But it is a fact, one authenticated by cultural and sociological evidence, that many cultures (Hispanic cultures especially) consist of a notion that the procreation of a multitude of children is a divine duty; to do otherwise is considered blasphemy on their part. Whether or not these people can support their large families apparently has no bearing on their decision to continue procreating. Obviously, many African Americans living in poverty do not let their socioecomic status deter them from raising large families either.
Thus, it's a complete and total non sequitor to have empathy for people who absolutely insist on having children that they can't take care of.
UMMMMMWHAT AGAIN!?!?!?!
I don't know how much of a problem that is in US, but I agree with Frank that it is a chief factor in living conditions of people in poor countries (India, for instance). People should have some sense of how many children they can feed, educate and provide a good life, before they decide to have more children. I know this troubles you because of your recent plunge into socialism. Probably you are translating this situation in your mind to "Oh, so rich people get to have more kids... how outrageous". But even in the ideal world with peasants happily controlling the means of production , some produce more than others and the same scenario (how many children to have) and choice would present itself there too. Having an additional child is a conscious decision in most cases, so don't equate it to scenarios like when a poor woman gives birth to a disabled child, whose medical costs she cannot bear. Even capitalistic societies have mechanisms to address those situations. I am probably answering too many questions preemptively, without you raising them, but knowing you, I can anticipate these questions
