Should people have children if they can't afford it?

[Jahrooshshalom]

If someone who is fertile but unfit or unable to care for a baby has a baby, why is it, why should it, be anyone elses responsibility? When the womb donor wasn't responsible should they just be allowed to keep making problems for society to take on? Or should she be held accountable? And for the sake of the children?

 

[dogs4thewin]

If someone who is fertile but unfit or unable to care for a baby has a baby, why is it, why should it, be anyone elses responsibility? When the womb donor wasn't responsible should they just be allowed to keep making problems for society to take on? Or should she be held accountable? And for the sake of the children?

bingo

 

[dogs4thewin]

Obviously I'm not talking about you, I'm talking about your attitude, which is that rich people can have as many illegitimate children as they like.

No, I am saying given a choice between someone who is NOT married, but is willing to step up and care for the child or someone who is married, but does NOT want to step up and care for the child or children and instead expects the government to do so while they keep having children.

Not that I support people that choose to have children out of wedlock.

 

[malvina]

Wait - women have "seeds"? Where?

Didnt you know a woman releases her seed every month?

 

[Berean777]

I have a friend that when we meet up, we always end up talking about a fairly controversial issue and often can never agree on them.

This came up yesterday as we were watching a programme on a family on welfare benefits with 11 children who were saying that the government were not helping them enough to look after the children and buy what they need.

What are your views? Should the government/ general public be in the position to pay for this?

No one here is in a position to be judgemental especially in regards to the children. The children should not be grouped with the patents situation. In fact the children may aspire to become better than their parents in many ways and contribute to the society in a positive way.

So in regards to whether the government should pay for parents to have children. Well definitely yes because parents are providing the next generation of workforce and tax prayers that the government will benefit from and any money that the government has invested in them in their early life will more than be paid for in taxes alone and in being consumers to help the economies growth in the future.

Money spent by government now from tax payers is recycled back to the system eventually worth 10000 percentage interest on top.

 

[dogs4thewin]

No one here is in a position to be judgemental especially in regards to the children. The children should not be grouped with the patents situation. In fact the children may aspire to become better than their parents in many ways and contribute to the society in a positive way.

So in regards to whether the government should pay for parents to have children. Well definitely yes because parents are providing the next generation of workforce and tax prayers that the government will benefit from and any money that the government has invested in them in their early life will more than be paid for in taxes alone and in being consumers to help the economies growth in the future.

Money spent by government now from tax payers is recycled back to the system eventually worth 10000 percentage interest on top.

Why should the government pay for people's choice to have children for whom they cannot provide?

 

[Berean777]

Why should the government pay for people's choice to have children for whom they cannot provide?

Because having children is not an economics choice but one that is a pro life choice.

Some parents choose to have many children because they love children. This is the only choice that doesn't require economics limitations. If God approves them, then so be it.

The government is required to support life and has the responsibility of supporting pro life choice, otherwise it should not be in power.

Life finds a way.

 

[Berean777]

...

 

[Berean777]

...

 

[Ana the Ist]

Women wanted 'liberation' and then had to turn back around and demand aid from men to continue such. Birth control didn't do anything except make women gravely irresponsible of the fact that they are women and rue being born with a uterus.

I do sort of enjoy the idea of something backfiring on women, being that men are so attacked and indoctrinated into a false concept that women essentially be as much like men as they can while men be as so as women. I don't like the idea of men being told there is something intrinsically wrong with them and not women when it is clearly the opposite if one wants to go there.

I'll bite.

What's intrinsically wrong with women?

 

[Crowns&Laurels]

I'll bite.

What's intrinsically wrong with women?

The accountability part of their brain is apparently non-existent.

I mean seriously can you name one thing? Just one. Because I see feminism as a volley of lies and blaming, and whenever any of those things are proven wrong they don't even have it in them to admit it, they just go on to another deceit.
When a woman states that she is not one of them she is seen as a dissenter.
That's pretty damning as far as I'm concerned.

Birth control and abortion simply means that they can't even take accountability for their own natural bodies. It's women trying essentially to be like men, seeing their uterus and womb as a disadvantage. It's not hard to see the incredibly absurd problem there.

 

[dogs4thewin]

I'll bite.

What's intrinsically wrong with women?

Nothing, but they should be held accountable for their actions the same as men.

 

[cifi]

The accountability part of their brain is apparently non-existent.

I mean seriously can you name one thing? Just one. Because I see feminism as a volley of lies and blaming, and whenever any of those things are proven wrong they don't even have it in them to admit it, they just go on to another deceit.
When a woman states that she is not one of them she is seen as a dissenter.
That's pretty damning as far as I'm concerned.

Birth control and abortion simply means that they can't even take accountability for their own natural bodies. It's women trying essentially to be like men, seeing their uterus and womb as a disadvantage. It's not hard to see the incredibly absurd problem there.

The way you talk, it's as if the womb is not your problem.

A womb was required to make you and everyone else on the planet. Let's remove this nasty "womb" and the responsibility of owning it from the human species and see how far we get.

Both male and female are responsible for the creation of life, the fact that you sit there disowning half of our species just shows how detached you are from reality. I blame poor education, and I pity you.

 

[Aelred of Rievaulx]

The accountability part of their brain is apparently non-existent.

I mean seriously can you name one thing? Just one. Because I see feminism as a volley of lies and blaming, and whenever any of those things are proven wrong they don't even have it in them to admit it, they just go on to another deceit.
When a woman states that she is not one of them she is seen as a dissenter.
That's pretty damning as far as I'm concerned.

Birth control and abortion simply means that they can't even take accountability for their own natural bodies. It's women trying essentially to be like men, seeing their uterus and womb as a disadvantage. It's not hard to see the incredibly absurd problem there.

It's statements like these which make me feel that more birth control is needed...

A woman is accountable to herself and God, most certainly not to you and she is not owned by men and their whims. If you don't like that then that's your problem.

 

[dogs4thewin]

It's statements like these which make me feel that more birth control is needed...

A woman is accountable to herself and God, most certainly not to you and she is not owned by men and their whims. If you don't like that then that's your problem.

However, she and the man should be held accountable for their actions that effect other people which would include having children for whom they cannot properly provide.

 

[squirrel123]

[QUOTE="Crowns&Laurels, post: 68884889] , Birth control and abortion simply means that they can't even take accountability for their own natural bodies. It's women trying essentially to be like men, seeing their uterus and womb as a disadvantage. It's not hard to see the incredibly absurd problem there.[/QUOTE]
So what would "taking accountability" (sic) look like?
a. Denying our husbands sex? Or
b. Birthing and bringing up baby after baby after baby, regardless of our physical, emotional or financial health and the health of the world in general? Or
c. What?

 

[Jeremy J]

I think it is a question that the couple should bring to God. With God, there is endless, endless hope and nothing is impossible. He is aware of our struggles. He is aware of our pains and sorrows. Maybe he is just waiting for some to fully trust him.

 

[jenniTexan]

Complicated, as many unforeseen circumstances can come into play (spousal death, divorce, loss of job, etc.) I agree, that it's irresponsible to bring children into the world if they can't be fully supported. Though, what's done is done.

I grew up in a low-income home. My mother did everything she could to make sure I was supported, but in a few cases, government assistance was a lifesaver for us. I don't believe in the idea of letting anyone starve, let alone children.