You’re free to make your choices, and I’m free to make mine. Also not trying to make a point that only a college education matters because that’s definitely not true. Trades are far more beneficial and I wish I’d had the option to learn that in high school.
Not all women will do well as mothers. A family friend—may she Rest In Peace—wound up taking in her nephew because he was going to the foster system otherwise. His mother was addicted to multiple substances, as was his father. His father/the foster mom’s brother was coddled and spoiled by their mom. Their dad was incredibly distant. The “smothered” kid wound up terrible—swindling even his own dementia-suffering mom for money in her last months of life. The “black sheep” fought for her nephew while keeping a steady job and raising her own daughters. She left this earth with multiple wonderful mom who are also nurses and teachers.
My grandfather shouldn’t have had children. He was an alcoholic after getting rejected from the priesthood. His family continues to suffer from that fallout. However, the traditional view deems him a solid “man” just because he put food on the table with the money he had left over after booze and taxes. Is that also the woman’s fault for the family’s breakdown?
I may never be able to have children. I may adopt one day, but will only do so if I know I can be financially and emotionally supportive to that child.
If simply being a mother makes you happy? Solid, go for it.
If you can handle both being a mother and being a working woman and that’s what you want? Cool, your choice.
Can’t afford children or have something else going on that you don’t want to subject them to your struggles? Seems responsible not to have them.
This isn’t an argument for abortion, btw, as I’m sure someone will take it that way
The question is, can the children really handle both parents missing from their lives? Can we afford to allow our young to be misled instead by predatory cults running our governments?
I don't disagree with you one bit -- I was simply asking the ? From a moral stance.
See my first sentence: agree with you.
Next sentence explores the effects of exercising one's rights.
I never suggested all women should be domestic engineers (my preferred term). Simply the statement "just a housewife" degrades a vocation that can be both challenging & rewarding
There have always been women working outside the home. The problem is now so many slave away at 2 jobs, few are available to provide the emotional and physical support that kept the family unit strong.
You’re free to make your choices, and I’m free to make mine. Also not trying to make a point that only a college education matters because that’s definitely not true. Trades are far more beneficial and I wish I’d had the option to learn that in high school.
Not all women will do well as mothers. A family friend—may she Rest In Peace—wound up taking in her nephew because he was going to the foster system otherwise. His mother was addicted to multiple substances, as was his father. His father/the foster mom’s brother was coddled and spoiled by their mom. Their dad was incredibly distant. The “smothered” kid wound up terrible—swindling even his own dementia-suffering mom for money in her last months of life. The “black sheep” fought for her nephew while keeping a steady job and raising her own daughters. She left this earth with multiple wonderful mom who are also nurses and teachers.
My grandfather shouldn’t have had children. He was an alcoholic after getting rejected from the priesthood. His family continues to suffer from that fallout. However, the traditional view deems him a solid “man” just because he put food on the table with the money he had left over after booze and taxes. Is that also the woman’s fault for the family’s breakdown?
I may never be able to have children. I may adopt one day, but will only do so if I know I can be financially and emotionally supportive to that child.
If simply being a mother makes you happy? Solid, go for it.
If you can handle both being a mother and being a working woman and that’s what you want? Cool, your choice.
Can’t afford children or have something else going on that you don’t want to subject them to your struggles? Seems responsible not to have them.
This isn’t an argument for abortion, btw, as I’m sure someone will take it that way
The question is, can the children really handle both parents missing from their lives? Can we afford to allow our young to be misled instead by predatory cults running our governments?
I don't disagree with you one bit -- I was simply asking the ? From a moral stance.
See my first sentence: agree with you. Next sentence explores the effects of exercising one's rights.
I never suggested all women should be domestic engineers (my preferred term). Simply the statement "just a housewife" degrades a vocation that can be both challenging & rewarding
There have always been women working outside the home. The problem is now so many slave away at 2 jobs, few are available to provide the emotional and physical support that kept the family unit strong.
Blessings to you.
If humanity had waited until economic conditions were right to have children we wouldn't be here, we would have died out a very long time ago.
Then what is the truth