Third world people have lots in the hope that some may survive the dirty water starvation and look after them in their old age
No Sanger was a pos. But on the other hand to be force into having a baby you don't want ..possibly birth control method failed etc is against that person's free will and could potentially lead to abuse of an unwanted child .
It's usually men who state absolutes....they don't get to deal with the real problems...like men in frocks pronouncing upon this and that ....with absolutely no idea of reality
So...it is better to kill a child than to let it live under less than optimal conditions? This is a philosophy that would justify machine-gunning all the orphans. I am not sympathetic to this view, as something of the kind happened to my stepchildren.
Don't go lecturing about "reality" when all you can offer is death.
Don't be dramatic. It's not a child in the first month and you are a man. ..next lifetime you may be a woman...let's see how you feel when you already have ten underfed unhappy kids and learn another one is coming forced on you by an abusive husband ....reality...it happens
So, shoot all the orphans. Put them out of their misery. Your scenario is unrealistic. The large families in this country come from unwed mothers who pump them out so as to receive the Welfare stipends associated with them. There were large families in our past history, having nothing to do with poverty or abuse (sadly, prompted by the then high infant mortality).
At least you have shifted your argument from the welfare of the child to the personal convenience of the mother, which is all that it ever comes down to. In which case infanticide is just as legitimate---and is indeed being argued for in the curent discussion of the subject. By extension, any other murder might be legitimate if it is to the convenience of the murderer.
What also happens is that abusive husbands are sometimes put out of the woman's misery. I'm not sure if you think that is better than killing the child.
Third world people have lots in the hope that some may survive the dirty water starvation and look after them in their old age
No Sanger was a pos. But on the other hand to be force into having a baby you don't want ..possibly birth control method failed etc is against that person's free will and could potentially lead to abuse of an unwanted child .
It's usually men who state absolutes....they don't get to deal with the real problems...like men in frocks pronouncing upon this and that ....with absolutely no idea of reality
So...it is better to kill a child than to let it live under less than optimal conditions? This is a philosophy that would justify machine-gunning all the orphans. I am not sympathetic to this view, as something of the kind happened to my stepchildren.
Don't go lecturing about "reality" when all you can offer is death.
Don't be dramatic. It's not a child in the first month and you are a man. ..next lifetime you may be a woman...let's see how you feel when you already have ten underfed unhappy kids and learn another one is coming forced on you by an abusive husband ....reality...it happens
So, shoot all the orphans. Put them out of their misery. Your scenario is unrealistic. The large families in this country come from unwed mothers who pump them out so as to receive the Welfare stipends associated with them. There were large families in our past history, having nothing to do with poverty or abuse (sadly, prompted by the then high infant mortality).
At least you have shifted your argument from the welfare of the child to the personal convenience of the mother, which is all that it ever comes down to. In which case infanticide is just as legitimate---and is indeed being argued for in the curent discussion of the subject. By extension, any other murder might be legitimate if it is to the convenience of the murderer.
What also happens is that abusive husbands are sometimes put out of the woman's misery. I'm not sure if you think that is better than killing the child.
You are a man...you can never understand ...so any discussion his useless. You are also very judgemental.