Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Common sense and personal responsibility dictates that you do NOT have children when you can't afford the most basic necessities, such as food. We're not talking hi-tech nurseries, the lastest stroller, or name-brand diapers. We're talking FOOD!!
Someone, anyone tell me: How can 8.9 million people (men and women) be so amazingly irresponsible to bring children in the world and then have to immediately get in line for FOOD assistance??!
Abortion is not the answer either, for the obtuse who might spew pro-abortion tripe. We're talking about NOT creating the child in the first place.
This is the height of Personal Irresponsibility in America. And it's disgusting!
So you are in support of the mandate that all insurance companies provide free birth control.
In many cases the recipient is selling the excess food stamps but also often there's a new boyfriend taking big advantage of the free housing and free food.
This thread is about WIC - not welfare/SNAP and Section 8! If you want to discuss those programs, I'm sure many of us will have a different opinion on the topic.
I don't think the people who are having lots of babies and drawing lots of social services are right wingers.
And the OP didn't say a single thing about denying contraceptives. You're reaching.
Definitely they are not. If they are religious, they wouldn't completely ignore the religious rules against fornication, they wouldn't be having many children out of wedlock which is the majority of those on WIC and foodstamps and other welfare programs.
Abstinence works to prevent pregnancy every time it is used. Name another contraceptive that can claim that success record?
Yes, very true, and it's interesting that in this day and age with so many forms of birth control and more sex education in the schools than ever before, there are more babies born to welfare and single mothers than in the past.
Welfare for the physically disabled or for those with IQs under 60 is one thing but the vast majority of those on WIC and food stamps are perfectly healthy, have their eyesight, their limbs and an IQ of at least 60.
Yes, very true, and it's interesting that in this day and age with so many forms of birth control and more sex education in the schools than ever before, there are more babies born to welfare and single mothers than in the past.
Welfare for the physically disabled or for those with IQs under 60 is one thing but the vast majority of those on WIC and food stamps are perfectly healthy, have their eyesight, their limbs and an IQ of at least 60.
Here is the problem:
States Move Away From Abstinence-Only Sex Education as Teen Birth Rates Rise
WIC started as a nutrition program so it wasn't only for the poor. It has evolved to where mostly the poor take advantage of it.
I would agree , if you can't afford kids you should not have them. When I drive through poor areas. I wonder what possesses someone to bring a child into the poverty the parents live in... just doesn't seem fair to me.
I have always thought that support should drop if more children are added to a welfare family. That would stop the unwanted pregnancies. when there is a perceived profit from another kid, people will continue to produce them.
IIRC, WIC has always had some income and asset requirements. That is from memory. The health dept where I worked in the 70s started up a WIC program while I was there.
I'm always impressed by number of Constitutional/legal experts on CD.
Didnt you know...most CD posters go on to law careers and supreme court justices
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.