View Poll Results: Should childless couples be considered inferior?

Voters
229. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes. Having children is a moral obligation to God/society/family/etc.

    9 3.93%
  • No, they are free not to have children. They don't have to answer to anybody

    161 70.31%
  • Not if they have reproductive problems.

    2 0.87%
  • Yes, even if they have reproductive problems. They can adopt, you know.

    1 0.44%
  • They should get a medal for lowering world population.

    44 19.21%
  • Other

    10 4.37%
  • I don't know.

    2 0.87%
Page 16 of 53 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 522

Thread: Should childless couples be considered inferior?

  1. #151
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Should childless couples be considered inferior?

    Quote Originally Posted by SmokeAndMirrors View Post
    "Childless" is a lumping together of everyone who doesn't have children, but may in the future. This includes infertile couples currently undergoing some kind of treatment or attempting to adopt, people who never found a partner to have kids with, and people who are too young to have gotten to that point in their lives. There is no data on the "childless," because they are a million different things. You have to look at each of those things individually.
    So you have no way of differentiating statistically between the child-less and the child-free when we discuss relative production (of goods and services, not children)?

    But all things are not equal.
    In measurement of a surety it can be - what we are discussing here is relative levels of impact. Raising a child typically produces a public good (a productive citizen). Provision of a public good compared solely to its' lack is a relatively higher level of social beneficence.

    Childfree people have an entirely different focus and purpose in life.
    Naturally, children tend to grab the focus and purpose of parents for 18-24 years or so. However I don't see much evidence for your claim that the focus of effort for the childfree has any particular reason to be devoting their lives to the good of others. (shrug) It may be some do, but there is no incentive structure or social/economic/legal demands that they do so, such as parents face. Those childfree who do devote their lives in some measure to serving others, it should be noted, are merely replicating the focus of parents (others vice self), not surpassing it.

    I have already countered your claim that they haven't contributed enough
    Which must have been ridiculously easy for you to do, given that I never made that argument.

    Where is your evidence that the childfree are less productive? Especially since they are the ones pulling the shifts that parents have to miss.
    Citing from earlier book (I know Redress apparently believes that nobody these days would be so neanderthalish as to put information in a book, but it is surprising what you can find when you read), and quickly pulling out the first stat that comes to my skipping-through-the-pages finger, for example, when one separates out the bottom 30% of the populace for productivity, we find that approximately one out of three males there have failed to form families (not "got married had kids then divorced", never got married and had kids in the first place). When we separate out the top 20% of the populace for productivity, we find that the comparative number is around 10% of the total. Chapter 8.

  2. #152
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Should childless couples be considered inferior?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Then link to that compiled evidence.
    I did. Feel free to read the book yourself - it's a bit thick, but it is fascinating.

  3. #153
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:38 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,344
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Should childless couples be considered inferior?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    I did. Feel free to read the book yourself - it's a bit thick, but it is fascinating.
    No you did not. You linked to an add. I am not running out and buying a book, nor am I taking your word for it's content. Linking to an add is not offering evidence. You have failed to offer evidence of your point being true. Hint: try google. If you are not willing to do the basic work, it is not my fault.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  4. #154
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Should childless couples be considered inferior?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    No you did not. You linked to an add. I am not running out and buying a book, nor am I taking your word for it's content. Linking to an add is not offering evidence. You have failed to offer evidence of your point being true. Hint: try google. If you are not willing to do the basic work, it is not my fault.
    If you will look above, you'll note I pulled said book off my shelf and cited it. I linked to the book on Amazon in case one wanted to read reviews or get it themself. I know that you aren't going to go out and read a book - that would ruin your ability to try to strawman this debate into an ad sourcinem rather than the subject at hand.

    This may be difficult to grasp for some folks today - not all information is on teh interwebz, and some of that information (i know, archaic) is found in books . Which, apparently, people still do write.

  5. #155
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:38 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,344
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Should childless couples be considered inferior?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    If you will look above, you'll note I pulled said book off my shelf and cited it. I linked to the book on Amazon in case one wanted to read reviews or get it themself. I know that you aren't going to go out and read a book - that would ruin your ability to try to strawman this debate into an ad sourcinem rather than the subject at hand.

    This may be difficult to grasp for some folks today - not all information is on teh interwebz, and some of that information (i know, archaic) is found in books . Which, apparently, people still do write.
    What part of "I am not taking your word for the content" too difficult for you. It is impossible to judge the validity without actual data. Most people, when they want to make a point on the internets, do some basic groundwork. That you have not is just a weakness on your part.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  6. #156
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Should childless couples be considered inferior?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    What part of "I am not taking your word for the content" too difficult for you.
    it's not surprising you wouldn't. You have a long history of accusing others of lying when they bring evidence you do not like to bear. However, until you are willing to purchase (or at least look at) the book itself and say "hey cpwill, you said X in Chapter 8, and it says nothing close to that", then you are left without much of a leg to stand on in that accusation. Accusation without evidence is simply ad hominem (to which, it is agreed, you are no stranger).

    It is impossible to judge the validity without actual data. Most people, when they want to make a point on the internets, do some basic groundwork. That you have not is just a weakness on your part.
    On the contrary, I actually research this stuff because it interests me. That you are unwilling to attempt to make or source a competing argument is telling of the weakness of your side of this debate. But, again, if you have anyone who has looked at the same data and come to opposing conclusions, I would be interested in seeing how they do so. I'm betting you don't, but then, I am interested in the actual subject at hand rather than trying to cover for a lack of background knowledge by attacking folks who happen to disagree with my preferred conclusions.
    Last edited by cpwill; 03-18-13 at 07:19 PM.

  7. #157
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:38 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,344
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Should childless couples be considered inferior?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    it's not surprising you wouldn't. You have a long history of accusing others of lying when they bring evidence you do not like to bear. However, until you are willing to purchase (or at least look at) the book itself and say "hey cpwill, you said X in Chapter 8, and it says nothing close to that", then you are left without much of a leg to stand on in that accusation. Accusation without evidence is simply ad hominem (to which, it is agreed, you are no stranger).
    I did not accuse you of lying. I stated you had not provided evidence to support your claim. Nice try though. It is up to you to support your point. Saying "well gee, I read it in a book" is not supporting your point.

    On the contrary, I actually research this stuff because it interests me. That you are unwilling to attempt to make or source a competing argument is telling of the weakness of your side of this debate. But, again, if you have anyone who has looked at the same data and come to opposing conclusions, I would be interested in seeing how they do so. I'm betting you don't, but then, I am interested in the actual subject at hand rather than trying to cover for a lack of background knowledge by attacking folks who happen to disagree with my preferred conclusions.
    I do much research, and even look at sources that are not people telling me what I want to hear(that is one of our differences). I also would not use the claim that I read it in some book and expect any one to take it seriously. I would (gasp) actually look for information on the internet to support the claim. I do not expect other people to do my research for me, then berate them for pointing out my failings.

    You also seem to fail to understand that I am not saying that the claim is false, only that without being able to look at the data, it is impossible to judge. Lord knows if I tried to source a claim I made with "well, I read it in a book", you would call me on it in a heartbeat, and you would be right. As much as you try and make this about me, it does not change the fact that you have not provided any evidence to back your claim. None, zero, zip, zilch.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  8. #158
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:31 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: Should childless couples be considered inferior?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    without being able to look at the data, it is impossible to judge.
    The "data" go back 25-30 years. It's a very well-known observation and an active area of research. Unless you want to write a PhD dissertation on the subject, a book (or two) just might be the way to go.

  9. #159
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Should childless couples be considered inferior?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    I did not accuse you of lying. I stated you had not provided evidence to support your claim. Nice try though. It is up to you to support your point. Saying "well gee, I read it in a book" is not supporting your point.
    citing a book is just as legitimate as citing a news source or an institute. Go open up any study you like you know what you'll find they cite? Written materials . When I say "Hey, Murray points out in Ch 8 of Coming Apart that those who don't form families make up a disproportionate portion of the least productive members of society", and you wish to dispute that, you have to either A) dispute that Murray said that or B) dispute Murray's claim. So far you have done neither. Which is why this is an example of an ad sourcinem fallacy.

  10. #160
    Sage
    SmokeAndMirrors's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    RVA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:08 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,174

    Re: Should childless couples be considered inferior?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    So you have no way of differentiating statistically between the child-less and the child-free when we discuss relative production (of goods and services, not children)?
    My goodness. Can you read?

    Yes, we can, because the childfree is one thing, and the childless are everything else.

    In measurement of a surety it can be - what we are discussing here is relative levels of impact. Raising a child typically produces a public good (a productive citizen). Provision of a public good compared solely to its' lack is a relatively higher level of social beneficence.
    I'm sorry, but a lot of these kids just aren't that special -- certainly nowhere near special enough to even begin to cancel out the worth of a lot of careers of childfree people I know. You have yet to give me any kind of reasoning why you think popping out yet another is one is so incredibly beneficial. In the mean time, I could be tearing away at this with what that one additional kid is doing in terms of consumption and pollution in the developed world.

    Naturally, children tend to grab the focus and purpose of parents for 18-24 years or so. However I don't see much evidence for your claim that the focus of effort for the childfree has any particular reason to be devoting their lives to the good of others. (shrug) It may be some do, but there is no incentive structure or social/economic/legal demands that they do so, such as parents face. Those childfree who do devote their lives in some measure to serving others, it should be noted, are merely replicating the focus of parents (others vice self), not surpassing it.
    No, they are most certainly not replicating parents.

    Their world is much bigger. They have no desire to mimic such parochialism. If they did, they'd just have kids.

    Give me some kind of evidence that the net effect of all these kids is positive no matter what, because I don't believe it for a second. I live in a world full of other people's kids -- I am one myself -- and let me tell you, an awful lot of them are not very useful. An awful lot of them 10 years my senior have yet to pay all these taxes your so damn worried about, yet I'll probably be doing it into my 70's with no interruption since I'm never going to abandon my work in order to go home.

    Citing from earlier book (I know Redress apparently believes that nobody these days would be so neanderthalish as to put information in a book, but it is surprising what you can find when you read), and quickly pulling out the first stat that comes to my skipping-through-the-pages finger, for example, when one separates out the bottom 30% of the populace for productivity, we find that approximately one out of three males there have failed to form families (not "got married had kids then divorced", never got married and had kids in the first place). When we separate out the top 20% of the populace for productivity, we find that the comparative number is around 10% of the total. Chapter 8.
    Your book has no validity if it doesn't separate out the childfree, which as I already demonstrated, is a recognized group that is different from the childless. As redress said, it's also a disingenuos way to propose evidence if I can only look at it separate from whatever "research" was done.

    And by the way, lots of childfree people get married.
    Last edited by SmokeAndMirrors; 03-18-13 at 11:04 PM.

Page 16 of 53 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •