|
|
|
|
|
| | What is Owed?Page 3 of 5 (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) | | i think that in a society the the lowest standered of living is how we should be judged. i do not have a problem with community shelters, community soup kitchens were people are able to obtain the fundamental and basic needs to life. i understand that every one can make an error a bad judgment or just run into misfortune i have no problems giving these people they help that is needed to their specific situation after all i can find myself in need of help one day.i feel that ultimatly along with the help it is up to the helped to put forth the effort to use the help and make the extra effort to become self supportive. i do not support enabling negitive cycles of social degradation nor do i support those who do not want to put forth at least the minnimum amount of effort to live in socity these slackers are where they are because that is where they belong nothing venture means nothing gained they should consider them selves lucky they do not live in a forest like primitive man would you think they would survive long if they decided to just not forage for food, make shelter, etc socity needs all members to contribute what they can those who do not should be sent to the woods to fend for them selves. | |
|
| What is Owed?
Posted: 4/18/2009 8:25:24 PM |
I am explaining this in detail because I am sick and tired of being called a fool who says incongruent things. I say everything because I believe they are apropos to the topic, and because they are relevant. And I say of course jokes, but they are not at all totally removed in relevance from the topic at hand.
1. Neither I nor anyone else called you a fool.
2. If that many of your jokes fall flat, then perhaps you should stop joking in forums. In a medium that lacks voice inflection and facial expression, jokes can be difficult to spot.
Dear Gwendolyn; the Nazi example was uncalled for. The Octomum was not forced into an experiment unwillingly.
It doesn't matter if she were willing or not; nine lives were put on the line because of her selfish desire to be a brood mother. And not only that, her selfishness will affect the lives of not only her recent eight babies, but her other children for years.
If I volunteer to allow doctors to perform heinous experiments on me, does that mean it is ethical for them to do so? Remember the incident where the man in Germany killed and ate another man who gave his consent? Was that legal or ethical?
Octomum proved a whole lot more with her voluntary contribution. Indeed, we don't know the future, but if there IS going to be a dearth of women, a dire dearth of women, Octomum's example may come in very welcomed and handy.
So it has been proven that a woman can bear eight children--I still don't see how this truly sheds light on anything.
When the dire dearth of women comes about, humans should bow out and become extinct gracefully. | |
|
| What is Owed?
Posted: 4/23/2009 6:18:33 PM | | All life is precious nor can any be replaced, we don't owe her but her children. As for the literalist in me, well.... society contributed to her thinking process, the idea she could have this many kids, thus if society contributed it has some responsibility for the event. | |
|
| What is Owed?
Posted: 4/23/2009 8:06:47 PM |
society contributed to her thinking process,
With the plethora of problems with overpopulation, I don't see how society pressured her into having kids. | |
|
| What is Owed?
Posted: 4/24/2009 10:20:37 AM | It could be argued that she was- she felt there was an opportunity to ensure the livelihood of both her current and future children.
Also, overpopulation isn't really an issue in the West- in fact, most Western nations populations for nationally born citizens have been down for decades | |
|
| What is Owed?
Posted: 4/24/2009 10:38:14 AM | I got a lecture from my dead beat welfare bum neighbours about money and life one day and I just stood up and said " some people have got to go to work in order for this system to provide what it does not every one can just sit at home and and do nothing"
They abuse the system and have no ambition to change... At the same time I don't really blame them either with their poor work ethic and lack of intelligence the only employment they could get would pay less than welfare which is 1600-1800$ or something a month where I used to live.
I'd rather have a bunch of dumb lazy people on welfare next door than have to waste good ammunition shooting at a thief running off with my power tools or patio furniture,lol | |
|
| What is Owed?
Posted: 4/24/2009 12:18:42 PM | octo mom is a walking slap in the face to the system because they are dammed if they do something and dammed if they don't.... personally I think it was a setup with the doc and he should be facing charges.
Ok so look this way.... It is clear that she deliberatly had that many kids. BUT.... If they take the kids away then that sets a presidence in the legal system for others to file and start taking away peoples kids if they are struggling and need help..... what that would do as a result is parents that are struggling would then fear losing their kids and no longer seek out help to get things back on track.
The kids will ultimatly pay since for many that have troubles it is not a habit and works very well meaning the help is just enough to assist while in a crisis and in many cases is coupled with other help.
But the octo mom is not the case. Due to the situation there is no workout for it. too many kids to take care of and since she is not educated she has no hope to earn enough money to take care of them unless she enters into the income bracket of like star status. but her attitude is being counter productive.
When people tried to help her she flipped out because it wasn't what she pictured the help would be like.
I only know what i have seen and it just seemed to me like she is not the nurturing type and in my opinion which i think a few others also thought about.... I think she was expecting to get some large chunck of money and likely just disapearing.
She hinted to that before and then claimed it as being depressed.
So my thought would be she should be required to uphold the same standards as others. but no matter what due to the amount of kids even her at 100% doing her best still falls under neglect.
example.... in many child care settings like daycare etc. the child to staff ratio can not exceed 8-1 so for every 8 kids has to be 1 adult staff member... some places it is even less.
Those numbers come from studies done that show anything less and there is a deminished level of care. so using that data she is in the red zone even if she is 100% on her game which she is not due to all the time she takes for herself as well as talking to everyone. So the result will be those kids will not be raised by their mother.
The only hope will be for staff to be hired to offset the imbalance and of course she has no money to pay.
So what do you do.... any way you turn is a bad choice that has a chance of effecting MANY other people. partly due to the way the legal system is structured.
We don't owe her but as society we do owe the children because it is in our founding documents. they were born here so they are entitled to the same rights as you, me, anyone. We can not punish those children for something they did not have the power to control they did nothing wrong so if we as a society deny them their rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness ...we are bad.
my personal thoughts. find a doctor, a lawyer, a social worker, and a accountant that are all willing to step up to help our society. establish a trust fund that requires each of them to sign off on expences. Each one assisting by providing those children their services and have the childrens benifits deposited into that trust fund to be used for their care. and have them assigned as advocates to the children so that miss smarty pants octo mom can't pimp out and exploit those children making back room deals and basically cut her off she can have a roof over her head and food to eat.
BAH!!.... its a mess.... That would be a start at least then the kids would have a voice and someone on their side that could be able to THINK through choices.
and take away that doctors licence to send a message to anyone else wanting to attempt it. Last thing we need is a bunch of these cases running around... i already know there are many out there similar just not quite to this extream and the kids are always the ones who pay.
these are my opinions at least
EDIT by the term pimp out I did not mean literally pimp out i meant slang as in sell off their stories to media shows etc. If the children wish to when they are of age that would then be THIER choice... NOT HERS | |
|
| What is Owed?
Posted: 4/24/2009 2:16:49 PM | Personally I don't believe that just because I live in the same city, state, or country as someone else (let alone that woman) I owe them anything.
I also wouldn't go out of my way to make life difficult for them...but if someone goes out and does what she did (have a total of 14 kids, not married, and going to college) I wouldn't touch that with a 100 mile pole. | |
|
| What is Owed?
Posted: 4/24/2009 2:42:23 PM |
It could be argued that she was- she felt there was an opportunity to ensure the livelihood of both her current and future children.
This wasn't culturally motivated--it was selfishness. She wouldn't have needed to ensure the livelihood of eight more kids if she hadn't had them.
Also, overpopulation isn't really an issue in the West- in fact, most Western nations populations for nationally born citizens have been down for decades
True, but huge families are anomalies, not the status quo. | |
|
| What is Owed?
Posted: 4/24/2009 2:43:50 PM |
Personally I don't believe that just because I live in the same city, state, or country as someone else (let alone that woman) I owe them anything.
Right but also think this way as well you are not doing it for her it is for the kids that didnt have a choice and don't have a choice. They are at the mercy of society as a whole now because their mom can't do it for them.
but you just brought up a good point. I am not implying anything BUT.... depending on what income you have others are likely thinking the same way about you.
example... most people still don't get it and don't understand and sad part i see a lot of them shouting the loudest.
two type of people come tax time... there are those that are happy when jan and febuary rolls around and then there is those that dread april.
I have seen with my own eyes many of those people that file their tax returns claim that earned income credit and wind up getting a refund check for MORE than they paid into the tax system and then in the next line bytch about how they are paying for people because they work and taxes get deducted out of their checks.
It makes them think that they pay..... but think those people are not paying to help maintain this country in fact the reverse is true that EIC is basically offered because someone is just a few steps above being on welfare. but since you did give it a shot and work well you get given a bonus hoping you will invest it in something that will increase your income so that some day you can actully help pay to keep the country running.
kinda like a good job here is a reward for at least trying ..now go back and work harder so that you can join the rest of us that don't get tax money back and have to pay in thousands instead.
so again like i said i am not judging but before you go judging someone else make sure you take a peek to see if you may be doing the same thing just worded different.
EIC is quite simply welfare for working people that still don't earn enough to contribute to the finacial burdens of keeping this great country running smoothly.
They won't call it that but I DO at least because i just say it how i see it. | |
|
| What is Owed?
Posted: 4/24/2009 3:12:52 PM |
Right but also think this way as well you are not doing it for her it is for the kids that didnt have a choice and don't have a choice. They are at the mercy of society as a whole now because their mom can't do it for them.
There's truth to this. But at the same time what am I supposed to do? (Or anyone).
Every single time someone makes a big mistake like this we all pitch in and save them. We can't possibly be expected to pull everyone out of the ditch if they fall in it.
The sad thing is we live in a society where you can't do anything nice for anyone just to be nice. Sure you can but then you get everyone else in a similar situation asking for help too. I mean, I don't really pay attention to the mother with 14 kids situation but I'm sure there are people angry that she is getting so much attention (and support) when there are people in similar situations who are seething angry because they get little to none on support.
So it boils down on to who gets priority on help?
Meh, way I see it. Maybe because I'm mister young guy here I don't see the whole picture, but hey I try. O_o | |
|
| What is Owed?
Posted: 4/24/2009 3:24:21 PM | it is the fine line that sets us apart.... compassion and decency to your fellow mankind.
you would not sit back and watch someone drown in a lake would you if you knew how to swim?
your instincts would kick in and even if you didn't know them you would dive in to save them from drowning.
well it is the same way.... the ones that are actully doing the contributing to keeping this country functioning decided long ago not to sit back and watch people drown. It is what sets this country apart from other countries that have all those horors going on right now.
we won't sit back and watch people deliberatly drown if they give up and ask for help there is help available. It is not easy. it is not just passed out as a hand out like some people think... but it is there regardless should someone NEED it and ask for it.
we are intellegant beings. it is what seperates us from the rest of the animals. we care so i guess empathy is the key that makes us human. | |
|
Larrup
| | Joined: 3/17/2009
Msg: 63 | |
| What is Owed?
Posted: 4/24/2009 6:19:25 PM |
when they see the debt they owe themselves, to get reward through altruistic works, abundance will finally deliver meaning to people's lives, and scarcity will become quaint.
You demonstrate a lack of understanding of economics. Scarcity will *always* be with us, because our desires are infinite. (At zero cost, we always want more.) Jesus told us that the poor would be with us *always*. So economic inequality will always exist. Nothing anybody can do will change this.
The important question is: how should we respond to this situation? How should we respond to the reality that economic inequality exists, and will always exist? Let me give two or three answers: the first two for everybody, and the last answer for Christians.
Principle 1
Government cannot do charity. This is an easily established fact. Charity must be voluntary. But the fundamental nature of government is that governments exist only through taxes and coercion. Taxes are not voluntary, no matter how many government lies you heard just 10 days or so ago. Just try and not volunteer and see what happens to you. But charity must be voluntary!! That is the very nature of charity, just like taxes and coercion are the very nature of government. Because government has the power of the sword and punishes those who do not pay the taxes which the government claims they are owed, governments cannot do charity. It is a fundamental impossibility, because of the nature of charity, and the nature of government. When governments try to do charity, what actually happens is theft and redistribution of stolen goods, much like if a mugger robbed you of your wallet and gave some of your money to a hungry homeless person. Charity requires that you voluntarily give your money to the hungry homeless person, but taxes, like muggings, are never voluntary. Recognizing this fact, we should all work diligently to get government out of the faux charity business.
Principle 2
Any "right" one person has must not impose any obligation on any other person, other than to leave that person alone. You have a right to life, and that means I have an obligation to not murder you. You have a right to free speech, and that means I have an obligation to not muzzle you. You have a right to your own property, and that means I have an obligation to not steal from you. You have a right to bear arms, and that means I have an obligation not to prevent you from doing so. These are all examples of true rights. But some people claim that there are other rights, such as a "right to health care". There can *never* be such a right, because if you have a right to health care, it must mean that somebody else has an *obligation* to provide it for you. But the very nature of true rights is that other people can only be obligated to leave you alone. No other obligations can be imposed upon other people to supply you with your "rights". Those are not rights at all, they are in fact *theft*. Recognizing this fact, we should all work diligently to get government out of the business of providing these false "rights", which are not rights at all, but examples of gross government corruption. They are examples of one group of people using the power of government for their own benefit, at the expense of the masses who must pay the taxes.
Principle 3 (for Christians only)
"Whatever you do for the least of these, you do for me." Jesus said that. He meant it. But he said it to *individuals*, not governments. Jesus did not tell people to go and change the government so that the government would do good things for other people; Jesus told people to go and do those good things themselves! Jesus did not tell people to set up a socialistic, or communistic, or fascistic government. He said "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar, and unto God what is God's." You *are* your brothers' keeper. You *do* have an obligation to care for them, to help them, and to love them. In fact, you have an obligation to care for, help, and love your *enemies*. You need to do this personally. But if you try to get the government to do this for you, on your behalf, you only turn yourself into a promoter of theft and redistribution of stolen goods.
Larrup | |
|
Larrup
| | Joined: 3/17/2009
Msg: 64 | |
| What is Owed?
Posted: 4/24/2009 6:37:12 PM | A Szibinyani Jank asked:
"If you don't work you don't eat."
I never read the Bible. Where in it says that?
% For even when we were with you, we used to give you this order:
% if anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat, either.
% 2 Thess 3:10
The Bible teaches free market capitalism; it is manifestly opposed to socialism.
http://www.GaryNorth.com/public/department57.cfm
http://www.Mises.org/store/Church-and-the-Market-P199.aspx
Larrup | |
|
| What is Owed?
Posted: 4/24/2009 7:33:40 PM |
The Bible teaches free market capitalism; it is manifestly opposed to socialism. No it it not.
People are told to work and share "They went from house to house" Paul made sure that people knew not to just pay for a person who was being what some call a "rice Christian" people who only hang out for a hand out never doing anything for any one. As I said before basic needs for every one and needs and wants to the ones who can afford them. | |
|
Larrup
| | Joined: 3/17/2009
Msg: 66 | |
| What is Owed?
Posted: 4/24/2009 9:15:59 PM | I said:
The Bible teaches free market capitalism; it is manifestly opposed to socialism.
vvendy replied:
No it it not.
But I also cited a wealth of published material to support my position. Most of the published material I cited is freely available online. Only one book that I cited requires you go to a bookstore or a library. Here are the links to that printed material, once again:
http://www.GaryNorth.com/public/department57.cfm
http://www.Mises.org/store/Church-and-the-Market-P199.aspx
Furthermore, the material I posted has been written by both Protestants and Catholics. I urge you to read it, and become thoroughly familiar with it.
In order to seriously criticize my position, you are going to have to address all of the logical, rational, and scriptural arguments give in that written material. It is not going to be an easy task. It will take you several weeks to read through it all. (But it will be worth it!)
The first link, to some of the writings of Gary North, is to the writings of a man who has made it his entire life's work to produce an economic commentary on the Bible. Since you cited verses from the book of Acts in order to support your (misguided and unBiblical) position, you should first read Gary's commentary on the book of Acts. As Dr. North states, the socialists cite the book of Acts quite often, because they do not understand it. Rather than the book of Acts teaching socialism, it teaches free market capitalism, just like all of the Bible does. Here is a link to Dr. North's commentary on the book of Acts:
http://www.GaryNorth.com/public/468.cfm
Here is a very short proof that the Bible teaches capitalism: "Thou shall not steal." (Exod 20:15) Stealing would not be possible if property were truly held in common. The fact that stealing is possible indicates that private property exists, and the rights of the owner of that private property ought not be violated.
You have almost certainly had something stolen from you during your life. Your reaction to this theft was proper and correct. You were likely angry, and perhaps even righteously indignant. Theft is wrong. It is immoral. It is evil. Theft violates God's law. The just man will not steal. The man who loves God, and who loves his fellow man, will not steal. Theft is sin. When you suffered the theft of your property, you were hurt. You suffered evil. You know that you were wronged. This would only be possible in the case that private property does in fact exist, and ought to exist. In a truly socialistic or communistic universe, you would have no right to be angry about somebody else helping themselves to your stuff, because it would be theirs just as much as it was yours. But that is not the actual world we live in. The fact that you were hurt when you had something stolen from you is proof that private property does in fact exist, and ought to exist. The fact that the Bible teaches "Thou shalt not steal" proves that the Bible teaches capitalism, and is very much against socialism and communism.
Once again, I urge you (and everybody else) to cut and paste the links above into their browsers, and start reading. Read Dr. North's free books. Buy and read Dr. Woods' book. And just in case you are a socialist or communist, I also strongly recommend reading "Productive Christians in an Age of Guilt Manipulators" by David Chilton. Here is a link where you can download it free of charge:
http://www.EntreWave.com/freebooks/docs/21b6_47e.htm
Larrup | |
|
| What is Owed?
Posted: 4/25/2009 5:15:29 AM |
Furthermore, the material I posted has been written by both Protestants and Catholics. I urge you to read it, and become thoroughly familiar with it.
Whether or not the Bible supports capitalism or socialism there is a HUGE flaw in this reasoning: people who do not subscribe to the Judeo/Xtian teachings couldn't care less what the Bible exhorts us to do. I am pagan, and I am not going to do something because a book tells me I should.
Jesus also said to give away your belongings for the poor!
you would not sit back and watch someone drown in a lake would you if you knew how to swim?
There is a flaw with this, per your "if" you knew how to swim--I can't swim. I can barely keep myself afloat, and I stay out of deep water. Anyone who risks swimming in an undertow will drown while I stand on the shore watching because I am NOT going down with him/her.
In addition, if a parent is negligent enough to allow a small child near the water without supervision or with lax supervision and that child drowns, the parents will be charged with negligence.
EIC is quite simply welfare for working people that still don't earn enough to contribute to the finacial burdens of keeping this great country running smoothly.
The goal of any "welfare" program should be to make people self-sufficient. I claimed the EIC for several years when I was getting my MA, but once I graduated, I was and am able to make enough money to support myself. I don't make a lot of money, but I do better than many who make more. Recently, I applied for a loan to buy a house. The loan officer asked me how much I made per year then asked if I have a savings. I replied in the affirmative and told him how much. For a moment, there was silence at his end of the phone and then he asked, "Is that $oo, 000 or $0,000?) I told him it was the five digit number and said, "I am frugal."
I am frugal because of my years making poverty line wages.
The octomom is not a quick fix. In fact, she could earn (when is she going to return to work?) a heck of a lot of money and still qualify for "money back" because of her extensive family. I forecast that she will not work toward making a secure financial situation for herself and her brood. She will rely on the kindness of strangers, government handouts, the book she is going to have ghost written, and the movie that will be made.
How many times do we save drowning people who INSIST on swimming in dangerous waters? When a parent looks at his/her child enter the water and does nothing to stop the child, or even aids that child, do we pat that parent on the back and reward him/her?
I won't buy the book or see the movie--I am too frugal and don't waste my money on things other than red shoes. | |
|
| What is Owed?
Posted: 4/25/2009 5:28:12 AM | | It helps my standard of living to not be surrounded by sick hungry people. So even for purely selfish reasons I agree that a certain minimum standard of living should be provided. | |
|
| What is Owed?
Posted: 4/25/2009 7:49:02 AM |
There is a flaw with this, per your "if" you knew how to swim--I can't swim. I can barely keep myself afloat, and I stay out of deep water. Anyone who risks swimming in an undertow will drown while I stand on the shore watching because I am NOT going down with him/her.
In addition, if a parent is negligent enough to allow a small child near the water without supervision or with lax supervision and that child drowns, the parents will be charged with negligence.
But you just said it yourself.... you can't swim so it isn't your money she would be receiving... I took what you said that you don't earn enough to be responsible for having any tax liability, so if it is not your money then again... why do you care.
The people that DO have a tax liability and DO pay to keep this countries social functions working understand that a society is only as advanced as the least member among us. So if we allow someone starve that does not have a choice then it is a reflection on the society as a whole.
personally I am one of the people that believes the simple way is the best way.
The tax code is so messed up and i feel it is partially responsable for many to NOT strive to earn more. when you look at facts and figures there seems to be a invisable barrier that many fail to push through because once you are past it you owe more.
I am one that thinks we should have a strait 10% flat tax all the way down the line. so if you make $10,000 a year or $10,000,000 a year you will still need to pay a flat 10% tax. on your income. Then have a flat 10% sales tax as well.
super simple... closes up all loopholes because they way it is now people think that the government steals your money but then scream that they want the people from government to protect their rights, freedoms, and defend them from attackers.
people hate taxes and don't want to pay them but they want the rewards that those taxes pay for. And as I said before... the sad part is most of the ones screaming the loudest don't even have a income high enough to really justify their whining and complaining.
take a step back .... How many times have you complained about sales tax while at the store? Then after leaving the store see a drunk driver swearving all over the road.... what would you do?.... maybe pick up your cell phone and call the cops to come and arrest that drunk to keep YOU protected from him/her right?????????
imagine the day you would call 911 and hear the tone "Im sorry the number you were dialing has been disconected at the owners request..... because people considered paying for those luxuries and protections was theft"
You would be pissed right? I mean shoot the cops are suppose to be there to protect YOU!!! even IF you are not willing to help pay for them.
So those in our society that DO understand how the system works and where that money really comes from vote in people that will represent us. So now we have all these groups of people forming up to make the choices now by voting in who they want yet the vast majority of them are puppets.
Their votes get manipulated when they don't even have a clue what the hell they are voting on....they don't know because they are not contributing to how it works.
Look at it this way..... Imagine this.... you worked hard and went and picked up your paycheck then I came in and started telling you what you need to spend your money on..... you would not take kindly for me to walk into YOUR house and start telling you that "$x" will be used to pay for "y" and too bad you don't get a say in how your own money is spent.
That is not any differance at all than someone with a zero tax liability trying to tell everyone else that does pay taxes what they should spend that on.....
seriously... think about it. it isn't your money that is being spent... so why should you care?
and if you do care then you are not any different than someone walking into YOUR house and trying to tell you how to divide up your income when they didn't have a hand in earning it. you just get to sit back and enjoy the safety and security and the social order that other peoples incomes paid for...... oh yeah and your right to voice out that people are spending someone elses money wrong.....
So i say since the latest trend is to have even people that don't help pay the bills to stand up and bytch and complain then fine... level out the playing field... make everyone equaly responsable...
everyone from the bum panhandling on the street corner all the way to the media mogal making billions from displaying suffering, injustices, and real life horrors
Freedom isn't free you know...... so if you have to pay the same ratio even if you only make 10,000 a year as you would if you made 100,000 a year which do you think people would rather earn?
We will always have poor among us.... but we don't need to have so damn many poor.
I asked a bunch of people in lower income area's why they don't make more money.... I was shocked at what the response was.... boiled down it was.. "Why should i bother making more money?... I i did make more money the government would just take it...the more i make the more they take"
I was shocked.... so if that is holding people back then simple.... make it the same for jane welfare mom as it is for bob factory worker, as it is for joe plumber and even mr CEO everyone taxed the same ratio and i would bet poverty would be greatly reduced
This kinda got a bit off topic but needed to to make my point which is again.... it isn't your damn money that would be used to take care of the children so why the hell do you or would you even think you have a right to even complain?
If it bothers you then fine work harder earn more money so that you can actully help keep this country working and then you will have a justified gripe... but then of course i would bet you would then take an ACTIVE role in making sure things are done right instead of whinning looking around saying "someone should do something" if not you then who?
just my opinions .....make sure you understand what it is your actully voting about... an un educated voter is just as bad as a thug with a gun. | |
|
| What is Owed?
Posted: 4/25/2009 8:05:30 AM | "The Bible teaches free market capitalism; it is manifestly opposed to socialism."
Two considerations spring to mind from this literally incredible belief.
The longer lived and less famous co-author of the Communist Manifesto noted that, "Marx wouldn't agree to be called a modern Marxist." And further underscoring the human animal's limitless capacity to paint it's best interests the colour of right -Heuy Long, who when asked if he thought fascism could ever overtake North America replied, "Yes, but we will call it anti-fascism."
If Jesus was a Capitalist, Ghengis Kahn was a pascifist. | |
|
| What is Owed?
Posted: 4/25/2009 6:49:57 PM | I'd say none! I'd also call your Prof an idiot and delusional. We are owed a healthy and happy life from our Parents and then we need to stand on our own 2 feet. If one works hard and makes something of themselves then they deserve the rewards that come with it. sit on your rear end and do nothing, then you should starve. As far as ethical responsibilites, you have a responsibility to society to pull your own weight.
If people need some help to get back on their feet fine, get a handout but get your butt moving again. Born disabled and can't work then okay help that person out because they truly need it otherwise no free rides on my back unless I chose to give it. | |
|
| What is Owed?
Posted: 4/26/2009 5:03:24 PM | Lamp,
I found a thread where we can post about our disagreement. Please do a search for Jesus was a socialist" to find it. This topic is really interesting and I would like to get back to it.
In class one of my students wondered why the octomom sent away her help. I said I do not know for sure but if I was her I would only send them away if I felt they only came to spy and report on my family. I think that if the older kids help her with the younger ones she can get them one schedule and raise them like a lot of people with big families do. Older siblings help the younger ones. | |
|
| What is Owed?
Posted: 4/26/2009 8:36:36 PM |
I'd say none! I'd also call your Prof an idiot and delusional.
C'mon, golfer! Tell us what you really think!
I think that if the older kids help her with the younger ones she can get them one schedule and raise them like a lot of people with big families do. Older siblings help the younger ones.
That might be an option when ALL the kids are older, but not with eight infants in the house with siblings who are much older.
Also, the question of what is "owed" extends to those older children. SHOULD they be responsible to play "Mommy"? I have seen children assume the role of parent for the younger siblings and I don't think it is healthy. Children should have responsibilities and chores, but they shouldn't be raising other children. | |
|
| What is Owed?
Posted: 4/28/2009 9:50:13 PM |
Also, the question of what is "owed" extends to those older children. SHOULD they be responsible to play "Mommy"? I have seen children assume the role of parent for the younger siblings and I don't think it is healthy. Children should have responsibilities and chores, but they shouldn't be raising other children.
exactly... why should they have to give up their childhood just because their mother made a very bad choice..... I would think that exceeds chores and would be considered more in the terms of slavery or child labor where most of their days would be spent slaving away to care for their younger siblings. | |
|
| What is Owed?
Posted: 4/29/2009 1:59:04 AM | | Who is to decide which of the eight of the same age would act as mommy? Drawing matches? Voting? Taking turns? | |
|
|
|
|
Page
3
of
5 (1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
|
|
Home
login 
