Is "Think of the children!" a red herring?

[BigT]

@Annie-Xmas

It’s also used in the anti-abortion crusade. “The child doesn’t get a choice.” A choice to what? Use a woman’s body without her permission?

I am not pro-life, but the idea of a non-thinking entity needing to get permission to exist seems kinda silly to me.

Of course a pro-lifer is going to bring this up. Just like the pro-choice message is “think of the mother,” the pro-life message is “think of the fetus.” An actual “think of the children” argument would be something like “What would your daughter think when you tell her you killed her new baby sister?”

[Musicat]

@dzeiger

The problem is that “Think of the Children!” is often used not in the sense of “Please consider the welfare of the children as one factor in the debate on a policy decision” so much as it is “The welfare of the children should be the sole factor considered.”

“Think of the children” is all too often used to mean, “my idea of morality is superior to yours, because I am thinking of the poor, defenseless children’s welfare and you are an evil, sinful and immoral monster.”

[Jackmannii]

My (non) favorite is the appeal that goes "if it saves a single child’s life, it’s worthwhile). Example: installing massive speed bumps on a residential street.

If your goal is preventing even one child from ever being killed in a traffic accident, we should ban cars and other forms of mass transit altogether. After all, “you can’t put a price on a child’s life”.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

I can, but that whole 13th Amendment thing results in enormous price distortions. Damn you, feds, and your nanny-state regulations!

[watchwolf49]

“Have you given any thought to the problems your children are going to have?”

Citation

At least follow until 0:27 …

[Voyager]

@deryk

Or is it a legitimate argument when discussing social issues like welfare?

I read an article today about that elementary school that threw away some children’s lunches because their parents had past due lunch bills. A quote from the article said:

I hear this argument often. Another case is when discussing drug testing for welfare recipients. If the person fails a drug test, they don’t get welfare, and people will often say, “It’s not the children’s fault that their parents used drugs!”

To be clear, I don’t oppose welfare or support taking food away from children (and I do think what the school did was humiliating for the children), but it also feels dishonest in a way to use your children as an excuse for being irresponsible.

How is the person in your quote doing this? She admits that things need to be cleared up - and IIRC at least some of the parents either had paid already or never got bills. Could you perhaps give an example of a parent or other adult justifying bad behavior for the sake of the children, as opposed to not wanting to punish children for sins their parents commit which they can’t possibly influence.
You’d think that not wanting to punish blameless party X for the sins of party Y wouldn’t be very controversial.

[Bryan_Ekers]

@Katriona

And now they’ll have to explain how people can marry message board posts…

(Maude Flanders) Won’t somebody please think of the children! (Maude Flanders)

Not to nitpick, but isn’t the phrase more closely associated with Helen Lovejoy?

[shiftless]

“Think of the children” is not an agrument. It’s a distraction, a “look over there”, meant to take our eyes off the ball in whatever the discussion is. If the issue really concerns children, then why not make that point rather than a vague statement that suggests everyone else has forgotten some critical point. It’s a rude statement that the things YOU consider in an argument are all less important than my priorities.

BTW, my children have suffered their whole lives for the mistakes I have made. Why won’t someone think of their last season fashions and their outdated cell phones?