Interesting that you ask such a question.
The US Census Bureau this week released some stuff saying that the US population has officially reached 300 million AND married couples are not in majority. Majority of the couples just "live" together as "domestic partners" instead of getting married.
Personally, I completely agree with you.Too answer your question, forget about the next generation, our generation has too many bastard children.
The reason for that, because actually waiting to get married, getting married, and then staying married is apparently too much. It requires too much maturity and too many responsibilities. People who "live together" can have sex whenever they want but they are "tied" to each other. People change partner like how you change your underwear. I mean come on, do you really consider yourself so worthless that you would go around throwing your body to the next sl*t/horndog who comes around and want to have sex with you, who only wants you for your body.
Does it really require so much control to not have sex before marriage and then having sex only in marriage? How long does it take to put on a condom?
You know what, I will take your question to the next level. We require people to have a license/certification to be a doctor, to be a pilot, to be a nurse, to be a teacher, to be in childcare, or simply to even be a driver or get married.
WE SHOULD BE REQUIRING A LICENSE TO HAVE A BABY.
A couple should be allowed to have children if and only if they shown with reasonable certainty that they are financially stable, mature enough, responsible enough, and healthy enough, and that they are not drug addicts, heavy smokers, alcoholics, or infected with some disease that can be transferred to the child. They must consent to be entirely responsible for the actions of the child until the child turns eighteen years old. They can't give up the child. They can't abandon him. They can't leave the child on the streets. Otherwise they will loose all their rights as a parent and both parents will be sterilized to prevent any future children.
I mean come on, is it really the child's fault if the mother smoked and drank like she never did before while she was pregnant. The child had nothing to do with it. Why must the child be punished FOR HIS ENTIRE LIFE because of the actions of his parents? Why must he be born already sick? Why must he be born with some disability or deformity which will deny him a full kick out of life?
It is interesting how by saying "bastard" you have created this ruckus. Why are people having such a difficult time with this? A bastard child is just that...a bastard. If people have such a hard time with this term then maybe you should initiate a reform to change the connotation associated with the term bastard.
My last point, don't any one try to put the blame on any one group of people. Don't try to argue that most moms are single because the dads are deatbeat jerks who ran away as soon as they found that she was pregnant. It is clear that BOTH partners are equally at fault. If the guy turns out to be a deadbeat jerk who ran away, then you should have had more sense than to get laid with some guy you met. Maybe you should have waited a little longer or maybe you should have taken the consequences of having sex with him into consideration (such as having his baby) and maybe just maybe you should have secured his commitment to YOU and YOUR BABY (such as by getting married) before you decided to throw yourself at him.
If you are not intelligent enough to predict even the possibility of getting pregnant in the future if you have sex with someone then don't get all fumed and bitter because the dad was a deadbeat. You should have had more common sense than to give away your body to someone like that.
Talk about women being more mature than guys. This also tells me that some women don't mature as quickly or as much as they think they do.
In very rare cases, in which only one of the parents maybe entirely at fault or simply circumstances are to blame (such as spouse abuse or something), they are obviously exempt from everything I have said up above. For them, my condolences and I sincerely hope that just because one indiviual treated you such, you do not turn away from the goodness of the rest of the humanity.
2006-10-20 08:29:12
·
answer #1
·
answered by The Prince 6
·
3⤊
3⤋
The percent of bastards must be close to 90% in "Christian" countries, in a religious sense. In the legal sense probably about 70%. But in the 'legal' sense women can be 8 months 3 weeks 6 days pregnant, get married on day 6 have the bastard on day 7, and consider the dirty bastards legit.
2016-11-20 13:21:51
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
While I do agree that teen pregnancy is a problem, I take issue with your characterization of single parenthood as being amoral. Not everyone has to live the life YOU choose. Some people don't believe in marriage. Some people makes mistakes that they don't want to compound by marrying the wrong person just because there's a baby on the way. A single parent home can absolutely be a happy home... I know I was a whole lot happier living with my single mom than I was living with my terribly unhappily married parents before they divorced. And punishing the children by referring to them as bastards is just judgmental and uncalled for.
2006-10-20 08:40:59
·
answer #3
·
answered by mockingbird 7
·
2⤊
5⤋
You say you know "too many single parents," have you told them how you feel? I don't agree with kids having un-protected sex, or adults if it's a one-night-stand. We can't return to the old days,it's gone too far for that. What I really object to is you calling the babies of single parents "Bastards." That was totally un-called for. A lot of single parents are struggling to hold down a job and bring up kids...through no fault of their own. Ok, some did make mistakes, but they're doing the best they can to make a life for their kids.
2006-10-20 08:32:44
·
answer #4
·
answered by Taylor29 7
·
4⤊
3⤋
It needs to stop..many if not all of these Animals go out and get with Babys, Then go on Medicare,Food Stamps, etc and if they can get more freebys have more. Takeing from the People that should Recieve it.
2014-04-11 08:40:29
·
answer #5
·
answered by DON S 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
First off. You are right in some of what you say. I on the other hand wouldnt desribe them as "bastard" children. The world has changed. You are right on that. But who are you tell whats right and wrong? Kids are blessings. And there are some aweful parents out there. But there are also single parents that never planned on being single parents that are doing a wonderful job. As far as teens having babies. You know, i was 16 when i had my first. I admit i was young and stupid and THOUGHT it was love. But i finished school, while working 2 jobs, i paid ALL of my bills, i went on through college, and now i have "MY" family. Its amazing. i dont think you should be worried about how people are raising their kids. Somethings happen that are unexpected and you just need to take them as they come. There are many kids out there that are loved very very much. There are people that cannot have children, getting children everyday from people that LOVED them enough to give them that. The world is a never ending circle. Its rude people like you that cause the "bumps in the road"
2006-10-20 08:36:27
·
answer #6
·
answered by jess_n_flip 4
·
5⤊
5⤋
using the term "bastard" is a little harsh....i do agree with alot of what you are saying...alot of kids now are having sex to become popular or to fit in...i just dont get it..sure when i was 17, i felt the pressure and gave in and wish i hadnt...
if you cannot take the precautions to protect yourself from AIDS, STD's or having an unexpected pregnancy, then you shouldnt be having sex...
its very sad that so many teenagers are getting pregnant...i actually know quite a few people who want to be single parents, make a really good living and are happy with their life...time is changing and alot of people dont see the need to get married just to live together and make babies...its not the 50's anymore so its acceptable now to be a single parent, the appropriate age of course
2006-10-20 08:32:25
·
answer #7
·
answered by sherichance79 4
·
4⤊
3⤋
wow you're old fashioned! more people are having children out of wedlock because it is becoming socially acceptable. i know several 'bastards' and they are more happy, polite and intelligent than alot of children from married couples. just because a woman of any age gets pregnant without being married and chooses to keep the baby doesnt mean she is ruining her life or the life of her child. there are ALOT worse things going on in society today so i suggest you spend your time contemplating more important issues instead of judging people on the marital status of theyre bigological parents.
and by the way, since you complained about illegitimate children being morally wrong, maybe you should ask yourself if its morally correct to suggest that 'bastards' are lesser beings than yourself, who obviosuly ignores a perfectly natural sex drive.
sort out your priorites mate! because the human race is nothing more than a population of sophisticated animals.
2006-10-20 10:32:32
·
answer #8
·
answered by innit_x 2
·
3⤊
4⤋
I think unless you're around 70 or 80, you need to "get with the programme" pal. Children from unmarried parents (single mothers or parents who have a solid relationship, but no marriage certificate) haven't been classed as "bastards" for donkey's years!
Whilst I can (just) see where you're coming from, unless you want to be seen as Victor Meldrew (a grumpy old man), you really could have phrased it better.
I also think it's dangerous to generalise. Not EVERYONE who's had a baby at an early age has ruined both lives.
2006-10-20 08:36:03
·
answer #9
·
answered by Scoob 2
·
4⤊
6⤋
Actually most people do not have their first baby until after the age of 26 nowadays. I am not sure. I am going to look it up.
2006-10-20 08:29:46
·
answer #10
·
answered by Sarah!! 2
·
1⤊
3⤋