Quote:
Originally Posted by Frosty
It's called personal rights and freedoms, they're under absolutely no obligation to adopt a single kid. They have every right to make their family as big as they want provided they can care for them.
You can make a moral argument however you can always legislate morality. They did nothing wrong from a legal standpoint. I certainly wouldn't want that many kids...hell I'm not having ANY however if they can care for them and give each kid the attention and resources they need to succeed in life who am I or anyone else to say they can't or shouldn't have that many kids?
|
Um, at which point and time did I say they [/HAD] to adopt kids, I said they could of, which last time I checked is a form of saying you made a decision. don't believe me, let's take a look back at my post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blacdout96
Listen, it's great they were able to raise them without much financial strain, but they could of done better by adopting 16 kids or what not. there are many children without parents, and these two could of adopted them. It's like going to ethiopia and a fat person eating a double quarter pounder with cheese infront of starving people, that could of been better used to those who need then those who already have.
|
Nope, don't see anything saying they should of been forced to.
