Sex and Sensibilities: Babies are not blessings
http://www.rappler.com/move-ph/ispeak/39791-babies-not-blessings
Marvin Macatol: “Babies are a blessing and we measure that not in financial terms. The moment you measure the blessing in financial terms, you don’t deserve that baby. Spend your money in stocks instead because you’re going to be a lousy parent. That being said, having children is a noble responsibility, not a status symbol. Be open to life and be ready with everything that goes with it. That includes preparing yourself (1) financially, (2) physically, (3) emotionally and (4) spiritually. Ignore one of these and you’d end up in a mess. But be mindful of these four and you’d realize how great a blessing the babies are.”
A lot replied to him and to each I replied to:
Andrew Lim: “Excellent arguments, and one cannot disagree with them. But that’s the ideal scenario, and many fail at no. 1 and no. 3 of your points in the real world.
What are we to do then – we expect the problem to fester without thinking of measures to temper it? Are we taxpayers doomed to have our taxes spent endlessly in trying to save millions of our countrymen who did not meet the four requirements you raised? You may answer – there is money, but corruption wastes it. True, but who elects the corrupt politicians over and over again? Is it not the numerous poor? Can information drives and education campaigns really work with them? “
PP: Then, let’s limit the welfare we give through gov’t, that is another way of looking at the issue. That should teach people to be more responsible. If poverty is the issue, then it is not about population ALONE. Why are these people poor? How do we increase responsibility? These are complex issues that can’t be addressed by focusing on convincing people that babies aren’t really blessings/assets but rather liabilities. Even in finance education we aren’t only taught to just save but more especially to grow our income in multiple directions. The issue is certainly a lot broader than that.
Rob Locke: “The whole point of the article is that if you don’t have the financial wherewithal or if you’re a teen, then a baby is definitely *not* a blessing. Hard to argue with that, no? If it weren’t for the backwards and anti-progressive church, the RH bill would reduce the number of these non-blessings.”
PP: Whether a baby is a blessing or not, and whther you’re a teen or not, would be moot if you *have* “the financial wherewithal”, then the issue is more about policy economics. I’d only wish we looked at the issue much broader. Responsibility (reducing the instances of these “non-blessings”) can be acheived in many ways, not only through the RH Bill.
Volt Nunez: “That was really nice Marvin, BUT as you’ve said, you have to prepare yourself not only physically, emotionally and spiritually BUT also FINANCIALLY.”
PP: Why “BUT”? Finance is our responsibility to ourselves ultimately, given a certain economic environment. Economic liberalization: More and better job opportunities, lower prices of goods and more choices, better quality education and again, more choices, can help all of us to gain a better financial position, then, that would render the question whether or not “babies are blessings” moot.
To an off-topic commenter:
Marnielle Estrada: “The article is talking about why babies are not blessings, babies! Focus instead on why do you think babies are blessings despite of its life lasting negating effects. I also find it sad that there are some people who fail to realize that there are costs in keeping poor children and everybody is shouldering that cost. It’s good to have ideals. But there’s also value in dealing with reality.”
PP: That babies may not really be the issue here, we could be missing the point. If we were all richer does it matter? Hmmm, that’s an economic liberalization (“baking a bigger pie”) issue and not necessarily a population issue ALONE. So you had “life lasting negative effects” to your parents? Speak for yourself, not everyone has the same experiences. I’d rather not pay for other people’s irresponsibility, less gov’t welfare then, more job opportunities, and better education (not necessarily, and especially not, gov’t-provided) should promote a culture of responsibility. Let’s “deal with reality”, I like your last statement! Yes, however, do not also lock everyone up in a rather narrow way of thinking about issues, problems are and can be looked at and solved from many different angles. My approach here is that there is a need for a really free economy where all of us can rise based on our own merits and hard work, and that is not what we have right now. Focus is good, but not at the expense of depth and breadth of thinking.
peperepublika 