| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
RFHall
Guest
|
 Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2008 1:25 am Post subject: If one can>t afford children, one should not have children. |
 |
|
If one can>t afford children, one should not have children.
This simple statement could be called a moral guideline. It seems
extremely reasonable and rational, yet it is rarely mentioned.
Perhaps, in antiquity, having children one couldn>t afford was never a
problem. There was probably always room for the extra, unkept
children in the slave markets, the streets, the sex mongers, or,
hopefully, the families who were afluent enough to properly raise
them. It still would have been advantageous if this were the eleventh
commandment, or something Buddha talked about, or even, a footnote in
a parable of Jesus. At any rate, one doesn>t see it then, or now.
The implications of this simple rule are enormous. Starvation, child
prostitution, poverty, crime, human suffering, all these things could
be drastically reduced if this simple rule were shouted from every
religous and secular media till it became common sense and reached the
mind of every human on earth.
People will say that this goal is impossible. If one imagines the
population on earth to be little better than animals with overpowering
sexual demands, they may be right.
Other people will say this is descriminatory toward the poor. What?
Poor people don>t have the right to have children? Unless you wish to
watch children shuffling and suffering through the garbage dumps of
the world, then, no, they don>t.
RFHall
http://www.seanet.com/~realistic/idealism.html
philosophy based on evidence |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Evelyn
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2008 1:25 am Post subject: Re: If one can>t afford children, one should not have childr |
|
|
On Jul 20, 4:25 pm, realis...@seanet.com (RFHall) wrote:
[quote]If one can>t afford children, one should not have children.
This simple statement could be called a moral guideline. It seems
extremely reasonable and rational, yet it is rarely mentioned.
Perhaps, in antiquity, having children one couldn>t afford was never a
problem. There was probably always room for the extra, unkept
children in the slave markets, the streets, the sex mongers, or,
hopefully, the families who were afluent enough to properly raise
them. It still would have been advantageous if this were the eleventh
commandment, or something Buddha talked about, or even, a footnote in
a parable of Jesus. At any rate, one doesn>t see it then, or now.
The implications of this simple rule are enormous. Starvation, child
prostitution, poverty, crime, human suffering, all these things could
be drastically reduced if this simple rule were shouted from every
religous and secular media till it became common sense and reached the
mind of every human on earth.
People will say that this goal is impossible. If one imagines the
population on earth to be little better than animals with overpowering
sexual demands, they may be right.
Other people will say this is descriminatory toward the poor. What?
Poor people don>t have the right to have children? Unless you wish to
watch children shuffling and suffering through the garbage dumps of
the world, then, no, they don>t.
RFHallhttp://www.seanet.com/~realistic/idealism.html
philosophy based on evidence
[/quote]
My friend, if everyone waited till they thought they could truly
afford children, there would be very few who had any.
Child prostitution exists not only because of poverty, but because of
sleazy and disturbed individuals who are attracted sexually to
children.
Improperly cared for children foraging through garbage, exists not
only through poverty, but also from the immaturity of adults, who
should be caring for them better, but who are barely able to take care
of themselves emotionally and practically, thus find the challenges of
parenting to be too daunting a task.
There is no one cause of anything of course. It is too complex a
problem. I agree that birth control would solve a great deal of it,
but there is no way that it would end the suffering of children in
general, nor would it stop those who are so immature and selfish that
they never even consider the dangers of having unprotected sex, much
less about the possible children their actions could create.
Ignorance is probably the root of a lot of it.
Do what you can in the world to help. Fix what you can, and be
content that you have done something when others have turned away.
It>s really all you can do.
Evelyn |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Julian
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2008 1:41 am Post subject: Re: If one can>t afford children, one should not have childr |
|
|
RFHall wrote:
[quote]If one can>t afford children, one should not have children.
This simple statement could be called a moral guideline. It seems
extremely reasonable and rational, yet it is rarely mentioned.
[/quote]
snip sob story.
Do you propose to do anything other than whinge about it
or are you, perhaps, yet another blustering coward? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
halfawake
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2008 3:06 am Post subject: Re: If one can>t afford children, one should not have childr |
|
|
RFHall wrote:
[quote]If one can>t afford children, one should not have children.
This simple statement could be called a moral guideline. It seems
extremely reasonable and rational, yet it is rarely mentioned.
Perhaps, in antiquity, having children one couldn>t afford was never a
problem. There was probably always room for the extra, unkept
children in the slave markets, the streets, the sex mongers, or,
hopefully, the families who were afluent enough to properly raise
them. It still would have been advantageous if this were the eleventh
commandment, or something Buddha talked about, or even, a footnote in
a parable of Jesus. At any rate, one doesn>t see it then, or now.
The implications of this simple rule are enormous. Starvation, child
prostitution, poverty, crime, human suffering, all these things could
be drastically reduced if this simple rule were shouted from every
religous and secular media till it became common sense and reached the
mind of every human on earth.
People will say that this goal is impossible. If one imagines the
population on earth to be little better than animals with overpowering
sexual demands, they may be right.
Other people will say this is descriminatory toward the poor. What?
Poor people don>t have the right to have children? Unless you wish to
watch children shuffling and suffering through the garbage dumps of
the world, then, no, they don>t.
RFHall
http://www.seanet.com/~realistic/idealism.html
philosophy based on evidence
***moron alert!***[/quote]
robert
- - - - - - - -
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
RaaN
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2008 12:59 pm Post subject: Re: If one can>t afford children, one should not have childr |
|
|
On Jul 20, 4:25 pm, realis...@seanet.com (RFHall) wrote:
[quote]If one can>t afford children, one should not have children.
This simple statement could be called a moral guideline. It seems
extremely reasonable and rational, yet it is rarely mentioned.
Perhaps, in antiquity, having children one couldn>t afford was never a
problem. There was probably always room for the extra, unkept
children in the slave markets, the streets, the sex mongers, or,
hopefully, the families who were afluent enough to properly raise
them. It still would have been advantageous if this were the eleventh
commandment, or something Buddha talked about, or even, a footnote in
a parable of Jesus. At any rate, one doesn>t see it then, or now.
The implications of this simple rule are enormous. Starvation, child
prostitution, poverty, crime, human suffering, all these things could
be drastically reduced if this simple rule were shouted from every
religous and secular media till it became common sense and reached the
mind of every human on earth.
People will say that this goal is impossible. If one imagines the
population on earth to be little better than animals with overpowering
sexual demands, they may be right.
Other people will say this is descriminatory toward the poor. What?
Poor people don>t have the right to have children? Unless you wish to
watch children shuffling and suffering through the garbage dumps of
the world, then, no, they don>t.
RFHallhttp://www.seanet.com/~realistic/idealism.html
philosophy based on evidence
[/quote]
You should expect a lot of knee jerk reactions to this bit of common
sense but if enough people in positions of influence repeated it then
it could eventually become the politically correct view and knees
would jerk accordingly.
--
RaaN |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
RaaN
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2008 1:01 pm Post subject: Re: If one can>t afford children, one should not have childr |
|
|
On Jul 20, 6:06 pm, halfawake <halfaw...@nonewsisgoodnews.com> wrote:
[quote]RFHall wrote:
If one can>t afford children, one should not have children.
This simple statement could be called a moral guideline. It seems
extremely reasonable and rational, yet it is rarely mentioned.
Perhaps, in antiquity, having children one couldn>t afford was never a
problem. There was probably always room for the extra, unkept
children in the slave markets, the streets, the sex mongers, or,
hopefully, the families who were afluent enough to properly raise
them. It still would have been advantageous if this were the eleventh
commandment, or something Buddha talked about, or even, a footnote in
a parable of Jesus. At any rate, one doesn>t see it then, or now.
The implications of this simple rule are enormous. Starvation, child
prostitution, poverty, crime, human suffering, all these things could
be drastically reduced if this simple rule were shouted from every
religous and secular media till it became common sense and reached the
mind of every human on earth.
People will say that this goal is impossible. If one imagines the
population on earth to be little better than animals with overpowering
sexual demands, they may be right.
Other people will say this is descriminatory toward the poor. What?
Poor people don>t have the right to have children? Unless you wish to
watch children shuffling and suffering through the garbage dumps of
the world, then, no, they don>t.
RFHall
http://www.seanet.com/~realistic/idealism.html
philosophy based on evidence
***moron alert!***
robert
[/quote]
Good of you to warn us about yourself especially if you consider that
any kind of an argument.
--
RaaN |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
RaaN
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2008 1:03 pm Post subject: Re: If one can>t afford children, one should not have childr |
|
|
On Jul 20, 4:41 pm, Julian <julianlz...@gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]RFHall wrote:
If one can>t afford children, one should not have children.
This simple statement could be called a moral guideline. It seems
extremely reasonable and rational, yet it is rarely mentioned.
snip sob story.
Do you propose to do anything other than whinge about it
or are you, perhaps, yet another blustering coward?
[/quote]
It>s just a matter of propagating the idea until it becomes part of
the social morality so he has already done something about it.
--
RaaN |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
RaaN
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2008 1:05 pm Post subject: Re: If one can>t afford children, one should not have childr |
|
|
On Jul 20, 7:22 pm, Evelyn <evelyn.r...@gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Jul 20, 4:25 pm, realis...@seanet.com (RFHall) wrote:
If one can>t afford children, one should not have children.
This simple statement could be called a moral guideline. It seems
extremely reasonable and rational, yet it is rarely mentioned.
Perhaps, in antiquity, having children one couldn>t afford was never a
problem. There was probably always room for the extra, unkept
children in the slave markets, the streets, the sex mongers, or,
hopefully, the families who were afluent enough to properly raise
them. It still would have been advantageous if this were the eleventh
commandment, or something Buddha talked about, or even, a footnote in
a parable of Jesus. At any rate, one doesn>t see it then, or now.
The implications of this simple rule are enormous. Starvation, child
prostitution, poverty, crime, human suffering, all these things could
be drastically reduced if this simple rule were shouted from every
religous and secular media till it became common sense and reached the
mind of every human on earth.
People will say that this goal is impossible. If one imagines the
population on earth to be little better than animals with overpowering
sexual demands, they may be right.
Other people will say this is descriminatory toward the poor. What?
Poor people don>t have the right to have children? Unless you wish to
watch children shuffling and suffering through the garbage dumps of
the world, then, no, they don>t.
RFHallhttp://www.seanet.com/~realistic/idealism.html
philosophy based on evidence
My friend, if everyone waited till they thought they could truly
afford children, there would be very few who had any.
Child prostitution exists not only because of poverty, but because of
sleazy and disturbed individuals who are attracted sexually to
children.
Improperly cared for children foraging through garbage, exists not
only through poverty, but also from the immaturity of adults, who
should be caring for them better, but who are barely able to take care
of themselves emotionally and practically, thus find the challenges of
parenting to be too daunting a task.
There is no one cause of anything of course. It is too complex a
problem. I agree that birth control would solve a great deal of it,
but there is no way that it would end the suffering of children in
general, nor would it stop those who are so immature and selfish that
they never even consider the dangers of having unprotected sex, much
less about the possible children their actions could create.
Ignorance is probably the root of a lot of it.
Do what you can in the world to help. Fix what you can, and be
content that you have done something when others have turned away.
It>s really all you can do.
Evelyn
[/quote]
Also cut carbon emissions.. or do you suppose that to be another
futile effort?
--
RaaN |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
RaaN
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2008 1:08 pm Post subject: Re: If one can>t afford children, one should not have childr |
|
|
On Jul 21, 7:31 am, Keynes <Key...@earthlinkspam.net> wrote:
[quote]On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 20:25:30 GMT, realis...@seanet.com (RFHall) wrote:
If one can>t afford children, one should not have children.
This simple statement could be called a moral guideline. It seems
extremely reasonable and rational, yet it is rarely mentioned.
Perhaps, in antiquity, having children one couldn>t afford was never a
problem. There was probably always room for the extra, unkept
children in the slave markets, the streets, the sex mongers, or,
hopefully, the families who were afluent enough to properly raise
them. It still would have been advantageous if this were the eleventh
commandment, or something Buddha talked about, or even, a footnote in
a parable of Jesus. At any rate, one doesn>t see it then, or now.
The implications of this simple rule are enormous. Starvation, child
prostitution, poverty, crime, human suffering, all these things could
be drastically reduced if this simple rule were shouted from every
religous and secular media till it became common sense and reached the
mind of every human on earth.
People will say that this goal is impossible. If one imagines the
population on earth to be little better than animals with overpowering
sexual demands, they may be right.
Other people will say this is descriminatory toward the poor. What?
Poor people don>t have the right to have children? Unless you wish to
watch children shuffling and suffering through the garbage dumps of
the world, then, no, they don>t.
RFHall
http://www.seanet.com/~realistic/idealism.html
philosophy based on evidence
Should people give others bad advice?
Is it their job to tell others what to do?
Perhaps if they had the power, they would
make others take their advice by law on pain
of punishment. This would be presumptuous,
from a person who feels himself wiser and
better than others to such a point that it were
his business to correct others without first
correcting himself.
How good you must be, so without fault
that you presume to guide others. You
must believe that. No doubt you wonder
why others cannot also perceive your
greatness. They must be stupid.
Or something.
[/quote]
Don>t drink and drive... you idiot.
--
RaaN |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
RFHall
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2008 2:34 pm Post subject: Re: If one can>t afford children, one should not have childr |
|
|
On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 18:06:32 -0400, halfawake
<halfawake@nonewsisgoodnews.com> wrote:
[quote]
***moron alert!***--->robert
Its ok, robert, your parents could probably afford you.[/quote] |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Keynes
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2008 4:31 pm Post subject: Re: If one can>t afford children, one should not have childr |
|
|
On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 20:25:30 GMT, realistic@seanet.com (RFHall) wrote:
[quote]If one can>t afford children, one should not have children.
This simple statement could be called a moral guideline. It seems
extremely reasonable and rational, yet it is rarely mentioned.
Perhaps, in antiquity, having children one couldn>t afford was never a
problem. There was probably always room for the extra, unkept
children in the slave markets, the streets, the sex mongers, or,
hopefully, the families who were afluent enough to properly raise
them. It still would have been advantageous if this were the eleventh
commandment, or something Buddha talked about, or even, a footnote in
a parable of Jesus. At any rate, one doesn>t see it then, or now.
The implications of this simple rule are enormous. Starvation, child
prostitution, poverty, crime, human suffering, all these things could
be drastically reduced if this simple rule were shouted from every
religous and secular media till it became common sense and reached the
mind of every human on earth.
People will say that this goal is impossible. If one imagines the
population on earth to be little better than animals with overpowering
sexual demands, they may be right.
Other people will say this is descriminatory toward the poor. What?
Poor people don>t have the right to have children? Unless you wish to
watch children shuffling and suffering through the garbage dumps of
the world, then, no, they don>t.
RFHall
http://www.seanet.com/~realistic/idealism.html
philosophy based on evidence
[/quote]
Should people give others bad advice?
Is it their job to tell others what to do?
Perhaps if they had the power, they would
make others take their advice by law on pain
of punishment. This would be presumptuous,
from a person who feels himself wiser and
better than others to such a point that it were
his business to correct others without first
correcting himself.
How good you must be, so without fault
that you presume to guide others. You
must believe that. No doubt you wonder
why others cannot also perceive your
greatness. They must be stupid.
Or something. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Julian
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2008 10:50 pm Post subject: Re: If one can>t afford children, one should not have childr |
|
|
RaaN wrote:
[quote]On Jul 20, 4:41 pm, Julian <julianlz...@gmail.com> wrote:
RFHall wrote:
If one can>t afford children, one should not have children.
This simple statement could be called a moral guideline. It seems
extremely reasonable and rational, yet it is rarely mentioned.
snip sob story.
Do you propose to do anything other than whinge about it
or are you, perhaps, yet another blustering coward?
It>s just a matter of propagating the idea until it becomes part of
the social morality so he has already done something about it.
[/quote]
So you agree that the only people that should breed are the ones who want,
and are prepared to take by hook or crook, more resources than they need?
There is plenty for everyone on this planet and if it were for such
gluttons
who want to stock pile excessive resources for themselves
there would be no "poor."
Further I see no reason why "social moralities" should have much effect on
the usual bell curve of distribution... they never have in the past.
There will always be poor so stop wimping out and start shooting and
force-sterilising the "poor" for that is surely where you are heading.
Here.. allow me to suggest an anthem for your Utopia...
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMVql9RLP34 |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Julian
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2008 11:02 pm Post subject: Re: If one can>t afford children, one should not have childr |
|
|
RaaN wrote:
[quote]On Jul 20, 7:22 pm, Evelyn <evelyn.r...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jul 20, 4:25 pm, realis...@seanet.com (RFHall) wrote:
If one can>t afford children, one should not have children.
This simple statement could be called a moral guideline. It seems
extremely reasonable and rational, yet it is rarely mentioned.
Perhaps, in antiquity, having children one couldn>t afford was never a
problem. There was probably always room for the extra, unkept
children in the slave markets, the streets, the sex mongers, or,
hopefully, the families who were afluent enough to properly raise
them. It still would have been advantageous if this were the eleventh
commandment, or something Buddha talked about, or even, a footnote in
a parable of Jesus. At any rate, one doesn>t see it then, or now.
The implications of this simple rule are enormous. Starvation, child
prostitution, poverty, crime, human suffering, all these things could
be drastically reduced if this simple rule were shouted from every
religous and secular media till it became common sense and reached the
mind of every human on earth.
People will say that this goal is impossible. If one imagines the
population on earth to be little better than animals with overpowering
sexual demands, they may be right.
Other people will say this is descriminatory toward the poor. What?
Poor people don>t have the right to have children? Unless you wish to
watch children shuffling and suffering through the garbage dumps of
the world, then, no, they don>t.
RFHallhttp://www.seanet.com/~realistic/idealism.html
philosophy based on evidence
My friend, if everyone waited till they thought they could truly
afford children, there would be very few who had any.
Child prostitution exists not only because of poverty, but because of
sleazy and disturbed individuals who are attracted sexually to
children.
Improperly cared for children foraging through garbage, exists not
only through poverty, but also from the immaturity of adults, who
should be caring for them better, but who are barely able to take care
of themselves emotionally and practically, thus find the challenges of
parenting to be too daunting a task.
There is no one cause of anything of course. It is too complex a
problem. I agree that birth control would solve a great deal of it,
but there is no way that it would end the suffering of children in
general, nor would it stop those who are so immature and selfish that
they never even consider the dangers of having unprotected sex, much
less about the possible children their actions could create.
Ignorance is probably the root of a lot of it.
Do what you can in the world to help. Fix what you can, and be
content that you have done something when others have turned away.
It>s really all you can do.
Evelyn
Also cut carbon emissions.. or do you suppose that to be another
futile effort?
[/quote]
I>m suprised you are concerned about carbon emissions
considering your tacit support for the introduction of
gas ovens to cremate the poor or have you a more
eco friendly way of disposing of the corpses? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Julian
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2008 11:06 pm Post subject: Re: If one can>t afford children, one should not have childr |
|
|
Julian wrote:
[quote]RaaN wrote:
On Jul 20, 4:41 pm, Julian <julianlz...@gmail.com> wrote:
RFHall wrote:
If one can>t afford children, one should not have children.
This simple statement could be called a moral guideline. It seems
extremely reasonable and rational, yet it is rarely mentioned.
snip sob story.
Do you propose to do anything other than whinge about it
or are you, perhaps, yet another blustering coward?
It>s just a matter of propagating the idea until it becomes part of
the social morality so he has already done something about it.
So you agree that the only people that should breed are the ones who want,
and are prepared to take by hook or crook, more resources than they need?
There is plenty for everyone on this planet and if it were for such
gluttons
who want to stock pile excessive resources for themselves
there would be no "poor."
Further I see no reason why "social moralities" should have much effect on
the usual bell curve of distribution... they never have in the past.
There will always be poor so stop wimping out and start shooting and
force-sterilising the "poor" for that is surely where you are heading.
Here.. allow me to suggest an anthem for your Utopia...
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMVql9RLP34
[/quote]
Just in case that link doesn>t work...
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=tomorrow+belongs+to+me&rls=com.microsoft:*:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GGIC&um=1&sa=N&tab=wv&oi=property_suggestions&resnum=0&ct=property-revision&cd=1# |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
halfawake
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2008 11:24 pm Post subject: Re: If one can>t afford children, one should not have childr |
|
|
RFHall wrote:
[quote]On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 18:06:32 -0400, halfawake
halfawake@nonewsisgoodnews.com> wrote:
***moron alert!***--->robert
Its ok, robert, your parents could probably afford you.
[/quote]
Actually they were quite poor when we started out, but for reasons you
probably can>t understand, they have no regrets, and in fact I am
actually helpful to them now in their old age. However, if, for richer
or for poorer, your parents had refrained from having you, the world
would be a slightly sunnier place.
Now, back under the rock where you belong.
Robert
= = = = = = = = = = = |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
