Single mothers - one kid only policy, then welfare stopped (carry, county)
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.
Plus you think single moms have it rough try being a single dad and finding help if your family needs it. Everything is geared for single moms and there kids.
So, then we pay more for all the associated costs of an orphanage? Also later in life the kid has issues because he/she was put in an orphanage.
Money talks, if they are on welfare, after their first kid on the dole, offer them a free tubal ligation and $500 cash. Offer the baby daddies free vasectomies and $500 cash...I bet you'll get some takers
You can't forcefully sterilize anyone.
I have no problem with forced birth control, but you cannot sterilize anyone else.
Geez, women who want tubals are refused them by idiot paternalistic doctors.
I think also what is an issue that no one is talking about, is our world population has doubled since 20yrs ago. Part of the reason is, ppl are living longer and there hasn't been a real major war or natural disaster to keep the populations down. So we are fighting for the same resources we had 20yrs ago. Thats why we have such a scarcity mentality, buts its only going to get worse guys.
You can't forcefully sterilize anyone.
I have no problem with forced birth control, but you cannot sterilize anyone else.
Geez, women who want tubals are refused them by idiot paternalistic doctors.
Right...they get a choice when they sign for the welfare..another pregnancy while on the dole means no extra money...or they can opt for sterilization after the first on the dole...or not get benefits
When a woman or a couple with children applies for welfare, the most logical decision would be to remove the children from the home and place them with foster families until their mother/parents can provide 100% financial support. There would be no greater motivation for welfare recipients to improve their situation if it meant getting their children back.
When a woman or a couple with children applies for welfare, the most logical decision would be to remove the children from the home and place them with foster families until their mother/parents can provide 100% financial support. There would be no greater motivation for welfare recipients to improve their situation if it meant getting their children back.
Uhmmmm maybe we should put every child in foster care, whos parents put there children in public school. Intell they can afford to hire there own teachers etc. No free rides. Oh hey speaking of free rides. Why should i have to pay for your police, fire protection? When i don't use it? Or pay for roads i don't use, or pay for government officals i didn't vote for? Geee i should be getting alot of tax money bk.
Right...they get a choice when they sign for the welfare..another pregnancy while on the dole means no extra money...or they can opt for sterilization after the first on the dole...or not get benefits
The whole point is that you can't forcibly sterilize someone.
What's the problem with mandatory bc, without sterilization?
If you needed temporary help, or if you didn't have the wherewithal or lifeskills to figure it out, would you be willing to opt out for permanent sterilization?
If you were, you'd be very foolish.
You don't know what the future will bring for yourself, let alone someone else.
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.
The "...or I'll shoot the bunny" argument?
Well, since personal responsibility is still off the table in the liberal universe, government support would seem to be in the best short-term interest and worst long-term interest of the child, but some things have to be.
NFN, why is it Christian haters like yourself only care about a child after he or she is born?
Is it because fetuses can't vote but welfare moms who are too irresponsible to use BC can and do?
Did you have a study to bolster your implication that Christians are less willing to adopt than non-Christians, or is your opinion simply based on blind pig-headed hate and a need to use ad hominem attacks when facts fail you?
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.