18 kids? Are you kidding me?

Non-lacrosse specific topics.

18 kids? Are you kidding me?

Postby DanGenck on Thu Oct 13, 2005 6:13 am

At what point does this behavior become irresponsible?

http://www.cnn.com/2005/HEALTH/parentin ... index.html
User avatar
DanGenck
All-America
All-America
 
Posts: 1016
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 5:26 pm


Re: 18 kids? Are you kidding me?

Postby Brent Burns on Thu Oct 13, 2005 6:47 am

DanGenck wrote:At what point does this behavior become irresponsible?

http://www.cnn.com/2005/HEALTH/parentin ... index.html


Actually, that family is 16 kids plus the parents (2)= 18 people.
Brent

a LSA Fan.
User avatar
Brent Burns
Coca-Cola Collector
Coca-Cola Collector
 
Posts: 2159
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 5:41 pm
Location: in the Hewitt

Postby Weberlax12 on Fri Oct 14, 2005 1:59 pm

still you have to ask yourself is have they figured out was causes them, or do they just not care?
Northridge High Varsity Coach
Div. B Davis Coaches Council
User avatar
Weberlax12
Veteran
Veteran
 
Posts: 131
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 12:37 am
Location: Ogden, Utah

Postby Sonny on Fri Oct 14, 2005 2:05 pm

Unless they cannot financial provide for their kids, why do you care?
Webmaster
Image
Image
User avatar
Sonny
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8183
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 3:18 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Postby Hackalicious on Fri Oct 14, 2005 4:08 pm

Sonny wrote:Unless they cannot financial provide for their kids, why do you care?


You subsidize people's kids with your taxes, chief. Both in paying for their schooling and in giving people tax credits for having kids. That's assuming they aren't collecting welfare.

Plus, they keep walking on your lawn. [shakes fist]

But I gotta respect this guy. He's basically breeding himself an army.
User avatar
Hackalicious
Veteran
Veteran
 
Posts: 225
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 11:20 pm

Postby Sonny on Fri Oct 14, 2005 4:42 pm

Hackalicious wrote:
Sonny wrote:Unless they cannot financial provide for their kids, why do you care?


You subsidize people's kids with your taxes, chief. Both in paying for their schooling and in giving people tax credits for having kids. That's assuming they aren't collecting welfare.


Sounds like he is building a house large enough for them all. Don't see them on welfare anytime soon.

We (the federal taxpayers) should get out of the child subsidy business and treat all taxpayers the same.
Webmaster
Image
Image
User avatar
Sonny
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8183
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 3:18 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Postby DanGenck on Sat Oct 15, 2005 7:33 pm

The parents actually home school their kids, so we really are not paying much for them...

My concern is two fold-

#1- Can you really provide enough love when you have 16 kids to spread it to?

#2- Does the world really need 16 more people? I feel like people should replace themselves, but to add that many more is somewhat irresponsible. Isn't it?

Of course, in the end, I am glad that this family is big, happy and apparently blessed with this many children. I offer my criticism for discussion, not for the sake of being negative toward their family.
User avatar
DanGenck
All-America
All-America
 
Posts: 1016
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 5:26 pm

Postby Hackalicious on Sun Oct 16, 2005 10:18 am

Sonny wrote:
Hackalicious wrote:You subsidize people's kids with your taxes, chief. Both in paying for their schooling and in giving people tax credits for having kids. That's assuming they aren't collecting welfare.


We (the federal taxpayers) should get out of the child subsidy business and treat all taxpayers the same.


Hear, hear.

Except nobody will ever win an election with a "Raise Taxes on Families" campaign.
User avatar
Hackalicious
Veteran
Veteran
 
Posts: 225
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 11:20 pm


Return to Water Cooler

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests


cron