Why Do Tories Hate Hungry Children?

"So you think people should have kids if they can't afford them?"

I'm tired of this argument, I'm sick of how morally derelict it is. 

Let's just dig a grave for it right now.

What is it with people who espouse this argument? They appear to be far more concerned with what they think ought to be, grounded in their own authoritarian power-fantasy, rather than what actually is. Their ideals have been sold to them a thousand times over by a system that, only by chance, works for them.

"I'm alright, Jack!" doesn't even need to pass their lips, it's always implied. 

They make long drawn out moralisations over those in poverty with children as if that in itself somehow magically changes their circumstances. Money, to them, is the reason you should not have children, spoken as if you can simply override biological imperatives and the innate desire within us to procreate and nurture. It's as if the basic drives of nature itself have never mattered to the world!

Circumstances change, jobs and people come and go. The latter has not even been a foundation of stability for some time now, many people rent and are at the whim of the property owners, the class of the capitalism that extracts wealth rather than creating it. Those who like to reap where they never have sowed.

Some people make mistakes, some are ignorant or naive, some by virtue of their religion, are forbidden from using contraception, others may not be able to use contraception for other reasons, or maybe the contraception fails. You cannot control for every eventuality in every circumstance and sneering at those who have to live them solves nothing. Some might even call that "virtue-signalling". 

What then do these moralisers think should happen in these situations? Should the children have to pay for the crimes of their parents? 

Of course not. This is what the state is for, it is what government is for, it is supposedly what we pay taxes for, and it is the duty of all the former to secure the welfare of all citizens by any means necessary. Our taxes, the smallest portion of our wealth produced by our hand and brain, should be redistributed as a moral imperative. 

For in securing the welfare of all citizens, we secure the present and future welfare of not only all those who work to build Britain but Britain itself. 

If Tories truly were patriots, is that not what they should do?

"But they'll become dependent on welfare!"

Really? Aren't you just trying to morally justify reductions in state expenditure because you can't see past the dogma of the ruling class? Aren't you uncritically and unrelentingly vomiting forth the Victorian values we should've left in the gutter decades ago? 

We should pity those dullards who swallow and regurgitate repugnant ideology.

What then they might as well say instead is "You're poor, you don't deserve to have children!", but they never do, because they're cowards who hide behind the rhetoric of the ruling class and their own facade of the "I'm alright, Jack" attitude.

"We have to balance the books!", "Fiscal responsibility!", they propound with the sort of graceful ignorance that'd make even Thatcher herself blush. Nonsense sloganeering to obscure the truth, the truth that there does exist money and wealth to support all.

So, then what is it with people who espouse this argument? 

They're arseholes, that's what.