undefined

points

[-]

If you're implying abortion (or Swift's proposal) is the only option for birth control, you're very wrong. Are there any roadblocks to condoms or contraceptives in any state in America? I'm not aware of one.

by johnnyanmac14 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

I'm implying that an existing family of 4 in the present day is a bit too late to be "in control of those variables". Unless you have a modest proposal in mind to cull the numbers. Not much point talking in "should" tense.

>Are there any roadblocks to condoms or contraceptives in any state in America?

A few states are working on restricting birth control, no worries.

by alex435782 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Presumably the family of 4 isn't a family of 4 from the 1950s. Supporting a family of 4 on $50K or less hasn't been a thing for at a decade, so they were clearly in control of the variables at the relevant point in time.

"Should" is fine because I'm disputing the very idea that this is an issue society should be responsible for solving. If I want a 4 bedroom home or lobster for dinner, buy it, then complain that I've financially overextended myself, is that society's fault or did I go beyond my means?

>A few states are working on restricting birth control, no worries.

So there are no roadblocks preventing them from using contraception in the past or currently. Not much point in talking about "working on" if you're discussing families now...

by johnnyanmac48 minutes ago|

parent|

[-]

I don't think you understand the actual point here. Or worse, are choosing not to understand the point.

>Should" is fine

"Should" is not what I'm arguing. If you want to make your theoreticals, find another discussion. I'm simply using this to highlight existing problems and the (lack of) solutions to it. "You should have X" is a dismissal of the problem (and quite frankly, an active show of malice), not a solution to problems caused by systematic issues.