Distressed by Baby Controversy, AOL’s Armstrong Reverses 401(K) Policy

Re:Distressed by Baby Controversy, AOL’s Armstrong Reverses ... by icebraining on Sunday February 09, 2014 @10:10AM (#7205739)

It doesn't matter how much you give. If it's not all - and I have to admit I checked from your post history - you're still putting a limit on how much other people's children matter to you. I'm not accusing you of being a bad person or anything like that, I'm saying that is unfair to disparage RexRollman for voicing something we all effectively do.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Distressed by Baby Controversy, AOL’s Armstrong Reverses ... by chris_wot on Monday February 10, 2014 @06:09AM (#7210309)

I respectfully disagree. The reason I thought it was unfeeling was because he said that "I have to wonder why, in a world with billions of people, we would spend a million dollars to keep just one human alive?"

It was the "we" part that got to me. We don't spend millions of dollars on every human, we (as a society) don't need to. But we do spend that on the few humans that it does cost millions to keep alive. There are a lot of research projects that costs millions of dollars to keep going, and often they find breakthroughs that influence other areas.

And I wasn't really disparaging him. He said himself that he thought it might sound unfeeling. To me, it did.

[ Parent | on HN ]