You remember Daniel Lapin, the Christian right’s favorite wingnut rabbi who says that retirement is un-biblical? Well now he also says that it’s “anti-social” not to have children, at least partly because they have to support you during retirement. Yes, I’m serious.
Green: If you are in a society and culture that has that connection and that places a high value on religion and affiliation there and you get the better health that results, it looks like now, the way that America is going with socialized medicine, those states that are like that are going to end up footing the bill for the states that choose the other path, which is less connection and less affiliation with religion and those things because they are going to have a higher health bill. But now, with socialized medicine, we’ll pay for it.
Lapin: Oh, absolutely. And by the way, that is also true of Social Security. It’s all very well people choose not to have children; not only do they pay a health penalty for that but the truth is that your children and mine are going to have to pay for them. People say “it’s not true, I have my investments to take care of me, I don’t need children.” Well, that may be true, however your investments depend on a growing market of customers because your investments are in company and what characterizes a profitable company is that it has customers; it’s customer are my children.
Green: Yeah, that’s a good point, I hadn’t even thought about that. If you don’t have children, first of all, they are not contributing to the overall marketplace but also the tax base and everything else.
Lapin: That is exactly right. So I really do think that a claim of anti-social behavior can be lodged at the door of people who choose not to have children.
Silly rabbit, consistency is for rational people.
Like Dispatches on Facebook: