I think that most people believe that the government has a duty to protect from abusive or otherwise inadequate parenting. If there's reason to believe that a child might be in danger, as is the case when the biological parents prove their lack some combination of judgement and self-control by conceiving a child out of wedlock, the government must protect the child.I think you're forgetting someone important who conceived a child out of wedlock.Sometimes I just don't get it.You are seriously proposing that the government should remove a new born baby from its mother (if the mother is unwed) until the parent is 'proved' fit - whether that mother is 17 or 30, employed or unemployed, single or in a relationship, living with her parents/boyfriend/alone or living on the street, she should have to satisfy the government of her suitability as a parent.First, this is extremely fascist. Babies don't belong to the government. They belong to their parents.Secondary to it being fascist, it's a completely impractical and stupid idea.Thirdly and most important, I can't imagine Jesus approving of anyone who wants to march into a hospital and rip an infant out of its' mother arms and put it in foster care until a judicial proceeding has been carried out. Maybe you need to meditate a little on the letters WWJD and try to grow a little compassion.
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar<