Topic: We should subsidize stay-at-home dads
subsidizing fathers to  stay home and look after their children is the wisest thing to do to help families be happy and women not to loose their jobs
subsidizing parents who stay at home is a good way to help them have a better life and a better future
subsidizing stay at home dads allows them to be lazy.
subsidizing stay at home dads is a bad idea as it is removing earners from the workforce where they are needed
subsidizing stay at home dads will allow them to bring in income while also raising a family.
subsidizing stay at home dads would help a family financially and not put a burden on them
subsidizing stay at home dads would help alleviate financial burdens on a lot of families
subsidizing stay-at-home dad will enable women to go out to work
Subsidizing stay-at-home dads helps children grow up with dignity and a father-figure while mom works
Subsidizing stay-at-home dads will lead to more dads getting more time for their newborn child without too much strain on their wages
subsidizing stay-at-home dads would allow mothers to continue to advance in the workplace
subsidizing stay-at-home dads would cost too much money. it would cost money to subsidize plus the dads would not be paying the taxes they would if working.
subsidizing stay-at-home dads would encourage more men to support home activities and allow women to grow their career of choice.
subsidizing stay-at-home dads would ensure that children get more one on one time than they would get in a nursery. this would help their development.
subsidizing stay-at-home dads would help women in the workplace to gain more equality and would decrease the gender pay gap.
subsidizing stay-at-home dads would make men lazy and disinterested in working
subsidizing stay-at-home dads would strengthen the family unit.
support for parents is woefully lacking in this country; anything that eases the burden on families should be considered.
taxpayer money is fungible and we should not allocate it to something that only benefits a small segment of the population.
the answer is short, equality of roles demands that it be so.
The bond between father and child is very important and we should support fathers who want to stay at home by subsidiies
the choice of a dad to stay at home should not be rewarded by a financial handout so we should not subsidize stay-at-home dads.
the father, usually being the higher earner, needs to be subsidised to ensure there is enough income to support the family when there is only the mother's income which may well be considerably lower.
the father's job is to provide for his family.  if he doesn't feel like working and supporting his own family, then no one else should be forced to pay to help him out.
the government does not have to subsidize parents who stay at home, make it propitious that unscrupulous people want to live in the state for the mere fact of having children
the government is not responsible for supporting everyone
the government should take money from us to help those that have no home not give money to stay-at-home dads