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.
Single mothers that can't pay the bills must have welfare cut after the first birth, any more kids then no extra cash - and if they can't pay then the kids must be put into an orphanage
Single mothers that can't pay the bills must have welfare cut after the first birth, any more kids then no extra cash - and if they can't pay then the kids must be put into an orphanage
I think that is the way to go, right?
orphanage? does that mean you propose to kill the mothers as well?
And if they have more, you want to hurt the child?
Let me get this straight.
C's don't want birth control, abortion, to support anyone born...
I have no problem with women being forced to use the norplant or other subcutaneous birth control if on any benefits (welfare or unemployment) since they can't take care of themselves, how can they take care of others. Once they're able to take care of themselves, the bc can be removed.
But to deny support for those born, who have a hard enough time of it is disgusting.
It's always so good to deny support to those who need it most.
Do they do that in the country where you live?
And tell me, are you christian?
Seems that they frequently go hand in hand.
And if they have more, you want to hurt the child?
Let me get this straight.
C's don't want birth control, abortion, to support anyone born...
I have no problem with women being forced to use the norplant or other subcutaneous birth control if on any benefits (welfare or unemployment) since they can't take care of themselves, how can they take care of others. Once they're able to take care of themselves, the bc can be removed.
But to deny support for those born, who have a hard enough time of it is disgusting.
It's always so good to deny support to those who need it most.
Do they do that in the country where you live?
And tell me, are you christian?
Seems that they frequently go hand in hand.
I'm not really in favor of the OP's plan, but he didn't specify that the kids would not be supported. They could be supported through the orphanage, but it would remove the financial gain from the parent. There are many other issue that would complicate this situation, such as separating a child from parents etc.
I would like to see no increase in payments for someone who has another kid while receiving social benefits.
I also would like there to be some trackin of who paid into the system, and who did not; I do not see why someone who paid into the system for twenty years should be treated the same as someone who has never paid into the system.
I have the one kid policy in mind here, and that is, if on welfare with no job, then the extra kids must be taken into the orphanage, a kind of mandatory self-regulation of breeding.
because most of these single mum are just trailer park trash anyway
parent can see the kid at the orphanage, or come up with her own money for it to be moved back in with her.
otherwise, it's contraception time, what is so hard about that?
What about the kids, we should sterilize them straight away right. cus they come form bad genes, right? lets not wait till they start popping out kids. lets sterilize them, OK.
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.
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.
