Topic: We should subsidize stay-at-home dads
a father figure that takes an active role in their child's life has a positive effect on the child
a father is entitled to sacrifice his work for time with his new-born, but this is a lifestyle choice and should be self-funded, not financially supported by the tax payer.
a man's place is in the workforce to provide for his family.  why should anyone else have to pay for that guy's family just because he doesn't want to go to work?
a modern society espousing gender equality has a duty to subsidize stay-at-home dads, just as it would support mothers - this both improves womens' career prospects, and fathers' emotional bonding.
a society should help the most vulnerable of us
a society shouldn't be responsible for the decisions of an individual
a stay at home dad does so by choice. taxpayers shouldn't be forced to pay for other people's expenses because someone decided they didn't want to get a job.
any person who stays home and takes cares of kids should be subsidized as parenting is a full time job
any system that rewards parenthood is often abused by lower income families and this leads to more systemic and societal failure.
as mothers are being pushed out of their homes and back to work rather than being allowed to remain in the carers roles we should not subsidize stay-at-home dads as they are pushing the mothers out.
at the time of getting married, people commit to take care of each other and if given the circumstances, the father is better able to attend to issues at home, what is the objective of questioning this subsidy?
because the household needs two incomes.
being a stay at home parent is a choice and it's no one else's responsibility to ensure an individual can stay at home with their children.
being a stay at home parent is hard, we should subsidize them if they financially need it
by subsidizing  stay-at-home dads we will improve the quality of the family life, giving the women a right to pursue a career
by subsidizing stay at home dads you are allowing them to form a bond with their child that they would never be able to have and still allow them enough money to supply their basic needs.
by subsidizing stay-at-home dads, it is giving the other parent to pursue their professional dreams, even if it means starting out at a lower salary.
Children flourish when a parent is their primary caregiver, but it nearly impossible to raise a family on one salary. Subsidizing stay-at-home dads would benefit such families.
children grow up happier and healthier when raised by stay-at-home parents and dads can perform that role as effectively as moms
children grow up to be better citizens with stay-at-home fathers in the house
children need dads, giving dads the opportunity to stay at home with their children will give us a generation of better adjusted people who  realize all roles can be undertaken by both parents
children who have a parent at home become much better adjusted adults and contribute much more to society
companies and goverments cannot afford the luxury of allowing dads to stay at home.