Unwed mothers

By your question it is obvious that you have read neither the totality of my posts nor have you read the links I have sent.

Correct me if I'm wrong but your main argument here is "no person(s) or organization(s) should put an undue burden upon the average tax payer".

So children should not be allowed to starve unless no one feels like feeding them in which case they should in fact starve?

I'm just not willing to cosign any coercive measures which would service that end.

Whatever you say, secularmerlin will hear something else entirely.

It gets tiresome very fast.

So at the end of the day no one should have to starve unless no one cares to feed them in which case they should starve. 

Or is there a secret third option I'm missing?

As I've said, no one should starve. I'm just not willing to cosign any coercive measures which would service that end.

You're missing a third option all right!!!!!

At least take responsibility for what you're suggesting--"I can't deal with children starving so I'm willing to cosign any measure that would coerce individuals, whether they be parents, public officials, or taxpayers to fund or provide any necessary provision I believe necessary in response to child starvation."

I am prepared to listen to this third option so long as you give it in plain direct language. 

Are you categorizing the collection of taxes coercion? 

To clarify when you say "who pays?" Do you actually mean "who ought to pay?"? 

I thought the question was "if the father cannot be found then who pays?" I thought that was A.

Mother's being unwed is not a problem per se is it?

 It is children who are not being financially supported that is the problem right? 

It is also possible I would prefer a commonwealth approach where the funds generated by capitalism equally benefit everyone rather than only the ultra wealthy.

Mother's being unwed is not a problem per se is it?

Within this thread ...Yes it is ....A = A

"the funds generated by capitalism equally benefit everyone rather than only the ultra wealthy."

What planet are you from?

Capitalism Has Made Human Life Fantastically Better."

Maybe he thinks we should let hungry kids starve

Ok why is it a problem if a woman's a child and also is not married?

. Capitalism is not necessary for Industrialization.

The discussion would seem to revolve around if it IS preventable and if it is WORTH the cost for that prevention. 

It's not preventable 

Then it is possible that I prefer some forms of coercion to wide spread poverty.

It is also possible I would prefer a commonwealth approach where the funds generated by capitalism equally benefit everyone rather than only the ultra wealthy.

Perhaps then we wouldn't even need to collect taxes.