(March 4, 2012 at 6:39 pm)Rokcet Scientist Wrote:(March 4, 2012 at 6:25 pm)Child of Stardust Wrote: who knows? It may end up being very worthwhile.
Correct: "Who knows?" It is a complete gamble. "It may end up being very worthwhile", but reality's odds are it won't.
Why? A non-ideal situation doesn't mean the odds lean towards disaster.
Quote:Those two kids may grow up to be wonderful people who make a positive difference to humanity.
Well, that's a relief! Then Xtianity isn't so bad either: "who knows? It may end up being very worthwhile. Those Xtians may turn out to be wonderful people who make a positive difference to humanity."
Yeah, right.
Christianity has proven itself to be a more negative force than a positive force, in general. This has not proven itself to be anything yet. Her decision to have kids at such a late age aside, we don't know much about this woman. We know nothing about who these kids will become. We literally, truly, cannot say.
Is it a great decision to have kids at 66? No. Is it sad they'll watch her pass away and possibly fall into senility when fairly young? Yes. But like I said, it's not uncommon for kids to lose parents, or to be raised by seniors, and they usually turn out fine. It's not ideal, but it's no reason to panic.
It just seems as if you are making unwarranted leaps concerning this lady's character (which is what would really give me reason to fear for the kids). She's a little selfish, sure, but for the most part I don't think this implies bad character. I think it implies poor judgment. I think, for the most part, she honestly just didn't grasp what she was doing when she chose to bring children into the world at her age.
