Reply With Quote
You still have to backup the contention that people have children "irresponsibly", whatever that means, and how that determination is made.
And if that determination is made, why not just deny the aid, period?
Of course it affects poor people, because those who can afford the expenses, as you point out, don't qualify. Is that any reason not to?So you agree you're talking about poor people after denying you were talking about poor people?
This is why it's very difficult to have a serious conversation with you, and you can't say I didn't give you another shot here.
Your reaction obviously means you think the poor are en led to other people's money.
You still have to backup the contention that people have children "irresponsibly", whatever that means, and how that determination is made.
And if that determination is made, why not just deny the aid, period?
Sometimes refusal to try to address a problem is because you agree with the status quo. Since you seem to have no better solution than I offer, why is it extreme?
mindreading!
I think some people have legitimate needs for aid that charity alone can't take care of. The problem here is that you're accusing certain people of systematically abusing the system (without really showing how much of a pervasive problem this is and thus if your policy makes sense implementing at all).
If it's so easy to recognize who these people are (you're going to be asking them to go through a surgical procedure, so you know how they are), why not just attack the actual problem (abusing the system) and deny aid instead?
it offers people an incentive to sterilize themselves and it gives the state power where it ought to have none.
it is a diabolically manipulative and totally extreme policy in my opinion.
How did you reach that conclusion?.
I pointed out how you first deny that this is only about the poor, then tacitly admit this is about the poor. Did I misconstrue anything you said?
First line of defense
BTW, I offered an alternative, that's probably cheaper and substantially less extreme too.
It makes sense and attacks the crux of the problem. Why wouldn't that work?
What is so difficult about it? I answered your questions before, in the original thread. I can't help but see you as some hard headed pundit that won't listen to others point of view. There will be a gray area that can be debated. Will you at least acknowledge that there are cases where people shouldn't be having children?
I would be all for solidly denying aide to those who cannot afford it, if unforeseen cir stances wasn't a normal thing in life. As I have repeatedly said in so many threads, I have no problem with safety nets. Just when they become a hammock.
What prevents people from sterilizing, then using the money to do the reversal, have another kid, and sterilize again?
if you're not part of the solution, you're a gas or a solid.
I'm asking for details on your idea, and I've engaged you in respectful conversation. It's your idea. You said those requesting aid qualify, except for those in temporary dire straits. At which point does having a children goes from "responsible" to "irresponsible". I'm sure you have that line drawn in your head if you think that can be determined.
I think having a baby is a big responsibility. I also think some people plan for it, and some people don't, but rather not abort (due to many reasons that are well known). Going through pregnancy and delivery takes time, and I don't think anybody knows with exact certainty what life is going to look like months, even years from now. Some people might hit a rough patch and take no time to recover, some other might take a long time, some might never recover. I think what you're trying to define as far as "responsible" vs "irresponsible" is a lot more difficult that you make it out to be.
So why not just do that? No surgeries, no verification that surgeries were done. Makes too much sense?
You are flat out wrong. We discussed the differences in the original thread. This is one reason why you are so irritating. You appear to refuse to accept things I say that don't fit in your attack against me. Legitimate needs fall under the "safety net" concept.
That's my point. Deny aide, unless they are willing to show it will not happen again. However, should we give no option for them to take care of an innocent life, or do you advocate we take an authoritarian approach, and take the baby away for adoption?
Would a responsible person risk having a child they couldn't afford to have if they had no aid option available?
Let me ask you this. Can a person buy a car without being able to finance it? Now we can't treat a baby like a product we license and sell, but why can any reasonable person advocate a person has the moral right to have a child they can't afford? Shouldn't there be some effective drawback, as a deterrent?
What is your solution, or do you not have a problem with the millions of people who live on tax payer subsidies from their own irresponsibility?
If they are able to save enough money to do that, then they either are now financially able to support themselves and a child, or they are effectively abusing the child or system and deserve jail time. I have no problem to have the procedure reversed, once they are financially independent.
LOL...
A gas or a solid can be part of the solution though.
sure.
all I meant was, just because you have an inference in your mind, does not mean it is the only one, or the most obvious, or the most reasonable. it does not even mean it even applies to the person you think it applies to. do you follow?
So doesn't the question or accusation help find the truth?
as an example of what not to do it's great
Nicely hedged. Thank you, Dr. Wild Cobra.They are both reversible, but not a guarantee.
Maybe you should double check with that quack who claims to be my surgeon.
do petty online tormentors induce aggrieved parties to cry out in the agony of truth? sometimes, yes, but that's a piss poor goal to set for yourself.
you know that's a joke, right?
Can you elaborate on how you think that applies to me?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions