Is a childless person unfit to be a political leader?

Question

Why or why not?
Hi there. For your information this topic has come up in the Australian media, with accusations made that the deputy opposition leader is unqualified to lead the country because she doesn't have children and therefore would not understand the broader community.
I also had a friend running for mayor who encountered a similar accusation.
To those who are local, I just want to throw out one name... Bob Carr! (Former NSW Premier, hugely successful, no kids)

Answer 1

Bush has kids.
The Clintons have a kid.

I'm more worried about the people with children.

Answer 2

This incident just underlines the fact that this country is still being run by backwards-thinking, narrow-minded, self-important old men who are so far removed from reality that they should not be given the opportunity to make decisions or speak on behalf of the modern Australian community. It really is shameful that such an ignorant opinion be voiced by a supposedly educated member of our political system. Is there ever to be a way in which a woman can be viewed for her accomplishments and not her marital or parental status....or her bust size. If our deputy opposition leader was blonde with three kids and a DD bra she would no doubt be considered dumb, soft-in-the head, and slutty. Will Australia ever grow up?

Answer 3

Being childless does not mean that a person is unfit to be a political leader. It is determination and being able to deal with people that make a person a successful political leader. Having children doesnt necessarily bring these about in a person.

That attack came from the Liberal, conservative government against the female deputy of the Opposition. I guess they think that a woman is going against nature by choosing to be childless.

A really ridiculous statement that makes for not so great publicity for the Liberals with the upcoming election.

Answer 4

Yes you might well say Bob Carr is successful in the wider comunity, but, single people, gays and bussiness get all the attention.
We need a leader in each state that is married and has kid's, for a number of reasons.
How can a single leader understand the feelings of poeple going through divorce.
How can a single leader truly understand what it is like to raise children if they have none of their own.
How can a single leader understand the preasures on school's and family life if the do not have children in school and are dealing with the childs education with the school.
How can a single leader have any idea what is right and what is wrong in the welfare of a child if they don't experience it first hand.
And what about the parents and their financial position, married people with kid's should automaticaly earn more money than single people due to their responsabilities, but they don't, Why?, because single polititians with no parental experience make the rules and guidelines.
A large family payment is issued to families with 4 or more kid's to help with the extra expences, no one is asking for a large amount of money, but $7.50 per fortnight is a kick in the teeth, This was thought up by a polly who has no kid's, not even a wife, who clearly does not understand.
There is also the role model situation, the government over the last few years has shown concern over the rising divorce rate and the increasing amount of single mum's, well if it was a set in stone rule that you cannot become a polly unless you are married with children, then this might set a trend of follow my leader and more people would stay married and less children would be born out of wedlock.
But, as always, the more you argue this with the pollies, the less likely you are, to come to a satisfactory conclusion.
It just goes to show that the government is a government for rich people and the wors they utter about helping families are hollow.


I hope there is a few pollies looking at my answer now, they might just get the message that if families are not put as priority over single people then the libs will loose this election.
AND IT WILL BE THEIR OWN FAULT NOT OURS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Answer 5

No of course not - this in an antiquated notion and shows a lack of understanding of the modern population.

How can a polition who has no understanding of modern relationships be a good politician???

Your career success should not (and in most cases is not) tied to your family life.
It is absurd and almost offensive to think that some Australian politicians are still living in the dark ages.

Good on you Julia Gillard.
If Kevin Rudd wins the next federal election she will be the First woman deputy in history...

Answer 6

That comment by a liberal senator(?) was a disgrace... and I'm glad he said it because surely he's aliented a whole bunch of people as a result (and hopefully that means liberals won't be voted in again.)

By that rude man's standards, men being childless, and often having never changed a nappy (in spite of "having" children), are not fit to be political leaders.

The idea is completely ridiculous. A person is a good political leader when they listen to what their constituents want and fairly represent the cause of the people who elected them. Nothing else is important.

Answer 7

this was such a stupid statement to make. I hope we end up with a leader who is committed to the job. I know personally as a parent my child comes first beyond everyone and everything else. I congratulate this woman on her choice to give her whole life to the job. After all woman do actually have choices now. As I was writing this it came up on the news shorts that he has actually apologised for his statement. Because that so makes up for it.

Answer 8

Bob Carr was an ass a real mongrol who raped the state of NSW of its wealth.....while government grew and companies made record profits the people themselves went on a struggle and services started to die.....the new bloke Iemma ( i wonder if he is eminem"s daddy) bubbles along aimlessly.
Tasmania has a senator that is childless....a assbandit homosexual ass kissing tree hugging boofhead that thinks chopping 1 tree down will ruin the world.....is it a case of barren women and childless politicians being fit to lead.....nah we are governed by a bunch of non caring hippocrates that are in it for themselves.
the problem is like dog **** in the yard....clean it up and get rid of the canine mushrooms ...i betcha another appears in the morning.

Answer 9

Does experience with dirty nappies and midnight feeds mean you're better equipped to lead a nation and more in touch with the community

No I don't think so ...............

Good on you Julia Gillard.
If Kevin Rudd wins the next federal election she will be the First woman deputy in history...

Time for change>>>>>>>>>>>>

Answer 10

No because running a country doesn't have anything to do with raising a child.

Granted some people may feel better that someone who has children would do a better job and that would make them feel better.

We've had presidents in the past who were not up to par and they had children.

Answer 11

"the authorities" ...? Is there only one? i imagine that is the highmark of paranoid conspiracy theory to communicate as in case you do not believe any authorities in any respect, not federal, state, or community. I only mistrust someone even as i comprehend that suitable man or woman has lied. i might want to apply Justice Anthony Kennedy as an celebration of a liar whom i don't think in any respect.