Also there is no such thing as blood bonding family members especially when money is involved.
That depends on the family. I would give my life and all my money for any of my family members.
I have a feeling that his sister is just going through a stage, a pretty selfish one no doubt, but one that will hopefully pass. Don't give up on family. You can get really pissed off at them sometimes, but that's only because of how close you are to them and how much you care for them to do what's right. Otherwise, the things they do wouldn't hurt so bad.
I don't get why people have lost all the hope in these ties that bond people anymore. Family is one of the major foundations to our society. We've got to start getting back to these basic principles and quit worrying about things that pass, like money.
It's gotten to where talking about things like love, family bonds, friendship, and all those things have become uncool or something. His sister is messing up, for sure. But she still deserves to be forgiven and offered back in when she realizes her mistake.
You pretty much explain what my post is about. You don't give up on family and there are certain thing that they just don't see eye to eye on and won't jump in, but you love and care is still there for them.
Yup. It takes a lot of patience at times. And sometimes it takes so much patience that you just have to keep your mouth shut and walk away in order not to say something bad. I've been there before. But you've got to put an importance on things in life that will hold things together and family is one hell of a good place to begin. Friendship is another. Finding a good friend or friends is treasure to keep as well. It can take just as much patience and work, but having someone that you can trust and believe in is literally priceless.
money changes everything it really affects the mind of every people of course money and riches is tempting even your family will turn back on you when there is money or riches behind it, however family is the most important gift you have recieved from God specially the one who is really loving and supportive family, blessing showers on the family that stays together no matter waht happen and keeping in touch with God as their Driver.
I would say that it's not just family that is a great gift from God, but the capacity to love one another. Even past the temptations of things like money or the emotions that we let trouble us like hatred, jealousy, and greed. Love is a gift that can bring you rewards greater than money could ever give you. Money cannot buy you love is the saying, and it's true. Love is something that God gave us that will even be there when this world is gone. Money will not.
To the OP: You can love someone without giving them a portion of your life savings. Being family doesn't mean being an open wallet. Love and money are not interchangeable commodities. Be angry at your parents because your sister has done nothing wrong. She didn't force them to buy a house they couldn't pay for did she? It's a house - not a life saving operation, and at the interest you'll be paying, you'd be better off having them move in with you. To the rest of you: Since when does having children give you the right to use them for personal gain at their expense? Were you born to serve your parents interests and not your own?
Pulling together in tough situations to help my family out is serving my own self interests. I can think outside of reconciling my own single personal desires and find reward in progress of what I choose to be connected to. I choose to be connected to my family and friends and their down falls are mine as well. We are a whole and a system that work together to succeed. I can't and I won't think on such selfish terms because it goes against my nature. I don't see it as a positive personal characteristic for a person to let a family member or friend suffer from an honest mistake.
To the OP: You can love someone without giving them a portion of your life savings. Being family doesn't mean being an open wallet. Love and money are not interchangeable commodities. Be angry at your parents because your sister has done nothing wrong. She didn't force them to buy a house they couldn't pay for did she? It's a house - not a life saving operation, and at the interest you'll be paying, you'd be better off having them move in with you. To the rest of you: Since when does having children give you the right to use them for personal gain at their expense? Were you born to serve your parents interests and not your own?
Pulling together in tough situations to help my family out is serving my own self interests. I can think outside of reconciling my own single personal desires and find reward in progress of what I choose to be connected to. I choose to be connected to my family and friends and their down falls are mine as well. We are a whole and a system that work together to succeed. I can't and I won't think on such selfish terms because it goes against my nature. I don't see it as a positive personal characteristic for a person to let a family member or friend suffer from an honest mistake.
The only way helping a family member out of debt is serving your own interests is if you are living with them. You can be connected to your family without having them take money from you, but because you don't understand this you must be suffering from some sort of guilt. Why you feel guilty towards your family members and friends I'll leave for you to decide. I'm willing to wager that someone has put it into your head that you owe them for something in which you don't and never have.
"The liberties and resulting economic prosperity that YOU take for granted were granted by those "dead guys"
To the OP: You can love someone without giving them a portion of your life savings. Being family doesn't mean being an open wallet. Love and money are not interchangeable commodities. Be angry at your parents because your sister has done nothing wrong. She didn't force them to buy a house they couldn't pay for did she? It's a house - not a life saving operation, and at the interest you'll be paying, you'd be better off having them move in with you. To the rest of you: Since when does having children give you the right to use them for personal gain at their expense? Were you born to serve your parents interests and not your own?
Pulling together in tough situations to help my family out is serving my own self interests. I can think outside of reconciling my own single personal desires and find reward in progress of what I choose to be connected to. I choose to be connected to my family and friends and their down falls are mine as well. We are a whole and a system that work together to succeed. I can't and I won't think on such selfish terms because it goes against my nature. I don't see it as a positive personal characteristic for a person to let a family member or friend suffer from an honest mistake.
The only way helping a family member out of debt is serving your own interests is if you are living with them. You can be connected to your family without having them take money from you, but because you don't understand this you must be suffering from some sort of guilt. Why you feel guilty towards your family members and friends I'll leave for you to decide. I'm willing to wager that someone has put it into your head that you owe them for something in which you don't and never have.
It has nothing to do with a debt. It has to do with love.
Your dime store attempt at psychology failed. Try again. This time try working from a premise of compassion and concern for others. Not who owes who something.
No, I'm pretty sure the topic of this thread is about debt and not love. So once again: You can love someone without giving them a portion of your life savings. Being family doesn't mean being an open wallet. Love and money are not interchangeable commodities.
Being family does mean being an open wallet when need be. If someone makes an honest financial mistake in my family I'm going to jump in and help them out. It's the moral thing to do. Letting them go into debt is not. What's mine is essentially theirs when times are tough. I wouldn't have it any other way. I don't go to work just so I can horde all my money and not use it for others sake as well. I even do this crazy wild ass thing called donating it to charity. Yeah, I give it to charities who use it to help total strangers. They're not even my family. So you bet your ass when my family is in trouble I'm for sure going to be there. Wallet wide open!
No, I'm pretty sure the topic of this thread is about debt and not love. So once again: You can love someone without giving them a portion of your life savings. Being family doesn't mean being an open wallet. Love and money are not interchangeable commodities.
Being family does mean being an open wallet when need be. If someone makes an honest financial mistake in my family I'm going to jump in and help them out. It's the moral thing to do. Letting them go into debt is not. What's mine is essentially theirs when times are tough. I wouldn't have it any other way. I don't go to work just so I can horde all my money and not use it for others sake as well. I even do this crazy wild ass thing called donating it to charity. Yeah, I give it to charities who use it to help total strangers. They're not even my family. So you bet your ass when my family is in trouble I'm for sure going to be there. Wallet wide open!
I disagree. Love does not come with obligations or strings - love for family is unconditional.
If you want to give money as a gift to make yourself feel better I will not object, it is your money and you can spend it however you want. Where I do object is when you suggest that a person is morally obliged to surrender a portion of their earned wealth upon request from friends and family.
A person has the right to say no and not have others suggest that they are immoral because of it.
I have also noticed that you have used the term "honest mistake" as a condition of surrendering your wealth. I guess your expression of love comes with strings attached? You will help someone so long as they meet a certain criteria determined by you - I believe that is the definition of conditional love.
My love is free.
"The liberties and resulting economic prosperity that YOU take for granted were granted by those "dead guys"
To the OP: You can love someone without giving them a portion of your life savings. Being family doesn't mean being an open wallet. Love and money are not interchangeable commodities. Be angry at your parents because your sister has done nothing wrong. She didn't force them to buy a house they couldn't pay for did she? It's a house - not a life saving operation, and at the interest you'll be paying, you'd be better off having them move in with you. To the rest of you: Since when does having children give you the right to use them for personal gain at their expense? Were you born to serve your parents interests and not your own?
I have the feeling you have a problem with social responsibility, you dont have the right to "use" your children but it is just a norm in stable families that you help each other out. If parents getting older you take care of them, everything else is just abnormal. And if one of your family members is in financial emergency they would try to help you, of course it is not possible always if it comes to high amounts like here..but we talk already about general social responsibility and not about this case.
To the OP: You can love someone without giving them a portion of your life savings. Being family doesn't mean being an open wallet. Love and money are not interchangeable commodities. Be angry at your parents because your sister has done nothing wrong. She didn't force them to buy a house they couldn't pay for did she? It's a house - not a life saving operation, and at the interest you'll be paying, you'd be better off having them move in with you. To the rest of you: Since when does having children give you the right to use them for personal gain at their expense? Were you born to serve your parents interests and not your own?
I have the feeling you have a problem with social responsibility, you dont have the right to "use" your children but it is just a norm in stable families that you help each other out. If parents getting older you take care of them, everything else is just abnormal. And if one of your family members is in financial emergency they would try to help you, of course it is not possible always if it comes to high amounts like here..but we talk already about general social responsibility and not about this case.
I don't have a problem with social responsibility so long as the person who is socially responsible has volenteered to be so. It should be a choice a person has made and not something that they are forced to follow - you should give because you want to and not because you are coerced into it.
A person owns their wealth and only that person has the right to determine how that wealth is used. The mob has no claim to that persons wealth and has no right to judge how that person spends their wealth. The sister is right simply because it is her wealth - if she gave it to her parents she is also right because it is her wealth.
Review this thread again and look at the very scarey thoughts that it contains. Coersion, blackmail, and slavery are common themes that run thruout the above posts from the people who believe themselves to be standing on moral high ground.
"The liberties and resulting economic prosperity that YOU take for granted were granted by those "dead guys"
Get His books for your family. Make them follow the plans then help with the last little bit to help them get over the hill. Its not your Responsability to Sholder the Deeds of you family anymore than its your sisters.
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude; greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. Samuel Adams
If you don't think she should help then just say it. Stop preaching the holier than thou crap.
She is free to do whatever the hell she wants and no one has a right to pass judgement on her.
You cannot say that the item her parents desire to purchase with her money has more value than whatever she desires to purchase with her money.
She is right with whatever she desides to do with her money.
None of the opinions are right except how the OP decides to handle it. It doesn't make him/her any less of a person. You, I, not anyone else has walked in his shoes. You have no high ground here neither does anyone else. The OP asked for opinions. All I was saying is get off your soap box. Everyone has limits.
What others have tried to show you is that her parents could have done whatever the hell they want as well. Get it , Got it , good.
It all boils down to the individual and his/her life experiences. Just to clarify I haven't made an opinion. It would be pointless to do so, I think. Reason already explained.
If you don't think she should help then just say it. Stop preaching the holier than thou crap.
She is free to do whatever the hell she wants and no one has a right to pass judgement on her.
You cannot say that the item her parents desire to purchase with her money has more value than whatever she desires to purchase with her money.
She is right with whatever she desides to do with her money.
None of the opinions are right except how the OP decides to handle it. It doesn't make him/her any less of a person. You, I, not anyone else has walked in his shoes. You have no high ground here neither does anyone else. The OP asked for opinions. All I was saying is get off your soap box. Everyone has limits.
What others have tried to show you is that her parents could have done whatever the hell they want as well. Get it , Got it , good.
It all boils down to the individual and his/her life experiences. Just to clarify I haven't made an opinion. It would be pointless to do so, I think. Reason already explained.
Soap box? The OP asked for opinions and I gave mine. Whether his sister gives her money to her parents or not it shouldn't change how the OP feels towards her - if he loved her before then he should still love her after. His anger should be directed at his parents more than at his sister. People disagreed with my opinion so I responded to those arguements as best I could using what i felt would get my point across.
"What others have tried to show you is that her parents could have done whatever the hell they want as well. Get it , Got it , good." I don't get it - A parent MUST take care of the children that they birth until that child becomes an adult. A child needs a guardian. When a child becomes an adult they become their own guardian.
The OP believes that family means something so if he does anything but continue to love his sister unconditionally he is a hypocrite and a betrayer of his own sense of values.
"The liberties and resulting economic prosperity that YOU take for granted were granted by those "dead guys"
To the OP: You can love someone without giving them a portion of your life savings. Being family doesn't mean being an open wallet. Love and money are not interchangeable commodities. Be angry at your parents because your sister has done nothing wrong. She didn't force them to buy a house they couldn't pay for did she? It's a house - not a life saving operation, and at the interest you'll be paying, you'd be better off having them move in with you. To the rest of you: Since when does having children give you the right to use them for personal gain at their expense? Were you born to serve your parents interests and not your own?
I have the feeling you have a problem with social responsibility, you dont have the right to "use" your children but it is just a norm in stable families that you help each other out. If parents getting older you take care of them, everything else is just abnormal. And if one of your family members is in financial emergency they would try to help you, of course it is not possible always if it comes to high amounts like here..but we talk already about general social responsibility and not about this case.
I don't have a problem with social responsibility so long as the person who is socially responsible has volenteered to be so. It should be a choice a person has made and not something that they are forced to follow - you should give because you want to and not because you are coerced into it.
A person owns their wealth and only that person has the right to determine how that wealth is used. The mob has no claim to that persons wealth and has no right to judge how that person spends their wealth. The sister is right simply because it is her wealth - if she gave it to her parents she is also right because it is her wealth.
Review this thread again and look at the very scarey thoughts that it contains. Coersion, blackmail, and slavery are common themes that run thruout the above posts from the people who believe themselves to be standing on moral high ground.
I went back and reviewed this thread and you seem the only one coerced. You seem coerced by what western society has told you is important, money and greed.
You seem really cranky when it comes to just letting that go and showing some compassion if you ask me. Almost like your pride is in your possessions or something.
I would give up my money to my family even if it turned out to be considered by some a mistake. Why? Because to me, the money is nothing. It's a spiritual thing that matters more to me. My family is my spiritual connection that goes on beyond this life. The money does not.
I just recently had a child and I am not going to teach that child that it is important to focus on material possessions in this world over people. Those things mean nothing. Even over survival compassion is more important. We are all in this together, not scratching a clawing to make our own way, but the way for all of us.
To the OP: You can love someone without giving them a portion of your life savings. Being family doesn't mean being an open wallet. Love and money are not interchangeable commodities. Be angry at your parents because your sister has done nothing wrong. She didn't force them to buy a house they couldn't pay for did she? It's a house - not a life saving operation, and at the interest you'll be paying, you'd be better off having them move in with you. To the rest of you: Since when does having children give you the right to use them for personal gain at their expense? Were you born to serve your parents interests and not your own?
I have the feeling you have a problem with social responsibility, you dont have the right to "use" your children but it is just a norm in stable families that you help each other out. If parents getting older you take care of them, everything else is just abnormal. And if one of your family members is in financial emergency they would try to help you, of course it is not possible always if it comes to high amounts like here..but we talk already about general social responsibility and not about this case.
I don't have a problem with social responsibility so long as the person who is socially responsible has volenteered to be so. It should be a choice a person has made and not something that they are forced to follow - you should give because you want to and not because you are coerced into it.
A person owns their wealth and only that person has the right to determine how that wealth is used. The mob has no claim to that persons wealth and has no right to judge how that person spends their wealth. The sister is right simply because it is her wealth - if she gave it to her parents she is also right because it is her wealth.
Review this thread again and look at the very scarey thoughts that it contains. Coersion, blackmail, and slavery are common themes that run thruout the above posts from the people who believe themselves to be standing on moral high ground.
I went back and reviewed this thread and you seem the only one coerced. You seem coerced by what western society has told you is important, money and greed.
You seem really cranky when it comes to just letting that go and showing some compassion if you ask me. Almost like your pride is in your possessions or something.
I would give up my money to my family even if it turned out to be considered by some a mistake. Why? Because to me, the money is nothing. It's a spiritual thing that matters more to me. My family is my spiritual connection that goes on beyond this life. The money does not.
I just recently had a child and I am not going to teach that child that it is important to focus on material possessions in this world over people. Those things mean nothing. Even over survival compassion is more important. We are all in this together, not scratching a clawing to make our own way, but the way for all of us.
I have learned that freedom is important and what freedom means and I recognize another persons right to it. I saw a persons freedom being assaulted so I protested against it.
Let's be very clear here - we are not talking about myself. I am not arguing this point for mercenary reasons. My parents would never have a need to borrow money from me, but if that need did arise they wouldn't ask me for it - I would have to volunteer to give money myself and then argue with my father over interest rates - him wanting to pay it and me not wanting him to. If I didn't volunteer my wealth he would love me the same and treat me the same as if I did.
To give YOUR wealth to your family cannot be considered a mistake by anyone other than YOU because it is YOUR wealth to be spent as YOU want. It's called FREEDOM.
Please teach your child about freedom and respect for other people's property when they are ready for such topics. Teach your child that love does not mean money and that unconditional love comes with no conditions.
"The liberties and resulting economic prosperity that YOU take for granted were granted by those "dead guys"
To the OP: You can love someone without giving them a portion of your life savings. Being family doesn't mean being an open wallet. Love and money are not interchangeable commodities. Be angry at your parents because your sister has done nothing wrong. She didn't force them to buy a house they couldn't pay for did she? It's a house - not a life saving operation, and at the interest you'll be paying, you'd be better off having them move in with you. To the rest of you: Since when does having children give you the right to use them for personal gain at their expense? Were you born to serve your parents interests and not your own?
I have the feeling you have a problem with social responsibility, you dont have the right to "use" your children but it is just a norm in stable families that you help each other out. If parents getting older you take care of them, everything else is just abnormal. And if one of your family members is in financial emergency they would try to help you, of course it is not possible always if it comes to high amounts like here..but we talk already about general social responsibility and not about this case.
I don't have a problem with social responsibility so long as the person who is socially responsible has volenteered to be so. It should be a choice a person has made and not something that they are forced to follow - you should give because you want to and not because you are coerced into it.
A person owns their wealth and only that person has the right to determine how that wealth is used. The mob has no claim to that persons wealth and has no right to judge how that person spends their wealth. The sister is right simply because it is her wealth - if she gave it to her parents she is also right because it is her wealth.
Review this thread again and look at the very scarey thoughts that it contains. Coersion, blackmail, and slavery are common themes that run thruout the above posts from the people who believe themselves to be standing on moral high ground.
I went back and reviewed this thread and you seem the only one coerced. You seem coerced by what western society has told you is important, money and greed.
You seem really cranky when it comes to just letting that go and showing some compassion if you ask me. Almost like your pride is in your possessions or something.
I would give up my money to my family even if it turned out to be considered by some a mistake. Why? Because to me, the money is nothing. It's a spiritual thing that matters more to me. My family is my spiritual connection that goes on beyond this life. The money does not.
I just recently had a child and I am not going to teach that child that it is important to focus on material possessions in this world over people. Those things mean nothing. Even over survival compassion is more important. We are all in this together, not scratching a clawing to make our own way, but the way for all of us.
I have learned that freedom is important and what freedom means and I recognize another persons right to it. I saw a persons freedom being assaulted so I protested against it.
Let's be very clear here - we are not talking about myself. I am not arguing this point for mercenary reasons. My parents would never have a need to borrow money from me, but if that need did arise they wouldn't ask me for it - I would have to volunteer to give money myself and then argue with my father over interest rates - him wanting to pay it and me not wanting him to. If I didn't volunteer my wealth he would love me the same and treat me the same as if I did.
To give YOUR wealth to your family cannot be considered a mistake by anyone other than YOU because it is YOUR wealth to be spent as YOU want. It's called FREEDOM.
Please teach your child about freedom and respect for other people's property when they are ready for such topics. Teach your child that love does not mean money and that unconditional love comes with no conditions.
+1 from me. I doubt I could have put it any better.
A friend is not him who provides support during your failures.A friend is the one that cheers you during your successes.
If you don't think she should help then just say it. Stop preaching the holier than thou crap.
She is free to do whatever the hell she wants and no one has a right to pass judgement on her.
You cannot say that the item her parents desire to purchase with her money has more value than whatever she desires to purchase with her money.
She is right with whatever she desides to do with her money.
None of the opinions are right except how the OP decides to handle it. It doesn't make him/her any less of a person. You, I, not anyone else has walked in his shoes. You have no high ground here neither does anyone else. The OP asked for opinions. All I was saying is get off your soap box. Everyone has limits.
What others have tried to show you is that her parents could have done whatever the hell they want as well. Get it , Got it , good.
It all boils down to the individual and his/her life experiences. Just to clarify I haven't made an opinion. It would be pointless to do so, I think. Reason already explained.
Soap box? The OP asked for opinions and I gave mine. Whether his sister gives her money to her parents or not it shouldn't change how the OP feels towards her - if he loved her before then he should still love her after. His anger should be directed at his parents more than at his sister. People disagreed with my opinion so I responded to those arguements as best I could using what i felt would get my point across.
"What others have tried to show you is that her parents could have done whatever the hell they want as well. Get it , Got it , good." I don't get it - A parent MUST take care of the children that they birth until that child becomes an adult. A child needs a guardian. When a child becomes an adult they become their own guardian.
The OP believes that family means something so if he does anything but continue to love his sister unconditionally he is a hypocrite and a betrayer of his own sense of values.
You're right the OP did ask for opinions. Not someone to stand on a soap box and say my view is the only and right view.
A parent does not have to do anything. Only thing one of the parents has to do is either have an abortion or give birth and turn it over to someone else. We're not debating what's morally right. We are talking reality.
Awfully quick to label someone a hypocrite. Family values is subjective to each person. Are you human, then why even call someone a hypocrite. You are full of yoruself.
I'm not telling you your opinion is wrong. I just don't see how you can't aknowledge the obvious about your remarks in this thread.
I disagree. Love does not come with obligations or strings - love for family is unconditional.
Unconditional love is something you have for your dog... family is totally different.
you're right on the part that you DONT have to give them money just like the other two siblings, but if you have the money that you could spend you should. Its your parents... jeez, and unless you hated them your whole life, maybe then you can think twice. If you were deep in the hole, I would only ask a family member for financial help. that is if this is the first time.
You know what.. it doesn't matter what I say. I love my family. Other people might not, and I don't think anyone would change their idea on that one. So I'm going to stop writing this post and leave it like that.
To the OP... You've got to make your own decisions. Lifes a bitch, eh?
______________________________
What if Paul Revere was like the boy who cried wolf....?
Originally posted by Hazmal
What does he say when people ask what he did? "My mommy was irking me yo - I wanted to keep pwning nubs on my xbox, so I roughed her up with a hardshell. That is just how I roll."
I have learned that freedom is important and what freedom means and I recognize another persons right to it. I saw a persons freedom being assaulted so I protested against it. Let's be very clear here - we are not talking about myself. I am not arguing this point for mercenary reasons. My parents would never have a need to borrow money from me, but if that need did arise they wouldn't ask me for it - I would have to volunteer to give money myself and then argue with my father over interest rates - him wanting to pay it and me not wanting him to. If I didn't volunteer my wealth he would love me the same and treat me the same as if I did. To give YOUR wealth to your family cannot be considered a mistake by anyone other than YOU because it is YOUR wealth to be spent as YOU want. It's called FREEDOM. Please teach your child about freedom and respect for other people's property when they are ready for such topics. Teach your child that love does not mean money and that unconditional love comes with no conditions.
The first thing a child should learn is the importance of themselves and that of other human beings, as true freedom comes from knowing one's self, and true happiness from understanding others.
Any parent that already understands these things would never come to ask for anything from their child, since they wouldn't sign a contract with highly volatile fine text in the first place.
I disagree. Love does not come with obligations or strings - love for family is unconditional.
Unconditional love is something you have for your dog... family is totally different.
<snip>
Depends on the person I guess, but you are right to correct me - not all people are the same, and I have no choice but to respect them when it comes to their life choices and feelings.
"The liberties and resulting economic prosperity that YOU take for granted were granted by those "dead guys"
You're right the OP did ask for opinions. Not someone to stand on a soap box and say my view is the only and right view. A parent does not have to do anything. Only thing one of the parents has to do is either have an abortion or give birth and turn it over to someone else. We're not debating what's morally right. We are talking reality. Awfully quick to label someone a hypocrite. Family values is subjective to each person. Are you human, then why even call someone a hypocrite. You are full of yoruself. I'm not telling you your opinion is wrong. I just don't see how you can't aknowledge the obvious about your remarks in this thread.
If I am wrong please point it out.
By parent obviously I meant the person who is the legal guardian that raises and nutures a child. A birth parent giving the child away would be considered taking care of it. I think I did a good job of illustrating that point within the content of that paragraph.
"We're not debating what's morally right. We are talking reality." Explain this to me I don't understand the concept.
When a person indicates that family matters and then shuns a member of thier family the word hypocrite is apt to me.
"I'm not telling you your opinion is wrong." Is this your way of telling me my opinion is right?
"The liberties and resulting economic prosperity that YOU take for granted were granted by those "dead guys"
You're right the OP did ask for opinions. Not someone to stand on a soap box and say my view is the only and right view. A parent does not have to do anything. Only thing one of the parents has to do is either have an abortion or give birth and turn it over to someone else. We're not debating what's morally right. We are talking reality. Awfully quick to label someone a hypocrite. Family values is subjective to each person. Are you human, then why even call someone a hypocrite. You are full of yoruself. I'm not telling you your opinion is wrong. I just don't see how you can't aknowledge the obvious about your remarks in this thread.
If I am wrong please point it out.
If you were not so caught up in trying to make a ridiculous point, you would already have seen them being pointed out by just about everyone who has replied to your posts.
By parent obviously I meant the person who is the legal guardian that raises and nutures a child. A birth parent giving the child away would be considered taking care of it. I think I did a good job of illustrating that point within the content of that paragraph.
"We're not debating what's morally right. We are talking reality." Explain this to me I don't understand the concept.
No you didn't imply that.
"What others have tried to show you is that her parents could have done whatever the hell they want as well. Get it , Got it , good." I don't get it - A parent MUST take care of the children that they birth until that child becomes an adult."
Where does that statement imply that is what you mean? Maybe that is what you meant to type.
When a person indicates that family matters and then shuns a member of thier family the word hypocrite is apt to me.
Someone could just as easily say, "When a person indicates that family matters then fails to help a family member in need the word hypocrite is apt to me."
Someone could also say, "I think we are looking at the biggest one on the block for arguing a point he/she possibly doesn't agree with."
"I'm not telling you your opinion is wrong." Is this your way of telling me my opinion is right?
It means that is your opinion and who can tell you that your opinion is wrong. It's yours after all. You seem or pretend to not understand this, tossing out insults and proclaiming how much of a better individual you are because you agrea with your own values. You fail to understand that your definition of values is probably not the same as other individuals.
That's also pretty much what got my atention. I then started thinking about the crap your spewing and either you have had a very fucked up life, Or you are in this thread not actually giving an opinion of what you would do. Rather arguing for the sake of arguing.
I think Gnome hit the nail on the head and summed up all your posts so far,
" Your dime store attempt at psychology failed. Try again. This time try working from a premise of compassion and concern for others. Not who owes who something."
So if a family member is in need as the ops would you offer to help them or not?
Comments
That depends on the family. I would give my life and all my money for any of my family members.
I have a feeling that his sister is just going through a stage, a pretty selfish one no doubt, but one that will hopefully pass. Don't give up on family. You can get really pissed off at them sometimes, but that's only because of how close you are to them and how much you care for them to do what's right. Otherwise, the things they do wouldn't hurt so bad.
I don't get why people have lost all the hope in these ties that bond people anymore. Family is one of the major foundations to our society. We've got to start getting back to these basic principles and quit worrying about things that pass, like money.
It's gotten to where talking about things like love, family bonds, friendship, and all those things have become uncool or something. His sister is messing up, for sure. But she still deserves to be forgiven and offered back in when she realizes her mistake.
You pretty much explain what my post is about. You don't give up on family and there are certain thing that they just don't see eye to eye on and won't jump in, but you love and care is still there for them.
Yup. It takes a lot of patience at times. And sometimes it takes so much patience that you just have to keep your mouth shut and walk away in order not to say something bad. I've been there before. But you've got to put an importance on things in life that will hold things together and family is one hell of a good place to begin. Friendship is another. Finding a good friend or friends is treasure to keep as well. It can take just as much patience and work, but having someone that you can trust and believe in is literally priceless.
===============================
I would say that it's not just family that is a great gift from God, but the capacity to love one another. Even past the temptations of things like money or the emotions that we let trouble us like hatred, jealousy, and greed. Love is a gift that can bring you rewards greater than money could ever give you. Money cannot buy you love is the saying, and it's true. Love is something that God gave us that will even be there when this world is gone. Money will not.
===============================
Pulling together in tough situations to help my family out is serving my own self interests. I can think outside of reconciling my own single personal desires and find reward in progress of what I choose to be connected to. I choose to be connected to my family and friends and their down falls are mine as well. We are a whole and a system that work together to succeed. I can't and I won't think on such selfish terms because it goes against my nature. I don't see it as a positive personal characteristic for a person to let a family member or friend suffer from an honest mistake.
===============================
Pulling together in tough situations to help my family out is serving my own self interests. I can think outside of reconciling my own single personal desires and find reward in progress of what I choose to be connected to. I choose to be connected to my family and friends and their down falls are mine as well. We are a whole and a system that work together to succeed. I can't and I won't think on such selfish terms because it goes against my nature. I don't see it as a positive personal characteristic for a person to let a family member or friend suffer from an honest mistake.
The only way helping a family member out of debt is serving your own interests is if you are living with them. You can be connected to your family without having them take money from you, but because you don't understand this you must be suffering from some sort of guilt. Why you feel guilty towards your family members and friends I'll leave for you to decide. I'm willing to wager that someone has put it into your head that you owe them for something in which you don't and never have.
"The liberties and resulting economic prosperity that YOU take for granted were granted by those "dead guys"
Pulling together in tough situations to help my family out is serving my own self interests. I can think outside of reconciling my own single personal desires and find reward in progress of what I choose to be connected to. I choose to be connected to my family and friends and their down falls are mine as well. We are a whole and a system that work together to succeed. I can't and I won't think on such selfish terms because it goes against my nature. I don't see it as a positive personal characteristic for a person to let a family member or friend suffer from an honest mistake.
The only way helping a family member out of debt is serving your own interests is if you are living with them. You can be connected to your family without having them take money from you, but because you don't understand this you must be suffering from some sort of guilt. Why you feel guilty towards your family members and friends I'll leave for you to decide. I'm willing to wager that someone has put it into your head that you owe them for something in which you don't and never have.
It has nothing to do with a debt. It has to do with love.
Your dime store attempt at psychology failed. Try again. This time try working from a premise of compassion and concern for others. Not who owes who something.
===============================
No, I'm pretty sure the topic of this thread is about debt and not love.
So once again:
You can love someone without giving them a portion of your life savings.
Being family doesn't mean being an open wallet.
Love and money are not interchangeable commodities.
"The liberties and resulting economic prosperity that YOU take for granted were granted by those "dead guys"
Being family does mean being an open wallet when need be. If someone makes an honest financial mistake in my family I'm going to jump in and help them out. It's the moral thing to do. Letting them go into debt is not. What's mine is essentially theirs when times are tough. I wouldn't have it any other way. I don't go to work just so I can horde all my money and not use it for others sake as well. I even do this crazy wild ass thing called donating it to charity. Yeah, I give it to charities who use it to help total strangers. They're not even my family. So you bet your ass when my family is in trouble I'm for sure going to be there. Wallet wide open!
===============================
Being family does mean being an open wallet when need be. If someone makes an honest financial mistake in my family I'm going to jump in and help them out. It's the moral thing to do. Letting them go into debt is not. What's mine is essentially theirs when times are tough. I wouldn't have it any other way. I don't go to work just so I can horde all my money and not use it for others sake as well. I even do this crazy wild ass thing called donating it to charity. Yeah, I give it to charities who use it to help total strangers. They're not even my family. So you bet your ass when my family is in trouble I'm for sure going to be there. Wallet wide open!
I disagree. Love does not come with obligations or strings - love for family is unconditional.
If you want to give money as a gift to make yourself feel better I will not object, it is your money and you can spend it however you want. Where I do object is when you suggest that a person is morally obliged to surrender a portion of their earned wealth upon request from friends and family.
A person has the right to say no and not have others suggest that they are immoral because of it.
I have also noticed that you have used the term "honest mistake" as a condition of surrendering your wealth. I guess your expression of love comes with strings attached? You will help someone so long as they meet a certain criteria determined by you - I believe that is the definition of conditional love.
My love is free.
"The liberties and resulting economic prosperity that YOU take for granted were granted by those "dead guys"
If you don't think she should help then just say it. Stop preaching the holier than thou crap.
I have the feeling you have a problem with social responsibility, you dont have the right to "use" your children but it is just a norm in stable families that you help each other out. If parents getting older you take care of them, everything else is just abnormal. And if one of your family members is in financial emergency they would try to help you, of course it is not possible always if it comes to high amounts like here..but we talk already about general social responsibility and not about this case.
I have the feeling you have a problem with social responsibility, you dont have the right to "use" your children but it is just a norm in stable families that you help each other out. If parents getting older you take care of them, everything else is just abnormal. And if one of your family members is in financial emergency they would try to help you, of course it is not possible always if it comes to high amounts like here..but we talk already about general social responsibility and not about this case.
I don't have a problem with social responsibility so long as the person who is socially responsible has volenteered to be so. It should be a choice a person has made and not something that they are forced to follow - you should give because you want to and not because you are coerced into it.
A person owns their wealth and only that person has the right to determine how that wealth is used. The mob has no claim to that persons wealth and has no right to judge how that person spends their wealth. The sister is right simply because it is her wealth - if she gave it to her parents she is also right because it is her wealth.
Review this thread again and look at the very scarey thoughts that it contains. Coersion, blackmail, and slavery are common themes that run thruout the above posts from the people who believe themselves to be standing on moral high ground.
"The liberties and resulting economic prosperity that YOU take for granted were granted by those "dead guys"
She is free to do whatever the hell she wants and no one has a right to pass judgement on her.
You cannot say that the item her parents desire to purchase with her money has more value than whatever she desires to purchase with her money.
She is right with whatever she desides to do with her money.
"The liberties and resulting economic prosperity that YOU take for granted were granted by those "dead guys"
Get His books for your family. Make them follow the plans then help with the last little bit to help them get over the hill. Its not your Responsability to Sholder the Deeds of you family anymore than its your sisters.
Give a man a fish and feed him for a day. Teach them how to be responsable and save their ass.
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude; greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.
Samuel Adams
She is free to do whatever the hell she wants and no one has a right to pass judgement on her.
You cannot say that the item her parents desire to purchase with her money has more value than whatever she desires to purchase with her money.
She is right with whatever she desides to do with her money.
None of the opinions are right except how the OP decides to handle it. It doesn't make him/her any less of a person. You, I, not anyone else has walked in his shoes. You have no high ground here neither does anyone else. The OP asked for opinions. All I was saying is get off your soap box. Everyone has limits.
What others have tried to show you is that her parents could have done whatever the hell they want as well. Get it , Got it , good.
It all boils down to the individual and his/her life experiences. Just to clarify I haven't made an opinion. It would be pointless to do so, I think. Reason already explained.
She is free to do whatever the hell she wants and no one has a right to pass judgement on her.
You cannot say that the item her parents desire to purchase with her money has more value than whatever she desires to purchase with her money.
She is right with whatever she desides to do with her money.
None of the opinions are right except how the OP decides to handle it. It doesn't make him/her any less of a person. You, I, not anyone else has walked in his shoes. You have no high ground here neither does anyone else. The OP asked for opinions. All I was saying is get off your soap box. Everyone has limits.
What others have tried to show you is that her parents could have done whatever the hell they want as well. Get it , Got it , good.
It all boils down to the individual and his/her life experiences. Just to clarify I haven't made an opinion. It would be pointless to do so, I think. Reason already explained.
Soap box? The OP asked for opinions and I gave mine. Whether his sister gives her money to her parents or not it shouldn't change how the OP feels towards her - if he loved her before then he should still love her after. His anger should be directed at his parents more than at his sister. People disagreed with my opinion so I responded to those arguements as best I could using what i felt would get my point across.
"What others have tried to show you is that her parents could have done whatever the hell they want as well. Get it , Got it , good." I don't get it - A parent MUST take care of the children that they birth until that child becomes an adult. A child needs a guardian. When a child becomes an adult they become their own guardian.
The OP believes that family means something so if he does anything but continue to love his sister unconditionally he is a hypocrite and a betrayer of his own sense of values.
"The liberties and resulting economic prosperity that YOU take for granted were granted by those "dead guys"
I have the feeling you have a problem with social responsibility, you dont have the right to "use" your children but it is just a norm in stable families that you help each other out. If parents getting older you take care of them, everything else is just abnormal. And if one of your family members is in financial emergency they would try to help you, of course it is not possible always if it comes to high amounts like here..but we talk already about general social responsibility and not about this case.
I don't have a problem with social responsibility so long as the person who is socially responsible has volenteered to be so. It should be a choice a person has made and not something that they are forced to follow - you should give because you want to and not because you are coerced into it.
A person owns their wealth and only that person has the right to determine how that wealth is used. The mob has no claim to that persons wealth and has no right to judge how that person spends their wealth. The sister is right simply because it is her wealth - if she gave it to her parents she is also right because it is her wealth.
Review this thread again and look at the very scarey thoughts that it contains. Coersion, blackmail, and slavery are common themes that run thruout the above posts from the people who believe themselves to be standing on moral high ground.
I went back and reviewed this thread and you seem the only one coerced. You seem coerced by what western society has told you is important, money and greed.
You seem really cranky when it comes to just letting that go and showing some compassion if you ask me. Almost like your pride is in your possessions or something.
I would give up my money to my family even if it turned out to be considered by some a mistake. Why? Because to me, the money is nothing. It's a spiritual thing that matters more to me. My family is my spiritual connection that goes on beyond this life. The money does not.
I just recently had a child and I am not going to teach that child that it is important to focus on material possessions in this world over people. Those things mean nothing. Even over survival compassion is more important. We are all in this together, not scratching a clawing to make our own way, but the way for all of us.
-----------------------
</OBAMA>
I have the feeling you have a problem with social responsibility, you dont have the right to "use" your children but it is just a norm in stable families that you help each other out. If parents getting older you take care of them, everything else is just abnormal. And if one of your family members is in financial emergency they would try to help you, of course it is not possible always if it comes to high amounts like here..but we talk already about general social responsibility and not about this case.
I don't have a problem with social responsibility so long as the person who is socially responsible has volenteered to be so. It should be a choice a person has made and not something that they are forced to follow - you should give because you want to and not because you are coerced into it.
A person owns their wealth and only that person has the right to determine how that wealth is used. The mob has no claim to that persons wealth and has no right to judge how that person spends their wealth. The sister is right simply because it is her wealth - if she gave it to her parents she is also right because it is her wealth.
Review this thread again and look at the very scarey thoughts that it contains. Coersion, blackmail, and slavery are common themes that run thruout the above posts from the people who believe themselves to be standing on moral high ground.
I went back and reviewed this thread and you seem the only one coerced. You seem coerced by what western society has told you is important, money and greed.
You seem really cranky when it comes to just letting that go and showing some compassion if you ask me. Almost like your pride is in your possessions or something.
I would give up my money to my family even if it turned out to be considered by some a mistake. Why? Because to me, the money is nothing. It's a spiritual thing that matters more to me. My family is my spiritual connection that goes on beyond this life. The money does not.
I just recently had a child and I am not going to teach that child that it is important to focus on material possessions in this world over people. Those things mean nothing. Even over survival compassion is more important. We are all in this together, not scratching a clawing to make our own way, but the way for all of us.
I have learned that freedom is important and what freedom means and I recognize another persons right to it. I saw a persons freedom being assaulted so I protested against it.
Let's be very clear here - we are not talking about myself. I am not arguing this point for mercenary reasons. My parents would never have a need to borrow money from me, but if that need did arise they wouldn't ask me for it - I would have to volunteer to give money myself and then argue with my father over interest rates - him wanting to pay it and me not wanting him to. If I didn't volunteer my wealth he would love me the same and treat me the same as if I did.
To give YOUR wealth to your family cannot be considered a mistake by anyone other than YOU because it is YOUR wealth to be spent as YOU want. It's called FREEDOM.
Please teach your child about freedom and respect for other people's property when they are ready for such topics. Teach your child that love does not mean money and that unconditional love comes with no conditions.
"The liberties and resulting economic prosperity that YOU take for granted were granted by those "dead guys"
I have the feeling you have a problem with social responsibility, you dont have the right to "use" your children but it is just a norm in stable families that you help each other out. If parents getting older you take care of them, everything else is just abnormal. And if one of your family members is in financial emergency they would try to help you, of course it is not possible always if it comes to high amounts like here..but we talk already about general social responsibility and not about this case.
I don't have a problem with social responsibility so long as the person who is socially responsible has volenteered to be so. It should be a choice a person has made and not something that they are forced to follow - you should give because you want to and not because you are coerced into it.
A person owns their wealth and only that person has the right to determine how that wealth is used. The mob has no claim to that persons wealth and has no right to judge how that person spends their wealth. The sister is right simply because it is her wealth - if she gave it to her parents she is also right because it is her wealth.
Review this thread again and look at the very scarey thoughts that it contains. Coersion, blackmail, and slavery are common themes that run thruout the above posts from the people who believe themselves to be standing on moral high ground.
I went back and reviewed this thread and you seem the only one coerced. You seem coerced by what western society has told you is important, money and greed.
You seem really cranky when it comes to just letting that go and showing some compassion if you ask me. Almost like your pride is in your possessions or something.
I would give up my money to my family even if it turned out to be considered by some a mistake. Why? Because to me, the money is nothing. It's a spiritual thing that matters more to me. My family is my spiritual connection that goes on beyond this life. The money does not.
I just recently had a child and I am not going to teach that child that it is important to focus on material possessions in this world over people. Those things mean nothing. Even over survival compassion is more important. We are all in this together, not scratching a clawing to make our own way, but the way for all of us.
I have learned that freedom is important and what freedom means and I recognize another persons right to it. I saw a persons freedom being assaulted so I protested against it.
Let's be very clear here - we are not talking about myself. I am not arguing this point for mercenary reasons. My parents would never have a need to borrow money from me, but if that need did arise they wouldn't ask me for it - I would have to volunteer to give money myself and then argue with my father over interest rates - him wanting to pay it and me not wanting him to. If I didn't volunteer my wealth he would love me the same and treat me the same as if I did.
To give YOUR wealth to your family cannot be considered a mistake by anyone other than YOU because it is YOUR wealth to be spent as YOU want. It's called FREEDOM.
Please teach your child about freedom and respect for other people's property when they are ready for such topics. Teach your child that love does not mean money and that unconditional love comes with no conditions.
+1 from me. I doubt I could have put it any better.
A friend is not him who provides support during your failures.A friend is the one that cheers you during your successes.
She is free to do whatever the hell she wants and no one has a right to pass judgement on her.
You cannot say that the item her parents desire to purchase with her money has more value than whatever she desires to purchase with her money.
She is right with whatever she desides to do with her money.
None of the opinions are right except how the OP decides to handle it. It doesn't make him/her any less of a person. You, I, not anyone else has walked in his shoes. You have no high ground here neither does anyone else. The OP asked for opinions. All I was saying is get off your soap box. Everyone has limits.
What others have tried to show you is that her parents could have done whatever the hell they want as well. Get it , Got it , good.
It all boils down to the individual and his/her life experiences. Just to clarify I haven't made an opinion. It would be pointless to do so, I think. Reason already explained.
Soap box? The OP asked for opinions and I gave mine. Whether his sister gives her money to her parents or not it shouldn't change how the OP feels towards her - if he loved her before then he should still love her after. His anger should be directed at his parents more than at his sister. People disagreed with my opinion so I responded to those arguements as best I could using what i felt would get my point across.
"What others have tried to show you is that her parents could have done whatever the hell they want as well. Get it , Got it , good." I don't get it - A parent MUST take care of the children that they birth until that child becomes an adult. A child needs a guardian. When a child becomes an adult they become their own guardian.
The OP believes that family means something so if he does anything but continue to love his sister unconditionally he is a hypocrite and a betrayer of his own sense of values.
You're right the OP did ask for opinions. Not someone to stand on a soap box and say my view is the only and right view.
A parent does not have to do anything. Only thing one of the parents has to do is either have an abortion or give birth and turn it over to someone else. We're not debating what's morally right. We are talking reality.
Awfully quick to label someone a hypocrite. Family values is subjective to each person. Are you human, then why even call someone a hypocrite. You are full of yoruself.
I'm not telling you your opinion is wrong. I just don't see how you can't aknowledge the obvious about your remarks in this thread.
Deleted this post. I mis-read the post I was replying to.
Unconditional love is something you have for your dog... family is totally different.
you're right on the part that you DONT have to give them money just like the other two siblings, but if you have the money that you could spend you should. Its your parents... jeez, and unless you hated them your whole life, maybe then you can think twice. If you were deep in the hole, I would only ask a family member for financial help. that is if this is the first time.
You know what.. it doesn't matter what I say. I love my family. Other people might not, and I don't think anyone would change their idea on that one. So I'm going to stop writing this post and leave it like that.
To the OP... You've got to make your own decisions. Lifes a bitch, eh?
______________________________
What if Paul Revere was like the boy who cried wolf....?
Originally posted by Hazmal
What does he say when people ask what he did? "My mommy was irking me yo - I wanted to keep pwning nubs on my xbox, so I roughed her up with a hardshell. That is just how I roll."
The first thing a child should learn is the importance of themselves and that of other human beings, as true freedom comes from knowing one's self, and true happiness from understanding others.
Any parent that already understands these things would never come to ask for anything from their child, since they wouldn't sign a contract with highly volatile fine text in the first place.
It has everything to do with the foundation.
Meanwhile, here's a slightly related comic.
Unconditional love is something you have for your dog... family is totally different.
<snip>
Depends on the person I guess, but you are right to correct me - not all people are the same, and I have no choice but to respect them when it comes to their life choices and feelings.
"The liberties and resulting economic prosperity that YOU take for granted were granted by those "dead guys"
If I am wrong please point it out.
By parent obviously I meant the person who is the legal guardian that raises and nutures a child. A birth parent giving the child away would be considered taking care of it. I think I did a good job of illustrating that point within the content of that paragraph.
"We're not debating what's morally right. We are talking reality." Explain this to me I don't understand the concept.
When a person indicates that family matters and then shuns a member of thier family the word hypocrite is apt to me.
"I'm not telling you your opinion is wrong." Is this your way of telling me my opinion is right?
"The liberties and resulting economic prosperity that YOU take for granted were granted by those "dead guys"
If I am wrong please point it out.
If you were not so caught up in trying to make a ridiculous point, you would already have seen them being pointed out by just about everyone who has replied to your posts.
By parent obviously I meant the person who is the legal guardian that raises and nutures a child. A birth parent giving the child away would be considered taking care of it. I think I did a good job of illustrating that point within the content of that paragraph.
"We're not debating what's morally right. We are talking reality." Explain this to me I don't understand the concept.
No you didn't imply that.
"What others have tried to show you is that her parents could have done whatever the hell they want as well. Get it , Got it , good." I don't get it - A parent MUST take care of the children that they birth until that child becomes an adult."
Where does that statement imply that is what you mean? Maybe that is what you meant to type.
When a person indicates that family matters and then shuns a member of thier family the word hypocrite is apt to me.
Someone could just as easily say, "When a person indicates that family matters then fails to help a family member in need the word hypocrite is apt to me."
Someone could also say, "I think we are looking at the biggest one on the block for arguing a point he/she possibly doesn't agree with."
"I'm not telling you your opinion is wrong." Is this your way of telling me my opinion is right?
It means that is your opinion and who can tell you that your opinion is wrong. It's yours after all. You seem or pretend to not understand this, tossing out insults and proclaiming how much of a better individual you are because you agrea with your own values. You fail to understand that your definition of values is probably not the same as other individuals.
That's also pretty much what got my atention. I then started thinking about the crap your spewing and either you have had a very fucked up life, Or you are in this thread not actually giving an opinion of what you would do. Rather arguing for the sake of arguing.
I think Gnome hit the nail on the head and summed up all your posts so far,
" Your dime store attempt at psychology failed. Try again. This time try working from a premise of compassion and concern for others. Not who owes who something."
So if a family member is in need as the ops would you offer to help them or not?