From: snodgras@lclark.edu (Bil Snodgrass)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.elections,ba.politics,co.politics,ne.politics,nj.politics,or.politics,ny.politics,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: VOTE, BABY, VOTE!
Date: 17 Nov 92 17:44:54 GMT
Organization: Lewis & Clark College, Portland OR

In article <adams.722020805@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) writes:
>
>
>>>>Yes, it must be guaranteed.  However, DON'T YOU DARE expect ME to pay for
>>>>YOUR decision to have more kids than you can afford.  
>>>
>>>Never...I will have no more than I can afford...and would certainly never
>>>ask you to pay for it in any event...


Most people cannot afford their children.  They need insurance to have
them and I am paying for that!!!

>>
>>Of course, sometimes it's not your choice, like if you die or become
>>incapacitated or it's clear your children are suffering, regardless of
>>your own principles someone may need to step in for the children's
>>sake, you can't really write a will which says "...and if the money
>>runs out let the children starve".

But this is not the vast majority of cases.  There are thousands of
children going to bed huyngry in Oregon alone...because it was easy
to breed but not to take care of them....


>In concept, yes, this is possible.  And perhaps likely.  But, trying to be
>responsible, I make sure that I have enough life insurance, carry
>disability insurance, etc to cover these contingencies.  I do not expect
>the govt to have to step in.  In fact, I've made sure to specify guardians
>for my kids (with backups), etc. so that it's all covered.  That's
>responsibility.


And only after one takes such steps as you have should they even consider
having children....And let's not forget the ever missing love for 
our children.  Lot of angry lonely kids roaming the streets today...

>
>>That may seem trite, but unfortunately in a lot of cases you basically
>>have this situation, fathers who left, mothers who simply aren't
>>coping even if they are trying, how much do we allow the children to
>>suffer because of the sins of the parents?

As a society we should take care of these children, but as a society we
are also responsible for telling people that it is wrong to have a child
if you cannot afford it....


>I understand your point...and given my set of moral principles, and my
>financial planning, I don't believe this will be the case in *my*
>situation.  I suspect I could conjure up some bizarre set of circumstances
>that would place my kids in the 'public trust' as it were, but I think I've
>got a reasonable set of protections in place.


Well your example is great!  But there are too many examples which are not.
Wish we had more parents like you...

>
> -Steve
>--
>  The opinions expressed above are those of the author and not SPSS, Inc.
>                         -------------------
>   adams@spss.com                                  Phone: (312) 329-3522
>   Steve Adams        "Space-age cybernomad"       Fax:   (312) 329-3558


I just jumped in on this one.  I am really getting upset with 
people saying I am pushing my sexuality on them when they
will not understand that many of our problems in this 
country are due to very poor family structure and that 
few heterosexuals are willing to take a look at just how
their abuse of their children and neglect of their children
is costing me money...lots of money....
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton