Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You talk about the 'wedlock" as a cure for all these problems, nothing could be further from the truth.I am sure you are aware of single mothers having children, or adopting them, all planed, right down to the cost factor. You may be one of them, you only mention yourself as a care giver. Thats ok, even Gay people have children that grow up well adjusted. Neglect can come from poor people as well as wealthy people cruel treatment of your offspring knows no bounds. And yes you are right, if you can't support, care, feed, provide a proper education then you should not have children, period ! The welfare mom that keeps spitting out babies thing is way overblown don't put all the blame in that direction.
We must have laws that protect the children and the public, there is no getting around that. Education will go a long way in solving the unwanted children issues across our lands.
Look. I don't care who is married and who isn't. I do care who is having kids they can't raise. I do care how many of them are left by the wayside. And I care how many will end up with criminal records. These are social issues and affect us all.
What's your warm fuzzy solution?
Throw more money? Education is free in this country and that hasn't helped.
I don't give a rat's patootie as to whether people are married, living together, adoptive parents, gay, straight, transsexual, religious, atheists, overweight, have a third grade education, a doctorate, are undocumented citizens, WHATEVER. I only care that every child born in this country has SOMEONE that will ante up to make sure their needs are met in some way other than TAX DOLLARS.
I have actually had someone tell me that they needed to find out about medicaid to make sure they are qualified as they wanted to have a baby but didn't have the money to pay for the hospital bill. I guess that is "planned parenthood?" The plan is - Uncle Sam raises these kids. And last time I looked, Uncle Sam was You and Me.
About 25% of the nation's children are living in poverty. Okay. I get that. But here's the thing. Where did they come from? They didn't just pop up under cabbage leaves. Someone had to birth them. So the problem to address is not "children living in poverty," it is the two people who decided to birth a child into a life of poverty.
So you tell me the solution. All the birth control pills and condoms and sex ed classes in the universe can't prevent pregnancy if THEY AREN'T USED.
When idiots like Joy Behar laughs approvingly at the mention of 13 year old girls having sex, what do you expect ?
Having sex versus not having sex is not the issue. Responsibility versus irresponsibility is the issue. Since the 1960's we have had modern scientific birth control (namely the "pill") which allows people the choice of having or not having children. The idea that we are responsible for our actions, or our lack of actions (not using birth control) is passé, tragically. People are going to have sex. That is just part of the human condition, and it is too deep-rooted to expect that some sort of arbitrary rules like marriage are going to make a lot of difference. What we can hope for is responsibility.
A natural, universal, inalienable right? A dissenting view.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anifani821
The right to procreate is a natural, universal, inalienable right.
I beg to differ. That is a nice theory, and certainly the urge to procreate (as opposed to just the urge to have sex) is very common, near universal, as it represents our ontological shot at eternity via passing along our genes.
However the human race reached the point about 50 or 70 years ago (or more or less, I don't really know) where our science had given us such dominion over the natural world and such an edge over infant mortality that we were starting to over-populate the world to a very, very dangerous degree. Our continued existence as a species (without mass death due to starvation and/or horrific wars over increasingly scarce resources in order to avoid starvation) was conceivably in question in the not-so-distant future.
As much as I abhor almost all the tenets and practices of the Chinese Communist regime under Chairman Mao, I must say that their draconian stand about having only one child per family was the one thing they got right. Without it, China would have been mired in the abject poverty and hand-to-mouth existence which it had known. The only path to a better life for the country as a whole was strict birth control.
Yes, I know: That has created a demographic problem of large proportions (partly world-wide) as the percentage of old people in the population grows while there are fewer young people to support them. However bad that problem is (and it is bad and becoming worse), it is not as bad as unchecked population growth would have been. Briefly, it is the lesser of two evils.
Thank heavens for the decreasing populations in much of the world - it is the only sliver of hope for the salvation of humanity in a world of increasing darkness.
Having sex versus not having sex is not the issue. Responsibility versus irresponsibility is the issue. Since the 1960's we have had modern scientific birth control (namely the "pill") which allows people the choice of having or not having children. The idea that we are responsible for our actions, or our lack of actions (not using birth control) is passé, tragically. People are going to have sex. That is just part of the human condition, and it is too deep-rooted to expect that some sort of arbitrary rules like marriage are going to make a lot of difference. What we can hope for is responsibility.
Being married has nothing to do with what I am protesting.
Marriage simply means that there are two people who, theoretically, will be available to bring in $$$ to the household and to provide childcare.
It *is* a matter of personal responsibility. There is also abortion and adoption available to folks who have unprotected sex and end up with an unwanted pregnancy. The problem is, we have a segment of society who considers it their right to live off subsidies. Most of these folks live in generational poverty.
The sad facts are . . . children are often brought into this world by folks who know full well they can't afford the children, but they are counting on the rest of us to pick up the tab. Having a child gives access to services. Even undocumented non-citizens receive food stamps, medicaid, etc for their children.
We need a safety net for the elderly, disabled and children. We all agree on that. But the safety net should not be a lifestyle decision, which is all too often the way it works.
What I always had a problem with is children( more than one ) considering the facts at hand, making the wrong choice and knowing it. I made my choice long ago when I was 20 , one kid then divorce 5 years later.
Why O why have multiple children? There is no requirement to propagate the world,mas if having children was a nessarly thing, regardless of who you are married too. Note: I am not singling in on you or any one on this forum. My thoughts are based on observation.
Yes. If this topic were discussed more, and not such a social taboo, maybe it would prevent others from making a serious error or at least to force them to think seriously about the topic, use their heads and not their hearts.
They say the crime rate in the country took a dive about 17 years after abortions were legalized. The fact that troubled young men commit the majority of crimes was cited.
Having kids is a very serious commitment for a good chunk of a person's life. They had better plan, save, and be ready for the sacrifice. Not everyone is parenting material.
I don't regret having a child, but as an only child I might regret having only one now - my parents and grandparents are dead, plus most of my aunts and uncles, leaving about 4 very distant cousins that I have not spoken to since the last funeral (7 years ago). We are all scattered across the country. My husband's parents are in their 90s, his sister and her husband have no children - it won't be that long until my son has no living relative, and that is sad. Of course, looking at my various cousins who haven't been on speaking terms in quite awhile, there is no guarantee that a sibling would be close.
Fortunately he has a ton of friends. Not quite the same thing (assuming you don't have a totally dysfunctional family).
They are my life- the product of my life. How can I regret attaining the only real wealth that a human being can really have.. Offspring...To regret would be like saying a rose regrets blooming. It is better to bloom whither and die than to never have bloomed and whither and die.
But artists say the same thing, and scientists, etc.
Your life can have products other than children. For some, the product of their minds and creative abilities are just as, or more important than the product that all other creatures can bring forth. Some of those other products may change the world, too.
I don't regret having a child, but as an only child I might regret having only one now - my parents and grandparents are dead, plus most of my aunts and uncles, leaving about 4 very distant cousins that I have not spoken to since the last funeral (7 years ago). We are all scattered across the country. My husband's parents are in their 90s, his sister and her husband have no children - it won't be that long until my son has no living relative, and that is sad. Of course, looking at my various cousins who haven't been on speaking terms in quite awhile, there is no guarantee that a sibling would be close.
Fortunately he has a ton of friends. Not quite the same thing (assuming you don't have a totally dysfunctional family).
i'm an only child who has never regretted it, although i grew up in a family of middle-aged aunts, uncles in addition to my parents. with parents only, i feel i would have been much less content.
i chose not to have children for a variety of reasons and have never had regrets. i feel if you have chidren, unless they turned out really badly, it's impossible to imagine not having them in your life.
at this point, i have no relatives except a cousin many years my senior and 800 miles away. my late husband , who was one of five, and i were family for each other during the years we were married, along with a number of friends who were in and out of our lives over the years. my husband was odd man out in his family- thank heavens- and was never especially close to his four siblings, so in his case, family was not of great significance.
currently, i have a significant other, who is a family substitute, and i for him. additionally, i have one or two friends of some meaning, and many acquaintances whom i see rather regularly. i have come to the conclusion that this configuration of people in my life suits me. without the significant other, it would definitely suit me much less well, but neither additional friends nor family could fill that space for me, given what i know about myself and my needs.
so i am generally content with where i am, acknowledging the fact that life can change at any minute. yes, i have some regrets, but they are concerning those things in life over which i had no choice or control.
Look. I don't care who is married and who isn't. I do care who is having kids they can't raise. I do care how many of them are left by the wayside. And I care how many will end up with criminal records. These are social issues and affect us all.
What's your warm fuzzy solution?
Throw more money? Education is free in this country and that hasn't helped.
I don't give a rat's patootie as to whether people are married, living together, adoptive parents, gay, straight, transsexual, religious, atheists, overweight, have a third grade education, a doctorate, are undocumented citizens, WHATEVER. I only care that every child born in this country has SOMEONE that will ante up to make sure their needs are met in some way other than TAX DOLLARS.
I have actually had someone tell me that they needed to find out about medicaid to make sure they are qualified as they wanted to have a baby but didn't have the money to pay for the hospital bill. I guess that is "planned parenthood?" The plan is - Uncle Sam raises these kids. And last time I looked, Uncle Sam was You and Me.
About 25% of the nation's children are living in poverty. Okay. I get that. But here's the thing. Where did they come from? They didn't just pop up under cabbage leaves. Someone had to birth them. So the problem to address is not "children living in poverty," it is the two people who decided to birth a child into a life of poverty.
So you tell me the solution. All the birth control pills and condoms and sex ed classes in the universe can't prevent pregnancy if THEY AREN'T USED.
From what I've heard, in New Jersey you are allowed to have one child on welfare. If you have others the state government will contribute no money towards them. I don't know if this is still true. I think it is. It's a start in the right direction, though.
But, as is mentioned, the problem goes farther than money. Some homes are just dysfunctional. Some children just feel unwanted. That, as you mention, is a harder subject to address, but I agree that there should be some education in high school regarding the needs of a family.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The issue is responsibility.
