Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#12 - mr skeltal (08/20/2013) [-]
I said it once and i'll ******* say it again... poor people shouldn't have children. If you can't take care of yourself then how the **** can you take care of another human? If you revive welfare or any other form of government payment then you should not have a child. In order to receive a welfare check you should be forced onto some form of birth control.
User avatar #70 to #12 - unicornmangina (09/11/2013) [-]
oh yeah poor people don't deserve any sort of happiness at all because they're poor and it'll affect their parenting skills (!) ******* asshole
User avatar #67 to #12 - racheecat (09/03/2013) [-]
Poor people should have at least one child, and sometimes, they live up to achieve their goals. Sometimes, parents are so caring to a child, they save up money so that they can get an education. The child will live on from there, and become a successful adult with their children, but will always remember that their parents were there for them...
#55 to #12 - doubledisme (08/20/2013) [-]
log in and say it or post on everyone's profile
I might say opinions that get the red flag but I still stick by my word like a man
#18 to #12 - acetrainerewan (08/20/2013) [-]
in most developing countries children are a source of income, this is true in some NIC's too, the more kids you have, the more there are to work on the farm/in the local factory. besides, with such undeveloped health care they have to have a lot of kids to guarantee that some of their offspring will grow old and not die young
in most developing countries children are a source of income, this is true in some NIC's too, the more kids you have, the more there are to work on the farm/in the local factory. besides, with such undeveloped health care they have to have a lot of kids to guarantee that some of their offspring will grow old and not die young
#20 to #18 - mr skeltal (08/20/2013) [-]
But i'm only talking about here in the USA. **** those other countries.
#22 to #20 - acetrainerewan (08/20/2013) [-]
*******					 coward posting as anonymous and faverouting to keep checking back, log in and say it like a man
******* coward posting as anonymous and faverouting to keep checking back, log in and say it like a man
#24 to #22 - mr skeltal (08/20/2013) [-]
or maybe all anons are the same person.
User avatar #13 to #12 - adu ONLINE (08/20/2013) [-]
So you're just making the assumption that two hobos decided to conceive a child? What if they were a happy family once that just fell upon hard times? What then? Give their child up for adoption because they can't afford an Xbox?
#25 to #13 - mr skeltal (08/20/2013) [-]
If they were able to maintain a position in which they could provide for a kid and then became homeless implies they were in a position to have a kid when they did. If not then they should not have and the counter argument is supported. Nice try Mr. Feels.
#17 to #13 - mr skeltal (08/20/2013) [-]
I'm talking about having a NEW kid once they have fallen on hard times. An existing kid is fine.
0
#15 to #13 - wholegrainhunter has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #14 to #13 - themastertroller (08/20/2013) [-]
amen to you sir
 Friends (0)