[spracks21]

Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch

I wouldn't argue that. There certainly is no guarantee that a child will turn out mentally retarded or with other debilitating defects and diseases.

Parts of a body is part of it and I don't just mean for the human aspect of civilization but for the good of all things contained therein.

Good means something vastly different than preservation.

Gotcha, thanks for the clarification.

[Iamamartianchurch]

Originally Posted by Treghc

So? If people want to be happy, they have every right to do so. Call it selfish or egotistical all you want. I don't, however, believe it to be cowardice. It can be, sure, but it's not always.

Answered at the end.

Originally Posted by Treghc

I see no point in living if you aren't actually living. There's things I want to do with my life. Having a child would stop me from doing some of them. How dare I want to do these things!

The sin of Odysseus was vanity.

What is the point of accomplishment if it serves only for the pleasure of pleasure itself? Do you wish to live a life only for feelings themselves?

Originally Posted by Treghc

I'm interested in knowing what this supposed deficiency is.

Vanity. Selfishness. Narcissism. Greed. All deficient behavior comes from valuing feelings above all else.

Originally Posted by Treghc

Happiness is the byproduct of living a joyful and prideful life. What's wrong with that?

Placing far too much emphasis on yourself. I I I!! Me!! Inward thinking is bad. Outward thinking is good.

[sucka T.]

Originally Posted by ladd_17

What you actually support is irrelevant. I'm trying to point out to you the flaw in your logic. Let's try again, shall we? This time, we'll put the shoe on the other foot....



Why do you expect the man to be held completely accountable for the creation of a child? The woman could have just as easily prevented the pregnancy.

Your logic is terribly inconsistent. If you're going to insist that abortion is an acceptable thing for women to do regardless of the wishes of the father, then it should be acceptable for men to refuse to pay child support on a child that he didn't want and the mother chose to keep.

I see your point, and you make a good argument.

[Treghc]

Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch

The sin of Odysseus was vanity.

What is the point of accomplishment if it serves only for the pleasure of pleasure itself? Do you wish to live a life only for feelings themselves?

What accomplishment should one be striving for? Our feelings are what tells us right from wrong, good from bad; it is our only perception of acknowledging events. How can one help others by not making them feel better?

Vanity. Selfishness. Narcissism. Greed. All deficient behavior comes from valuing feelings above all else.

What if one values the sense of pride that comes from helping others above all else? I understand you're not explicitly saying valuing feelings above all else always leads to deficient behavior with that statement, but it sounds like it's what you're getting at.

Placing far too much emphasis on yourself. I I I!! Me!! Inward thinking is bad. Outward thinking is good.

This is why I mentioned being prideful. But both happiness and pride can come from outward thinking and influence. Does anyone ever actually help others when it only makes them feel worse in every aspect of their life? I don't believe such a thing has ever occurred in human history, nor do I believe it to be possible. A sense of pride comes from outward thinking.

Also, to stay in context with the thread's intentions, do you not consider it possible for would-be parents to be able to provide a much better life for a child further down the road, with better finances, a better living situation, and more access to better care for the child if they simply waited before having a child?

Say there's a starving college student who can barely afford to do anything, even while living in his parent's low-income household. This student is fortunately quite bright and has performed well in high school. His girlfriend gets pregnant. Should he stop funding his education to support that child when he could graduate, find a decent-level position and have a much more modest income to expend on a future child? I would consider that decision selfless, not selfish. It's a better life for a child, the man, and the woman to live in. Three people win while over one losing. I'd call that the better option.

[Iamamartianchurch]

Originally Posted by Treghc

What accomplishment should one be striving for? Our feelings are what tells us right from wrong, good from bad; it is our only perception of acknowledging events. How can one help others by not making them feel better?



What if one values the sense of pride that comes from helping others above all else? I understand you're not explicitly saying valuing feelings above all else always leads to deficient behavior with that statement, but it sounds like it's what you're getting at.



This is why I mentioned being prideful. But both happiness and pride can come from outward thinking and influence. Does anyone ever actually help others when it only makes them feel worse in every aspect of their life? I don't believe such a thing has ever occurred in human history, nor do I believe it to be possible. A sense of pride comes from outward thinking.

Also, to stay in context with the thread's intentions, do you not consider it possible for would-be parents to be able to provide a much better life for a child further down the road, with better finances, a better living situation, and more access to better care for the child if they simply waited before having a child?

Say there's a starving college student who can barely afford to do anything, even while living in his parent's low-income household. This student is fortunately quite bright and has performed well in high school. His girlfriend gets pregnant. Should he stop funding his education to support that child when he could graduate, find a decent-level position and have a much more modest income to expend on a future child? I would consider that decision selfless, not selfish. It's a better life for a child, the man, and the woman to live in. Three people win while over one losing. I'd call that the better option.

Moving to R/P

[Treghc]

Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch

Moving to R/P

FINE

[benji25]

Originally Posted by barrel roll

Nah, kids are cheap. They like playing with garbage like cardboard boxes for Pete's sake. Teenagers can be expensive. When they become legal adults, charge them for room and board, and any additional insurance fees if they don't feel independent enough to get their own.

I've got this <del>****</del> all planned out.

The cost of raising a child from birth to age 18 for a middle-income, two-parent family averaged $226,920 last year (not including college), according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. That's up nearly 40% -- or more than $60,000 -- from 10 years ago. Just one year of spending on a child can cost up to $13,830 in 2010, compared to $9,860 a decade ago

http://money.cnn.com/2011/09/21/pf/c...hild/index.htm

If you don't have health insurance, you should know that the average cost of prenatal care is about $2,000, if you're paying out of pocket.

The costs of childbirth can be steep. The charge for an uncomplicated cesarean section was about $15,800 in 2008, while an uncomplicated vaginal birth cost about $9,600, government data show.

http://www.webmd.com/baby/features/c...-a-baby?page=3

I would hardly call that cheap. I sure as hell don't have $13k extra a year to spend and that doesn't even include the hospital visit and the pregnancy.

[barrel roll]

$12606.66 a year, $400 goes a long way if you are smart about it.

I do have that much to throw around, I'm not worried. I'll cut out fast food.

[Iamamartianchurch]

If your child is costing you a grand a month or more, you are doing something horribly wrong. I can buy 3 weeks of produce alone for 30 bucks at a farmers market.

[barrel roll]

But people need disposable diapers, and formula, and baby Jordans, and brand new baby clothes, and etc etc etc

[Murph1329]

Originally Posted by barrel roll

But people need disposable diapers, and formula, and baby Jordans, and brand new baby clothes, and etc etc etc

being poor in america is a rough life

[Iamamartianchurch]

Originally Posted by barrel roll

But people need disposable diapers, and formula, and baby Jordans, and brand new baby clothes, and etc etc etc

God forbid someone might breast feed, mash their own peas.

[scienceguy]

The stuff isn't expensive. Tell someone you're having a baby and stuff comes out of the woodwork. I bought one of our carseats for $20 at a yard sale. The best food comes for free out of mom.

The real expense comes from buying time. Infant daycare is about 1800 where we go and that's the ghetto one. the one across from my work is $2400 a month. One of my coworkers has twins there... I don't know how they do it. Add Afterschool programs for our other kids that's around 2400 total a month. Multiply by 12.

Take daycare out and kids are pretty cheep for the first few years if they're healthy. Clothes are very cheap and people usually give you their hand-me-downs. Diapers are around the cost of a movie with popcorn for 2. You don't do that once the baby shows up. There are lots of other tricks to keep costs down. It's the time that's expensive.

As they get older food costs go up and they have all the team sports that cost money. Then factor in the trips to Disney that you'd never do if they weren't begging to go. You can play the tough card and say you'd never do anything like that, but they have more power over you than you'll admit.

It's expensive, but it's life. What's the point if you aren't enjoying the ride?

[Murph1329]

Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch

God forbid someone might breast feed, mash their own peas.

instead they fill them up with food that is over processed and full of preservatives. Then they wonder why they turn out fat.

You're right...
this could easily be fixed if everyone mashed their own god damn peas