In third world countries you see so much horrible suffering because of poverty.

The worst of all are the children being born into this poverty.

You see it in India, africa and Asia.

We also see it in the developed countries, unemployed adults having children.

The bottom line is that children born into poverty leads to suffering in third world countries and crime in the developed countries, so called.

It is a crime for anyone who cannot provide for their children, to have them.

It is also irresponsible as well.

It is not love to subject children to poverty.

If anyone cannot provide the basics, food, clothing and shelter, it should be a crime against both the state and against humanity.

Any thoughts?

I dont agree with legislating reproductive rights,,,under any conditions

I think anyone who intentially brings children into poverty is selfish

however, i understand that situations can change quickly and from the time one is pregnant to the time a child is born , financial situations can change,, and I dont support abortion

so, as long as people are working to provide,,, they are being responsible,,the economic culture is not their responsibility,,,

I am completely against the government (or anyone) telling a couple whether or not they can have children and how many children they can have.

I am very much for increased education to people on family planning. I am also for not giving additional welfare to a woman who gets pregnant while on welfare.

thats reasonable

I am also for a cultural change which includes teaching teens and young adults in school about INVESTING and Money Management, and not just about working to line others pockets


that would eradicate quite a lot of poverty,, if people knew ways to grow their money more readily instead of just how to seek menial pay from others,,,,

I absolutely abhor the idea of punishing infants for the perceived shortcomings of their parents. If a mother who is receiving assistance has another child, the child still deserves to be cared for.

good point

I have been on welfare in the past, and i would have compromised on agreeing not to expect more payment for more children


after all, "working" folks dont get raises when they have more children, they have to learn to budget what they have for new kids,,,

but I also agree that its cruel to punish the children ,,,,

If it were only a perfect world.

Morally, I don't think people who can't take care of their children should get pregnant.

But people are stupid.

They fornicate because it feels good and they don't think about the consequences. I've known unmarried women who have babies just so they can get more welfare from the government, and they are usually living with some lazy dead beat sperm donor who smokes pot all day.

As far as making it a "crime" punishable by jail, not a good idea.

The fact is, the state basically owns your children anyway. They can and will take them from you if they think they are in danger.

And the Churches only add to these problems by condemning birth control and abortions, and preaching that it is better to spill your seed into the belly of a whore than onto the ground.

It looks to me that the OP reflects ethnocentric thinking.

1 Timothy 5:8 is being taken out of context. The verse refers to the duty that adults have to take care of their elderly relatives.

1 Timothy 5:4 states, "If a widow has children or grandchildren, these should learn first of all to put their religion into practice by caring for their own family and so repaying their parents and grandparents, for this is pleasing to God."

Indeed, in parts of the world with high child-mortality rates, parents may want to have several children because doing so increases the odds that at least one of their children will live long enough to reach adulthood. Then, the offspring who reaches adulthood will be able to take care of the parents when they become unable to take care of themselves.

If you are so worried about children in third-world nations living in poverty, then do something about it. Help one of them. Don't tell me that it can't be done, because I know better.

Finally we agree on something JB wich the responses prove.

May I reminds the so called christians who have replied, that Paul said that if a man cannot provide for his family, he is worse then a nonbeliever.

I have the backing of scripture on this.

No one has any rights only responsibilities.

To disagree with child birth regulations in our current situation is mironic.

If you cannot provide for children you cannot have them.

Before having children you have to get a job and be prepared to support them.

It's logic, it's reason and anything else is perversed maddness"

No his own family/household means just that.

No it reflect on anyone who has children without a steady income.

Absolutely and that is the governments fault for allowing the unemployed make a career out of having babies.

For the government to not have the forsight not to see the ramifications is testament to the corruptness of those in government who want votes. We are now seeing 3rd generation unemployment.

Having children is a privilege not a right and you have to have a job first.

The government of every country is guilty as well. It all falls back on the governments who failed in their duty to make the hard decisions and not bow to the stupidity of the inbreed lowbrow masses, who are basically animals.

No you don't.

If Yahweh is the Alpha and the Omega then all life comes from him and you are literally saying Yahweh is an Infidel.

We are told to take care of the stranger the orphan and the widow. Yahshua's message.

Gen 1:1 - Luke 4:22

So He came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up. And as His custom was, He went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood up to read. 17 And He was handed the book of the prophet Isaiah. And when He had opened the book, He found the place where it was written:

18 "The Spirit of Yahweh is upon Me,
Because He has anointed Me
To preach the good news to the poor;
He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted,
To proclaim liberty to the captives
And recovery of sight to the blind,
To set at liberty those who are oppressed;
19 To proclaim the acceptable year of Yahweh."

20 Then He closed the book, and gave it back to the attendant and sat down. And the eyes of all who were in the synagogue were fixed on Him. 21 And He began to say to them, "Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing." 22 So all bore witness to Him, and marveled at the gracious words which proceeded out of His mouth. And they said,"Is this not Joseph's son?"
NKJV

What u r talking about an infidel. is a deadbeat dad. not one who does whatever is possible for him to do for his family in all thing he is NO INFIDEL.

What right do you have to call people such THINGS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think that tells us all we need to know about the motivation behind a thread like this...

If it is okay for anyone to have children, then why is it so difficult to adopt a child? The government requires adoptive parents to be able to provide a good home for the child. They do a background check, they probably do drug testing and who knows what else. They don't just hand over a child to anyone.

Yet if you go get screwed and get pregnant, nobody can do much about that. If you are a guy you can screw anyone who lets you that has a skirt and you can produce numerous children and then let the State support them.

People just don't THINK. They have NO DAMN CLUE. They should at least be charged with neglect if they can't support their off spring.
Dead beat husbands are pursued by social services and made to pay child support or go to jail, but that is not always the case.

WE DO HAVE SUCH A THING AS BIRTH CONTROL!

And the young adults today HAVE NO DAMN CLUE. What the hell is wrong with them? I think they are just plain stupid.

its not practical logic,,


as long as it is legal to use contraceptives and have abortions,the womans body is her own and it wont be practical to add the manpower to do an assessment on every woman that gets pregnant about whether they are 'able to spport' the child

what critiria would be used? children need more than finances...

so how much TIME will be required for them to have for the child
how much of an INCOME will be required for them to earn...


,,,its not practical as much as it is punitive,,,,its a self defeating plan,,,

IMO JB.. It is because they r trying to protect them. Anyone who says blood does not mean anything I respectfully disagree. a parent especially a mother when she has carried their son or daughter and it comes into the world is AWESOME. same goes for dad the 1st time he sees his child. I am not saying an adopted parent can not love a child as their own at all.. What I am saying it's different. and when do u tell the child they were adopted? some never do. if the child fines out later in life who r they going to blame? possibly everybody. IMO all adopted parents should let a child as soon as they can understand and IMO would be about 5 that they were adopted and explain to them in simple terms then as they grow up with questions they will trust you to answer their questions and let them know they are loved by all parents and things in this world just happen.. Never run down a childs parents including your divorced spouce to your children.Never