~ archived since 2018 ~

The worst liberal hypocrisy

reereeeees · 2018-10-12T17:07:36+00:00

The worst liberal hypocrisy140 points•22 comments•submitted 2 years...

reereeeees

October 12, 2018

25 upvotes

/r/MensRights

Archived from /r/MensRights

r/MensRights is a community advocating for the social and legal equality of men and boys since 2008.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/MensRights archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Post Information

Title	The worst liberal hypocrisy
Author	reereeeees
Upvotes	25
Comments	16
Date	October 12, 2018 5:07 PM UTC (7 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/9nm350/the_worst_liberal_hypocrisy/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/the-worst-liberal-hypocrisy.892063 https://theredarchive.com/post/892063

Comments

[–]reddit-MT 9 points10 points11 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheBookOfSeil 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]valenin 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Your premise is that the parent can be forced to pay for kids instead of society. Without a major, major societal overhaul, that's wrong.

An abortion causes some amount of money, once. Raising a child will cost the sum of healthcare, housing, and education, which is way more than $X. The parent will not pay enough to make the society's share less than $X, why should they, they didn't want the kid. If they had a sense of responsibility strong enough to step up to the plate, there wouldn't be a kid in the first place.

And the kid, frankly, is unlikely to be a contributing member of society. With a neglectful or abusive parent, or 'the system' as a parent, a good outcome is unlikely. A criminal is more likely. Now society pays for incarceration, and the opportunity cost of the crime over the contribution of a non criminal.

We can't force responsibility. We can't. We can incentivize it, but at what cost? We can disincentivize irresponsibility, but that's politically unworkable unless you want to argue that the irresponsible will vote that they be punished.

Under current laws, society will pay for the child. If we want to stop, we have to decide not to pay for abortion, to completely privatize adoption, and to accept that hundreds of thousands of children will essentially be beggared and die in the streets (with the rise in crime [and again, opportunity cost] that comes from gangs of feral children). Western society will not accept that.

So it's a minimization problem. And abortion is the smallest number available.

[–]TheBookOfSeil -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Your premise is that the parent can be forced to pay for kids instead of society.

I never said anything about being "forced," but sure. Society is forced, so why not the parents.

Without a major, major societal overhaul, that's wrong.

According to whom?

The parent will not pay enough to make the society's share less than $X, why should they, they didn't want the kid.

Okay, this is the "having your cake and eating it too" mentality. A child/ pregnancy is a consequence of sex, so you cannot say "I want to have sex, but I don't want any consequences resulting from sex." If X causes (or has a high probability of causing) Y, you cannot or should not do X without expecting Y to happen. People who say this are basically saying "I didn't know that sex causes pregnancy," which is obviously false.

If they had a sense of responsibility strong enough to step up to the plate, there wouldn't be a kid in the first place.

What do you mean by this?

And the kid, frankly, is unlikely to be a contributing member of society.

Speculation. This could be said about any kid.

With a neglectful or abusive parent, or 'the system' as a parent

We already have a course of action for this though. Neglectful or abusive parents have their children taken away from them. I am for adoption, and I think that if society should pay for someone else's "unwanted" child, this should be the way to do it: by having people who actually want to be parents take care of them. With the legalization of homosexual marriages, there are plenty of couples who want children but cannot have them for obvious reasons. Defaulting to abortion as an easy, lazy means to solve the problem isn't exactly the best one.

We can't force responsibility. We can't. We can incentivize it, but at what cost?

In what way? We are both being forced to be responsible for millions of people that we haven't even met, at this very moment. If we can be forced to pay to be responsible for strangers across the nation, I think parents can be "incentivized," as you put it, to take care of their own children.

[–]valenin 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I never said anything about being "forced," but sure. Society is forced, so why not the parents.

Someone has to pay for the kids. Technically, no, but if nobody does they'll die. You're saying the parents should pay for the kids. And if they don't want to, there's no other way to make them do it than by force. If they don't, society is forced to. Again, on the assumption that we're Not Okay with dumpster babies.

... People who say this are basically saying "I didn't know that sex causes pregnancy," which is obviously false.

Absolutely. I'm not saying it's morally right, I'm not saying it's how it should be. I'm saying that that's the way those parents approach things. I may have worded it poorly. I know they should pay and I know why, I head meant to imply that unwanted parents might see their obligation as 'we don't want the kid, why should we pay.'

What do you mean by this?

That people who are willing to take voluntary responsibility for a kid are more likely to plan their family more responsibly than people who aren't.

Speculation. This could be said about any kid.

Absolutely not speculation. You think parents who have a kid they didn't want are going to work hard to make a healthy home life for the unwanted kid? Statistics overwhelmingly tell the story that children from broken and disfunctional homes grow up more likely to commit crime.

We already have a course of action for this though. Neglectful or abusive parents have their children taken away from them. I am for adoption, and I think that if society should pay for someone else's "unwanted" child, this should be the way to do it.

Your initial statement was that society shouldn't pay for the consequences of unwanted pregnancies. Now you say it should maintain a foster system. You think the foster system is free? You think it's cheaper than supporting abortion? I actually agree with you. The foster system is an amazing thing and I wish it wasn't prone to some of the problems it currently has. But make no mistake, if we're talking costs, abortion is way cheaper.

I think parents can be "incentivized," as you put it, to take care of their own children.

Two sentences before that you challenged me to come up with how to do so. If you think it can be done, it's up to you to say how, because I don't see how it can be done more effectively than we do now.

You're contradicting yourself at this point. Are you arguing just to argue?

[–]Pathfinder24 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]messengerofthesea 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]noleague 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheBookOfSeil 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]noleague 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheBookOfSeil 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]noleague 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheBookOfSeil 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]noleague 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]TheBookOfSeil 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]kevingrumbles -3 points-2 points-1 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link