Number of Homeless Children Has Dramatically Risen in U.S.

Homeless kids, the topic of this silly thread, were not aborted, by choice of the mother, and nobody forced them to birth anything

 

He was president wasn't he?

Did he address it or allow it to happen?

 

What has the present Pres done about it?

 

Don't know, we were talking about Obama however.

 

Thank you! A shorter, to the point post rather than snipping every 2-3 words and filling a page. Appreciate it Fox.

As to the bolded, this is part of the problem. You want Women to have the only and final say...yet expect responsibility from the Man depending on the Womans decision. lol.
Yeah, sorry. I don't buy into that. If the Woman decides to kill the fetus that the Man wanted...should she be liable for some damages?

Or the Man just has to suck it up? She can kill the child and he gets nothing, but if she wants to have it he has to open his wallet. So Women control Men too?

Sorry Fox, the system as it is now is too flawed and needs to be re looked at. 60 Million lives so far and counting, time to slow that down a bit IMO.

 

You : "" She can kill the child and he gets nothing, but if she wants to have it he has to open his wallet. So Women control Men too?""

NOPE, women only control their decision. The LAW however says that men should pay for their kids...


That is so confusing, men whining about getting nothing AND whining about getting something..

Men should control themselves......if they don't want to support their kid then they shouldn't have one....you make men sound so weak and irresponsible...

 

I see, FoxHastings, that your solution to homeless children is the same solution Iceland has for down syndrome.

 

ALL mothers should comply with a standard of conduct, and it's not his, mine, or yours. It's basic animal welfare.

 

'humanitarianism' is not giving free money to junkies and obese layabouts. that's the opposite to humanitarianism.

 

sorry, i was wrong, i forgot that it's humanitarianism when you let the poor be brutally exploited and die of rickets because you don't like what some of them do with their lives

 

There are no involuntarily poor in America. You have to want it (pretty darned badly) to make it a permanent feature of your life. And rickets hasn't been a thing in the west for a couple of generations, at least. Again, you'd have to work pretty hard to acquire it in 2018.

More the point, there is nothing 'kind' about giving easy money to people who use it to destroy themselves (and potentially those around them).

 

Neither is it putting them in jail for having an addiction.

 

evoking law as a basis for an argument is the most unintellectual form of debate.

 

okay, apparently you can't empathize with poor people, i guess there's no point in trying to convince you that things like poor people starving are bad then

 

I absolutely agree with that. Men should be responsible as well. Don't put yourself into the situation at all if you cannot afford or want a child. That goes for the Man and the Woman. It's not up to society to give them easy outs or take up the responsibility that they themselves don't have.

Anyway Fox, I think it's safe for us to just say we'll never agree at this point. You think the 60 million abortions is a badge of honor,or "right". I think it's a shame and shows that we don't have a high regard for life in society. I get bored as well though so lets just call it a disagreement and move on. Neither of us will change the others mind.

 

You were doing OK until you "misrepresented" what I have said and told me what I think.

I do not, and have never indicated that 60 million abortions is a " badge of honor".


Do you think all the people we've killed in war is a badge of honor ? Or should I just state that you do?


Then your : "" It's not up to society to give them easy outs or take up the responsibility that they themselves don't have.""


Maybe not but it IS up to society to take care of CHILDREN who need care....

...blaming and punishing CHILDREN for what their parents are or did is a "badge of honor" to you????

 

Those were my words based on how I see it after conversing with you. I'm sorry that you don't care for that impression, but that's what you left on me.

Blaming or punishing children?? Is that really a big concern from someone who is not ashamed...or even A-ok with snuffing out 60 million of them as some "Womans right"? I'm just not buying into your concern, sorry.


Anyway Fox, thanks for the discussion! We'll talk again I'm sure.

 

No, I don't because I think War should be avoided unless absolutely unavoidable. That's not the same with your abortion stance obviously.

Hahaha, touché. I still love ya Fox you crazy kidder you.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
no children die in abortion but they do die after birth..THOSE are the children who need societies care

First, why should I do anything?

I'm not the one idolizing fetuses as gods , calling them "precious lives that must be saved" who should have more rights than anyone else on earth...

Those who do should quit whining about paying for those little "abortions that didn't happen..."" ..and reach into their pockets..

Second, I'm not in favor of cutting funding to Welfare, WIC, SNAP, etc., entities that aid CHILDREN....

I like my taxes going to help poor children, that's partly what they're for...

I'm not the one belonging to a political party ( Republican) that delights in cutting funding to entities that aid CHILDREN...


SO I'm not the one who has to defend my actions or lack thereof.......

 

You expecting people to payer higher tax rates than you in order to fund the things you want is a disgusting viewpoint

 

I'm so surprised

Every child in this nation is here because the mother chose to have it

You just don't want to actually help anyone with your own time, energy and resources.
I can feel your care.......not

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
Thank you for showing you couldn't answer or refute a word I said

Where did I say that? I NEVER said that so you are li....""misrepresenting" what I said because you have nothing but feeeeelings, wo oh feeeelings...(cue the sappy music)


After your "really" did you go HARRUMPH!.......just wondering...

Uh, no, I will post anytime I want....

 

I see a poor person in need. Which of the following two options requires more charity on my part?

1) I take $100 out of my wallet and give it to them.

2) I rob you at gunpoint and take the money I stole from you and give it to them.

3) I have my agent rob you at gunpoint and take the money I stole from you and give it to them.

(Please note that options 2 and 3 are ethically equivalent.)