Parents disowning children - pathetic AND stupid

salm · Post by **salm** » 2005-04-27 03:59pm

Jalinth wrote: This I disagree with. Once you are 18 and finished high school, your parents obligations are done and over. You are an adult.

Not really. You´re an absolute adult at 21. At least here and also in the states where you get certain rights at 21.
And this law helps avoiding bullshit like this whole situation.

Most parents will try to help support their children at college in some fashion, but this should be optional. College costs an absolute fortune and the benefits go to the student.

College costs nothing here and students whose parents income is under a certain limit get federal funds.

So why should a parent have to drain their retirement accounts to fund their kid (which is often the choice in the US - and even in other places)?

In order to make it possible to study for everybody even if the parents don´t want this individual to study.

Bob the Gunslinger · Post by **Bob the Gunslinger** » 2005-04-27 08:29pm

Jalinth wrote:Bob

Sometimes relatives are great, aren't they?

I hate almost all of my extended family. Well, the ones I know.

Jalinth · Post by **Jalinth** » 2005-04-27 08:37pm

I'm of the view that once you are an adult, your parents have zip obligations to you. They raised you (hopefully in a good way) and paid for you, your room and board, and likely allowances, etc... for 18 years. Anything they decide to give after that is gravy and gratuitous on their part.

And university is not a requirement for a successful life - although it helps. But skilled trades can do very nicely and earn more than a good part of the white collar work force.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2005-04-27 09:37pm

Frankly, I'd expect parents to support their children simply because it's in their best interests.

If you kids are bogans, you're going to die in a pile of your own vomit, lying in a back alley, trying to fight off the skeleton hordes inside your mind. Thats what kids are FOR - to look after us when we're horribly old.

What interests me is not all 'undesirable' behaviour is cause for 'disowning'. Its always something that offends the PRIDE of the parents, or makes them LOOK BAD. I got into lots of fights when I was a kid: at school, in the Ditch, in my yard. My dad didn't care: he seemed faintly proud that I was taking names. My activities were dangerous, probably illegal, and caused problems for others - but noone cared beyond 'don't get kicked out of school'. If I was *gay*, I can readily imagine the response - even though it's not dangerous, not illegal, and doesn't cause problems for others. Because it would EMBARRASS them in a way that me being a hardass didn't.

Smuggler's run · Post by **Smuggler's run** » 2005-04-28 09:29am

Stark wrote:Frankly, I'd expect parents to support their children simply because it's in their best interests.

If you kids are bogans, you're going to die in a pile of your own vomit, lying in a back alley, trying to fight off the skeleton hordes inside your mind. Thats what kids are FOR - to look after us when we're horribly old.

What interests me is not all 'undesirable' behaviour is cause for 'disowning'. Its always something that offends the PRIDE of the parents, or makes them LOOK BAD. I got into lots of fights when I was a kid: at school, in the Ditch, in my yard. My dad didn't care: he seemed faintly proud that I was taking names. My activities were dangerous, probably illegal, and caused problems for others - but noone cared beyond 'don't get kicked out of school'. If I was *gay*, I can readily imagine the response - even though it's not dangerous, not illegal, and doesn't cause problems for others. Because it would EMBARRASS them in a way that me being a hardass didn't.

if you were, gay, what would they have done?

Star Empire · Post by **Star Empire** » 2005-04-28 07:14pm

That is horrible that her parents would threaten to disown her. I've always been taught hate the sin, but love the sinner.

My Grandma is the most devoted Catholic I know and her oldest son got married to someone who was anti-Catholic (and he converted). I'm sure this disappointed her heavly, but it wasn't something she would let tear apart the family. Despite religious differences we all make it up to their house every Christmas and get along great.

I agree that in a lot of cases where disownment is threatened, if people didn't use religion as an excuse, they would just use something else or take it out in another way. Religion is just a convient excuse often.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2005-04-28 07:15pm

Star Empire wrote:I agree that in a lot of cases where disownment is threatened, if people didn't use religion as an excuse, they would just use something else or take it out in another way. Religion is just a convient excuse often.

That's complete bullshit. In many of these cases, religion is the primary driver for the conflict in the first place. It is hardly a mere "excuse".

wolveraptor · Post by **wolveraptor** » 2005-05-01 05:22pm

It's hard to find a reason to hate gays beyond religion. What other beliefs besides the Judeo-Christian ones teach anti-homosexual rhetoric?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2005-05-01 06:22pm

unbeataBULL wrote:It's hard to find a reason to hate gays beyond religion. What other beliefs besides the Judeo-Christian ones teach anti-homosexual rhetoric?

The North American culture of machismo tends to be hostile towards gays even without religion, but only the religious people are so vehement about it that they form protest groups, lobby aggressively, send death threats to elected officials who support gay marriage, etc.

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2005-05-02 03:12am

unbeataBULL wrote:It's hard to find a reason to hate gays beyond religion. What other beliefs besides the Judeo-Christian ones teach anti-homosexual rhetoric?

Islam is IIRC. Hinduism and Buddhism I think are against it, I'm not sure.