Was the dig at the "left" just to ensure this article would be published on the "right" leaning news papers and web sites?

What absurd logic in this article! The only reason that anyone could have for not supporting government assistance to parents is to weed out those of a low socio-economic background. Has the author ever heard of the concept of justice?

Governments should distribute wealth equally or at least have it available so that all can meet their needs when the time comes. No one ever needs to have a child. It is everyone’s right to have a child but that does not mean they have a right to government assistance any more than other people who make lifestyle choices according to their rights.

Our society should be built on justice first and foremost. When such basic principles are in order then we should concern ourselves with less fundamental issues. We should be making sure that wealth is distributed equally then everyone can choose how to use their share of the wealth. Everyone should have an equal amount of that wealth. As it stands people who become parents and receive government help have an unequal amount of that wealth.

You should not solve the problem of the ‘wrong’ people becoming parents by government intervention. It is society’s problem and that does not mean it is the government’s problem. Governments should not be in the business of distributing wealth on the basis of a person’s parental status at all. We need to find other ways to improve the overall ability of people to become good parents if that is what they choose. You do not solve one problem by perpetuating another problem which is the injustice to all those who choose not to have children or call upon the public purse to help raise them.

People, like this author, who just accept as given that governments should support parents show a distinct lack of understanding of justice. This is a bigger problem for society than the ‘wrong’ people becoming parents.

phanto, even if the parents don't need support, surely the children do?

Aidan:
Well, that is true but at some point in time you have to make a commitment to stop the injustice. You cannot ‘punish’ a child for the presumptions of its parents and children born to parents up until then should be supported since their parents had them on the pretence that they would receive assistance but you have to address the injustice as well. You have to say after a certain date no assistance will be given by the government to parents who choose to have a child. No one can then say that they chose parenthood under false pretences. In any case the support should not be assumed as an ongoing unchangeable right.

The element of justice should also weigh on the conscience of those who currently receive it but do not necessarily need it. There are many parents who could survive without assistance but take it on the presumption that it is their right. There are many parents who never take assistance.

If only that wish list, the social responsibility and true Christian nobility that might make it work, were actually possible phanto, what a wonderful world this would be!

If only it could be thus so!
Rhrosty.

Why this article at all? Is anything of the sort on the cards? Has anyone actually suggested either a breeder's license or a breather's license?

However, since the article was posted, I completely agree with Phanto:
Continue to assist those children already here, but no assistance to children conceived past a given date - and no publicly-funded schooling either for those conceived past that date.

Rich or poor, educated or otherwise and all that class nonsense - this should apply to everyone: people should pay for their own hobbies, procreation being no exception.