3 ms·

>making decisions that will require taking resources from others by force is the definition of neglect I'm gona walk right past the 'taxation is theft' dog whi

>making decisions that will require taking resources from others by force is the definition of neglect I'm gona walk right past the 'taxation is theft' dog whistle. You can talk about 'personal responsibility' all you want, but at the end of the day, the urge to have kids is probably our second strongest drive as a species. Babies are gona happen. When they do, they should be fully supported as much as necessary to make sure parents and children get what they need at a base level. I don't mind my taxes paying for baby formula and diapers. We should probably fund daycare too. This is that 'equality of opportunity' conservatives are so fond of in place of 'equality of outcomes'. Well, if that's true, at the very least we need to make sure that everyone gets the bare essentials to properly raise a child.

nitrogen 6y ago
"Dog whistle" is a term that needs to die. You are responding to a made up argument using words I never even said. There is a huge difference between fait accompli past events and future planning. Feeding and supporting and loving children who exist does not at all preclude planning to reduce the percentage of future children born into unfavorable circumstances. There are ample means to avoid having kids until one is ready, at every stage of the process. We kind of know what causes childbirth by now. It is wantonly irresponsible for a couple to choose to have children, or for people to engage in activities that produce them, without taking measures to prevent the creation of more children before they are ready to support them. If everyone just decides to sleep around without availing themselves of the means to avoid pregnancy and thus have unfed children, where is the food going to come from? Has society completely given up on the ideas of family planning and personal responsibility?

nitrogen 6y ago

"Dog whistle" is a term that needs to die. You are responding to a made up argument using words I never even said. There is a huge difference between fait accompli past events and future planning. Feeding and supporting and loving children who exist does not at all preclude planning to reduce the percentage of future children born into unfavorable circumstances. There are ample means to avoid having kids until one is ready, at every stage of the process. We kind of know what causes childbirth by now. It is wantonly irresponsible for a couple to choose to have children, or for people to engage in activities that produce them, without taking measures to prevent the creation of more children before they are ready to support them. If everyone just decides to sleep around without availing themselves of the means to avoid pregnancy and thus have unfed children, where is the food going to come from? Has society completely given up on the ideas of family planning and personal responsibility?