Who cares about the children?

[Sir GuitarCozmo]

Also, I don't begrudge anyone their opportunity to have kids.  Some people think that it's going to make their life complete and in some instances they're right.  A lot of times, they're wrong and they end up resentful.  All I'd ever ask a parent is that if you're going to have a child, don't be a fuckup parent.  Keep your child in line the way a parent is supposed to.  Yes, let them be children, don't force completely unrealistic expectations on them, but by the same token, don't let them be completely evil, sniveling, manipulative little terrorists that get away with whatever they want, because it's too much work for you to do the right thing.

Also, I know that there are extenuating circumstances sometimes.  Children born with birth defects or learning impairment, for example.  Examples like that require different considerations and are outside of the scope of my bitching.

[AwakeFromOctavarium]

Anyone that cant see the importance of children isnt thinking.
Anyone that doesnt feel love and affection towards children, even in the most minute sense, isnt feeling.
Anyone who feels that children are of no importance, or dont contribute anything to society, needs to buy a mirror, and evaluate honestly what they are contributing.....and I will be willing to bet that many see a child looking back in that miror.
Seriously, this is one of the most immature threads I have seen, and smacks of the typical adolescent views of children..
 
EDIT:  I too get annoyed by children...even my own.  But I also realize that most unacceptable behavoir by kids can be mostly attributed to the parents.  I also realize, that even after all the annoying things, that children are one of the most precious things that are in this world.

So if you do not conform to the society, you're immature and adolescent? Look. I think snakes are as adorable and precious as children. But I can't say that if you can't see the importance of snakes, you aren't thinking, etc, etc. Because snakes are generally hated upon. Why? For absolutely ridiculous and non-sense reasons. Now the love for children may not be ridiculous. They are human just like us, they're innocent, they look cute, they hold our future, etc. But can we just try to look at them in the way we look at any other objects or living things on Earth?

For me, I think it's perfectly efficient for people to stop raising half of their children who are less competent, and devote the time earned to invest on something more promising and productive.

You can call me a jackass and a cold-hearted person. But it's just that I look at humans just the way I look at every other things in existence. Or well, I try to.

[TAC]

Why is some little kid dieing of Leukemia any more tragic than a 94 year old dieing of some other fucked up cancer?  While the kid has potential (both good and bad), the old fart actually has experience and history.  I'm more bummed by the death of an old guy who faught at Anzio than I am a kid who hasn't done anything at all yet. 

Bart, c'mon man.

I'm not sure what the point of this thread even is. Yes, all death is tragic and all life is important, no one's is more or less. If that's your point, fine..I don't disagree, but there's something not right about a kid being robbed of life before they even get a chance to experience it. Certainly no kid asks for disease, nor does an old fogey, so I think I may get your overall point, but ...I don't know..it just doesn't feel right. Seems a little hard lined for me.

[eric42434224]

Anyone that cant see the importance of children isnt thinking.
Anyone that doesnt feel love and affection towards children, even in the most minute sense, isnt feeling.
Anyone who feels that children are of no importance, or dont contribute anything to society, needs to buy a mirror, and evaluate honestly what they are contributing.....and I will be willing to bet that many see a child looking back in that miror.
Seriously, this is one of the most immature threads I have seen, and smacks of the typical adolescent views of children..
 
EDIT:  I too get annoyed by children...even my own.  But I also realize that most unacceptable behavoir by kids can be mostly attributed to the parents.  I also realize, that even after all the annoying things, that children are one of the most precious things that are in this world.

So if you do not conform to the society, you're immature and adolescent? Look. I think snakes are as adorable and precious as children. But I can't say that if you can't see the importance of snakes, you aren't thinking, etc, etc. Because snakes are generally hated upon. Why? For absolutely ridiculous and non-sense reasons. Now the love for children may not be ridiculous. They are human just like us, they're innocent, they look cute, they hold our future, etc. But can we just try to look at them in the way we look at any other objects or living things on Earth?

For me, I think it's perfectly efficient for people to stop raising half of their children who are less competent, and devote the time earned to invest on something more promising and productive.

You can call me a jackass and a cold-hearted person. But it's just that I look at humans just the way I look at every other things in existence. Or well, I try to.

That was silly.  Equating snakes and children.  

And I didnt say you are immature or adolescent if you dont conform to society.  You just decided to do that out of thin air.

And no, you shouldnt equate children with all other objects on Earth.  Some things have more intrinsic and universal value than others.

Try again.

[AwakeFromOctavarium]

Some things have more intrinsic and universal value than others.

And this is what makes me quit discussions like this.

Sorry, but I can't continue because we clearly don't have same beliefs.

[eric42434224]

Why is some little kid dieing of Leukemia any more tragic than a 94 year old dieing of some other fucked up cancer?  While the kid has potential (both good and bad), the old fart actually has experience and history.  I'm more bummed by the death of an old guy who faught at Anzio than I am a kid who hasn't done anything at all yet. 

Bart, c'mon man.

I'm not sure what the point of this thread even is. Yes, all death is tragic and all life is important, no one's is more or less. If that's your point, fine..I don't disagree, but there's something not right about a kid being robbed of life before they even get a chance to experience it. Certainly no kid asks for disease, nor does an old fogey, so I think I may get your overall point, but ...I don't know..it just doesn't feel right. Seems a little hard lined for me.

Exactly.  The 94 year old was able to experience a lifetime on this Earth, and the kid has that taken away.  And the 94 year old has the experience, wisdom, and understanding to deal with dying.  The kid is innocent, and isnt equipped.  Damn dude....

[AwakeFromOctavarium]

Why is some little kid dieing of Leukemia any more tragic than a 94 year old dieing of some other fucked up cancer?  While the kid has potential (both good and bad), the old fart actually has experience and history.  I'm more bummed by the death of an old guy who faught at Anzio than I am a kid who hasn't done anything at all yet. 

Bart, c'mon man.

I'm not sure what the point of this thread even is. Yes, all death is tragic and all life is important, no one's is more or less. If that's your point, fine..I don't disagree, but there's something not right about a kid being robbed of life before they even get a chance to experience it. Certainly no kid asks for disease, nor does an old fogey, so I think I may get your overall point, but ...I don't know..it just doesn't feel right. Seems a little hard lined for me.

Exactly.  The 94 year old was able to experience a lifetime on this Earth, and the kid has that taken away.  And the 94 year old has the experience, wisdom, and understanding to deal with dying.  The kid is innocent, and isnt equipped.  Damn dude....

I'll try to tackle this. If the kid was like 12 to 20, then that is tragic. Because he learned about all the pleasures you can experience in life. But I don't see any tragedy in the death of an infant to age 2 to 3. Because they didn't learn much about life and death doesn't mean much to them anyway.

[El Barto]

Anyone that cant see the importance of children isnt thinking.
Anyone that doesnt feel love and affection towards children, even in the most minute sense, isnt feeling.
Anyone who feels that children are of no importance, or dont contribute anything to society, needs to buy a mirror, and evaluate honestly what they are contributing.....and I will be willing to bet that many see a child looking back in that miror.
Seriously, this is one of the most immature threads I have seen, and smacks of the typical adolescent views of children..
 
EDIT:  I too get annoyed by children...even my own.  But I also realize that most unacceptable behavoir by kids can be mostly attributed to the parents.  I also realize, that even after all the annoying things, that children are one of the most precious things that are in this world.

Believe it or not, I'll occasionally crack a smile when I see a cute kid being cute.  Love and affection?  Not so much.  He's just another stranger.  And my point wasn't that children are unimportant.  Children in general are actually quite important.  But not one of them is as valuable as society seems to want to deem him. 

Why is some little kid dieing of Leukemia any more tragic than a 94 year old dieing of some other fucked up cancer?  While the kid has potential (both good and bad), the old fart actually has experience and history.  I'm more bummed by the death of an old guy who faught at Anzio than I am a kid who hasn't done anything at all yet. 

Bart, c'mon man.

I'm not sure what the point of this thread even is. Yes, all death is tragic and all life is important, no one's is more or less. If that's your point, fine..I don't disagree, but there's something not right about a kid being robbed of life before they even get a chance to experience it. Certainly no kid asks for disease, nor does an old fogey, so I think I may get your overall point, but ...I don't know..it just doesn't feel right. Seems a little hard lined for me.

That's pretty much what I hope for in these threads.   

Like I said, this wasn't intended as a bag on all children thread.  It's more about trying to understand the massive importance placed on each and every individual child.

[eric42434224]

Why is some little kid dieing of Leukemia any more tragic than a 94 year old dieing of some other fucked up cancer?  While the kid has potential (both good and bad), the old fart actually has experience and history.  I'm more bummed by the death of an old guy who faught at Anzio than I am a kid who hasn't done anything at all yet. 

Bart, c'mon man.

I'm not sure what the point of this thread even is. Yes, all death is tragic and all life is important, no one's is more or less. If that's your point, fine..I don't disagree, but there's something not right about a kid being robbed of life before they even get a chance to experience it. Certainly no kid asks for disease, nor does an old fogey, so I think I may get your overall point, but ...I don't know..it just doesn't feel right. Seems a little hard lined for me.

Exactly.  The 94 year old was able to experience a lifetime on this Earth, and the kid has that taken away.  And the 94 year old has the experience, wisdom, and understanding to deal with dying.  The kid is innocent, and isnt equipped.  Damn dude....

I'll try to tackle this. If the kid was like 12 to 20, then that is tragic. Because he learned about all the pleasures you can experience in life. But I don't see any tragedy in the death of an infant to age 2 to 3. Because they didn't learn much about life and death doesn't mean much to them anyway.

Better practice tackling.  That was sad.

[ehra]

Pretty crazy how we go from an OP about people overvaluing and being overprotective of children to, on page two, posts about abandoning kids that aren't as smart as others and equating human life to a TV remote or any other object.

I think we've gotten into two entirely different topics at that point 

[El Barto]

Why is some little kid dieing of Leukemia any more tragic than a 94 year old dieing of some other fucked up cancer?  While the kid has potential (both good and bad), the old fart actually has experience and history.  I'm more bummed by the death of an old guy who faught at Anzio than I am a kid who hasn't done anything at all yet. 

Bart, c'mon man.

I'm not sure what the point of this thread even is. Yes, all death is tragic and all life is important, no one's is more or less. If that's your point, fine..I don't disagree, but there's something not right about a kid being robbed of life before they even get a chance to experience it. Certainly no kid asks for disease, nor does an old fogey, so I think I may get your overall point, but ...I don't know..it just doesn't feel right. Seems a little hard lined for me.

Exactly.  The 94 year old was able to experience a lifetime on this Earth, and the kid has that taken away.  And the 94 year old has the experience, wisdom, and understanding to deal with dying.  The kid is innocent, and isnt equipped.  Damn dude....

I'll try to tackle this. If the kid was like 12 to 20, then that is tragic. Because he learned about all the pleasures you can experience in life. But I don't see any tragedy in the death of an infant to age 2 to 3. Because they didn't learn much about life and death doesn't mean much to them anyway.

Better practice tackling.  That was sad.

It was pretty fucking harsh, but a perfectly valid opinion nevertheless.

[eric42434224]

Anyone that cant see the importance of children isnt thinking.
Anyone that doesnt feel love and affection towards children, even in the most minute sense, isnt feeling.
Anyone who feels that children are of no importance, or dont contribute anything to society, needs to buy a mirror, and evaluate honestly what they are contributing.....and I will be willing to bet that many see a child looking back in that miror.
Seriously, this is one of the most immature threads I have seen, and smacks of the typical adolescent views of children..
 
EDIT:  I too get annoyed by children...even my own.  But I also realize that most unacceptable behavoir by kids can be mostly attributed to the parents.  I also realize, that even after all the annoying things, that children are one of the most precious things that are in this world.

Believe it or not, I'll occasionally crack a smile when I see a cute kid being cute.  Love and affection?  Not so much.  He's just another stranger.  And my point wasn't that children are unimportant.  Children in general are actually quite important.  But not one of them is as valuable as society seems to want to deem him. 

Why is some little kid dieing of Leukemia any more tragic than a 94 year old dieing of some other fucked up cancer?  While the kid has potential (both good and bad), the old fart actually has experience and history.  I'm more bummed by the death of an old guy who faught at Anzio than I am a kid who hasn't done anything at all yet. 

Bart, c'mon man.

I'm not sure what the point of this thread even is. Yes, all death is tragic and all life is important, no one's is more or less. If that's your point, fine..I don't disagree, but there's something not right about a kid being robbed of life before they even get a chance to experience it. Certainly no kid asks for disease, nor does an old fogey, so I think I may get your overall point, but ...I don't know..it just doesn't feel right. Seems a little hard lined for me.

That's pretty much what I hope for in these threads.   

Like I said, this wasn't intended as a bag on all children thread.  It's more about trying to understand the massive importance placed on each and every individual child.

Im not even talking about the cute factor.
If you want to talk about REAL importance, there is nothing more important for the species.
We are genetically hardwired to feel the way we do about children.  Not when you are a teenager and you somehow think that snakes are as important as children, but when you have children of your own.

[eric42434224]

Why is some little kid dieing of Leukemia any more tragic than a 94 year old dieing of some other fucked up cancer?  While the kid has potential (both good and bad), the old fart actually has experience and history.  I'm more bummed by the death of an old guy who faught at Anzio than I am a kid who hasn't done anything at all yet. 

Bart, c'mon man.

I'm not sure what the point of this thread even is. Yes, all death is tragic and all life is important, no one's is more or less. If that's your point, fine..I don't disagree, but there's something not right about a kid being robbed of life before they even get a chance to experience it. Certainly no kid asks for disease, nor does an old fogey, so I think I may get your overall point, but ...I don't know..it just doesn't feel right. Seems a little hard lined for me.

Exactly.  The 94 year old was able to experience a lifetime on this Earth, and the kid has that taken away.  And the 94 year old has the experience, wisdom, and understanding to deal with dying.  The kid is innocent, and isnt equipped.  Damn dude....

I'll try to tackle this. If the kid was like 12 to 20, then that is tragic. Because he learned about all the pleasures you can experience in life. But I don't see any tragedy in the death of an infant to age 2 to 3. Because they didn't learn much about life and death doesn't mean much to them anyway.

Better practice tackling.  That was sad.

It was pretty fucking harsh, but a perfectly valid opinion nevertheless.

A 3 yr old dying of cancer isnt a tragedy?  I guess it is valid if you think cow shit and used tires are as important and valuable as children.
But everybody is entitled to their opinion.

[AwakeFromOctavarium]

Well ok, not to that point.

[TAC]

 It's more about trying to understand the massive importance placed on each and every individual child.

My favorite scene in School Of Rock is where Jack Black recites the Whitney Houston song at the lunchroom table...

I'll just say to help you understand is that children ARE the future. Their path to adulthood is critical.  It'd be great if after each baby was born that they could be examined with an Asshole-o-meter, but the fact is that our children must be taught and prepared.

[eric42434224]

Well ok, not to that point.

I am trying to understand your point of view.  I can understand trying to be consistent in your assignment of "value" to all things in this universe.  I mean, why should one thing be intrinsicly valued more than the next?  It seems fair, neat, and unbiased, right?  But that isnt the way life is.  Some things do have more value depending on their importance to something/someone, be it a person, an idea, or the survival of a species.
And things are constantly changing, which can change what is important to a person.  I used to laugh at dead baby jokes.....but now if I see a terminally sick kid, or a toddler being critically injured...i get a lump in my throat.  Likely due to me being older and a Father....(but I will still chuckle at a good dead baby joke)
If I am not understanding you, sorry.  

[AwakeFromOctavarium]

Well no need to be sorry. I was kinda pushing my idea there as well. It's just that I try to judge things not in a human way, which is pretty much pretentious and immature.

[Sir GuitarCozmo]

It'd be great if after each baby was born that they could be examined with an Asshole-o-meter, but the fact is that our children must be taught and prepared.

I think it's safe to say (AFAIC) children have as much capacity to be assholes as anyone else.  I'm sure if there was an Asshole-o-meter, you could walk through any elementary school hallway nowadays and the thing would be red-lined.

Also, yes, children DO need to be taught and prepared to be contributing members of society.  Unfortunately, a disturbingly HUGE number of parents get to the point that "Sonofabitch, this is a lot of work to raise a child" and they subconsciously do as little to raise their child properly as they can get by with.  The phrase "Do do the crime if you aren't willing to do the time" is actually quite fitting in that instance.  

[El Barto]

Well ok, not to that point.

I am trying to understand your point of view.  I can understand trying to be consistent in your assignment of "value" to all things in this universe.  I mean, why should one thing be intrinsicly valued more than the next?  It seems fair, neat, and unbiased, right?  But that isnt the way life is.  Some things do have more value depending on their importance to something/someone, be it a person, an idea, or the survival of a species.
And things are constantly changing, which can change what is important to a person.  I used to laugh at dead baby jokes.....but now if I see a terminally sick kid, or a toddler being critically injured...i get a lump in my throat.  Likely due to me being older and a Father....(but I will still chuckle at a good dead baby joke)
If I am not understanding you, sorry.  

And my concern is why people don't get that same lump in their throat when some old woman is sick or injured.  From what I can tell it's because she's no longer cute.  As far as I'm concerned, the Eleanor Rigby's of the world deserve just as much, if not more, consideration than the precious wittle kids do.  

[eric42434224]

It'd be great if after each baby was born that they could be examined with an Asshole-o-meter, but the fact is that our children must be taught and prepared.

I think it's safe to say (AFAIC) children have as much capacity to be assholes as anyone else.  I'm sure if there was an Asshole-o-meter, you could walk through any elementary school hallway nowadays and the thing would be red-lined.

Also, yes, children DO need to be taught and prepared to be contributing members of society.  Unfortunately, a disturbingly HUGE number of parents get to the point that "Sonofabitch, this is a lot of work to raise a child" and they subconsciously do as little to raise their child properly as they can get by with.  The phrase "Do do the crime if you aren't willing to do the time" is actually quite fitting in that instance.  

It isnt the child that needs to be examined and tested with the "Asshole-o-meter" at birth, it is the parents that need to be tested, as they are the overwhelming influence in what kind of kid they will raise.

[TAC]

Unfortunately, a disturbingly HUGE number of parents get to the point that "Sonofabitch, this is a lot of work to raise a child" and they subconsciously do as little to raise their child properly as they can get by with.  The phrase "Do do the crime if you aren't willing to do the time" is actually quite fitting in that instance.  

I don't know Coz, I think MOST parents are doing the right thing.

[eric42434224]

Well ok, not to that point.

I am trying to understand your point of view.  I can understand trying to be consistent in your assignment of "value" to all things in this universe.  I mean, why should one thing be intrinsicly valued more than the next?  It seems fair, neat, and unbiased, right?  But that isnt the way life is.  Some things do have more value depending on their importance to something/someone, be it a person, an idea, or the survival of a species.
And things are constantly changing, which can change what is important to a person.  I used to laugh at dead baby jokes.....but now if I see a terminally sick kid, or a toddler being critically injured...i get a lump in my throat.  Likely due to me being older and a Father....(but I will still chuckle at a good dead baby joke)
If I am not understanding you, sorry.  

And my concern is why people don't get that same lump in their throat when some old woman is sick or injured.  From what I can tell it's because she's no longer cute.  As far as I'm concerned, the Eleanor Rigby's of the world deserve just as much, if not more, consideration than the precious wittle kids do.  

Well people do feel bad, but in a different way, or not to the same degree.  I dont think you want to take this arguement to the end though, as by your logic, Hitler and Bundy deserve our throat lumps too, as they are human.
Children have certain qualities that will make us more sympathetic in cases of tragedy.  They are helpless and innocent.  I dont think it has to do with cuteness.  We examine the situation and react on a case by case basis....but is likely rooted genetically as well.

[eric42434224]

Unfortunately, a disturbingly HUGE number of parents get to the point that "Sonofabitch, this is a lot of work to raise a child" and they subconsciously do as little to raise their child properly as they can get by with.  The phrase "Do do the crime if you aren't willing to do the time" is actually quite fitting in that instance.  

I don't know Coz, I think MOST parents are doing the right thing.

95% of parents are doing the right thing and raising their kids well.  But the other 5% are the ones in the news, and their behavoir is the annoying behavoir that garners attention in Walmart.  Even good parents have bad days and make poor choices...and that is what you see.  The good parents and good kids arent as noticeable.

[El Barto]

Well ok, not to that point.

I am trying to understand your point of view.  I can understand trying to be consistent in your assignment of "value" to all things in this universe.  I mean, why should one thing be intrinsicly valued more than the next?  It seems fair, neat, and unbiased, right?  But that isnt the way life is.  Some things do have more value depending on their importance to something/someone, be it a person, an idea, or the survival of a species.
And things are constantly changing, which can change what is important to a person.  I used to laugh at dead baby jokes.....but now if I see a terminally sick kid, or a toddler being critically injured...i get a lump in my throat.  Likely due to me being older and a Father....(but I will still chuckle at a good dead baby joke)
If I am not understanding you, sorry. 

And my concern is why people don't get that same lump in their throat when some old woman is sick or injured.  From what I can tell it's because she's no longer cute.  As far as I'm concerned, the Eleanor Rigby's of the world deserve just as much, if not more, consideration than the precious wittle kids do. 

Well people do feel bad, but in a different way, or not to the same degree.  I dont think you want to take this arguement to the end though, as by your logic, Hitler and Bundy deserve our throat lumps too, as they are human.
Children have certain qualities that will make us more sympathetic in cases of tragedy.  They are helpless and innocent.  I dont think it has to do with cuteness.  We examine the situation and react on a case by case basis....but is likely rooted genetically as well.

You're citing two known assholes.  If you take two generic people, say the two pictured in my OP, and have them both run over by a Budweiser truck, there will be hundreds of mourners building a giant tower of teddy bears at the kids funeral, and maybe a couple of family members at the old woman's. 

[Sir GuitarCozmo]

It isnt the child that needs to be examined and tested with the "Asshole-o-meter" at birth, it is the parents that need to be tested, as they are the overwhelming influence in what kind of kid they will raise.

I know and that was part of my point.  I know that parents are the primary influence in their kids being assholes, but I refuse to believe that the kid doesn't have some responsibility for it also.  Kids nowadays have such entitlement issues, that they think the world is owed them, on a silver platter.  Yes, no doubt parental misguidance comes into play there, but I refuse to believe that kids don't contribute to their own asshole-ish-ness at all.

When they're babies?  No, I guess most of the asshole-ish-ness comes from the parents, but being a father, you know how aware children are, even when they're little.  They observe.  They take note of social cues and situations.  They're smarter than anyone gives them credit for.  They learn early how to manipulate their parents (not in an evil, destroy the world kinda way, but in the "get me a bottle!" kinda way).  They figure out how to play one parent off the other as best they can.  That isn't taught, it's observed and learned on their own.  Interesting how that works, really, but it's one more reason I know I could never have a child of my own.

I don't know Coz, I think MOST parents are doing the right thing.

The 5% of parents that don't do the right thing are giving the other 95% a really bad name, by association.  I dunno.  I see SOOOOOOOO many self-important, gimme gimme gimme, wah I didn't make the team let's sue, entitled little brats in real life, in the lives of friends, in the lives of acquaintances, in the news, etc. that I cannot believe 100% that it's that little of a problem.

[bosk1]

95% of parents are doing the right thing and raising their kids well.  But the other 5% are the ones whose kids end up posting on DTF, and their behavoir is the annoying behavoir that garners attention in Walmart.  Even good parents have bad days and make poor choices...and that is what you see.  The good parents and good kids arent as noticeable.

I agree.

[Sir GuitarCozmo]

[EPICVIEW]

 

[eric42434224]

Well ok, not to that point.

I am trying to understand your point of view.  I can understand trying to be consistent in your assignment of "value" to all things in this universe.  I mean, why should one thing be intrinsicly valued more than the next?  It seems fair, neat, and unbiased, right?  But that isnt the way life is.  Some things do have more value depending on their importance to something/someone, be it a person, an idea, or the survival of a species.
And things are constantly changing, which can change what is important to a person.  I used to laugh at dead baby jokes.....but now if I see a terminally sick kid, or a toddler being critically injured...i get a lump in my throat.  Likely due to me being older and a Father....(but I will still chuckle at a good dead baby joke)
If I am not understanding you, sorry.  

And my concern is why people don't get that same lump in their throat when some old woman is sick or injured.  From what I can tell it's because she's no longer cute.  As far as I'm concerned, the Eleanor Rigby's of the world deserve just as much, if not more, consideration than the precious wittle kids do.  

Well people do feel bad, but in a different way, or not to the same degree.  I dont think you want to take this arguement to the end though, as by your logic, Hitler and Bundy deserve our throat lumps too, as they are human.
Children have certain qualities that will make us more sympathetic in cases of tragedy.  They are helpless and innocent.  I dont think it has to do with cuteness.  We examine the situation and react on a case by case basis....but is likely rooted genetically as well.

You're citing two known assholes.  If you take two generic people, say the two pictured in my OP, and have them both run over by a Budweiser truck, there will be hundreds of mourners building a giant tower of teddy bears at the kids funeral, and maybe a couple of family members at the old woman's.  

First...who knows if there will be fewer at the old persons funeral?

Regardless, the factors that will create a bigger emotional reaction to a 90 yr old woman dying, and 4 yr old girl dying are pretty obvious and understandable.

1) The child is innocent and and cant comprehend what is happening.  The lady has experience and wisdom, and is far better equipped to deal with it.
2) The child has not had the chance to live and experience all that this life can offer.  The lady has had the benefit if a long life, so we dont lament her not having that.
3) I think we are genetically wired to feel this way toward offspring, and children in general, for the benefit of the species.

All things in this world are not equal.  There are factors which make a human being feel more, or feel different, in different situations.

EDIT:  I do understand your point.  Why are they not treated equal?  Because they arent equal.  There are factors that make people feel different about one more than the other....that is about as simply as I can put it.  What are those reasons?  I put my views above, but they will likely differ between people...as obviouskly seen here in this thread

[TAC]

You're citing two known assholes.  If you take two generic people, say the two pictured in my OP, and have them both run over by a Budweiser truck, there will be hundreds of mourners building a giant tower of teddy bears at the kids funeral, and maybe a couple of family members at the old woman's. 

THAT's a womang??

The 5% of parents that don't do the right thing are giving the other 95% a really bad name, by association.

YES!

[El Barto]

First...who knows if there will be fewer at the old persons funeral?

Regardless, the factors that will create a bigger emotional reaction to a 90 yr old woman dying, and 4 yr old girl dying are pretty obvious and understandable.

1) The child is innocent and and cant comprehend what is happening.  The lady has experience and wisdom, and is far better equipped to deal with it.
2) The child has not had the chance to live and experience all that this life can offer.  The lady has had the benefit if a long life, so we dont lament her not having that.
3) I think we are genetically wired to feel this way toward offspring, and children in general, for the benefit of the species.

All things in this world are not equal.  There are factors which make a human being feel more, or feel different, in different situations.

1:  Irrelevant.  We're talking about the simple cessation of being, not some long, protracted death. There's nothing to come to grips with.  You simply cease to be.  If anything, I'd say that if there actually was anything to comprehend, then the old woman has it worse for the knowledge of impending loss. 
2:  The child gives up a future.  The old woman gives up a history.  Those two cancel out in my opinion.  That old woman could tell you first hand what it was like to live through significant periods of Russian history. 
3:  This I'm inclined to agree with.  Sadly, I don't think it benefits us in the slightest.  The more people get their knickers in a twist over children, the more annoying they tend to become for the rest of us.

[Arcaeus]

I think it's far more than 5% of people that are fuckup parents these days, but I understand your point.

[eric42434224]

First...who knows if there will be fewer at the old persons funeral?

Regardless, the factors that will create a bigger emotional reaction to a 90 yr old woman dying, and 4 yr old girl dying are pretty obvious and understandable.

1) The child is innocent and and cant comprehend what is happening.  The lady has experience and wisdom, and is far better equipped to deal with it.
2) The child has not had the chance to live and experience all that this life can offer.  The lady has had the benefit if a long life, so we dont lament her not having that.
3) I think we are genetically wired to feel this way toward offspring, and children in general, for the benefit of the species.

All things in this world are not equal.  There are factors which make a human being feel more, or feel different, in different situations.

1:  Irrelevant.  We're talking about the simple cessation of being, not some long, protracted death. There's nothing to come to grips with.  You simply cease to be.  If anything, I'd say that if there actually was anything to comprehend, then the old woman has it worse for the knowledge of impending loss.  
2:  The child gives up a future.  The old woman gives up a history.  Those two cancel out in my opinion.  That old woman could tell you first hand what it was like to live through significant periods of Russian history.  
3:  This I'm inclined to agree with.  Sadly, I don't think it benefits us in the slightest.  The more people get their knickers in a twist over children, the more annoying they tend to become for the rest of us.

1.  Irrelevant for you, not for others.  We are talking about death in general, not just a very narrow and specific example.  We are talking about feelings here, and most people, likely including the old woman, would feel the way I do.
2.  These two dont cancel out.  The womans experiences already exist, and her death does not erase her experience, contributions, and effects.  The girls never happened.  Not equal by any stretch of the imagination.
3.  Of course it benefits us.  It is the propogation of the species, and the continuation of our society and what we think is important.    And people being concerned about children is GOOD, and is only annoying for people like you.  This world would be a better place if we were more concerned about our children and their future.  We would have less economic, environmental, and criminal problems for sure if we truly cared.

I just think we should agree to disagree, as it seems we have vastly differing views.

[El Barto]

Not everybody shares your valuation of our species or our society.  While I'm fine with their continued existence, it won't really bum me out too much when either run their inevitable courses.  As for the concern for the children, it doesn't bother me when demonstrated in reasonable amounts towards the kids that matter to you.  What does bother me tremendously is the ridiculously overwhelming concern for all kids.  That's when people make stupid decisions that effect all of us and very rarely for the better.  Teach your kid to cope with society.  Don't try to warp society to conform to some Ward Cleaver Ideal. 

[Sir GuitarCozmo]

Teach your kid to cope with society.  Don't try to warp society to conform to some Ward Cleaver Ideal.

So very this.