[OnyxCougar]

Originally posted by Radar
I'm saying anyone who has children without being able to afford to give them the education, healthcare, clothing, food, shelter, etc. they need and desire is irresponsible at best and they are thieves if they expect government to force anyone else to pay for those things.

snip

I'm also flat out saying that poor people should not have children and if they do, they are irresponsible.

OK, so they are irresponsible. What you will have if you remove "free" education is a LARGE group of children that are completely uneducated, sick, and breeding irresponsibly. A downward spiral.

What happens in your world? They simply starve to death, out of the economic gene-pool? Just because their parent, an educated teacher making much less than your $50,000 winning number a year, can't afford to send them to school?

I'm saying that those who can't afford to pay for all the needs of their own children including education should adopt their children out to people who can afford it. This is the responsible thing to do.

I heard you. But you didn't answer my question. Let's say all 68% of the populous suddenly becomes responsible and adopts their children out because they can't afford them.

Who then, adopts them? By your definition, the 32% of the people that can afford them. And when those 32% are having their OWN children, what parcentage of that 32% is going to adopt? What do you do with the rest of the children?

I don't think they should be forced to adopt their children out though. But if they don't, their children should only get the education, healthcare, etc. their parents do pay for. So I guess your kids wouldn't be very educated. Much like a person who can only earn $12/hr.

Please check my edit on the post above this one. I am educated. And will be more educated by the time I earn my second degree. But according to your definition, I will still be too poor to have children. So you can't use the "uneducated" argument, when educated people STILL make less than your magic number per year.

I love how you put the 'k' in America as though I were promoting some horrible authoritarian violation of your rights when it is you who want to use men with guns to make other people pay for your irresponsible decision. Freedom means you pay for what you want and don't steal from others to pay for it. Freedom and Responsibility are inseparable.

What you are promoting is not possible in today's world. It simply will not work.

You're saying only those making over $50K a year should procreate, because they are the only ones who will be able to afford to live in America. Since when was that considered freedom?