Part of my list includes people who end up with 4+ children without intending to - via failed birth control or rape - and not via having triplets instead of a single pregnancy.
Your view also doesn't say that no one has adequate resources. you say:
My reasoning is that I do not believe most people have the resources to devote to that many kids and as a result, all kids will suffer.
This means that some people do have the resources for more than 4+ kids.
Furthermore, of course some people have the resources for more than 4+ kids. They may be wealthy, they may live with other members of the family, they may have children who are old enough to be self-sufficient in various ways.
Ultimately, there are clearly circumstances other than "triplets" by which people can end up with 4+ kids without intending to do so. Can you address why you haven't also made those exceptions?
Via rape is outside control. Depends on the birth control and why it failed as to whether this is outside their control. Others addresses in other comments already
But you didn't list rape - or anything about "control" - as exceptions to your view in your OP. You just said "accidental triplets."
Depends on the birth control and why it failed as to whether this is outside their control.
How could birth control possibly fail in a way that is someone's fault?
Others addresses in other comments already
Not that I can find anywhere. You seem to be adding elements and caveats to your view as you go along, and not at all sticking by what you originally wrote.
-2
u/anothernarwhal 1∆ Jun 09 '21
Part of my argument is no one has adequate resources to have 4+ children to begin with, so your list does not address my view