- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
January 6, 2013 at 8:03 pm #781366
DBPMemberIn re: #69
“Orphanages were the answer in the past.”
–Were they? Really? If that’s so, then why did we do away with them? And why do they stir up such unpleasant associations for us even now?
It’s difficult for me to imagine a situation in which a child could be raised better by an institution than by two loving parents (or even one) at home.
But perhaps orphanages were never about helping children anyway. I suspect their real purpose was to scare adults. Specifically poor ones.
January 6, 2013 at 8:03 pm #781367
hooper1961MemberJoB I realize the answers are not easy. But the existing system of providing support for teen parents is not working. If it doesn’t work it needs to discontinued.
Liberals would do themselves a service if they would recognize that if a social program is not working that it should be discontinued.
January 6, 2013 at 8:11 pm #781368
DBPMemberRe: forced adoptions
What morally sound adult would even want to adopt a child that had been taken away from its parents simply because they were poor?
                    Get out and pick a pocket or two.  Â
Â
January 6, 2013 at 8:17 pm #781369
hooper1961Membermany couples are forced to adopt from abroad; what is the morality of allowing a person to keep a child when they have no resources to properly take care of them?
January 6, 2013 at 8:19 pm #781370
hooper1961Membermy fathers parents were dirt poor; with porridge a typical meal. the key is that he had both a mother and father.
the issue is a single person with no resources simply (yes there are a few exceptions) is not the best option PERIOD from the child’s perspective
January 6, 2013 at 8:23 pm #781371
DBPMemberOh yeah, hooper. By all means. Keep it up.
–Keep ignoring the questions I raise about the practicability of your “solutions.”
–Keep repeating that there are problems with the current system.
–Keep baiting Jo.
Â
Â
That’s a brilliant strategy for carrying the argument.
January 6, 2013 at 8:25 pm #781372
hooper1961MemberDBP – what is not practical about making adoption the preferred and heavily encouraged option?
January 6, 2013 at 8:37 pm #781373
DBPMemberWhy don’t you ask someone here who has adopted a child? Let’s ask ***Rich, for example.
Hey Rich, would you adopt a kid that had been taken away from its parents by the government because they were poor?
***************************
And what do you mean when you say “heavily encouraged” hoop?
Does that mean like this . . .
You have a choice, Miss Twist. You can either give little Ollie up for adoption or you and Ollie can both starve.
No pressure now, Miss. It’s entirely up to you.
January 7, 2013 at 12:22 am #781374
JoBParticipanthoop..
it’s obvious to me that you know exactly nothing about that which you speak
yet you would have us all believe that you have found the answers by making some assumptions based on personal prejudices and creating solution that caters to those same personal prejudices.
had you ever faced the choice of giving a child up for adoption?
or lived the consequences of that choice?
or been an adopted child yourself?
or visited even one “home” for unwed mothers?
or one orphanage?
if you had, you would quickly discover that your assumptions are faulty
which makes your conclusions faulty
and the fact you can find other equally ignorant people who assume the same things you do and come to the same conclusions about them that you do doesn’t change the basic fault in your argument..
garbage in
garbage out.
Now, as someone who has faced the choice of whether to give an unexpected child up for adoption or marry the father of the child.. twice.. i have some understanding of the complexity of the situation that seems to escape you.
As someone who became pregnant after she was told she would never be able to have children due to damage from several years of repeated childhood sexual abuse and who became pregnant anyway…
and whose attempts to use the birth control methods of the time, condoms for one and birth control pills for the other… not to mention the deformed fetus found among the tumors during the hysterectomy that followed a tubal ligation after the last pregnancy
i don’t have your faith in birth control.
As someone who has lived long enough to understand the full consequences for both myself and my children for my decision to end none of my unintended pregnancies by abortion
i have done my best to be as polite about this as i feel i can reasonably be …
you simply don’t have the kind of information you need to be making decisions for others
especially since you expect others to take on the personal responsibility for the consequences of your decisions.
January 7, 2013 at 2:44 am #781375
hooper1961MemberJoB all i know is that current system is not working. as a parent i know first hand the value of having a partner to help raise a kid.
children in two parent households are far more likely to be successful. tell me that this statement is not correct JoB. all the statistics clearly point to this. thus taxpayer support of teenage single parents needs to be questioned. is it an appropriate expense of limited resources when statistics clearly indicate a high percentage of poor outcomes?
January 7, 2013 at 4:29 am #781376
JoBParticipanthooper..
it’s all stats hoop..
the two parent stat is aided by the fact that two parent families are less likely to live in poverty because these days both parents work..
which by the way doesn’t contribute to that ideal of a mom or dad at home every day to pay attention to what junior does or doesn’t do :(
working moms are now the norm
but public investment in childcare isn’t
if anything needs to be questioned.. that does.
there is a lot we could do as a society to make parenting more successful, regardless of the age of the parent..
blaming teenagers isn’t one of those things.
January 7, 2013 at 5:16 am #781377
hooper1961Membermy kid was in childcare that we paid for out of our own earnings! children are expensive and before having a child it is important to be financially ready and not expect the taxpayer to pay for the choice.
January 7, 2013 at 1:41 pm #781378
redblackParticipantactually, hooper, the current system is working. it keeps those kids off of the streets.
and you can blah-de-blah all day long, but that kid is a thousand times better off with its single, poor mom than in some state-subsidized program like foster care.
adoption? when are you going to answer mike’s stat about how many kids are waiting for adoption?
there’s a baby surplus. therefore, it’s not a viable alternative. that is a broken system.
you know what makes the adoption system more pathetic, though, hooper? people cherry-pick those kids. i guaran-damn-tee you that most of the kids waiting to be adopted have congenital health problems. what happens to them when no one adopts them, hooper? what church organization is going to raise those damaged kids to adulthood? and then what happens to them after they reach the age of 18?
no, dude. if you want to fix a state program, start there. leave people on welfare and medicaid alone.
January 7, 2013 at 5:01 pm #781379
hooper1961Memberi find it strange that there is a baby surplus and yet couples still are going abroad to adopt. this does not add up.
January 7, 2013 at 5:55 pm #781380
JoBParticipanthoop..
everyone is in search of the “perfect” little baby ..
or they think the process used in the United States to verify that they should actually be given the care of a child is too difficult or too expensive or takes too long..
or they buy into the ideal that they are doing the ‘noble” thing by rescuing a child and bringing them to the land of opportunity..
so they adopt overseas ..
thinking there is some universal warranty on those kids..
too many of the people i know who adopted overseas now say that they would have been better off going through the process at home…
certainly the kids languishing here in the foster system would have been better off.
January 8, 2013 at 12:59 am #781381
funkietooParticipantHas anyone ever read Margaret Atwood’s book, ‘A Handmaid’s Tale’?
‘[Poor] women, with vital wombs, are used as public vessels for bearing children for elite couples that have trouble conceiving’.
It’s a thought provoking novel. I re-read it every few years.
January 8, 2013 at 4:04 am #781382
redblackParticipantfunkietoo for the win.
January 8, 2013 at 4:06 am #781383
redblackParticipanthooper: you find it strange. why am i not surprised?
if you want an answer, read what jo posted.
man, you seem to think america is just altruism and apple pie all the time.
hint: it ain’t. this is one of the roughest places on earth. being poor and having mean-spirited people constantly asking you why you need government assistance doesn’t make it any easier.
and being barely affluent and advocating for the continuation of government assistance for the destitute isn’t exactly a picnic either.
January 8, 2013 at 4:34 am #781384
dyn99ParticipantYou guys seriously need to stop responding to Hooper’s posts. There is no discussion, nor discourse. Only ignorance with no desire for enlightenment.
Give it up. Press the “ignore” button and move on.
January 8, 2013 at 4:38 am #781385
redblackParticipantdyn:
no.
there are too many people who read that tripe and believe it. someone has to call them on their b.s.
vigilance.
January 8, 2013 at 4:46 am #781386
dyn99ParticipantAnd I commend you, Redblack for your efforts, however fruitless it may be. If they want to believe Hooper’s bullshit, then they will believe it, no matter how logical your counter arguments are.
Give it up. If you stop responding, he will stop posting at some point.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.