• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Stay at home dads.

Is it acceptable for the man to stay at home raising the kids while the woman works?


  • Total voters
    77
As to the bolded sentence..... YES, if necessary to ensure that society continues to operate in its proper order.

So just how do you determine just who the "right parent" is? Surely you don't think that it should be based on gender. I've seen some horrible mothers and great dads and visa versa.
 
Whatever works for the family should be the method that family chooses. If it makes more sense and satisfies the needs of both partners, then do it. If the kids benefit from it, then do it.
 
Whatever works for the family should be the method that family chooses. If it makes more sense and satisfies the needs of both partners, then do it. If the kids benefit from it, then do it.

that's the key right there. it's not about your self-actualization any more when you have kids.
 
So just how do you determine just who the "right parent" is? Surely you don't think that it should be based on gender. I've seen some horrible mothers and great dads and visa versa.

I've seen terrible and wonderful parents of both genders. Of course what makes a great Dad doesn't really make a great Mom and vice versa. I am and always have been in favor of licensing Parents the same way we do drivers and gun owners.
 
I've seen terrible and wonderful parents of both genders. Of course what makes a great Dad doesn't really make a great Mom and vice versa. I am and always have been in favor of licensing Parents the same way we do drivers and gun owners.

If that was the case, I would hope a sanity meter would be part of the licensing evaluation, that way you'd never be allowed to procreate.

Which would make us all feel a little safer for the future.
 
If that was the case, I would hope a sanity meter would be part of the licensing evaluation,.....

It would be comprised mainly of the following items:

Financial capability of providing for the child/family
Marital & Employment status of the parents
Proof of Competency/Values & Morals necessary to raise the child

Honestly, I'd probably have a better shot at getting a license than many of the parents I currently know.
 
Sorry if this is in the wrong area as I'm not sure if it is political enough but I did want it to be a poll so this seems the logical place to put it. Feel free to move it to an appropriate section if you think it doesn't belong here. :)

I often hear people say that it is perfectly legitimate for the woman to stay at home raising the kids while the man goes off to work. While at the same time I hear people say that it is wrong for the man to stay at home raising the kids while the woman works.

What do you think? Is it acceptable for the man to stay at home raising the kids while the woman works? Or is the man just a lazy bum (a phrase that I hear often when refering to stay at home dads) that should get off his butt and get a job?

I thought I replied when you first posted - guess not!

I support SaHD's 100% - I think it's awesome. My brother in law was one for quite some time when they let him go from his archetectural job.
 
I knew a retired Navy officer that did that. He also homeschooled his two boys, and worked part-time. I guess technically he wasn't 100% stay at home.
 
I knew a retired Navy officer that did that. He also homeschooled his two boys, and worked part-time. I guess technically he wasn't 100% stay at home.

That scenario sounds fine. When I see young couples though where the man chooses to stay home and be Mr mom I think the kids get sent a confusing message.
 
That scenario sounds fine. When I see young couples though where the man chooses to stay home and be Mr mom I think the kids get sent a confusing message.

What message: that parenting is a dedication and your kids are worth your time and love? Or the message that Dads can care for their kids too and aren't incapable of being good parents? Or maybe that women can be successful at their careers and that's ok?

Do you worry about the message that's sent when Dad or Mom is so busy at work that he/she doesn't have hardly any time for their children? How many generations are raised with fathers or mothers who love them but can't be there for them becaues they have other priorities?

Your concern over 'sending confusing messages' is silly - the confusing message that everyone in the US has been raised with is the idea that work-identity is more important than family and that children will ruin your life and deprive you of your identity when you have them and they're an inconvenience and we can't wait to get them out of the house.
 
Last edited:
What message: that parenting is a dedication and your kids are worth your time and love? Or the message that Dads can care for their kids too and aren't incapable of being good parents? Or maybe that women can be successful at their careers and that's ok?

Do you worry about the message that's sent when Dad or Mom is so busy at work that he/she doesn't have hardly any time for their children? How many generations are raised with fathers or mothers who love them but can't be there for them becaues they have other priorities?

Your concern over 'sending confusing messages' is silly - the confusing message that everyone in the US has been raised with is the idea that work-identity is more important than family and that children will ruin your life and deprive you of your identity when you have them and they're an inconvenience and we can't wait to get them out of the house.

The confusing message is, moms are the nurturer, dad's are providers. If you turn this upside down you defy the natural order of things, that's confusing for little growing minds.
 
What's confusing about the message that women and men are equal?

It's not about equal or unequal. It's about using the right tool for the job. If I need to put a nail into a piece of wood and I have two choices on which tool to use, a hammer and a wrench; which one should I pick? The hammer obviously. Now, I bet that with enough time and motivation, I could use that wrench like a hammer, but it was not made for that task and it will not do the job anywhere near as efficiently as the hammer will.
 
It's not about equal or unequal. It's about using the right tool for the job. If I need to put a nail into a piece of wood and I have two choices on which tool to use, a hammer and a wrench; which one should I pick? The hammer obviously. Now, I bet that with enough time and motivation, I could use that wrench like a hammer, but it was not made for that task and it will not do the job anywhere near as efficiently as the hammer will.

What tools (be specific) make it a woman's job to stay home with the kids, and what tools (be specific) make it a man's job not to?

Also, why not get a nailgun? It's far more efficient.
 
Last edited:
I never said that a stay at home parent is lazy. Trust me, I think the exact opposite.

As to the bolded sentence..... YES, if necessary to ensure that society continues to operate in its proper order.
Well at least you are honest about not liking liberty and freedom. Personally I feel that liberty and freedom comes before proper order in our society. In fact the Constitution agrees with me on liberty and freedom. The Constitution is explicit about individual liberties and freedoms and how much power the Government has in our decision making.

And what do you mean by proper order? My guess (the obvious one) is that you are insisting that men should work in every case and the women must always be the one that stays home with the kids. Which was fine years ago when most jobs involved muscle power. But those are a thing of the past along with the horse and buggy. Perhaps you should go live in a Amish community, where men still treat their women like property? Or maybe the middle east?

So who exactly gets to decide what is the proper order?

I will never support any political movement that insists that the government has the power to dictate personal liberties.
 
Last edited:
What tools (be specific) make it a woman's job to stay home with the kids, and what tools (be specific) make it a man's job not to?

It's a combination of the biology and psychological/emotional traits of the two genders. Women's biology and psychology are designed for the bearing and raising of children. Everything from the way their body is designed to their instincts is much more focused on being able to raise children than men are.

Here's a great example.... Last fall I went to Western NY to visit my brother, sister-in-law, and their three kids (ages 1, 2, and 3). I spent both nights in a bedroom adjacent to the 2 & 3 year old and just across the hall from the 1 year old. While I was awake I could hear everything going on in both rooms. Both mornings that I was there my sister-in-law apologized for the yelling, screaming, crying, etc... that had gone on the night before. In neither case had I heard a single thing or had my sleep disturbed for an instant though I was in the next room. Yet SHE can hear the 1 year old crying when she's at the total opposite end of the house. My brother can't even do that.

Also, why not get a nailgun? It's far more efficient.

Not for every job, Tucker.
 
It's a combination of the biology and psychological/emotional traits of the two genders. Women's biology and psychology are designed for the bearing and raising of children. Everything from the way their body is designed to their instincts is much more focused on being able to raise children than men are.

That's not specific. It's just a bunch of bull**** if there are no specifics.

Here's a great example.... Last fall I went to Western NY to visit my brother, sister-in-law, and their three kids (ages 1, 2, and 3). I spent both nights in a bedroom adjacent to the 2 & 3 year old and just across the hall from the 1 year old. While I was awake I could hear everything going on in both rooms. Both mornings that I was there my sister-in-law apologized for the yelling, screaming, crying, etc... that had gone on the night before. In neither case had I heard a single thing or had my sleep disturbed for an instant though I was in the next room. Yet SHE can hear the 1 year old crying when she's at the total opposite end of the house. My brother can't even do that.

So because your sister in law is a light sleeper, while you and your brother are not, you think that men shouldn't be the one's staying home with the kids? :rofl



Not for every job, Tucker.

The job in question is putting a nail in a piece of wood (recheck your post if you forgot). For that job, a nailgun is always superior to a hammer.
 
Last edited:
Well at least you are honest about not liking liberty and freedom. Personally I feel that liberty and freedom comes before proper order in our society. In fact the Constitution agrees with me on liberty and freedom. The Constitution is explicit about individual liberties and freedoms and how much power the Government has in our decision making.

Whereas I feel that Freedom and Liberty are Privileges that should be handed out to those who have PROVEN they can speak, think, and act appropriately; nothing more. The US Constitution ceased to have any significant value when Abraham Lincoln took it to the outhouse and used it to wipe his butt from 1860-1865. It hasn't had any significant value since then.

And what do you mean by proper order? My guess (the obvious one) is that you are insisting that men should work in every case and the women must always be the one that stays home with the kids. Which was fine years ago when most jobs involved muscle power. But those are a thing of the past along with the horse and buggy. Perhaps you should go live in a Amish community, where men still treat their women like property? Or maybe the middle east?

Trust me, I keep looking for somewhere else to go.

I will never support any political movement that insists that the government has the power to dictate personal liberties.

Whereas I refuse to support ANY movement (poitical or otherwise) that suggest that what one WANTS to do is more important than what one SHOULD do.
 
That's not specific. It's just a bunch of bull**** if there are no specifics.

Tucker, if I really have to explain to you the physical and psychological characteristics of women that make them superior at raising children, then there's probably really no point in us continuing this conversation. I might suggest a basic biology textbook or something along those lines.

So because your sister in law is a light sleeper, while you and your brother are not, you think that men shouldn't be the nurturers? :rofl:

In the case of every couple I know that has children, the mother is the one who will hear/see things going on that the father is totally oblivious to. Even in the few cases where dad is the stay-home parent.
 
The confusing message is, moms are the nurturer, dad's are providers. If you turn this upside down you defy the natural order of things, that's confusing for little growing minds.

Adults make things confusing - kids are good with anything.

Moms are not the nurterers - Dads are not the providers on some natural instinct level. This is our social construct. Which actually doesn't exist these days to MOST people.

A lot of kids - a vast populous of children in this country - grow up without a mom or dad, or with their parents divorced and remarried so they have a mom / mom and dad . . .the notion of this idyllic nuclear family doesn't exist at all in the minds of millions of children.

Are they confused and unable to function or something?
 
Are they confused and unable to function or something?

Considering the state of this nation, our society, and our culture I would suggest that a very solid arguement can be made that we/they are confused and unable to function.
 
Whereas I feel that Freedom and Liberty are Privileges that should be handed out to those who have PROVEN they can speak, think, and act appropriately; nothing more. The US Constitution ceased to have any significant value when Abraham Lincoln took it to the outhouse and used it to wipe his butt from 1860-1865. It hasn't had any significant value since then.
Yes in a dictatorship one needs to prove themselves to gain what the Constitution deems inalienable rights. Natural rights are not privileges to be earned but rights that every American is born with. Since you do not understand the basic concept of inalienable rights I bet you have an interesting reason why you believe that the Constitution has been in your opinion insignificant since Lincoln. Wishing that you could own slaves?


Trust me, I keep looking for somewhere else to go.
Well try harder then.



Whereas I refuse to support ANY movement (poitical or otherwise) that suggest that what one WANTS to do is more important than what one SHOULD do.
Liberty and freedom is not a want it is our natural rights. Creating an dictatorship to force people to do what you think they should do is a want though.
 
The confusing message is, moms are the nurturer, dad's are providers. If you turn this upside down you defy the natural order of things, that's confusing for little growing minds.

I was a stay at home dad for a short time. Frankly, my wife makes way more money than I do and we needed the income.
 
Yes in a dictatorship one needs to prove themselves to gain what the Constitution deems inalienable rights. Natural rights are not privileges to be earned but rights that every American is born with. Since you do not understand the basic concept of inalienable rights I bet you have an interesting reason why you believe that the Constitution has been in your opinion insignificant since Lincoln. Wishing that you could own slaves?

Actually, No. The only two decent things Lincoln did during his time in office were the Emancipation Proclaimation and accepting that invitation to the Ford Theater that night. My issues with Lincoln have to do with carrying out an aggressive war against a sovereign nation without cause or justification. In doing so, by the way that war was conducted, and through the precedents set by his actions Lincoln destroyed everything that I believe this nation was designed to be from the start.

Well try harder then.

Trust me, I'd love to be gone from this wretched hive of scum and villiany.

Liberty and freedom is not a want it is our natural rights. Creating an dictatorship to force people to do what you think they should do is a want though.

On that we will have to disagree, completely.
 
Back
Top Bottom