fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2686 ]

[ SECRET POST #2686 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2686 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 059 secrets from Secret Submission Post #384.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - posted twice ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Oh, sorry. I assumed you thought I was american.

I said "one child can be an accident, three are not". You can have one accidental child, but there are people running around with a whole bunch of children they cannot take care of. After having one child and seeing that you don't really have the resources to care for it properly, I'd think you'd try harder to not have a second or third.

Why? If I'd said you shouldn't buy a puppy if you don't have the money to take care of it, you'd almost certainly agree. Just because children happen naturally instead of being bought doesn't mean you don't have the responsibility to make sure you can give them a good life before having them.

If I lived in the USA (or any place with bad/weird health care options), I'd be even more determined not to have children until I can provide for them - the thought that my child might get sick and die, even though there are medical options, simply because I couldn't afford to pay for those medical options, is horrifying. I wouldn't want to put myself, let alone my (theoretical) child in such a situation.

I'm not saying there should be a law against it, just that I think people shouldn't do it... and that I think it's common sense.

fwiw, OP, I've been reading through this thread and I pretty much agree with you. I don't have time to really get into it, since I need to drive back to school as soon as this weather blows over, but...yeah. Having kids is about the kids, not about the parents.

This is why I will never, ever be able to view having kids as a 'right.'

I don't think any person's personal desire to have children outweighs the kid's right to be loved, wanted, healthy, and to have access to the things they need in order to grow and thrive.

I have personally opted not to have children (even though I would like them) because my health problems would mean essentially playing Russian Roulette with a potential biologicial child's health and life and there is no way that I can justify that under any circumstances. My desire to have biological kids does not trump their right to be healthy and not suffer from lifelong health problems. Yeah, it's disappointing to me, but I'll live. If I were to have a kid, the kid might NOT live.

(reply from suspended user)

Love is a necessity, but it also isn't some magical power that will provide all other physical necessities. Those are important too.

(reply from suspended user)

Because all of those things are necessities. You can love your child, but loving them isn't going to put food on the table or buy them clothes. Likewise, you can be rolling in money and be able to give your kid all the material things they could ever want, but that's meaningless if you don't love them.

(reply from suspended user)

Na

They shouldn't have them. If you shouldn't get a dog in those circumstances, why the hell should you be having a kid in those?

(reply from suspended user)

DA But I think the one point where you just won't agree is that one side favours the rights of the child and the other the rights of the parents. So when asked "What about the people who want kids but really shouldn't have them", the answer would be that they just have to suck it up because it's not about them, it's about the child.

Then I think they shouldn't have kids. Obviously I can't stop them, but I can think they're irresponsible and selfish.

My best friend grew up poor. Very, very poor, as in there were often times when all she got was one meal a day. Sure, her parents loved her, but that didn't make her any less hungry. Today she can't stand to eat peanut butter because that was often the only thing they had to eat - bread and peanut butter.

Likewise, my mother works at a school, and I've heard plenty of stories from her of kids from well-off families whose parents treated them as trophies to show off their accomplishments rather than as people. The kids were scheduled to death because they had to be the best at everything so that Mommy and Daddy could brag about how talented and wonderful their children were.

I think both of those situations are equally awful because the parents were thinking of themselves rather than their kids.

(reply from suspended user)

I am not ayrt, and I can't speak for the specific situation you're asking about, but I'll answer your first question: no, I don't think people who have kids they can't provide for should be punished. I wish you would quit pushing for that because that's already been made clear by multiple people. We're not looking for government control. We're just expression opinions on certain scenarios.

(reply from suspended user)

Ok, I guess if everything you have an opinion about has to come with an idea that it needs to be legislated. I think the reason this has blown up so much is that an opinion was stated with zero connections to legislation and a bunch of people assumed legislation had to be part of it. Because literally, you and fingals and some anons mentioned legislation before ANYONE agreeing with OP, and now you all seem mad that we don't really want to talk about that because that wasn't OP's opinion. (nor is it mine.)

I've given this a lot of thought, though. I slept on it and thought about it through today. I want to be really clear that I agree with your legislative stance, and I understand where you're coming from in being wary of opinions that can lead to bad legislation. I respect that. I was just really taken by surprise when suddenly people started getting really upset about something that wasn't originally part of the conversation, at least from the way I was reading it.

(reply from suspended user)

Re: Controversial opinions

diet_poison - 2014-05-13 01:22 (UTC) - Expand

I'm not sure what can be done, really. Life isn't fair, and it will never be 100% fair for everyone, and sometimes you don't get to have something you want even if you really, really want it. That's just the way life is. I mean, hell, there were a lot of things that I and my family never got to do because we couldn't afford them, and yes, it sucked when classmates of mine were going on optional class ski trips and things like that and I couldn't go. It sucked and I was sad, but I also understood that we couldn't afford it.

I can't speak for my friend but I can say that many times she has spoken about how much she hated her childhood. She loves her parents, but her relationship with them is very strained and I wouldn't say that she's close to them by any means. She definitely does have at least some anger towards them for the circumstances in which she grew up because they've had a lasting impact on her life.

(reply from suspended user)

I'm actually not, I only lurk around DW for this community so I haven't seen a reason to make an account just for that. I'm a little curious as to who you think I am, though!

(reply from suspended user)

Oh for goodness' sake. This person isn't advocating the restriction of reproductive rights. They're just wishing that other people's moral choices aligned with their own when it comes to placing the well-being of children over their own desire to have a child.

Sort of like how some people think it's a shitty thing to treat pets like shiny toys to be left at a shelter when you're bored with them, and they wish people would realize it's immoral and stop doing it, but they're not likely to advocate any sort of legal enforcement to stop it.

Thank you.

(reply from suspended user)

You have a choice, and you are making the choice that is best for you.

When we say that something is not a right, we are saying that it is not up to the individual. We are saying that society at large can control it. And the trouble with that is that, when it comes to reproduction, society tends to opt for controls that are based on power and prejudice. Enshrining reproduction as a right doesn't completely prevent that from happening, but it does provide a decent stop-gap.

It's all well and good to educate people and to encourage them to have children responsibly. But saying that reproduction is not a right leaves us open to far too many abuses.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only