Even the "three cardinal guides and five permanent members" who are always criticized for being backward in feudalism always talk about "loving father" before "filial piety". We often say that rights and obligations are equal. Parents have the right to have children, but at the same time they should fulfill their obligation to raise them. It is the birthright of children to be raised healthily. Parents who fail to perform their maintenance obligations owe their children to their parents, not their children. Children can generously say, "Forget it, forget it." Let go of yourself and your parents who owe you.
However, people who are not related to their children are kind to them, bring them up and fulfill their obligations for their biological parents. This is kindness, and they are the people who should be grateful and rewarded most.
"Good is rewarded with good, and evil with evil" and "Only giving is rewarded" are the fairness that everyone longs for and the social order that we should maintain. Otherwise, "how to repay evil with good?" . Otherwise, isn't it actually conducive to the spread of injustice? When we want to get a fair return, we must be fair first.
This depends on the three views of children when they grow up. Parents are the people who give us life, so we have no reason not to be grateful. When children grow up, they will be grateful whether they are adopted or raised cheaply. If children don't grow up well, they will have ideas and will definitely complain. Life will not be smooth sailing. Parents are sometimes embarrassed and disappointed. Sometimes life is really hard. It's good to have life. Will it be said that it is cheap to raise?
There are always people who use "after all, your parents gave birth to you" to defend those parents who were born without raising and abusing their children. I want to say: "being born without raising" is the murder of children. Won't your conscience hurt when you defend the murderer?