose names for their children that they personally find entertaining, rather than selecting names that would be most appropriate for the children and society. An extreme example are the parents who chose ordinary words for their children's names, such as Audio Science, Sailor, Pilot, Ireland, Egypt, Ocean, Paris, Petal Blossom Rainbow, Alabama, Apple, Peaches, Bear, Blanket, Banjo, Blue Ivy, and North West. A conversation about those people resembles the Abbott and Costello comedy routine called "Who's on First?" Two of the names that Elon Musk chose for his 10 children are X Æ A-12 and Exa Dark Sideræl. Another problem are the parents who give names to children that are ignored because everybody refers to the child by a nickname. For example, many parents give their daughter the name of Margaret, but refer to her as Peggy. There is no benefit to giving a child a name that nobody uses. Some people consider this custom to be adorable, but this constitution regards it as obnoxious, childish, confusing, awkward, and idiotic. Another idiotic tradition is for men to give their son the same name that they have, and which their father, grandfather, and other relatives have had, resulting in such names as John, John II, John III. That tradition is idiotic because it creates confusion, and because it uses Roman numerals, which is as stupid as using Egyptian hieroglyphs in our names. We should stop using the ancient Roman language and number system. Another absurd situation is when grandparents use emotional pressure or offers of money to convince their children to give a grandchild a certain name. Those grandparents are not thinking about what is best for the child or society. Rather, they are using their grandchild as an object to titillate themselves with.
•		To provide children with unique names, especially the boys. Millions of parents have given a child the name of a Disney, Harry Potter, or religious character, or the name of somebody they admire, such as a Hollywood celebrity or athlete. This results in a lot of children with the same name. For example, in Britain, the most popular name for boys in 2023 was Muhammad. In the USA, the 66th most popular name for boys in 2001 and 2002 was Jesus and the two most popular names since 2013 has been  Liam and Noah. "Noah" has been a popular boy's name for centuries, but "Liam" became popular only from the 1970s, and is now the most popular name for Ameican boys. When parents have the freedom to create names for their children, they give millions of children, especially boys, the same name, which creates confusion without benefits.
•		To ensure that girls and boys have different names. Most parents select names for boys that we associate with boys, and names for girls that we associate with girls, but there are some parents who don't follow that cultural tradition. This results in some boys having names that are typically used for girls, and vice versa, and there are some names that are almost equally given to both boys and girls. There is no benefit to allowing boys and girls to share the same names, but there is a benefit in having different names for boys and girls. Specifically, it makes it easier for us to determine male from female. We create confusion and awkwardness when we make a mistake about a person's gender. Many people today are promoting the theory that we should not make a distinction between male and female, or that we should treat everybody as unisex creatures, or that we should let everybody choose their gender. However, we should not follow a policy simply because some people want or demand it. We should evaluate policies according to their effect on society and the human race. How does the human race benefit from gender neutral names? If there are benefits, do they outweigh the disadvantages? Nobody has any evidence that the human race benefits from gender neutral names, but there is a lot of evidence that those names create confusion and awkwardness. Therefore, the Database Ministry must provide boys and girls with gender specific names, and this will make it easy for us to determine male from female. The people who are sexually mixed up, such as a person with male sexual organs but female emotions, might want a name associated with girls, but he is not a girl. We could create names that are specific for those particular people. That would give us four type of names: 1) boys, 2) girls, 3) feminine boys, and 4) masculine girls. That would make it easy for us to determine who is one of those mixed up people, which will reduce confusion and awkwardness. We also create confusion when we give human names to animals and other non-human things. To prevent that confusion and awkwardness, the names that are selected by the Database Ministry for humans are restricted to humans. The names that people give to horses, especially racehorses, are especially absurd, and I suspect that it is because many people want a horse for the status value. They want to be the center of attention and feel important, and that causes them to be attracted to names that attract our attention. They are behaving like the people who boast about eating caviar and drinking champagne. Specifically, they are doing things in an attempt to feel special and impress us. There is no benefit to society for allowing people to give idiotic names to horses and other non-human things, but it causes confusion and encourages obnoxious behavior, so that freedom is denied. We need restrictions on “having fun” Many parents have noticed that their children sometimes get carried away with "having fun", and end up doing things that are destructive, dangerous, or irritating. As a result, parents occasionally observe their children and pass judgment on whether they are behaving appropriately. However, not many adults believe that we also have a tendency to get carried away with our activities. Men enjoy competing with each other, and this can cause us to get involved with risky, obnoxious, or worthless activities in order to show off to the other men, or to impress the women. A democracy does not provide supervision of the adults, but this Constitution puts the Children Ministry in control of the activities and behavior of the children, and the Behavior, Leisure, and Social Clubs Minister is in control of the activities and behavior of the adults. This constitution puts a lot of restrictions on people's freedom to "have fun", such as preventing them from choosing names for their children, and passing judgment on whether the names they have chosen for their software programs, material items, and horses are acceptable. For example, Microsoft has used ordinary words for their software programs, such as describing their operating system as "Windows", and their word processing software as "Word". This is annoying for those of us who use speech recognition software because that software is not yet advanced enough to figure out when the word "windows" is referring to the operating system or glass windows. The ministers have the authority to require businesses to select more appropriate names for software. Some people might complain that this is allowing the government to treat the public as children, and is preventing the public from "having fun", but what is "fun"? How can we figure out if we are "having fun" when we do something? To make the issue more complicated, if we receive pleasure from an activity, is the pleasure coming from the activity, or some other aspect of it? I've given many examples of this dilemma in previous documents. For example, most, or all, of the people who play sports believe that they receive pleasure when they win the game. This results in people becoming upset when they lose, and some people react to losing by cheating, pouting, or having tantrums. Although we get some momentary pleasure by winning a competitive event, most of the pleasure that we receive from competitive activities is because we enjoy competing, being with people, getting out of our homes and offices and into nature, and getting some exercise. The games that we play are meaningless, and the rules and equipment are arbitrary, and we don't need any reward for winning a recreational event. Therefore, we should design our events so that they are safe, don't need a lot of resources, don't encourage winning, and don't encourage people to become upset when they lose. Furthermore, our recreational activities should not require much training. Everybody, including the future generations, benefit when somebody learns a useful skill and applies it to something useful, but nobody benefits when somebody improves his skill with soccer, basketball, baseball, or golf. The people who practice recreational activities, or provide lessons for them, are wasting a portion of their short and precious life on a worthless skill. For example, when the first world championship was held for solving the Rubik's cube, the winner required 22.95 seconds, but in the decades that followed, people have been practicing to such an extent that they now can solve the puzzle in only a few seconds. However, all of the people who are practicing how to solve the Rubik's cube are developing a skill that has no value to anybody. The subject of "happiness" is extremely important because all of us want to enjoy life. We should learn as much as possible about this issue, rather than assume we are experts on what makes us happy. (There is more about this issue in the happiness document.) Getting back to the issue of names for children, horses, and other things, there is no evidence that we will improve our lives by having the freedom to give idiotic names to horses, software, dogs, or children, and there is no evidence that we will suffer when we have to follow sensible rules for names. Obnoxious people should not be cultural leaders All of us want the freedom to do as we please, but we do not benefit when we have the freedom to be obnoxious, or to create confusion or awkwardness. We must put restrictions on our freedom to prevent ourselves from irritating one another with idiotic and obnoxious behavior. When children grow up around adults who are giving "funny" names to horses, we encourage children to do similar things, rather than encourage them to do something that is truly useful and impressive. For example, by giggling at the funny names that people give to horses, some people are inspired to give "funny" names for other things, such as foods, drinks, material items, children, vaginas, and penises. That type of behavior can also lead to people doing "funny pranks", and those funny pranks can evolve into dangerous pranks. We enjoy competing with one another, so when we encourage obnoxious behavior, it can encourage us to compete to create the most amusing obnoxious behavior, which is a ridiculous competition. The "funny" names and "amusing pranks" are examples of how we are allowing the most childish, obnoxious, and mentally ill people to degrade our culture. Children are mimicking the worthless and dangerous behavior of the mentally inferior people. By denying people the freedom to choose names for their children, horses, body parts, and other things, the government is restricting our freedom to be obnoxious and confusing, rather than tormenting us with oppressive and cruel regulations.
•		To help parents realize that children are not their possessions. Having the government give names to children should dampen the attitude of parents that children are their personal possessions to do with as they please. It should help parents realize that children are the next generation of people rather than a toy.
•		To prevent parents from wasting their time and arguing Allowing parents to choose names for their children is giving them a freedom that they don't benefit from. Rather, it results in parents wasting some of their life on a worthless activity. Furthermore, some parents argue over the issue, and sometimes their relatives get involved, increasing the arguments, frustration, pouting, and anger. Creating names for children is a chore, not a source of enjoyment. We do not take photos or videos of ourselves as we choose names for children because no one has a desire to reminisce about such an activity. Choosing names for children is a waste of our lives.

Some parents enjoy spending time choosing names for their children because they are bored and lonely. When we become bored, we search for something to do, and we can end up doing something that we enjoy only because it is better than being bored, not because it is truly enjoyable.

When we are bored or lonely, we should experiment with improvements to our city and culture, not pick something idiotic to do to relieve the misery. We need to make intelligent decisions about when we are enjoying ourselves and when we are trying to prevent boredom or loneliness.

Choosing a name for a child is more enjoyable than wasting another evening watching an idiotic television program, but it is not an activity that brings real satisfaction to human life.

If we were living in a city that we enjoyed, and in which we had friends and activities, and in which we could trust the people, I think most parents would regard choosing names for their children as a chore, not a pleasurable activity.

Another reason that many parents enjoy choosing a name for a child is because they only do it occasionally. If somebody had to choose a name for a child on a weekly basis, he would quickly regard it as a chore.

Giving people the freedom to choose their children's names is like giving them the freedom to choose a personalized license plate for their automobile. Some people who are bored will enjoy spending days choosing a license plate for themselves, and some people who are suffering from low self-esteem will enjoy feeling special for having a personalized license plate, and some people might get one simply because their friends have one, and some people get a license plate to advertise their business. However, a person who is enjoying his life and doesn't have any peer pressure to get a personalized license plate is likely to regard a choosing a license plate as a waste of his time.

Before we give ourselves the freedom to do something, we should consider whether that freedom will give us benefits that outweigh the disadvantages. There are no benefits to giving people the freedom to name their children, but there are lots of disadvantages, so the Database Ministry will choose names for children.

Since we use people's names on a regular basis, the Database Ministry must create names that are only 1 or 2 syllables, and easy to pronounce, or order to reduce our desire to use a nickname. For example, "Margaret" has 3 syllables, but we tend to simplify it to Margret, Maggie, Marge, Margie, Peg, and Peggy. Therefore, the Database Ministry is prohibited from using such names. They must create a list of names that people will use rather than simplify.

The list of names will be kept in a database, and a computer will assign names in sequential order so that the people in the Database Ministry do not have to waste their time choosing names.

Since there are a limited number of sensible first names, the lists of names will eventually have to be reused. However, by the time that happens, there will be a large gap in the ages of the people.

Our childhood is a small portion of our life, but it is the most critical portion of our life because it is the only time that our brain can rapidly learn information and skills, and it is when our body is adapting to the environment, and developing its muscles, bones, and immune system. However, all cultures are wasting a large portion of childhood because they are still following animal culture. Four examples are:

1)		Learning absurd languages or vocabularies The children who must learn Chinese, Japanese, and other crude languages are wasting a significant portion of their childhood. The children in Europe and the US are wasting a portion of their childhood by learning of foreign languages, and by learning unnecessarily large vocabularies. If the world would switch to English, and stop promoting large vocabularies, the children would not have to waste any of their time on primitive languages, or foreign languages. They would have more time to learn something useful. Our memory is limited, so filling a child's memory with unnecessary words and complex languages is as idiotic as cluttering a house with unnecessary toys, clothing, and furniture.
2)		Encouraging worthless fantasies All cultures are encouraging children to spend a lot of their leisure time on fantasies, such as fictional books, television programs, Hollywood movies, and video games. A lot of people criticize children for spending a lot of time with cell phones, video games, social media, and Internet videos, and they encourage the children to read books, but they encourage children to read fiction books, but there is no evidence that reading a Harry Potter book is more beneficial than watching a Harry Potter movie. It is possible for fictional material to be beneficial, as mentioned here, but almost all of the fictional materials produced in a free enterprise system are entertainment without benefit. The children who spend their time with worthless fiction are filling their mind with unrealistic fantasies, which can encourage idiotic and unrealistic attitudes and goals. However, no culture yet cares about the quality of the information that they are giving to their children. Every culture is still practicing the animal attitude of "enjoying" children rather than preparing them for life.
3)		Practicing worthless activities Schools are encouraging children to practice soccer, basketball, and other activities in order to win competitive recreational events. However, children do not benefit by winning those events, and they do not suffer by losing, so they are wasting their childhood by practicing those events. They are developing a skill that has no value. Children need exercise, but the activities in a democracy tend to be emotionally attractive, rather than designed to provide the most beneficial exercise, and some of the activities cause serious physical injuries and brain damage.
4)		Memorizing useless information Every school system is still based on the original system from 6000 years ago, which was created to teach children to do arithmetic and to read and write. The schools are doing an excellent job of those two tasks, but they have since expanded into providing lots of other courses with no concern for whether that additional education has any benefit. This is resulting in children learning a lot of information they have no use for. Children have a phenomenal ability to learn information, so it is absurd to waste that talent on the memorization of worthless information. To make the situation more absurd, there is no concern whether the information that schools teach is honest, and this allows crime networks, Jews, religious fanatics, feminists, and other people to provide children with false information about the world wars, human behavior, climate change, the 9/11 attack, and the Apollo moon landing. The end result is that many children become adults who forgot a lot of what they learned as children, and many adults discover that they need to learn some additional, and useful, information in order to get a job.

The Schools Minister is required to experiment with the school curriculum and recreational activities to figure out what provides the children with the best preparation for life. These experiments will never end because the curriculum will need routine changes in order to adapt to the endless changes in technology and culture.

Children don't have much of an interest in history, or a use for it, so the Schools Ministry is required to provide historical information only to the older teenagers. If a child wants to learn some history during his leisure time, that is acceptable, but schools cannot include history as part of the curriculum for the preteen children.

The School and Children Ministries are responsible for designing activities for the children, but they cannot give the children the activities that the children want. They must design activities that will be beneficial to the children and to society.

Most of the existing recreational activities for children are detrimental because they encourage the children to win the activity. Encouraging the children to win competitions is detrimental because it encourages the arrogance of the winners, and it can cause the losers to suffer from low self-esteem, or becoming envious, angry, or sad.

It is especially detrimental to encourage children to practice recreational activities because that causes them to waste a portion of their short and precious childhood on the development of a skill that has no value. It is as stupid as encouraging children to practice finding the end of a rainbow.

The adults who are involved with training the children are also wasting a portion of their life.

Encouraging children to win leisure activities is also encouraging them to set goals for themselves with no concern for whether the goal has a benefit to them or society. The Schools Minister is required to teach children to analyze their activities and goals, and ensure that they are doing something that is beneficial to themselves and other people.

Teaching children to practice recreational activities is likely to cause them to become adults who believe that they must train for and win the casual games of tennis, golf, and chess that they play with their friends, and it can encourage adults to waste time and money trying to find "better" golf clubs, baseball bats, and soccer shoes.

The Schools and Children Ministries must design activities for children that encourage beneficial attitudes and behavior, and which provide useful exercise. Most of the existing leisure activities for children do not provide useful exercise. Some sports, such as baseball, don't provide much exercise, and others, such as rugby and tackle football, encourage brain and nerve injuries that the ministers must regard as unacceptable.

As with other government officials, the Schools and Children Ministers cannot pander to the children or their parents. They are responsible for experimenting with activities in order to find ways to make them more beneficial for the children. They must prohibit or alter the activities that encourage bad attitudes or behavior.

Developing beneficial activities for children will take time and experiments, and during the first few years the experiments will likely seem crude. However, the experiments will help us gain knowledge, and eventually we will figure out how to provide children with activities and educational programs that they benefit from.

Prehistoric children would learn everything they needed to know simply by observing the adults, but today children need to learn so much information, and much of it is so complicated, that children must spend many years of their life in school. Unfortunately, the human mind did not evolve to be a teacher, so teaching children is somewhat irritating for us.

Parents want to play with their children, and be entertained by their giggles and laughter. Parents do not want to train them for jobs or help them deal with laws, marriage, disappointments, or other aspects of a modern society. Parents have an especially difficult time teaching them about sex and human bodies.

To improve this situation, this constitution advocates the development of robots to assist in the raising of children. As of 2024, we already seem to have the technology to create robots that can provide some games for children, such as "Simon Says". Children enjoy that type of game, but adults quickly become tired of supervising it, so it would be more sensible to let robots do it.

Furthermore, the robots can do more than give simplistic commands, such as "Robot says put your hands up". A robot could create more complex commands to help the children learn something. For example, a robot could say "Put your hands up if 2 plus 2 equals 7", or "Take a step forward if hummingbirds eat insects".

Those type of commands can help the children learn how to pay attention to commands and follow them accurately, while also helping them learn something useful. Robots would not get tired of supervising that game, and they can give commands about sexual issues without embarrassment.

The Children Ministry is responsible for experimenting with facilities that provide children with recreational activities. This Ministry designs the children facilities, and they post their requests in the Requests category for the Economic Division to manufacture the facilities, equipment, and supplies.

The Children Ministry must judge the facilities and activities according to the benefits and disadvantages to society, rather than according to what the children or parents want. The goal of the Children Ministry is to provide the most beneficial activities, rather than the most entertaining activities.

Every activity is potentially dangerous, so we cannot create activities that are completely safe. However, the Children Ministry must pass judgment on when an activity is so dangerous that it needs to be modified. For example, are the injuries from trampolines acceptable? If not, should the Children Ministry prohibit trampolines, or make them less bouncy, or require they have a boundary fence and a thick, foam padding over the springs?

Whatever the Children Ministry decides to do about trampolines and other activities, they must post a document in the Explanations category so that we can pass judgment on whether they are making wise decisions.

In a free enterprise system, the businesses prefer to create products for the largest number of consumers, and that results in businesses pandering to the "typical" parents and children. This provides the "ordinary" people with a wide variety of the toys, foods, television programs, and activities that they want, but the children who are unusually curious, adventurous, or intelligent do not have so many options.

The Children Ministry will improve upon that situation by ignoring what the parents and children want, and designing activities and facilities according to what will be most beneficial to the children. This will allow the Children Ministry to provide activities that encourage curiosity, intelligence, and thinking.

For example, they will be able to justify the development of equipment and software to let children stand in front of a camera to analyze their body. That technology exists today, but it is very crude, as can be seen in the photos below.

A girl looks at a simulation of her skeleton as she moves.		A boy looks at a simulated window on his body to see his skeleton.

The children could also be given access to equipment that gives them an infrared image of their bodies so that they can see which sections produce the most heat, and whether there are any areas that might be suffering from a medical disorder.

Robots will also eventually be able to help children learn how to take their heartbeat and blood pressure, look inside their ear with tiny cameras, and analyze their pee for sugar and other chemicals.

As our societies become more technically advanced, people need to have a greater interest in ability to understand and use technology. The children's toys should adapt by becoming more similar to the equipment that they will use when they are adults.

Children in 2024 can play with magnifying glasses, electric scooters, telescopes, microscopes, cell phones, computers, and pocket calculators that are more advanced than the equipment that the adults had a thousand years ago.

The children thousands of years in the future will play with toys version of CT scanners, electron microscopes, DNA sequencers, and 3D printers that are more advanced than the the equipment in scientific labs today.

In order to truly improve children's lives and their recreational activities, we must be intolerant of the criminals who are involved with human trafficking, illegal organ sales, pedophilia, and murdering children for their blood for either Jewish rituals or for trying to remain young.

Every culture today is more concerned with feeling sorry for criminals and trying to rehabilitate them than in protecting children. This results in a culture that puts a lot of labor and resources into jails and rehabilitation programs, and which teaches children to be afraid of strangers and remain inside their home at night.

This Constitution reverses that attitude. There is no pity for criminals, and the dangerous criminals are evicted. This Constitution requires the Quality Division to keep crime at such a low level that children can go outside to play, even at night. The land between the neighborhoods should be a recreational area for children and adults. Crime should be so low that children feel safe to sleep in the parks with their friends. Parents should not have to fear that their children will be kidnapped, murdered, drained of their blood, or raped.

When children look out of the window of their apartment, they should see a giant playground between the neighborhoods.

There should not be any homeless people living in the bushes, and there should not be any people vandalizing the city by breaking glass bottles on the bicycle paths or spraying graffiti on the buildings.

Humans inherited the intense craving of animals to care for and protect their children, and a democracy allows people to satisfy this craving to extremes. For example, many parents have demanded that public swimming pools be off-limits to children unless there is an adult present to provide lifeguard services.

It is sensible for adults to prevent infants from having access to swimming pools, knives, and medicines, but we must raise standards for everybody, and that includes children. Children are the next generation of adults, not fragile toys. The ministers are required to design culture to fit the people, including the children, that we regard as desirable, not the people who are the worst behaved, most neurotic, most incompetent, and most stupid.

The prehistoric children played in water, climbed trees, and chased one another around the campsite. Some of those children became injured or died by falling out of trees, getting poked in the eye by branches, tripping over rocks, drowning, and choking on food. Injuries in that era could be deadly since there was no medical technology.

The prehistoric children who survived were more aware of the need to protect their eyes, avoid inhaling water, be cautious when climbing trees, and be more aware of the rocks, thorns, and pits on the ground.

When a child drowns in a swimming pool, no culture considers the possibility that the child is genetically inferior to those who are capable of swimming without drowning. Likewise, when a child chokes on food, no culture considers the possibility that the child has something genetically inferior about him compared to the children who can eat without choking.

This constitution has a different attitude. Specifically, that a certain percentage of the children will be inferior to the others, and we must not design culture to fit the inferior children. We must accept the unpleasant aspect of life that half of the children are below-average, and a small percentage are extremely inferior.

The recreational activities for children must be designed according to the abilities and limitations of the children that we regard as desirable. For example, the recreational areas for children should not enclose a swimming pool in ugly chain link fence, or provide lifeguards, because a normal child will not drown. A modern child who cannot swim is considered to be too defective for this modern era.

The swimming pools should be beautiful decorations in the city, and the children should have easy access to them. Some of the swimming pools will be restricted to adults, but the recreational pools for children cannot have chain link fences, lifeguards, or other safety procedures.

The only safety feature that the children need is the same that the adults benefit from; namely, lights in and/or around the water so that they can safely swim at night.

The children who are too defective to take care of themselves, or properly use the recreational equipment, should be restricted from those activities, or restricted to certain neighborhoods, or, if they are young enough, euthanized. We should not make the high-quality children suffer, or make our city ugly, simply because a tiny percentage of the population is too defective to cope with modern life.

Most or all cultures today provide children with more secrecy than the adults have. For example, when children commit crimes, they are usually not identified, and when they become adults, they are allowed to request the police to hide their criminal behavior.

This constitution regards children as young adults, so their behavior is considered to be an indication of their genetic characteristics. Therefore, their behavior is regarded as valuable information for scientists and doctors who are trying to understand human behavior and health, and it can help the Reproduction Ministry determine who should reproduce.

We must expect idiotic and crude behavior from young children, but we must set standards for children. The children that cause trouble at social or recreational activities, museums, or tours of a business, factory, or social club must be restricted from those activities rather than allowed to torment the adults or encourage bad attitudes in other children.

The Children and Behavior Ministries have the option of clearing those restrictions when a child becomes a teenager, if they believe the child has shown the potential to improve his behavior. Their history cannot be erased, however, so whatever bad behavior they showed as a child will remain in their database entry. If the badly behaved children don't improve during their teenage years, then they are regarded as inferior adults. They are given only that one chance to improve.

A popular plot for children's stories (and also for adults), is the "feel-sorry-for-me" plot. Examples are The Ugly Duckling, Beauty and the Beast, and Rudolph the Red Nose Reindeer. Another popular plot is of the murder of children, such as Hansel and Gretel, and Red Riding Hood.

It was beneficial for parents centuries ago to frighten their children about the potential dangers of witches, monsters, strangers, wolves, and snakes because their children were living in a dangerous environment.

There is still a lot of crime in modern nations, so children still need to be taught to be afraid of strangers, but if we can create a city in which there is not much crime, then the only thing children need to be warned about of is machinery, electricity, chemicals, sharp items, and the dangerous things in nature.

Although there could be a benefit to children's stories that frighten them about falling off a cliff or climbing over a fence and getting electrocuted, does a child benefit from The Ugly Duckling and other feel-sorry-for-me stories?

I suspect that those stories have a detrimental effect on children because they encourage the ugly children to:

•		Feel sorry for themselves and pout. This is a form of masturbation, but instead of stimulating pleasant sexual emotions, it is the stimulation of unpleasant, childish emotions.
•		Develop unrealistic expectations and goals, such as believing that they will someday become beautiful and admired, or attract a beautiful spouse. Those unrealistic fantasies will likely result in frustration, disappointment, anger, or sadness.

The ideal way to figure out what effect those stories have on children is to have the children in one particular area have access to those stories, and the children in a separate area have stories that are more realistic, and then observe the differences in their behavior and attitudes. My suspicion is that the children will have better attitudes and relationships if we prohibit the feel-sorry-for-me stories.

The Children Ministry is required to develop stories that will provide the children with something useful, such as a better understanding of nature, their city, or some historical event, recreational activity, social custom, or holiday celebration.

There is no dividing line between a story that is detrimental and a story that is beneficial, but it is better to make that judgment rather than ignore the issue and allow children to be exposed to whatever story that somebody decides to create.

This constitution is based on the theory that it is best to teach children to accept reality, and to learn to deal with their particular genetic disorders, limitations, and problems.

For example, the plot in a lot of Hollywood movies are a variation of the Beauty and the Beast story.

Specifically, a beautiful, intelligent, well behaved woman falls in love with a clumsy, badly behaved, or ugly man.

However, a short, bald man cannot improve his life by titillating himself with movies about Beauty and the Short Bald Man, or Rudolph the Short Bald Reindeer.

The adults who titillate themselves with Ugly Duckling types of stories are wasting their life. They are not accumulating pleasant memories that they will want to reminisce about when they are older, and they are not contributing something that other people appreciate.

The children who titillate themselves with those stories are also wasting their life, but they might also become very disappointed when they grow up and are still just as ugly, clumsy, stupid, stinky, and deformed.

The only sensible solution to defective children is to restrict reproduction to the better quality people.

Another popular type of children's stories is to entertain them with fantasy animals, such as unicorns, fire breathing dragons, Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, and other animals that talk or have magic abilities.

As mentioned with the "feel-sorry-for-me" stories, we could determine what effect the fantasy animals have on children by allowing one group of children to have access to them, and give a separate group of children stories that are more realistic, and then compare the differences in their behavior and attitudes.

I suspect that the children raised on a realistic information will develop better attitudes and relationships with one another, and that they will be more likely to treat animals as "animals" rather than use them as substitutes for friends, lovers, and children.

Religions, businesses, governments, and other organizations are encouraging children to believe in flying reindeers, Santa Claus, tooth fairies, Easter bunnies, and various Halloween monsters and witches, but do children benefit from any of that?

I suspect that these fantasy holidays are also detrimental by filling children's minds with nonsense, and encouraging stupid behavior. It also results in a lot of disappointment when children discover that they were lied to about Santa Claus and the tooth fairy.

One of the justifications for allowing people to do "silly" things is that they are having fun, but the problem with that philosophy is that humans easily get obsessed with our activities. We become obsessed with things because our mind was designed for a primitive environment in which our primary activities were finding food and shelter, and defending ourselves from predators and neighbors, and taking care of our children wife or children. It was beneficial for the people to become obsessed with achieving those goals.

Today, however, we often set goals that are meaningless or idiotic, such as winning a recreational activity; breaking the world record; or acquiring a larger house or more expensive piece of jewelry.

When we become obsessed with an activity, especially if it is a competitive activity, it can slowly evolve through the years, but when nobody puts any intelligent thought into how it is evolving, the changes are likely to be idiotic rather than beneficial.

The tooth fairy may have initially been a harmless concept that some parent created to entertain his child, but it has since evolved to the point at which millions of people are providing large amounts of money or candy to their children when they lose a tooth, and the Canadian and Australian governments made some commemorative coins to promote the tooth fairy (photo to the right).

The Children, Behavior, Leisure, Events, and Social Club Ministers must regularly observe society and pass judgment on whether people are becoming obsessed with something to the point at which it becomes idiotic, wasteful, or destructive.

For example, has a society gone too far when it creates amusement parks in which hundreds of adults are dressing up as fictional characters, as seen in the photo below of Disney World? Do children or adults benefit from those fantasy creatures?

Even if a minister determines that the fantasy creatures provide more benefit than disadvantages, that does not justify the activity. The minister must pass judgment on two other issues:

1)		How much labor and resources should be allocated? How many people do we want dressing up as fantasy characters? Should they do it every day, all day, and in the evening also? Or should they do it only on weekends, or only during the afternoons of certain holidays? How much labor and resources should be put into making the costumes?
2)		How does it compare to the alternatives? Are there other activities that would provide us with more benefit for the same amount of labor and resources?

The democracies and free enterprise systems are giving us what we want with no regard to its value to human life, but this Constitution requires the ministers to provide evidence that their cultural policies are giving us what we need to have the most healthy and satisfying life.

For example, when a minister authorizes a holiday celebration or children's book, they must post a document in the Explanations category to show that it will be beneficial to the human race. Furthermore, they must periodically analyze their policies to determine whether they have achieved the benefit that they were expected to provide.

Our holiday celebrations, children's books, and other culture should encourage beneficial behavior and attitudes, and give us something to reminisce about when we are older. Our culture should not encourage us to pout, hate, or waste our time on idiotic fantasies.

Many parents provide meals to their children as if they were providing meals to adults. For example, they provide the children with visually attractive foods that are served on attractive bowls and plates, and on a decorative dining table.

Some people also provide meals for their pet animals in expensive and decorative bowls, such as those in the photos below.

However, neither young children nor animals care about or appreciate such "luxuries". The younger a child is, the less he cares about the meal and the manner in which it has been prepared and served.

Although this constitution regards children as "young adults", they cannot be treated as adults. As pointed out in other sections of this constitution, we are not treating people fairly when we treat them as equals. We must adjust our treatment of people according to their age, sex, and other criteria.

This section of the Constitution pointed out that adults are designing birthday parties for their children to titillate themselves, not to be beneficial for the children. Adults are also designing meals for their children in a manner that titillates the adults rather than what is most sensible for the children. This results in the parents wasting some of their life on:

1)		Providing the children with "gourmet" meals that the children do not like or appreciate. Children are especially uninterested in status foods, such as a caviar soufflé.
2)		Providing the children with a beautiful tablecloth, flowers, plates, glasses, and utensils that the children do not appreciate or care about.

The younger a child is, the more similar he is to an animal, and the parents who don't understand this, or who refuse to accept it, can become upset when their children don't appreciate their meals. Some parents react to those situations by scolding or punishing their children, but those parents are tormenting themselves and their children by trying to force their children to fit their fantasy of how children should behave.

Many women whine that men don't understand how difficult it is to take care of children, but some of that difficulty is self-inflicted, such as when mothers waste their time on the production and cleanup of gourmet meals for their children.

Modern humans must be capable of understanding that humans are apes, and that the younger a child is, the more closely his mind resembles that of a ape. The younger a child is, the less he will be concerned about how his meals are prepared and served.

Children are wasting a lot of food, mainly at school cafeterias. I have personally witnessed the waste at several school cafeterias. At an elementary school in Sacramento, it seemed to me as if more than half of the food was wasted.

The US government has rules that the school cafeterias must follow, but our government officials are too incompetent to analyze the effect of their rules and experiment with improvements to them. Our government doesn't even bother to estimate at how much food is wasted at the school cafeterias, or whether the waste is increasing or decreasing.

A few groups of people in different nations have tried to determine how much food is wasted at their school cafeterias, and estimates range from 23% to 53%.

A teacher and student at the Belen Jesuit Preparatory School published this document about their experiments with offering an Oreo cookie to 16-18 year old high school boys if they ate all of their food. They discovered that it reduced waste significantly, which brought them to the conclusion that we could reduce the amount of food that is wasted if we offer a reward to the children who ate all of their meal.

However, this Constitution prohibits using rewards to fix bad behavior because rewards are considered just as detrimental and worthless as punishments.

When we try to stop bad behavior people with rewards, we are treating the people like circus animals, and the badly behaved people will behave properly only if they want the reward. We will create a much more pleasant society when people behave properly because they want to. Therefore, we should look for a method to reduce food waste that people want to follow.

We need to find a way to encourage children to eat their meals without using rewards or punishments. This requires that we first put some effort into researching the issue of why the children are wasting so much food. Nobody has studied that issue yet, but four possible reasons are:

1)	Some children might be so accustomed to sweet and intensely flavored foods that the school meals seem bland or bitter.
2)	Some children might eat excessively at home, or take snacks to school, thereby reducing their appetite for the school meal.
3)	Some school meals might be inferior in taste and appearance to the meals that some children get at home.
4)	Some children might waste food because of genetic disorders or differences that cause them to dislike some of the foods.

If a significant amount of food is wasted because of any of the first three of those reasons, then it will be easy for the Meals Minister to reduce food waste. The next section will explain this. And the fourth reason can be reduced by controlling reproduction to reduce diversity and defects.

The Meals Minister has the authority to determine which foods we have access to; when we have access to foods; the amount of sugar and flavors in the foods and drinks; and what type of meals the restaurants and cafeterias can provide.

In regards to meals for children, the Meals Minister has a significant advantage over the school officials in a democracy. Specifically, he does not have to compete with parents, vending machines, McDonald's restaurants, or Halloween candy. The children get all of their meals from restaurants and school cafeterias that follow his guidelines. He is a "dictator" of meals.

Since he has total control of what the children eat, he determines how many times a day they can eat, what they eat, and whether they have snacks between meals, and if so, what type of snacks.

This constitution recommends the two-meal schedule, so the children will get breakfast in the late morning when they are at school, and they will get dinner in the evening. They will not have any snacks unless they are involved with some strenuous physical activities.

During the weekends, they get both breakfast and dinner from restaurants, but they must go to the restaurants that have been designated for children in order to ensure that they are getting the meals that have been specified for children, and to avoid irritating the adults who don't want to eat with children.

Since none of the homes have kitchens, parents cannot give food to their children, and there are no vending machines or other sources of food for the children. This will significantly reduce food waste because they will not have any other options for food.

As mentioned earlier, the 4th possible reason that children are wasting food is because of genetic differences and defects. This constitution prohibits forcing people to do something they don't want to do, so those children cannot be forced to eat the meals.

Instead, they are provided with meals that they want in order to keep them healthy and happy, but their entry in the People database must show that they are genetic misfits, and they must be prohibited from reproducing.

The US government has an agency that has designed a lot of meals for children of different ages, but the photos of those meals make them look like the gourmet meals that restaurants provide adults.

Adults have a tendency to design meals for children in order to please themselves, not do what is best for the children. This behavior is similar to the way mothers design smash birthday parties to titillate themselves, rather than do what is best for their baby, and it is similar to how people provide meals for their pet dogs in very expensive bowls.

Animals do not know how to take care of their children. Instead, their emotions evolved to cause them to enjoy doing things that are beneficial to the children. For example, a mother bird does not understand the concept that her babies need to eat spiders and caterpillars. Rather, she has an emotional craving to bring them insects, and she is titillated by their chirping and their open mouths. She brings them insects to please herself, not to feed the babies. She doesn't even notice or care whether she is giving one of the baby birds more food than the others.

Likewise, a female dog feeds her babies with milk without any understanding that she is providing her babies with food. She enjoys the feeling of her babies sucking on her nipples. She allows her babies to do it because it pleases her.

Prehistoric women would do things to make their children laugh, giggle, and smile, and to stop them from crying. This resulted in mothers taking care of their children without any understanding of what they were doing.

The same concept applies to male animals. They have sex to please themselves, not to reproduce. They don't have any understanding of what they are doing. Likewise, the males compete for leadership to satisfy their craving for dominance, not because they want to provide leadership to their group.

Our emotions evolved for a prehistoric era, and they are no longer appropriate. Mothers are not helping their children when they provide them with smash cakes, and men are not helping anybody, including themselves, when they titillate themselves excessively with pornography, or get involved with pedophilia. People today must refrain from doing whatever is pleasurable and think about what we are doing.

We are wasting our time and resources by creating fancy meals for children. The meals for children should be designed to be nutritional, not decorative. Furthermore, the meals should be easy for the children to eat without making a mess.

A democratic government cannot create sensible meals for children because parents would complain that the government is treating their children as animals, but the Meals Minister is required to ignore what parents want and design meals that are best for the children.

All of the ministers must also consider that one of the main goals of this constitution is to reduce undesirable chores, so the Meals Minister must also design meals for children that reduce the labor of creating them and cleaning up the mess.

There is no benefit to providing children with complex, luxurious meals, or providing them with delicate or beautiful drinking glasses, plates, table cloths, tables, chairs, or utensils. The younger a child is, the more idiotic it is to provide them with luxury meals.

By making food items even smaller, they could be eaten in one bite.

The meals for very young children should be designed so that they can eat them with their fingers without making a mess.

We already produce a lot of appetizers that can be eaten with our fingers, such as granola bars, eggrolls, empanadas, and taquitos.

As food processing machines become more advanced, we will be able to create foods that are small enough for children to eat in one bite, and clean enough for them to pick up without getting their fingers oily or messy.

By providing children with clean, bite-sized food items, the restaurants for children will not need to provide forks, spoons, or knives. The children will not make much of a mess, either, because they will not have to cut their food into pieces, or bite pieces off.

Children pick up whatever culture that they are exposed to, but adults are very resistant to changes. Adults are frightened to try something that is different from what we became accustomed to. We want to eat the foods, wear the clothing, play the recreational activities, and follow the religion that we became accustomed to during our childhood.

If children are raised on candy bars, excessively sweet pizzas, cookies, and cakes, then they will become adults who have a resistance to healthy foods. Therefore, it is important that we ensure that children become accustomed to a variety of healthy foods.

None of the existing cultures believe that we need to expose children to healthy foods because most people believe that humans are a creation of a supreme being, or that we are like pieces of clay. They don't believe that we are a species of ape that adapts to the environment during our childhood, and then we become adults who behave like a herd of wildebeest on a migration path.

Many adults realize that they don't want to change their clothing styles, recreational activities, language, or religion, but they assume that the reason they don't want to change is because they have the correct beliefs. They don't realize that they are following the culture that they grew up with because they are emotionally similar to animals that follow migration paths.

The resistance to genetics and evolution is another example of why we must be concerned with the information that we are providing children. When children are taught that their religion is correct, or that the Big Bang is correct, or that Freudian psychology is correct, they will become adults who believe that they have the correct beliefs, and they will resist considering "false" concepts. It is better to teach children that nobody has the answers to life, and they should be willing to consider alternative opinions.

Likewise, children will assume that the foods that they grow up with are the proper foods, so in order for children to enjoy the variety of foods that are available today, and in order for them to enjoy healthy meals, the meals minister must ensure that they are provided with a variety of healthy meals.

The Meals Minister is required to ensure that the foods that are provided to children are healthy. For example, the animal crackers, biscuits, and cookies can be made from sprouted grains; sugar levels can be very low; some of the sugar can be replaced with Stevia; gelatin can be added to make them more chewy; and they can have fillings of fruit, vegetables, and meat.

Crackers and cookies must be designed to be healthy.

Those type of cookies and crackers would be such a nutritious food that they could be a child's primary meal, rather than "junk food", because they would be the same as eating a bowl of porridge made from sprouted oats and wheat.

Likewise, the dough used for pies, ravioli, pizzas, and other foods, can also be made from sprouted grains. The pizzas can be given toppings that are nutritious, rather than a sugary tomato sauce, and pies can have low sugar levels.

In a free enterprise system, or in a democracy, only a few people would choose to eat the cookies, pizzas, and pies that are made with whole grains and low sugar levels, but the children growing up in Kastron will not have any options. They can eat only what the Meals Ministry authorizes. Therefore, the children will become accustomed to healthy meals.

The children will have no memories of a food similar to an Oreo cookie that has a filling made from a secretive mixture of hydrogenated vegetable oil, high fructose corn syrup, artificial flavors, and titanium dioxide.

Furthermore, the Meals Minister cannot keep any recipes a secret, and none of the restaurants can be secretive about the food they provide. All of the government officials and businesses must treat people as friends, rather than as profit opportunities. If the Meals Minister authorizes something like Coca-Cola, the ingredients will be public knowledge.
(More details are in the Meals document.)

In a free enterprise system, most of the businesses that produce food products compete for consumers by claiming to have the best tasting food. Individual citizens on YouTube also try to attract attention by claiming that they have the best tasting food recipe. There are also organizations arranging for contests to determine the best tasting chili, peach pie, or lasagna.

The attitude that certain foods are "the best" is as detrimental as claiming that certain flowers are the best, or that certain colors are the best. We will have a more pleasant life when we are taught that the universe is an incredibly wonderful place, and that it provides us with a wide variety of things to enjoy.

Although each of us has particular emotional preferences for visual images, flavors, odors, textures, and sounds, we should be taught to enjoy the variety rather than restrict ourselves to just a couple items.

The meals minister must dampen the attitude that certain meals are "the best". They must design meals for children that expose them to a wide variety of flavors and appearances so that they don't become finicky adults who will only eat a couple different types of foods.

Adults should not be so ignorant as to believe that there is only one proper way to make a pizza, or that cookies that are flavored with turmeric and onion are disgusting.

At the University of California at Santa Barbara, which is near my home, a chef at one of the dormitories told me that a lot of the students would complain about the meals if he gave them anything "unusual". The most popular breakfast food at his dormitory was Froot Loops cereal, and the most popular dinners were pizza, hamburgers, and hot dogs. Many of the students did not want to try any other type of food. For example, some of them complained when he served them jambalaya, and others complained when he served them stir-fried shrimp.

The concept that there is one thing in particular that is the best is nonsense. People who believe that there is such a thing is the best food, the best recreational activity, or the best clothing item are denying themselves the pleasures of other things, as I explained in this video. They are essentially treating themselves as prisoners who are limited to what they can enjoy in life.

The Schools Minister is required to ensure that children realize that they are apes, and that they will become adults who want to follow whatever culture they learned as a child. The children must be told that the schools are exposing them to a variety of foods and activities so that they become adults who can enjoy the variety that the universe provides to us.

Schools should help children understand that there is no "best" food, clothing, color, flower, animal, or activity, and that they should regard the different options as different pleasures in life.

Providing children with tablecloths, beautifully decorated plates, and flower arrangements is as wasteful and idiotic as feeding dogs, chickens, or pigs in expensive, decorative bowls.

The Restaurants Minister is required to provide separate restaurants for children, and those restaurants must be designed with waterproof tables and chairs, and the floors must be waterproof, also, rather than carpet or wood. That will make it easier to clean the restaurant.

The tables cannot have a tablecloth, and the children cannot be given drinking cups made of glass, or plates made of porcelain or wood. All of the items in the children's restaurants must be rugged and durable. The ruggedness will reduce the breakage of items while the children are eating, and it will allow the children and robots to drop the items into bins for cleaning and storage.

Since the children must get all of their meals from the children's restaurants, they will become accustomed to whatever style of restaurants the Restaurants Minister provides them, and they will become accustomed to whatever type of meals that the Meals Minister provides to them. The children will not have any concept of getting food from vending machines, fast food restaurants, or their mother, so they will not complain about the restaurants or the food.