Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 Social Issues
 Day Care Should Be Free
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 9

marfknox
SFN Die Hard

USA
3739 Posts

Posted - 09/05/2011 :  21:03:02  Show Profile  Visit marfknox's Homepage  Send marfknox an AOL message Send marfknox a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I decided to write on this topic on my parenting blog in honor of Labor Day:
In honor of Labor Day, I've decided to write about an issue that has bothered me since the birth of my daughter two years ago. Although it should have bothered me long before that. The only reason it didn't is because, until I had my own child, it never occurred to me.

We should have free, public day care in the United States. Just as we have public schools and public libraries, the services of firefighters and police, day care should be free to the public and funded by tax dollars. And we should have this because it is fair and in the interest of not only parents, but our society at large.


Read the rest here.

"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong

Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com

Kil
Evil Skeptic

USA
13462 Posts

Posted - 09/05/2011 :  21:32:26   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Kil's Homepage  Send Kil an AOL message  Send Kil a Yahoo! Message Send Kil a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by marfknox

I decided to write on this topic on my parenting blog in honor of Labor Day:
In honor of Labor Day, I've decided to write about an issue that has bothered me since the birth of my daughter two years ago. Although it should have bothered me long before that. The only reason it didn't is because, until I had my own child, it never occurred to me.

We should have free, public day care in the United States. Just as we have public schools and public libraries, the services of firefighters and police, day care should be free to the public and funded by tax dollars. And we should have this because it is fair and in the interest of not only parents, but our society at large.


Read the rest here.
I agree. I have always agreed. Daycare should be publicly funded.

Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.

Why not question something for a change?

Genetic Literacy Project
Go to Top of Page

Ebone4rock
SFN Regular

USA
894 Posts

Posted - 09/06/2011 :  06:25:36   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Ebone4rock a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by marfknox

I decided to write on this topic on my parenting blog in honor of Labor Day:
In honor of Labor Day, I've decided to write about an issue that has bothered me since the birth of my daughter two years ago. Although it should have bothered me long before that. The only reason it didn't is because, until I had my own child, it never occurred to me.

We should have free, public day care in the United States. Just as we have public schools and public libraries, the services of firefighters and police, day care should be free to the public and funded by tax dollars. And we should have this because it is fair and in the interest of not only parents, but our society at large.


Read the rest here.


Unfortunately due to filters I cannot read your entire blog post so I will be arguing only about the concept.

A couple of years ago my wife moved out of working for the public to directing a day care center. She made this move because over the many years she worked for the public she got fed up with not being able to really do anything about the horrible conditions the loser-ass parents raised (and I use that word lightly) their children in. The day care center is in a nasty part of town. 75% of the children there DO get their daycare for free from state assistance.

With the large amount of poverty stricken families that are at her day care center it makes it very difficult to actually educate the kids. So much time is spent dealing with behavior problems caused by loser parents lack of parenting that my wife now wants to get the fuck out of there too! Some days she feels more like a warden than a director. She has been interviewing at many other day cares recently (in the suburbs) and is amazed at how well the children are behaved and how much easier it is for the teachers to actually teach the children.
The only thing I can see coming from universal, free day care is universal mediocre education. Would you really want to sacrifice a stable learning environment for your own kid by throwing the poverty kids in the mix? Thats what would happen if day care was universally free. It would become more of a holding tank for children rather than an educational facility.

I would hope that parents want better for their kids.

Haole with heart, thats all I'll ever be. I'm not a part of the North Shore society. Stuck on the shoulder, that's where you'll find me. Digging for scraps with the kooks in line. -Offspring
Go to Top of Page

marfknox
SFN Die Hard

USA
3739 Posts

Posted - 09/06/2011 :  06:35:43   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit marfknox's Homepage  Send marfknox an AOL message Send marfknox a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Ebone, here's the rest of the blog post:

Consider these facts:

According to the National Association of Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies, the average cost of day care for a single child over one year is $11,666.

According to the 2008 Census, average household income is around $52,000. Single custodial parents (who care for 26% of America's children) are obviously earning less than that, although the majority of them still do not qualify for or take advantage of social services such as food stamps, rent subsidy, or Medicaid.

According to analysis of 2008 data by Emmanual Saez at the University of California-Berkley, the bottom 90% of American household's average income is just over $31,000.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, child care workers average around $20,000 annually, with the highest paid still barely reaching $30,000. (So basically, those workers - mostly women - can't afford to send even one of their own kids to the very facility they work at caring for other peoples' kids.)

As of 2006 the average full time Walmart employee (working about 34 hours per week at just over $10. per hour) earns $17,874 per year.

The typical working parents of young children are just barely getting by financially, many in the gap where they aren't quite poor enough to qualify for aid, but also aren't earning enough to save for emergencies, retirement, or their children's college funds, much less for well-deserved and psychologically-needed vacations. They are literally on the edge of poverty, and face rapidly rising costs of medical care and insurance, food, gas, and higher education, while wages stagnate.

Obviously huge numbers of Americans simply can't afford professional child care. Even the crappy little one-room day cares loaded with crying infants, where the TV is blaring all day long, and exhausted caretakers are overworked and underpaid are too expensive for most American households. A single mother working a job making $30,000 a year simply cannot afford full time professional day care, but she must work in order to provide housing, food, and medical insurance for her family. So who exactly is taking care of the kids?

Retired and unemployed relatives and friends is one answer. And is that a good solution? I question the quality of care children receive by people who might be alone with them for 40+ hours a week, and whose only qualification may be that they happen to be around and have been pressured into it by a sense of family or friendly obligation. I also question how fair it is to older relatives, usually grandparents, who may not be in the best health, and after earning their retirement now have to go back to work full time doing the highly stressful job of caring for babies and toddlers.

Then there are the parents who sacrifice earnings and career to care for kids. Many highly educated, productive working mothers (and some fathers) are leaving their careers or at least cutting back heavily on work to raise children, and then finding themselves at a huge disadvantage when they return to their career. Women are especially at a disadvantage if their marriage ends in divorce. Society is losing out on the benefits of these peoples' work.

There is obviously a problem here.

But if I bring this issue up to my middle class, liberal friends, they mostly just sort of shrug their shoulders and say something like, "Well, yeah, it probably should be made a little more affordable for some people."

Bullshit, I say. This is outrageous! The cost of just about everything is outpacing wages too quickly. Children are not a luxury or accessory. They are members of our society who need to be cared for until they mature, and we as a society have a responsibility to them and to the parents and guardians who raise them. Day care should be a free, public service. And it should be as simple and easy as enrolling a kid in public school.

Happy Labor Day, folks.

"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong

Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com

Go to Top of Page

Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie

USA
4826 Posts

Posted - 09/06/2011 :  06:53:29   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Valiant Dancer's Homepage Send Valiant Dancer a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by marfknox

I decided to write on this topic on my parenting blog in honor of Labor Day:
In honor of Labor Day, I've decided to write about an issue that has bothered me since the birth of my daughter two years ago. Although it should have bothered me long before that. The only reason it didn't is because, until I had my own child, it never occurred to me.

We should have free, public day care in the United States. Just as we have public schools and public libraries, the services of firefighters and police, day care should be free to the public and funded by tax dollars. And we should have this because it is fair and in the interest of not only parents, but our society at large.


Read the rest here.


I'll be succinct here.

There is no such thing as a free lunch.

Taxes pay for those institutions. They also do not have the serious challenges that those services have. Police patrol the neighborhoods to keep the peace. Fire personnel only respond to fires and emergencies. Librarys house books. Schools educate children (even though some parents look to them to raise them).

Daycare is not in the interest of parents because it shifts the burden of raising one's child onto the government. We already have myriad problems of child protective services whereby the state is raising some children (poorly, I might add). Involved parents can do a far better job of raising their children that the government ever could.

Daycare is a service. Sharing the cost for your child across people who did not have children or raised their own children is robbing Peter to pay Paul. It is not fair for someone else to pay for your service. It would be analogous to someone filling up their car by demanding money from passing bicyclists.

This also has the added issue of discouraging people from planning pregnancies.

My pocket has been picked enough. A severe economic downturn is no time to be asking for a new entitlement which does not serve the children well.

Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils

Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion
Go to Top of Page

Ebone4rock
SFN Regular

USA
894 Posts

Posted - 09/06/2011 :  07:03:17   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Ebone4rock a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by marfknox
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, child care workers average around $20,000 annually, with the highest paid still barely reaching $30,000. (So basically, those workers - mostly women - can't afford to send even one of their own kids to the very facility they work at caring for other peoples' kids.)



Yep, and most of the daycare facilities my wife has been interviewing for require AT LEAST a bachelors degree just for a regular old day care teacher....a few only require an associate but most want a bachelors...can you fucking imagine going to college for four years to earn $8-$9 an hour? Un-fucking-believable. Fortunately my wife is management material so she can make the top dollar.

I say keep it private so that the parents have a CHOICE as to what type of environment their kids are being educated at such an early age.

If I had kids I sure as fuck would not want the government raising them.


Haole with heart, thats all I'll ever be. I'm not a part of the North Shore society. Stuck on the shoulder, that's where you'll find me. Digging for scraps with the kooks in line. -Offspring
Go to Top of Page

marfknox
SFN Die Hard

USA
3739 Posts

Posted - 09/06/2011 :  07:05:50   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit marfknox's Homepage  Send marfknox an AOL message Send marfknox a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Ebone wrote:
With the large amount of poverty stricken families that are at her day care center it makes it very difficult to actually educate the kids. So much time is spent dealing with behavior problems caused by loser parents lack of parenting that my wife now wants to get the fuck out of there too! Some days she feels more like a warden than a director.
Please read the following in a sarcastic tone of voice: What? Kids grouped together based largely on economic disadvantage and who are exclusively raised in home environment that is also economically segregated tend to have behavior problems? You don't say! /end sarcasm. Are you suggesting that the reason these kids are badly behaved is because they get their day care for free? That there is something inherently poor quality about publicly funded day care? Because it seems obvious to me that the reason these day cares suck is because they are in and serving whole communities of economically disadvantaged people. Or do you deny the impact environment has on children and parents?

She has been interviewing at many other day cares recently (in the suburbs) and is amazed at how well the children are behaved and how much easier it is for the teachers to actually teach the children.
Why is she amazed? Why would anyone be amazed that kids who grow up in homes with parents who have much less stressed than poor ones, and who can easily afford vacations and entertainment to relax even further, and who themselves probably grew up in such a cozy environments, and who get social pressure from their peers to maintain a certain level of decorum and ambition would behave better than poor kids growing up in the ghetto?

The only thing I can see coming from universal, free day care is universal mediocre education. Would you really want to sacrifice a stable learning environment for your own kid by throwing the poverty kids in the mix? Thats what would happen if day care was universally free. It would become more of a holding tank for children rather than an educational facility.


What you are saying makes no sense. At all. You really need to refine your argument. Because on hand you are acknowledges that quality of day care and education makes a difference for children. If you didn't, you wouldn't worry about protecting those middle class kids from the influence of the poor kids.

A number of babies and toddlers die every year in the care of relatives and friends who are babysitting for free. A number of retired grandparents have to start working again full time taking care of toddlers and infants because the alternative is trying to enjoy their retirement while their struggling, working-class kids (who do not qualify for social assistance) go deep into debt or lose their homes or take on other financial hardships to pay for day care for their grandkids.

The other thing you seem to totally miss is that people with money will continue to hire private nannies or send their kids to expensive private day cares. (Don't worry, those kids will continue to have HUGE advantages in their emotional health, academic success, and overall potential for achievement over kids from lower classes - yay capitalism!) I never proposed that we outlaw private forms of day care. I called for a public option for the huge number of parents in the gap between poor and lower middle class. I'm in that gap myself. If I could take advantage of free daycare for just a couple days a week I could quickly triple my earning potential and put my career back on the faster track it was on before I had kids. Instead, I (and all the moms in my play group) am hunkering down, accepting huge losses of potential earnings and achievement, and hoping I can play catch up in a decade or so.

Die, middle class, die!

"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong

Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com

Go to Top of Page

marfknox
SFN Die Hard

USA
3739 Posts

Posted - 09/06/2011 :  07:07:09   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit marfknox's Homepage  Send marfknox an AOL message Send marfknox a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Ebone wrote:
I say keep it private so that the parents have a CHOICE as to what type of environment their kids are being educated at such an early age.
Where are you getting this insane idea that I'm proposing mandatory public day care for all? I said make it like public schools. Do you HAVE to send your kids to public schools? No.

Edited to add: If you can't afford an alternative, you have no choice. So don't just throw up that word "choice" like it means anything to anyone with less than $15K a year extra laying around to spend on really great day care.

"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong

Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com

Edited by - marfknox on 09/06/2011 07:08:14
Go to Top of Page

Ebone4rock
SFN Regular

USA
894 Posts

Posted - 09/06/2011 :  07:09:00   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Ebone4rock a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer

Originally posted by marfknox

I decided to write on this topic on my parenting blog in honor of Labor Day:
In honor of Labor Day, I've decided to write about an issue that has bothered me since the birth of my daughter two years ago. Although it should have bothered me long before that. The only reason it didn't is because, until I had my own child, it never occurred to me.

We should have free, public day care in the United States. Just as we have public schools and public libraries, the services of firefighters and police, day care should be free to the public and funded by tax dollars. And we should have this because it is fair and in the interest of not only parents, but our society at large.


Read the rest here.


I'll be succinct here.

There is no such thing as a free lunch.

Taxes pay for those institutions. They also do not have the serious challenges that those services have. Police patrol the neighborhoods to keep the peace. Fire personnel only respond to fires and emergencies. Librarys house books. Schools educate children (even though some parents look to them to raise them).

Daycare is not in the interest of parents because it shifts the burden of raising one's child onto the government. We already have myriad problems of child protective services whereby the state is raising some children (poorly, I might add). Involved parents can do a far better job of raising their children that the government ever could.

Daycare is a service. Sharing the cost for your child across people who did not have children or raised their own children is robbing Peter to pay Paul. It is not fair for someone else to pay for your service. It would be analogous to someone filling up their car by demanding money from passing bicyclists.

This also has the added issue of discouraging people from planning pregnancies.

My pocket has been picked enough. A severe economic downturn is no time to be asking for a new entitlement which does not serve the children well.


Yeah, what Val said....and he didn't even have to use the word "fuck' as much as I did while making a more valid point.

Haole with heart, thats all I'll ever be. I'm not a part of the North Shore society. Stuck on the shoulder, that's where you'll find me. Digging for scraps with the kooks in line. -Offspring
Go to Top of Page

marfknox
SFN Die Hard

USA
3739 Posts

Posted - 09/06/2011 :  07:12:00   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit marfknox's Homepage  Send marfknox an AOL message Send marfknox a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Ebone, you like to talk about the poor as "losers". I'm not poor nor am I a loser. But I can't afford the many fabulous daycare centers in my neighborhood. There is one just a few blocks from my house that has a great reputation and often a waiting list. It costs $1600 per month for full time. For one kid. The ghetto day care down the street that has the TV on all the time, is a single room, and pays its employees $8/hr (I actually did send my daughter there part time last summer while I worked a summer job. It ate up more than half of my income.) costs $800 per month for full time.

This is not a problem for the poor. This is a problem for the bulk of the middle class.

"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong

Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com

Go to Top of Page

marfknox
SFN Die Hard

USA
3739 Posts

Posted - 09/06/2011 :  07:29:35   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit marfknox's Homepage  Send marfknox an AOL message Send marfknox a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Valiant Dancer wrote:
Daycare is not in the interest of parents because it shifts the burden of raising one's child onto the government. We already have myriad problems of child protective services whereby the state is raising some children (poorly, I might add). Involved parents can do a far better job of raising their children that the government ever could.
Wow, could you be more ignorant and insulting to working parents? I do day care out of my home and last year I interviewed a client who was a single mom and who spontaneously started weeping because she couldn't quit her job to take care of her son. Family could help her out with bills and food, but she needed the health insurance. But quality day care was going to eat up 80% of her salary. I know a woman in her 70's who has to care for her 2 grandkids 40+ hours a week because her daughter and son and law both work full time but with mortgage, student loans, health insurance and co-pays, etc. can't afford private day care. This woman's husband is recovering from triple bypass surgery, so she's dealing with that and two very young children when she should be enjoying her hard earned retirement. I can tell she's trying not to be resentful, but I there is definitely a bitter undertone when she talks about their situation. Seriously, how the fuck can you look at the numbers, realize that the bottom 90 percent of American households are earning only 3x the average cost of full time private day care, and not acknowledge that they need and deserve some help in that area? Are 90% of Americans supposed to decide not to have any kids?

Daycare is a service. Sharing the cost for your child across people who did not have children or raised their own children is robbing Peter to pay Paul. It is not fair for someone else to pay for your service. It would be analogous to someone filling up their car by demanding money from passing bicyclists.
If quality of day care increases overall productivity of parents and future achievement/productivity of children, it benefits the whole society. That's why we have public schools. And libraries. And public funding for museums, and many many other public services that not everyone uses.

This also has the added issue of discouraging people from planning pregnancies.
What the fuck are you talking about? Throughout my entire blog post I was speaking about the needs of the lower middle classes. That demographic has been having LESS children than past generations and waiting longer to have children!

My pocket has been picked enough. A severe economic downturn is no time to be asking for a new entitlement which does not serve the children well.
The rich in the United States are not taxed nearly enough. Disparity in income has been rapidly and steadily growing, while the percentage that the highest earners are taxes has dramatically fallen over the past few decades. American voters disagree harshly on many things, but they are overwhelmingly in favor of higher taxes for the rich, and this taking into account the fact that the majority of Americans don't seem to understand how extreme the disparity of income is. And yet Warren Buffet has to complain about his housekeeper being taxed at a higher rate in some areas than he is. This is insane.

Also, your pocket has not been picked. You benefit from the services provided by government. Are soldiers in the military being paid with stolen money? Police? Firefighters? Unless you consider those employees to be a party to theft, then your choice of phrasing is totally insulting and inappropriate. We can discuss who should be taxed, how much they should be taxed, and what taxes should be spent on without referring to taxes in general as theft.

"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong

Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com

Edited by - marfknox on 09/06/2011 07:31:22
Go to Top of Page

marfknox
SFN Die Hard

USA
3739 Posts

Posted - 09/06/2011 :  07:35:47   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit marfknox's Homepage  Send marfknox an AOL message Send marfknox a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Ebone wrote:

Yeah, what Val said....and he didn't even have to use the word "fuck' as much as I did while making a more valid point.
I find the word "fuck" to be incredibly satisfying and appropriate in many contexts. Hunter S. Thompson was a true master of the use of obscenity in writing on social issues. I miss him.

"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong

Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com

Go to Top of Page

Ebone4rock
SFN Regular

USA
894 Posts

Posted - 09/06/2011 :  07:40:05   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Ebone4rock a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by marfknox
That there is something inherently poor quality about publicly funded day care? Because it seems obvious to me that the reason these day cares suck is because they are in and serving whole communities of economically disadvantaged people. Or do you deny the impact environment has on children and parents?



Again, would you want YOUR kid to be in this type of environment or would you rather sacrifice a bit more to send them to a good day care? Thats what would happen if there was a public option.

Why is she amazed? Why would anyone be amazed that kids who grow up in homes with parents who have much less stressed than poor ones, and who can easily afford vacations and entertainment to relax even further, and who themselves probably grew up in such a cozy environments, and who get social pressure from their peers to maintain a certain level of decorum and ambition would behave better than poor kids growing up in the ghetto?



Because she has been working with the poor for so long that it is flaberghasting to her to see things running smoothly.

What makes you think that working families are LESS stressed than poor families?

What you are saying makes no sense. At all. You really need to refine your argument. Because on hand you are acknowledges that quality of day care and education makes a difference for children. If you didn't, you wouldn't worry about protecting those middle class kids from the influence of the poor kids.



Not following ya here. Are you suggesting that day care would get BETTER if it was run by the government?

Where are you getting this insane idea that I'm proposing mandatory public day care for all? I said make it like public schools. Do you HAVE to send your kids to public schools? No.



Point taken and conceded.

Haole with heart, thats all I'll ever be. I'm not a part of the North Shore society. Stuck on the shoulder, that's where you'll find me. Digging for scraps with the kooks in line. -Offspring
Go to Top of Page

Ebone4rock
SFN Regular

USA
894 Posts

Posted - 09/06/2011 :  07:42:55   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Ebone4rock a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by marfknox

Ebone wrote:

Yeah, what Val said....and he didn't even have to use the word "fuck' as much as I did while making a more valid point.
I find the word "fuck" to be incredibly satisfying and appropriate in many contexts. Hunter S. Thompson was a true master of the use of obscenity in writing on social issues. I miss him.



Haole with heart, thats all I'll ever be. I'm not a part of the North Shore society. Stuck on the shoulder, that's where you'll find me. Digging for scraps with the kooks in line. -Offspring
Go to Top of Page

marfknox
SFN Die Hard

USA
3739 Posts

Posted - 09/06/2011 :  07:51:11   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit marfknox's Homepage  Send marfknox an AOL message Send marfknox a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I can't help but compare critical statements against people choosing to have children to critical statements that Jesus Freaks make against people choosing to have recreational sex.

No one denies that when people with any financial issues (which is almost all Americans) have children, those financial issue become worse and negatively impacts the parents' and children's potential for achievement and productivity. Likewise, no one denies that having sex for enjoyment always poses some risk of unwanted pregnancy.

The conservative response to the former problem? People with financial issues should choose to not have kids. The conservative response to the latter problem? People who don't want kids shouldn't have sex.

The liberal decries: But, the desire to have and raise children is pretty hard-wired into us, probably by both biology and culture. The desire to have sex for enjoyment is also pretty hard-wired into us, probably by both biology and culture. Is it fair to demand that the majority of people abstain from ever having children (or sex) no matter how badly they are driven toward this choice?

The conservative conclusion: Yup. If they choose to have kids when they aren't in a position to hire a nanny or private day care or quit their job to take care of them, then fuck 'em. If they choose to have sex for fun an accidentally get pregnant, fuck 'em. They made that choice, they are solely responsible.

Liberal counter: But doesn't that negatively impact the whole society, especially since we're talking about huge numbers of people? Isn't it in the interest of society at large to make sure everyone can choose to have kids and enjoy a healthy sex life, despite personal financial burdens? Are we really going to regard parenthood and sex as luxuries?

Conservative?


"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong

Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com

Go to Top of Page

Ebone4rock
SFN Regular

USA
894 Posts

Posted - 09/06/2011 :  08:42:21   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Ebone4rock a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by marfknox
I can't help but compare critical statements against people choosing to have children to critical statements that Jesus Freaks make against people choosing to have recreational sex.



It's a tough pill to swallow isn't it?

The conservative response to the former problem? People with financial issues should choose to not have kids. The conservative response to the latter problem? People who don't want kids shouldn't have sex.



I agree with the first sentence. There are alternatives to the last sentence such as using multiple forms of birth control.

The liberal decries: But, the desire to have and raise children is pretty hard-wired into us, probably by both biology and culture. The desire to have sex for enjoyment is also pretty hard-wired into us, probably by both biology and culture. Is it fair to demand that the majority of people abstain from ever having children (or sex) no matter how badly they are driven toward this choice?



Are you suggesting that people shouldn't be held responsible for controlling their emotions and their genitals? Should we just be able to run around doing whatever we feel while sticking the rest of society with the bill? Bullshit.

There are a lot of things hard-wired into me which I MUST control otherwise I would just be a man-whore all my life and get into lots of trouble.

The conservative conclusion: Yup. If they choose to have kids when they aren't in a position to hire a nanny or private day care or quit their job to take care of them, then fuck 'em. If they choose to have sex for fun an accidentally get pregnant, fuck 'em. They made that choice, they are solely responsible.



Pretty much, are you suggesting people shouldn't be held responsible for their actions?

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Are we really going to regard parenthood and sex as luxuries?



Yep. I have not noticed that the human species is in any kind of danger of extinction because of a lack of reproduction.


And marf, I do want you to know that it actually kinda makes me sick to my stomach expressing these views to you seeing as you are a mother and all. I feel like a huge dickhead but I have to say it.


Haole with heart, thats all I'll ever be. I'm not a part of the North Shore society. Stuck on the shoulder, that's where you'll find me. Digging for scraps with the kooks in line. -Offspring
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 9 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.62 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000