Starchild wrote:
SC) so you also favor a rebuttable presumption that adult migrants entering a community would be able to take care of themselves (i.e. no one would be stopped at the borders), and that similar consequences would befall anyone failing to live up to this presumption, regardless of which group he or she belonged to? (SC
I favor that people in groups with the similar likelihood of being responsibly sponsored enjoy the same rebuttable presumption about whether they will be sponsored.
SC) Or are you suggesting that parents should likewise have to prove to a government that they can assume responsibility for any children they might have before being allowed to have them? (SC
BH) I hope you are not suggesting I have the right to call 1-800-ORPHANS, order 100 infants, and then leave them on a sidewalk when the novelty wears off a few hours after they're delivered. (BH
SC) you have some chutzpah to be talking about "strawman" arguments after implying that something I said might lead a reasonable person to entertain the possibility that I favor you having the right to order 100 infants from 1-800-ORPHANS and leave them on the sidewalk a few hours after delivery (SC
If my comment above embedded a strawman, it was built from the straw in your parents-prove-finanical-responsibility strawman that I disassembled. :-) You could not possibly have believed that I wouldn't find a way to answer "no" to your question.
Your question suggested you might believe in an unlimited right to procreate, without any input from the community on whether the procreation is going to impose burdens on the community. I doubt you consider the right to adopt much different than the right to procreate, so I'm just trying to figure out how you distinguish the two cases. Also, do you think that a woman serving a multi-decade prison sentence has the right to procreate?
