Anti-childfree charities

Mar 10, 2010 15:56

I'm sure you've encountered them before. March of Dimes, WIC (Women Infants and Children), "Save the Children", "Make a Wish" foundation. WIC in particular I've even seen them put up huge booths in public buildings like libraries, explaining how they'll help you out if you want to make a child. Does anyone know any dirt on these organizations? I ( Read more... )

taxes, charity, government, babies

Leave a comment

Comments 156

aprilstarchild March 11 2010, 00:24:22 UTC
Dude, I don't want kids, but I think the kids that are already here should get whatever aid and education they need. Kids who grow up healthy and educated grow up to be productive people, not to mention that the higher the education level of people, the lower their average fertility rate.

WIC is a government program, btw. It allows women who are pregnant, and their children, to buy a specific list of foods that are considered especially nutritious.

Also, how can anyone hate the Make a Wish foundation? Jesus.

Reply

dust_mote March 11 2010, 00:32:03 UTC
I'd like kids to get whatever aid and education they need, and especially healthy food. Not so much to make them productive people, but to give them the best chance at life possible. I realize this isn't always possible though, and I wouldn't put one person's suffering as a higher priority to another person's suffering, no matter how young the first person was. I mean, imminently terminal diseases excepted. But it's not so black and white as we must only help children first, by virtue of them being children ( ... )

Reply

aprilstarchild March 11 2010, 00:40:50 UTC
Um, the Make a Wish foundation is for kids who are dying of terminal illnesses.

Reply

dust_mote March 11 2010, 00:49:43 UTC
Oh, thought it was just for disadvantaged kids. More misleading advertising!

I wonder any of those kids have had the thought to consider suicide as a possible solution.

Reply


shotglass March 11 2010, 00:31:50 UTC
Wellll I can't hate pro-kid charities because once a kid's born, it's a little person, you know, with feelings and thoughts and a life, only without all of the levels of comprehension that an adult has. So if taking a kid to Disneyland or letting a kid see the Eiffel Towel can make them feel better about having a terminal illness? I'm all for it. I think there should be charities to help out people who aren't children/parents too, but I don't mind the children's charities existence. It's not like their going away would make other charities appear.

But I'm not a fan of subsidies that do encourage reproduction. Fine, help out the people who have suddenly fallen upon hard times and are genuinely trying to get out of it. But to support someone in popping out babies for tax credits? No fucking thank you. Problem is, it's really pretty much impossible to weed that out without hurting the people who do legitimately deserve that. And who decides who's deserving and who isn't? Yeah, just a tangled up mess, there ( ... )

Reply

dust_mote March 11 2010, 00:36:28 UTC
I dunno if I had a terminal illness I'd probably just want to end it right away. For some illnesses there is a lot you can do before you die, but a lot of this stuff is just silly. It's like trying to make a thousand paper cranes when you're stuck in Garbage Compactor 3263827 on the Death Star.

Reply

shotglass March 11 2010, 00:38:47 UTC
I think it can be good. It can give comfort to a kid who really is having a hard time grasping what death is, is in pain, is scared, and hasn't even really lived much. Kids don't normally think in that "I just want it to be over already" terms yet. That sort of invokes a higher level of reasoning than most (certainly not all!) kids around that age are capable.

Reply

dust_mote March 11 2010, 00:52:49 UTC
The thousand paper cranes story struck me as more effective because they couldn't finish making them before she died. That's what that would teach a kid who is having a hard time grasping what death is. They'd be able to grasp it, because they could see the absence of paper cranes that they would never live to see completed. In that way it's a great lesson, but I don't know if it would make kids very happy. Why teach terminal patients lessons anyway? Might be better to just go out in ignorance, secure in the thought that you'll wake up in the morning.

Reply


firesplace March 11 2010, 01:02:06 UTC
For the charity side of things, I have always felt that choosing not to donate to charities that enforce goals I don't agree with is the simplest and best way to act on my beliefs. =)

Reply

dncingmalkavian March 11 2010, 01:21:32 UTC
Good call!

Reply

visionari March 11 2010, 01:27:32 UTC
Amazing how that works, isn't it? :)

Reply

dust_mote March 11 2010, 06:09:35 UTC
If only it did work. :/

Reply


pocketthesaurus March 11 2010, 01:40:31 UTC
We subsidize tons of things we don't like. You can't change that. Just accept it and move on.

I don't like war, but guess what, we all pay for it.

Reply

flawed_karma March 11 2010, 02:19:50 UTC
I don't like Social Security. A lack of planning on some old guy's part should not constitute a financial burden on my part.

I'm not happy to be paying for a war, or sending billions in aid to countries that hate us, or seeing a portion of my taxes go to campaign funds for candidates I don't support with policies I abhor.

I hate that my taxes fund abstinence only programs, and programs that deny women the right to choose what to do with their bodies.

But I kinda like living here, so. I deal with it.

Reply

dust_mote March 11 2010, 06:15:12 UTC
Technically Social Security shouldn't involve you paying for some old guy at all. It was intended that the old guy would pay while he was a young guy, and then when he became an old guy he could take that money back out and live comfortably. Only thing you'd be paying for is your (generation's) retirement. But the Congress went and spent every penny in that fund instead of leaving it there. So what you're paying for is politicians who stole some old guy's retirement fund, not the old guy's retirement itself.

As for war though, yeah you're pretty much paying for it. Income tax was established and continues to be used to pay for the military. Though I dunno if they spend as much money on the military as they do the national debt.

Reply

dncingmalkavian March 11 2010, 18:45:46 UTC
*headspin* Wut.

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

rehd_fawx March 12 2010, 06:06:09 UTC
Well played.

Reply

dust_mote March 12 2010, 06:13:07 UTC
I would have started a thread on more serious financial problems like the wealth gap or globalization, but I didn't think that they were topical for a "childfree" community. But no, a dime will not do. Please next time more respectfully state that there are bigger problems in our life than helping children, instead of trying to use it to make funny threats against me.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up