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.
Don't agree with that. The human race will die if it is not maintained. Birth rates are at a historical low in the western world and thus society needs to make sure that having kids isn't seen as a waste of time and money by most people. Don't get me wrong, there should be limits to how much parents are paid, but there is a huge difference between making it easier for responsible parents to raise their kids and subsidizing social ills like single parenting.
Adding incentives to make people have more kids has been failing since Augustus. Even the Chinese after they have relaxed their one child policy cannot seem to get people to have more children. I don't see that changing anytime soon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hakkarin
If single parents are not paid child benefit, people will think twice before making themsevles into one. I am also sick and tired of this "think of the children" bull**** that these people keep hiding behind. I AM thinking of the children, by trying to prevent them from being raised by single parents who aren't as likely to take care of them. I would also argue that consistent failure to take care of your kids is a form of child neglect and that such parents should not have kids anyway. Have child protection take their kids, they won't be worse off then they would have been with the parents considering that the parent could not even afford them anyway or pissed the money away.
Like they did in the past? Logic never trumps biology. Don't kid yourself, they will still have those kids.
I am not really sure what any of what you just said has anything to do with single parenting. Are you saying some relationships fall a part because people can be ugly?
Yes and a myriad of reasons. Your law would discriminate against the differently attractive.
What if nobody wants to be with you?
But I guess you don't have that trouble so you can't conceive of that kind of suffering?
And so you want to make law to make people feel even worse about being alone.
Yes and a myriad of reasons. Your law would discriminate against the differently attractive.
What if nobody wants to be with you?
But I guess you don't have that trouble so you can't conceive of that kind of suffering?
And so you want to make law to make people feel even worse about being alone.
Do you ever think of anyone but yourself?
Do you?
I totally reject your position/interpretation...whatever!
Some of the most beautiful people I know are not attractive to the human eye's first sight. They are beautiful inside as a terrific human being. Surface looks are just a shallow and first attraction. An intelligent person will see the beauty of the real person within. It is when you get to know a person you find that beauty. One even has to look within at the most attractive, first appearance person. Some of them are not worth taking a second look. If one rejects because of surface looks...that person can go look elsewhere and find another shallow person that's probably not worth much.
Whether handsome, beautiful or not attractive, it is the person within that must be evaluated...not the surface of any person.
I totally reject your position/interpretation...whatever!
Some of the most beautiful people I know are not attractive to the human eye's first sight. They are beautiful inside as a terrific human being. Surface looks are just a shallow and first attraction. An intelligent person will see the beauty of the real person within. It is when you get to know a person you find that beauty. One even has to look within at the most attractive, first appearance person. Some of them are not worth taking a second look. If one rejects because of surface looks...that person can go look elsewhere and find another shallow person that's probably not worth much.
Whether handsome, beautiful or not attractive, it is the person within that must be evaluated...not the surface of any person.
So your law will be "Make someone stay with you or fall in love with you or be punished by society."
Brilliant plan, Einstein! That doesn't discriminate against anyone! Not!
This is why this planet is doomed!
Edit: Whoops. I thought you were the OP. Disregard the reference to "your law".
Instead of punishing the single mom that CHOOSE HER CHILDREN??? How about punishing the non-existent fathers???? I can say that as a 20+yr single Mom, who now has 4 Adult Sons.
Her body her choice" stop blaming men or society because you can't afford the kid you CHOOSE to give birth to.
We need to punish both. First, make welfare like unemployment where there is a limit and people have to take anything. In the case of single parents, after a second child born on welfare you are sterilized. This goes to both parents. We also need to stop glamorizing having kids without being married. It's a sin to have multiple kids with multiple people and instead of accepting it, not allow it. In the case of baby daddies, castrate them and put them to work.
We need to punish both. First, make welfare like unemployment where there is a limit and people have to take anything. In the case of single parents, after a second child born on welfare you are sterilized. This goes to both parents. We also need to stop glamorizing having kids without being married. It's a sin to have multiple kids with multiple people and instead of accepting it, not allow it. In the case of baby daddies, castrate them and put them to work.
Welfare actually DOES have a 5 year lifetime limit
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.