nalani said:
I just want to make sure I'm understanding you correctly, because you seem to be debating me and I feel compelled to answer at each turn ...
Yes, I agree - there are some people out there that should not procreate. But you seem to be making a very broad and general statement without actually making that statement. What I'm getting from you is, if you cannot financially take care of a child, do not have children. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Like I said, you're not actually making a statement, but rather, alluding to such.
The question I would pose to such a broad generalization is, what of the parent who is left widowed ... or becomes divorced ... or, for whatever traumatic reason, becomes emotionally unfit or unstable ... what of the millions of circumstances after you've already become a parent?
1. The parent left widowed.
Part of being responsible is life insurance...just in case something bad happens.
2. The parent becomes divorced.
Enforced child support.
3. Becomes emotionally unfit/unstable.
The other parent has to step up to the plate and do the right things.
Since you drew me out, I'd like to add this, at the risk of no more smooches (
)...
It is not my job to pay for someone elses kids. I can sympathize, and, at my own discretion, choose to help out, but the decision should be mine. Not the governments. By the same token, I don't think anybody else should pay for my children. My last word is this...If you cannot be financially responsible, how can you be parentally responsible? You,
Na are the kind of person every parent should be. You don't rely on the state to help you pay to raise your children, and you should'nt have to. Yes...I'll agree that there are always exceptions, but those exceptions should be taken on a case-by-case basis.