The shooting dead of a 11 yr old boy by a young thug on a bike, should draw attention to the fact that a large minority of young children are out of control, they will carry out criminal acts just for the hell of it, and some will commit murder, by knife or gun.
One large contributory factor towards this developing disaster, are the ever increasing number of teenage unmarried girls, having children, some with two or more different fathers. Very often the fathers accept no responsibility for the children, and the mothers are having them for all the wrong reasons, such as, it's a good way to get your own flat, and receive numerous state benefits.
These poor children come into an uncaring environment, and at a very young age are out on the streets, with no concept of what decent behavior is.
Ideally every parent should receive training on the ways of parenthood, a very difficult task. But priority must be given to ending this production line of unwanted children, withdrawal of benefits, would bring it to an abrupt end, something must be done.
starrman
28 Comments
good heavens no!
that would be against your republican belief!
Case in point...some people I used to be friends with got pregnant very young. When the baby was born, she said she had no idea who the father was so that she could receive welfare. One time, I went to visit them and there the man was pouring 3 gallons of milk down the sink because his food stamps were to arrive the next day and he'd be getting more milk so he figured he'd just get rid of it before it went sour. I was so angry, I never spoke to them again. Two years later, I heard through the grapevine that since the baby was off of formula and diapers, they dropped the welfare and he went through the process of adopting his own daughter.
Yes, a law to deny benefits to people who don't name a father would have helped in this circumstance, but I wonder if in the long run that wouldn't just create more poverty, more crime.
I don't really think anyone knows what the answer to this problem is, otherwise it wouldn't be snowballing in every country the way it is.
along with having guidance from a parent, a friend, etc.
though some choose to be unwed mothers, im sure some do not choose to.
i see a lot of judgemental comments about the mother on this thread, i dont see the same response about the sperm depositor.
Or just adopt the one person one kid rule they have in china for anyone on benefits, other kids will result in nothing extra for them. This will stop folks from living large off the state.
As for "i see a lot of judgemental comments about the mother on this thread, i dont see the same response about the sperm depositor" well... there's a good reason for that. Men cannot chose to have kids. Women can!
If a woman decides she doesn't want kids, she wont have kids. Its that simple. If a man decides he wants kids, he first needs to find a woman. The "the sperm depositor" is exactly that. He can be nameless, faceless, etc etc if the woman so desires.
A man can't trap a woman into having kids. A woman can trap a man, claim she's on the pill etc, still coming on each month, and how would a guy know? Women have the ultimate control in this "issue", and i use that word in all its meanings!
I've been on the recieving end of this. An ex... we were trying for a kid, she got caught pregnant, and changed her mind. I had no choice. No say. No input. She went to the docs, and then to the abortion, through the counciling thing to say "Are you sure that's what you want" etc. Me... i had a planned child taken away and killed. Disguarded. And i had to deal with it.
Yup... I can see why the men could be the bad guys in this. A woman always has the choice as to if she wants to have a baby by someone. Quite simply, she can just say no, and keep her legs closed. I'm pretty damned sure all those bad bad men who might fertilise her, may well struggle to do so when met with such a stance.
Men, cant have kids. Women can! Women can also choose not to, and theres nothing a man can do about it. The equation isn't equal ergo the responsibility isn't either!
I dont see many teenage fathers wandering the streets pushing prams telling how their women made them have sex with them, then forced them to have the child afterwards while they go off and pull the same trick on another guy! You stick a guy and a girl in the same financial situation in a custody battle and the girl will win every time.
Curiously... Men also cant force a woman to have an abortion. Yup.. again.. i can see how balanced and fair this whole thing is.
it is sad to hear what happened in your situation, and she was wrong for how she treated you - you both had planned a child and she decided to end that pregnancy without your input.
The responsibility for there being any "unmarried fathers" in the world lies completely and utterly with women! A woman is able to choose if she wants to have a child, and that is the end of it! Without women chosing to have that child, there would be no unmarried fathers!
Don't confuse the issue of it takes two to make a baby, with it takes two to have a baby! It doesn't. It takes one.
I think Moose is confusing my "sounding bitter" because of the topic, with my ability to be coldly logical about the whole thing. I'm not being confrontational. I'm making statements.
" No matter what the situation, it still takes both men and women to have children. BOTH are responsible. Condoms get holes in them, women get raped, even sterilization surgery fails at times. Saying that she should keep her legs closed is insulting, and doesn't make people receptive to your input. I know I sound like I am judging you, I'm not, really. I just know the way you put your comments made me angry at first, and I had to re read them to give your opinion a fair shake."
1 : Condoms get holes in them... True. You wouldn't notice that it had a hole in afterwards? Ever taken one off? Its a nasty process but i'm pretty sure I'd notice if it were split. Theres the morning after pill for that, which is something a woman can take. Also you then have the 4 months of not coming on afterwards? I think a woman might notice no period, and would have ample time to abort.
2 : Rape. Rape is nothing to do with sex, or making babies. Its about power. Therefore the man is not engaging in the act to have a child, nor is the instance of a child coming from that ever within his mind. A woman has the option of a morning after pill, and again of course abortion.
3 : Serilisation fails at times. Yup. True. but i dont know very many unmarried mums who are sterilised. Infact, I don't kow anyone who's become pregnant after sterilisation. There will always be pregancies that happen which defy logic. Thats life. Hardly the guy's fault is it if the woman says.. "dont worry, I'm sterilised"?
As for the leaving a woman pregnant etc, I think thats a biological base thing, stemming from the fact that, after all, we are still animals, and nature compells us to spread our jeans. Society has imposed the idea that, to have sex with someone, you should be in a relationship and love them etc... Nature and the urges it so pleasantly provides us with has none of the moral claptrap which we have bred into us. Nature says, I need to spread your genes.
There will always be kids born where the Dad is not around. I'm one! My wee lad was born about 15,000 miles away from where I lived. This again was an instance of the supposed inability to get preganant was the case, but not the outcome. Most people from VIP know the story of me and Glenda (Samsara) although some still even this year spread lies about it. Imagine my surprise when, having flown back to the UK in march 02 i get a text in May saying "I'm pregnant!". We had the discussion of, are you keeping it etc but ultimately it was her choice what to do in that situation. The outcome of this was that, in October, I will have a 5 year old boy who I've spent 10 days of his life with. No one was to blame for the pregnancy happening, but it WAS possible to have stopped a birth. I'm glad it wasn't stopped, but i'm being objective here and demonstrating a point.
Kooky... : " can't even stand the thought of my children not being taken care of or being loved (by me of course). " Thats something when you have no choice in the matter you have to get used to. I know that I've been told that my lad will call nobody Dad but me. I should be pleased about this... but now his mum is settled with someone else, and he will never have the ability to say to his friends "Dad is picking me up to go play football", or to tell the story of what he did on the weekend with his dad. I can't help but think it would be better for him to be able to do that. I'm a biological father. That shouldn't stop the lad from having a dad.... theres a hell of a difference between the two. I certainly dont think that, me being one, should deny him the opportunity to have the other. The best gift a father can give a child is a stable, fun loving dad. It's just in this case, they're not one in the same.
a jerk. But you don't know how much of a jerk till it happens. Luckily it turned out I wasn't pregnant (luckily because if I had been, I might have risked a back street abortion). Telling women not to open their legs (I know you didn't say that, kooky) is just stupid, as stupid as my saying, because of that little bit of nastiness, that women should avoid men.
I am rather interested to see that no-one's suggested men should keep their dicks to themselves...
Its pretty simple. If you don't want a baby, don't have sex. If you don't want a baby and DO have sex then you must be prepared to do what it takes to ensure that a baby doesn't occur. For a woman that means either insist on a condom for a man, take birth control tablets, take a morning after pill if needs be, or go have an abortion should the need arise.
As a woman, its that simple.... and at the risk of sounding crude... the mans part in the whole thing err.. doesn't come into it!
Sex is the design for procreation of the species. Sex for anything other than that is not what it's designed for. Women are empowered to decide who they want babies with, and if and when they want them! To choose not to abort... to choose not to take a morning after pill... to choose not to take birth control pill... to choose to allow a man inside her without a condom... these are all her choices... as is the ability to just not have sex at all!
This is the 21st century and frankly, if a woman doesn't want to have a kid there is absolutely nothing her man can do about it. However... if a woman does want a child... well... then again there's absolutely nothing her man can do about it either. Women have the option to further their genes via sperm banks etc, or just find one of those afore mentioned "jerks" to do the deed for her.
I actually think there's a hell of a lot of guys out there who would love to be Dads but their lasses don't want kids. A guy can't just acquire a child with his genes... he has to find a woman, and then pretty much commit himself to her to ensure that any child which is born is his, and even then, if he wanted to leave the woman and take his child with him, the chances of him getting sole custody are slim. I bet there's not many Birth Certificates where the man has the mothers name left blank! He cant force that woman to get pregnant, stay pregnant, then make her give up the child afterwards.
Someone said that "Saying that she should keep her legs closed is insulting"?
I find it insulting to the female gender that the implication there is that they are simply not capable of doing that.
http://ww.yummyuck.com
Hey you know AdGuy always gets the last word! ;)