|
I agree why have kids knowing you womnt be able to provide to take care of them and give them what
they need.. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I agree. Temporary contraception for those on welfare would be good for the overall being of society
at their expense, and also provide an incentive to get out of poverty. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
A person should be able to afford to look after a child, if they can't then they shouldn't have it
in the first place. They can love the kid more than anyone in the world but that love alone isn't
going to put food on the table and clothes on its back. It is incredibly selfish and irresponsible
to bring a kid into the world when the parents cannot afford to look after it. They end spounging
off the tax payer to bring up there kids. I absolutely agree with the above statement. If they can't
bring up there kids properly maybe they should be forced to give them to a family who maybe can't
have kids but can bring them up properly. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
If you have a child and you know you can't care for them properly(long term), your a bad parent even
before you have a kid. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Its not fair to the kids. Bring them into the world and then don't give them what they need. Too
many parents don't think they should wait until they are financially stable to have kids. They say
all they need is "love". Love never paid the bills. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I think them being 'not allowed' is sort of unrealistic but they SHOULDN'T have the kids on PURPOSE
or CARELESSLY. I can understand accidental pregnancy where as your %98 effective birth control pill
didn't work. Or even if your IUD falls out (happened to me but I didn't end up pregnant). You see
too many families depending on the government to feed their 5 hungry kids when all they would have
had to done was use a condom or some sort of birth control method. Having that many kids on minimum
wage in inexcusable. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
You should only take what you can afford if you can't afford a child you should not have one today
there is so much pressure on kids to have a nice car nice clothes be able to go out with their
friends . If you can't provide 3 meals a day put clothes on their back and have enough money to fund
sporting clubs or whatever else your child may want to do then it is selfish to have a child! This
is an extreme suggestion but just think about it if you are on benefits and done really have any
disability your just lazy and its easier not to work in Britain today imagine if no-one worked where
would you get your money from I think if you have a child you should HAVE to have a job even if it
is on minimum wage I think you should get some support if you earn below a certain wage but to get
support you should have to be trying to do some yourself otherwise it is not "support" its just
giving money away. Another reason I don't think you should just get paid to have children is because
not in all cases but in quite alot of cases it encourages people with little money to have children
and don't necessarily spend it on their kids I have seen alot of this since my parents began to
foster until the government can conduct a plan to ensure the benefits are being spent on the
children I don't think tax payers money should be given more freely. People who work and earn a good
living in this country are punished by taxes whilst those who choose not to work are rewarded with
benefits, these standards seem to make no sense to me! I believe in tuff love make it hard for
people who are lazy for the kids that skip school and those that take drugs make rewards for the
ones who learn and are respectable members of society that way people will try harder to get jobs
they will want to work and pay their way!!! |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I agree to a point: If I have to pay taxes to support social programs just so some lazy brood mare
doesn't have to get up, clean up and get a job, then somebody needs to step in because I can use
that money in MY family. You know, the one I bust my ass to support!
To say nothing of the lack of parenting provided to these little money makers...ignorance is
perpetuated and stereotypes are proven. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
This statement is so true. If you cannot afford food and clother for yourself, how are you going to
afford formula, diapers, bottles, crib, changing table, clothes and everything else a baby needs. I
know people don't agree with abortion but sometimes that is the better option. Why do people
stupidly insist upon having kids and treating them bad, or not having money to raise them so they
can get made fun of for their clothes and other items? I just can't stand people like this. I wish
they truly knew how things are wroth a child before they can have one. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
If someone accidentally does get pregnant they should be forced to terminate the child, but as a
choice
people who can not afford to care for a child, should try not to get pregnant. It is irresponsible |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
So true. You shouldn't be poppin out babies for government checks like most of the ppl on
welfare(the ones that are lazy and don't work) |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Absolutely true. Look at Africa so many children so little food. End World Poverty Compulsory
Sterilisation Now!!! |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I agree if you cant afford a baby then be more cautious use protection or something.
Because the stuff you do effects your kids the most. You cant afford it you will most likely want
a better life for it so you end up putting it up for adoption and no kid wants to grow up in an
adoption agencies. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I agree if you can't afford a child then you should wait. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Without question, people need to take responsibility for their own actions. That goes for kids, it
goes for pets, it goes for everything they do in their lives. How can you expect to be able to
raise a responsible child if you are not responsible yourself? |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
It is a very important for someone to know that if he or she is not having the capacity to do
something then they should not even attempt to do so, consequences may turn out to be tragedies.
Before taking a step one should be confident about his or her abilities and all other situations
that prevail around them. Often it has happened that any harsh decision has ruined someone’s life.
The same thing is very much applicable to all those people who are not having the condition to feed
themselves either and they are having a baby to feed. In such a situation what happens is the
upbringing of that child happens in negligence and due to insufficient feeding the child suffers
from poor health. Thus before giving birth one should definitely think that whether they can take
care of their baby or not. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
This is true. Millions of parents have babies that they cannot support and they do become a menace
to society. If parents cannot support their children, then they should lose them. It is a good idea
to put them in a foster home with a family who can support them and provide them with their basic
needs. Then, if the parents ever become responsible and can support them, then they can get them
back. However, I agree that if you do not have the means to feed your own mouth, then don't make a
poor, helpless child suffer. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I wish this could really work, but we have too many liberals in America as well as that dang'd ACLU.
Would never happen. But I do think more focus should be put on what types of assistance these
people should be allowed to receive and if they should be mandated to put their children in foster
care until they could afford them, without the welfare. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Every child should be a wanted and loved child but this is an ideal not a reality.
I agree in theory that no-one should have children they can't support. Their are many reasons why
this doesn't work in reality.
Some religions encourage people to have more children than they can feed and love, this needs to
addressed and people re-educated.
Many people are ignorant of birth control and men in particular need to taught how irresponsible it
is to bring unwanted children into the world.
I agree that in theory something should be done to help people limited their families to what they
can cope with.
The people who suffer most are the neglected children but I don't see how people can be forced into
not having them.
China has a policy of one child families but plenty of people break the rule.
One of the suggestions has been enforced sterilisation which introduces a lot of contentious issues
about human rights.
People should be educated better into responsible relationships and parenthood and sterilisation for
men and women can be positively promoted . |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Absolutely. If people cannot afford to have children, then they should not go out here and have
them. It is not fair that the working people pay their taxes and the tax money is used to help feed
and take care of these kids who have worthless parents who cannot support them. Then at the end of
the year, the worthless parents continue to cash in on the taxes when they file their taxes and get
money back. I believe that anyone who is on welfare should not receive any government issued tax
money. They already receive discounted housing, food, and insurance. If they don't work, they should
not be entitled to any tax refund. They already get too much from the government already. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
This is true. People who cannot take care of themselves and have very low income should not be
allowed to have children in the United States. It is not fair for the child or for the society. All
of these women who go out here and have one baby after another and they have no job or means of
supporting these children and only abusing the children and they are a massive burden to society. It
is because of these people the hard working people have to pay higher taxes. It is not fair to those
who work for a living. Society should not be forced to pay for your mistakes. I strongly agree that
if you cannot feed them, then don't breed them. Only people who can support their children should be
allowed to keep them. If you can't feed yourself, then get your tube tied before you bring a baby in
this world to suffer. Quit depending on others to feed your kids. Get off your butt and get a job
and live up to your responsibility. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
What if you have unprotected sex and not have a child purposely |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
While I agree that if you can't afford to provide for your kids you *shouldn't* have them, I don't
agree that you should be forced to abort them. That's just as disgusting as forcing a woman to give
birth. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Humans are sexual creatures. Children are the result of having sex. No man and no woman can decide
who can have or who can't have children. Sex is a natural process. Sure, we should all be able to
provide for our offspring but that is not always the case in this society. You see, just as the rich
and well-to-do have sex so do the poor.
Bill Clinton's Welfare to Work Program was one of the best cures for this situation. Mother's had to
secure a job and contribute to the support of their children and eventually were weaned off of the
welfare system. The absent father's were sought out for child support, but many of these mothers
didn't even know who their children's fathers were.
It is sad to see so many young women black and white having children by more that one "baby's daddy"
and them being only a "baby's momma". |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I agree that if you can't support them you shouldn't have them. However government involvement in
the decision of who gets to baby make and who doesn’t scares me to death. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Most of the folk on the other side of this debate must think they are God. But God attached no coin
slots or credit rating software to our genitals. The only restrictions he asks us for is that we
procreate with somebody we marry of the opposite sex and that we love and honor them and the progeny
produced. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
No kids for you |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I disagree. I think that if people who couldn't support children weren't permitted to give birth to
them, then people who couldn't have children because of infertility would also lose the option to
adopt said children... |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Nothing to do with being allowed.
Just give them benefit for the first one, then see how the flow will dribble to a halt. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
No. You should have the children you love. Everyone needs help at first; then you grow up, like
everyone else.
Money doesn't grow on trees: Everyone develops money-skills as they get older. Usually in 30's and
40's. Even 50's: Too old to be giving birth. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
It would probably make the world a better place but you just cannot do that I am afraid. I wish
feckless idiots wouldn't just keep popping out kids for a welfare cheque (there are many who do) but
I prefer that to having a government who can dictate that people have to terminate their pregnancy. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
If this was phrased differently i might agree, but it isn't. I don't like the idea of a government
having any kind of control at that level, not to mention institutionalized required abortion. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
This is an awkwardly phrased resolution. My take on this is that one ought to be able to take care
of a child before trying to have one, HOWEVER, if the child is conceived in the womb, regardless of
ability to support, the child must not ever be aborted |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
This sounds a lot like communist China to me, to regulate something like that the "state" needs to
be involved and I don't believe they should have the authority to make that decision for you or
anyone. Education is the way to get people away from popping out so many kids and welfare laws in
the US almost encourage multiple child birth, reform the laws and educate people and this should
cease to be a large problem. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Probably the answer to all these issues is not disallowing those who can not afford to raise a
child. There is a need for an aggressive and massive awareness campaign that focuses on real life
stories of children that live substandard lives in foster homes and on welfare money. I am sure no
parents would want their child to suffer after he has been born and continue suffering for a long
time.
These people need to be educated on contraception so that accidental pregnancies can be avoided. If
after doing all this there are children being born still then counseling regarding adoption should
be given to the parents. It is the life and future of the child that should most concern us and this
future is not secure if he/she gets to stay with the biological parents. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I believe that all children should be wanted and planned but I don't think that forcing people not
to have them can work.
How would the forcing them work?
One way would be compulsory sterilisation which is contrary to human rights. Any society that
introduces enforced sterilisation is bordering on something dangerous.
It needs to be asked; who would make the rules and implement them? In the wrong hands this sort of
legislation is very dangerous and repressive.
Agreed that people shouldn't have children they can't feed or love but to force them not to is
another issue.
People need educating and better opportunities not institutionalised enforcement which then leads to
other repressive methods in other areas of life. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
People must determine for themselves if they have the financial means to raise a child, but the
government is in no position to make this decision for anyone. I find the idea of not allowing
people with inadequate income to have children to be very problematic.
Does this mean that government would decide that if your yearly income is less than a certain amount
each year, you may not give birth? What would be the magic threshold and who would decide this?
Additionally, imagine if someone gets pregnant, has a well-paying job, but then becomes unemployed
before the child is born. Would she be forced to terminate her pregnancy? Would doctors be ordered
to refuse to serve pregnant women who are deemed not to have enough money to raise a child?
The US and Britain are both democratic countries and allowing freedom of choice is at the centre of
liberal society. People should take responsibility for their decisions in life, but when they don't,
the rest of the community must sometimes collectively pick up the slack. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
People should be able to have kids no matter what. And If they get pregnant on accident? How are you
gonna change that. It doesn't work like that. I say its their lives and we should not medal in their
decisions. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
LMAO I have to disagree.... HAHAHA |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
How terrible of an outlook must you have to have to look at raising a child as: Breeding? I
understand this is just a casual website for casual debate, but even the subject matter of your
argument is something you have to realize is impregnably retarded. In other words, do you think
that by thinking of families who irresponsibly have kids they can't afford to handle, that they will
stop having them? It is like me saying: You should not be allowed to put more arguments on here
than you can afford the credibility to lose. You don't care what credibility you risk on this site,
thus will not stop posting your opinions.
And herein, the truth is exposed. Because even though you cannot outlaw having kids, you can outlaw
keeping kids. Digressing slightly, one's own credibility is taken away upon that credibility
raising opinions it cannot afford to justify, as should kids be taken away and raised by parent's
who (without any other factor in your argument) have enough money to raise them.
So, I'm not so much against your opinion as I am your solution. Although, I don't think people
should have their kid-limit determined by law. I think one rich family can abominate one little
daughter, as much as a family on welfare and disability can ruin a dozen kiddies.
Realistically, parents play a role in the development not the future of their children). And the
number of children never correlates with how well those kids are raised, let alone how much money
those kids grow up around. Sorry for the convoluted analogy in the beginning, I should probably fix
it. Just a website, ::shrugs::. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I disagree, and think that you need to practice what you preach.
-I'm just another low life that smokes pot and makes $100,000+ a year... So I guess my opinion
doesn't matter... HAHAHA
I DON'T HAVE ANY KIDS!!!! OMG HAHAHAHAHA! |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
25 Jan 2008 20:09
Sign In
For and Against Recent Activity
