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.
Doesn't matter, taxpayers in every country should be able to decide not to support deadweights. I'm tired of paying for people having kids they can't afford.
Why is it extreme. She has 6 kids already. If you have the resources: money, time, intelligence, patience and love to have 6 kids or 100 go for it. If your an average working stiff, 6 kids seems a bit much these days and if your mentally challenged and on welfare 6 kids is probably too many and I don't see how not having 7, 8 or 9 is infringing on your reproductive rights. Have a tubal is not a big deal, outpatient procedure. I had a tubal after my second child. I wish the government would have volunteered to pay for it.
Being forced against your will to have an elective surgery you don't want can be very traumatic, especially for someone of a limited mental capacity.
Three men in Tennessee have notched up a staggering 78 children by 46 different women between them - and are doing their best to squirm out of paying for a single one.
Being forced against your will to have an elective surgery you don't want can be very traumatic, especially for someone of a limited mental capacity.
That may be true but its not like the government doesn't already impose its will on peoples personal medical issues. They force procedures against religious beliefs, outlaw assisted suicide, indirectly force immunizations, are constantly trying to outlaw, limit or put burdens on abortion, and god only knows what procedures are forced on the mentally ill in institutions or even the elderly in nursing homes.
This particular woman apparently has medical issues that would make a pregnancy extremely dangerous or fatal. I believe that would be far more traumatic than being put under for about 30 minutes and spending a few hours in the hospital.
That may be true but its not like the government doesn't already impose its will on peoples personal medical issues. They force procedures against religious beliefs, outlaw assisted suicide, indirectly force immunizations, are constantly trying to outlaw, limit or put burdens on abortion, and god only knows what procedures are forced on the mentally ill in institutions or even the elderly in nursing homes.
This particular woman apparently has medical issues that would make a pregnancy extremely dangerous or fatal. I believe that would be far more traumatic than being put under for about 30 minutes and spending a few hours in the hospital.
Agreed. People like to make knee-jerk declarations that its wrong to hold someone to a surgery they don't elect regardless of context or circumstances.
Good point. We legislate every other aspect of our bodies, why not this?
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.
