the poor need to wake UP and stop having kids

[C_Clayton_Jones]

YEAH! Its the SAME as letting THIEVES keep what they STEAL the EXACT SAME THING!

except having babies isn't a crime, and neither is being a poor kid. you fucking moron.


ITS TIME TO TAKE A STAND AND STOP POOR KIDS FROM PROFITING OFF OF THEIR PARENTS BAD DECISIONS BY GETTING TO EAT!!!

Taking tax money from me via the Government's illegal and unConstitutional welfare programs is EXACTLY like stealing.

Ignorant nonsense.

The government’s authority to tax is neither ‘illegal’ nor ‘un-Constitutional,’ and it in no way constitutes ‘stealing.’

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Maybe because for millennia among humans, there was NO BIRTH CONTROL pill to stop women from getting pregnant when they had sex...poor or rich, women had their babies, (whenever God decided they would be blessed with one)... (God told them to reproduce and multiply, it was an order! for them) I am just saying that this is something that all female humans have had for millennia, they were to bear children....

For the most part, there was no thoughts that women should NOT have their babies or PLAN their pregnancies with time in between or anything like that....this is a fairly recent phenomenon.

We are naturally PROGRAMED to reproduce like all other animals as well....and what is going on today or since the birth control pill, is unnatural to some females innermost programming and I think it will take some time....

For some women it is harder for them to adjust to this type of mentality.

The condom was invented in Egypt in 3000 BC. Plenty of time to get "adjusted" to the idea of birth control. And besides,it's 2014 whatever happened to "We've come a long way baby"?
The idea that man cant change or hold back their urges is baloney,we do it everyday. Will there be accidents? Absolutely...but it's no longer an accident when it happens repeatedly.
It's more to do with irresponsible people and those who want a payday.
To the detriment of the children,and society as a whole.

The Condom was invented for women in 3000 bc? Hmmmm, that's a pretty good trick for them to figure out in 3000bc how women can wear condoms to prevent them from getting pregnant....

The men may have gotten used to wearing condoms since you say they've been doing it since 3000bc....? (which were illegal in America until the past century I believe?) but they sure are FAILING at it, still...and in this day and age....so I agree with your sentiments on that...

I don't think it is a "accident", I think it just happens for most women, if you have sex, during child bearing years and you are not on birth control pills (or something else)....pregnancy is almost a guarantee...except for some women like me, who haven't been able bear children... (I view this differently because knowing my husband and I have not been able to have children, I see bearing a child as one of the most wonderful gifts in life, and anyone pregnant...married or not, poor or rich, black or white, should be counting their blessings, because they could be like me, and be childless when they die)

But what's next? Are you going to force these women to be on Birth Control Pills or sterilize them, force them to have abortions? It's the only realistic place this type of talk can go, no?

Stop paying people to have children. I dont want to tell anyone they cant have a child(although in some cases that would be best)but at what point do you say enough is enough? I would suggest that if you have one child and are receiving welfare you wont be receiving anymore benefits if you have more children. Of course offer them free birth control and the morning after pill so they have zero excuses.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

That is the really cool thing about responding to blog statements. You can be anyone you want to be. I do not believe you. Only the week minded do. So, do you believe yourself???

What the hell are you talking about now?

Sorry you are so slow, me dear. I was simply saying that you are full of shit. Anyone who believes someone suggesting their children are going to inherit the earth is delusional.
But then, maybe it was just your effort at humor.

First of all...what the hell is with "me boy" and "me dear"? If your not Irish it makes you sound like a complete douche bag.
And if children aren't going to inherit the earth then who the fuck is? In your rush to sound superior ........

 

[I.P.Freely]

The condom was invented in Egypt in 3000 BC. Plenty of time to get "adjusted" to the idea of birth control. And besides,it's 2014 whatever happened to "We've come a long way baby"?
The idea that man cant change or hold back their urges is baloney,we do it everyday. Will there be accidents? Absolutely...but it's no longer an accident when it happens repeatedly.
It's more to do with irresponsible people and those who want a payday.
To the detriment of the children,and society as a whole.

The Condom was invented for women in 3000 bc? Hmmmm, that's a pretty good trick for them to figure out in 3000bc how women can wear condoms to prevent them from getting pregnant....

The men may have gotten used to wearing condoms since you say they've been doing it since 3000bc....? (which were illegal in America until the past century I believe?) but they sure are FAILING at it, still...and in this day and age....so I agree with your sentiments on that...

I don't think it is a "accident", I think it just happens for most women, if you have sex, during child bearing years and you are not on birth control pills (or something else)....pregnancy is almost a guarantee...except for some women like me, who haven't been able bear children... (I view this differently because knowing my husband and I have not been able to have children, I see bearing a child as one of the most wonderful gifts in life, and anyone pregnant...married or not, poor or rich, black or white, should be counting their blessings, because they could be like me, and be childless when they die)

But what's next? Are you going to force these women to be on Birth Control Pills or sterilize them, force them to have abortions? It's the only realistic place this type of talk can go, no?

Stop paying people to have children. I dont want to tell anyone they cant have a child(although in some cases that would be best)but at what point do you say enough is enough? I would suggest that if you have one child and are receiving welfare you wont be receiving anymore benefits if you have more children. Of course offer them free birth control and the morning after pill so they have zero excuses.

so what would you do with the second child?

 

[Politico]

It is amazing how many idiots are out there.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Why is that we can all agree that you dont buy a car you cant afford,but when it comes to having children affordability no longer matters?
You have to admit having children you cant afford is a much more grievous offense then buying that car. We're talking about a humane life here.

Maybe because for millennia among humans, there was NO BIRTH CONTROL pill to stop women from getting pregnant when they had sex...poor or rich, women had their babies, (whenever God decided they would be blessed with one)... (God told them to reproduce and multiply, it was an order! for them) I am just saying that this is something that all female humans have had for millennia, they were to bear children....

For the most part, there was no thoughts that women should NOT have their babies or PLAN their pregnancies with time in between or anything like that....this is a fairly recent phenomenon.

We are naturally PROGRAMED to reproduce like all other animals as well....and what is going on today or since the birth control pill, is unnatural to some females innermost programming and I think it will take some time....

For some women it is harder for them to adjust to this type of mentality.

That time period also had sky-high infant and child mortality rates as well as, typically, a massive amount of social pressure keeping women from fucking without marrying. Essentially, bastards (back when we were referred to as such) happened less and, when they were unaffordable to the family to which they were born, tended to "work themselves out".

The comparison you've drawn leaves several glaringly obvious factors unconsidered.

On top of this, you're implying that we can't enact laws that force humans to temper their biological urges with their intellectual judgement. That's the silliest shit ever. Instinct tells me, when I find a woman attractive, to smash her face into the nearest available headboard and take what I want. There's nothing in the instinct that tells me to acquire permission. That part is learned. . . intellectual. If I don't temper my instinct to grease every woman I'm attracted to with the judgement to refrain from greasing the ones who don't want to be greased, I go to prison, and rightly so.

 

[Care4all]

Why is that we can all agree that you dont buy a car you cant afford,but when it comes to having children affordability no longer matters?
You have to admit having children you cant afford is a much more grievous offense then buying that car. We're talking about a humane life here.

Maybe because for millennia among humans, there was NO BIRTH CONTROL pill to stop women from getting pregnant when they had sex...poor or rich, women had their babies, (whenever God decided they would be blessed with one)... (God told them to reproduce and multiply, it was an order! for them) I am just saying that this is something that all female humans have had for millennia, they were to bear children....

For the most part, there was no thoughts that women should NOT have their babies or PLAN their pregnancies with time in between or anything like that....this is a fairly recent phenomenon.

We are naturally PROGRAMED to reproduce like all other animals as well....and what is going on today or since the birth control pill, is unnatural to some females innermost programming and I think it will take some time....

For some women it is harder for them to adjust to this type of mentality.

That time period also had sky-high infant and child mortality rates as well as, typically, a massive amount of social pressure keeping women from fucking without marrying. Essentially, bastards (back when we were referred to as such) happened less and, when they were unaffordable to the family to which they were born, tended to "work themselves out".

The comparison you've drawn leaves several glaringly obvious factors unconsidered.

On top of this, you're implying that we can't enact laws that force humans to temper their biological urges with their intellectual judgement. That's the silliest shit ever. Instinct tells me, when I find a woman attractive, to smash her face into the nearest available headboard and take what I want. There's nothing in the instinct that tells me to acquire permission. That part is learned. . . intellectual. If I don't temper my instinct to grease every woman I'm attracted to with the judgement to refrain from greasing the ones who don't want to be greased, I go to prison, and rightly so.

of course self control is admirable for men and virtuous for women....

It's not silly, it is unconstitutional/illegal for gvt to try to limit our reproductive rights...

what's all this concern over women having too many babies and welfare? The percentage of women on welfare having even more babies has dropped.

95% of the people on welfare are off of welfare in 2-5 years...at least at the federal level, and TANF stops paying extra after the 3rd kid I believe and 5 years is max? STATES however, can modify or pay for out of their own tax money, for families with more than 3 kids, or for longer periods if they choose to etc.



BUT THAT is welfare that you need to address with your own State, because it is your State taxes paying for that....

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Maybe because for millennia among humans, there was NO BIRTH CONTROL pill to stop women from getting pregnant when they had sex...poor or rich, women had their babies, (whenever God decided they would be blessed with one)... (God told them to reproduce and multiply, it was an order! for them) I am just saying that this is something that all female humans have had for millennia, they were to bear children....

For the most part, there was no thoughts that women should NOT have their babies or PLAN their pregnancies with time in between or anything like that....this is a fairly recent phenomenon.

We are naturally PROGRAMED to reproduce like all other animals as well....and what is going on today or since the birth control pill, is unnatural to some females innermost programming and I think it will take some time....

For some women it is harder for them to adjust to this type of mentality.

That time period also had sky-high infant and child mortality rates as well as, typically, a massive amount of social pressure keeping women from fucking without marrying. Essentially, bastards (back when we were referred to as such) happened less and, when they were unaffordable to the family to which they were born, tended to "work themselves out".

The comparison you've drawn leaves several glaringly obvious factors unconsidered.

On top of this, you're implying that we can't enact laws that force humans to temper their biological urges with their intellectual judgement. That's the silliest shit ever. Instinct tells me, when I find a woman attractive, to smash her face into the nearest available headboard and take what I want. There's nothing in the instinct that tells me to acquire permission. That part is learned. . . intellectual. If I don't temper my instinct to grease every woman I'm attracted to with the judgement to refrain from greasing the ones who don't want to be greased, I go to prison, and rightly so.

of course self control is admirable for men and virtuous for women....

It's not silly, it is unconstitutional/illegal for gvt to try to limit our reproductive rights...

what's all this concern over women having too many babies and welfare? The percentage of women on welfare having even more babies has dropped.

95% of the people on welfare are off of welfare in 2-5 years...at least at the federal level, and TANF stops paying extra after the 3rd kid I believe and 5 years is max? STATES however, can modify or pay for out of their own tax money, for families with more than 3 kids, or for longer periods if they choose to etc.



BUT THAT is welfare that you need to address with your own State, because it is your State taxes paying for that....

I didn't know we were arguing for the ability of the Federal Government, in particular, to limit reproductive rights. When did that become the OP?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

The Condom was invented for women in 3000 bc? Hmmmm, that's a pretty good trick for them to figure out in 3000bc how women can wear condoms to prevent them from getting pregnant....

The men may have gotten used to wearing condoms since you say they've been doing it since 3000bc....? (which were illegal in America until the past century I believe?) but they sure are FAILING at it, still...and in this day and age....so I agree with your sentiments on that...

I don't think it is a "accident", I think it just happens for most women, if you have sex, during child bearing years and you are not on birth control pills (or something else)....pregnancy is almost a guarantee...except for some women like me, who haven't been able bear children... (I view this differently because knowing my husband and I have not been able to have children, I see bearing a child as one of the most wonderful gifts in life, and anyone pregnant...married or not, poor or rich, black or white, should be counting their blessings, because they could be like me, and be childless when they die)

But what's next? Are you going to force these women to be on Birth Control Pills or sterilize them, force them to have abortions? It's the only realistic place this type of talk can go, no?

Stop paying people to have children. I dont want to tell anyone they cant have a child(although in some cases that would be best)but at what point do you say enough is enough? I would suggest that if you have one child and are receiving welfare you wont be receiving anymore benefits if you have more children. Of course offer them free birth control and the morning after pill so they have zero excuses.

so what would you do with the second child?

If they refused to take free birth control and or the morning after pill?
You remove them from the home and put the child up for adoption. Which more then likely would be better for the child anyway because it wouldnt be raised by an irresponsible idiot.

 

[I.P.Freely]

Stop paying people to have children. I dont want to tell anyone they cant have a child(although in some cases that would be best)but at what point do you say enough is enough? I would suggest that if you have one child and are receiving welfare you wont be receiving anymore benefits if you have more children. Of course offer them free birth control and the morning after pill so they have zero excuses.

so what would you do with the second child?

If they refused to take free birth control and or the morning after pill?
You remove them from the home and put the child up for adoption. Which more then likely would be better for the child anyway because it wouldnt be raised by an irresponsible idiot.

sounds wonderful you obviously like enlarging governmental powers , which departments of government would enforce your plan.How many children are available for adoption today and what do you think the numbers would be if your plan is implemented ?
How much would it cost the taxpayers?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

That is the really cool thing about responding to blog statements. You can be anyone you want to be. I do not believe you. Only the week minded do. So, do you believe yourself???

What the hell are you talking about now?

Sorry you are so slow, me dear. I was simply saying that you are full of shit. Anyone who believes someone suggesting their children are going to inherit the earth is delusional.
But then, maybe it was just your effort at humor.

Unintentional humor on her part, actually.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Stop paying people to have children. I dont want to tell anyone they cant have a child(although in some cases that would be best)but at what point do you say enough is enough? I would suggest that if you have one child and are receiving welfare you wont be receiving anymore benefits if you have more children. Of course offer them free birth control and the morning after pill so they have zero excuses.

so what would you do with the second child?

If they refused to take free birth control and or the morning after pill?
You remove them from the home and put the child up for adoption. Which more then likely would be better for the child anyway because it wouldnt be raised by an irresponsible idiot.

This is unmitigated idiocy and blatantly un-Constitutional – did you even stop to think this all the way through?

The state has no authority whatsoever to remove a child from the home because the family is perceived to be ‘too poor,’ or because a woman doesn’t use birth control.

Such a policy would violate the 4th Amendment’s right to privacy and the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause and Due Process Clause.

The ignorance of, and contempt for, the Constitution and its case law exhibited by you and most other conservatives never ceases to amaze.

 

[Care4all]

so what would you do with the second child?

if they refused to take free birth control and or the morning after pill?
You remove them from the home and put the child up for adoption. Which more then likely would be better for the child anyway because it wouldnt be raised by an irresponsible idiot.

this is unmitigated idiocy and blatantly un-constitutional – did you even stop to think this all the way through?

The state has no authority whatsoever to remove a child from the home because the family is perceived to be ‘too poor,’ or because a woman doesn’t use birth control.

Such a policy would violate the 4th amendment’s right to privacy and the 14th amendment’s equal protection clause and due process clause.

The ignorance of, and contempt for, the constitution and its case law exhibited by you and most other conservatives never ceases to amaze.

A-men!!!!!

 

[Anathema]

The government’s authority to tax is neither ‘illegal’ nor ‘un-Constitutional,’ and it in no way constitutes ‘stealing.’

The taxation is legal. What it's being spent on IS both illegal and un-Constitutional. No Place in Article 1 Section 8 is ANY form of social spending mandated.

 

[Care4all]

That time period also had sky-high infant and child mortality rates as well as, typically, a massive amount of social pressure keeping women from fucking without marrying. Essentially, bastards (back when we were referred to as such) happened less and, when they were unaffordable to the family to which they were born, tended to "work themselves out".

The comparison you've drawn leaves several glaringly obvious factors unconsidered.

On top of this, you're implying that we can't enact laws that force humans to temper their biological urges with their intellectual judgement. That's the silliest shit ever. Instinct tells me, when I find a woman attractive, to smash her face into the nearest available headboard and take what I want. There's nothing in the instinct that tells me to acquire permission. That part is learned. . . intellectual. If I don't temper my instinct to grease every woman I'm attracted to with the judgement to refrain from greasing the ones who don't want to be greased, I go to prison, and rightly so.

of course self control is admirable for men and virtuous for women....

It's not silly, it is unconstitutional/illegal for gvt to try to limit our reproductive rights...

what's all this concern over women having too many babies and welfare? The percentage of women on welfare having even more babies has dropped.

95% of the people on welfare are off of welfare in 2-5 years...at least at the federal level, and TANF stops paying extra after the 3rd kid I believe and 5 years is max? STATES however, can modify or pay for out of their own tax money, for families with more than 3 kids, or for longer periods if they choose to etc.



BUT THAT is welfare that you need to address with your own State, because it is your State taxes paying for that....

I didn't know we were arguing for the ability of the Federal Government, in particular, to limit reproductive rights. When did that become the OP?

Ohhhh, somewhere along the way...it morphed.....

 

[bedowin62]

of course self control is admirable for men and virtuous for women....

It's not silly, it is unconstitutional/illegal for gvt to try to limit our reproductive rights...

what's all this concern over women having too many babies and welfare? The percentage of women on welfare having even more babies has dropped.

95% of the people on welfare are off of welfare in 2-5 years...at least at the federal level, and TANF stops paying extra after the 3rd kid I believe and 5 years is max? STATES however, can modify or pay for out of their own tax money, for families with more than 3 kids, or for longer periods if they choose to etc.



BUT THAT is welfare that you need to address with your own State, because it is your State taxes paying for that....

I didn't know we were arguing for the ability of the Federal Government, in particular, to limit reproductive rights. When did that become the OP?

Ohhhh, somewhere along the way...it morphed.....

the Left has always wanted to limit reproductive rights; it is in the history of the American Progressive movement



read a book

 

[g4racer]

Make Birth Control mandatory and retroactive. I have started the list for those to be retroactive and they are all politicians

 

[Care4all]

I didn't know we were arguing for the ability of the Federal Government, in particular, to limit reproductive rights. When did that become the OP?

Ohhhh, somewhere along the way...it morphed.....

the Left has always wanted to limit reproductive rights; it is in the history of the American Progressive movement



read a book

Then why is it.... that it is Conservative/libertarians on this very thread, calling for it and it is the liberals for the most part, fighting against it?

 

[bedowin62]

Ohhhh, somewhere along the way...it morphed.....

the Left has always wanted to limit reproductive rights; it is in the history of the American Progressive movement



read a book

Then why is it.... that it is Conservative/libertarians on this very thread, calling for it and it is the liberals for the most part, fighting against it?

like i said; read a book. it's in the history of Progressives

 

[Care4all]

the Left has always wanted to limit reproductive rights; it is in the history of the American Progressive movement



read a book

Then why is it.... that it is Conservative/libertarians on this very thread, calling for it and it is the liberals for the most part, fighting against it?

like i said; read a book. it's in the history of Progressives

Progressives or Liberals?

and isn't what is happening NOW with the conservatives on this board, more important than an era long past? Why are conservatives on this very thread calling for sterilization of the welfare women, and calling for their children to be taken away from them if they have more than 1 and they should be forced to take the birth control pill and CRAPOLA like that, coming from your right wing con friends?

Why haven't you CALLED THEM OUT on it? Do you agree with them?