No, but I support benefits such as paid parental leave and tax credits for parents as a means of encouraging responsible childrearing. The health of the family is fundamental to the health of society, and needs to be the focus of prosocial policy ideas surrounding the topic. Not aiding and abetting the Peter Pan Syndrome of the modern American.
Suddenly I'm interested in how the distinguished PiT believes my abstinence from sexual relationships or raising any type of family reflects on me either personally or mentally. But I do encourage total honesty. We're all adults here, after all. Except of course for those of us who are children for not fitting into that cookie-cutter mold.
I think it's commendable that you practice celibacy given that you don't want to raise a family, and in fact exactly the right choice for you to be making. Adhering to a religion where monasticism is practiced, I would be a hypocrite if I said not raising a family was an unacceptable choice. My problem is that the topic question implicitly classes abortion as a form of contraception and thereby is asking if people should be guaranteed easy access to contraceptives. I call it a Peter Pan Syndrome because it strikes me that people think there needs to be an easy out from the responsibilities that life seeks to put on their shoulders.
Can you please stop with this fiction that people have abortions to keep from ever becoming parents when most women who have abortions
already have children, and among those who don't, most go on to have children later on?
Are a husband and a wife not allowed to say two children is enough for them? Three children? Do you really expect two 30 year olds to remain celibate until the wife reaches menopause? Do you think that's going to result in a healthy, functional relationship?
Poll
