I Got 15 Kids & 3 Babydaddys-SOMEONE'S GOTTA PAY FOR ME & MY KIDS!!!

[R8ers]

[HonestChieffan]

Multi generation welfare folk. This is where we are

[RNR]

Originally Posted by HonestChieffan

Multi generation welfare folk. This is where we are

It is the biggest scam going. The shitbags who make themselves feel better by putting on blinders and ignore this fact are the problem with this country. It is a permanent problem that was intended to be a solution temporary problem~

[lewdog]

Originally Posted by Bump

using birth control is a one way ticket to HELL!!!

Yea that and abortion, but I am for both so consider my ticket punched!

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

Well, no one from Raider Nation could foot the bill much less have enough to order from the value menu, so...

[Rain Man]

So I have a question. What do we as a society do about these kids? I see only three options:

1. If the woman can't provide food and shelter for them, take them away and do the foster home thing or some sort of state home for the Children Of The Stupid.

2. Give them (and her) food and shelter at taxpayer cost, recognizing that we're subsidizing stupidity.

3. Step out of it, and let Mr. Darwin handle the kids.

If someone has a fourth option, feel free to offer it. But which of these options would you pick?

In this particular case, Option 1 seems good. You don't want those kids growing up with that woman as an example. But then you have to draw a line. What if she's stupid and irresponsible and has 1 kid? What if she's caring and unlucky and has 9 kids?

Philosophically, I like Option 3. But I'm not sure if Option 3 produces 15 petty thieves and prison residents in the long run.

Is #2 really the best option? And can you do it under the condition that she gets sterilized?

[PunkinDrublic]

Add in a scary black panther guy at the polling place, a phony voter fraud paranoia and you've hit the trifecta of Republican bogey men.

[HonestChieffan]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

So I have a question. What do we as a society do about these kids? I see only three options:

1. If the woman can't provide food and shelter for them, take them away and do the foster home thing or some sort of state home for the Children Of The Stupid.

2. Give them (and her) food and shelter at taxpayer cost, recognizing that we're subsidizing stupidity.

3. Step out of it, and let Mr. Darwin handle the kids.

If someone has a fourth option, feel free to offer it. But which of these options would you pick?

In this particular case, Option 1 seems good. You don't want those kids growing up with that woman as an example. But then you have to draw a line. What if she's stupid and irresponsible and has 1 kid? What if she's caring and unlucky and has 9 kids?

Philosophically, I like Option 3. But I'm not sure if Option 3 produces 15 petty thieves and prison residents in the long run.

Is #2 really the best option? And can you do it under the condition that she gets sterilized?

Im coming around to abortion. The more I know abot the abortees the more I begin to see the benefit

[Brock]

Originally Posted by HonestChieffan

Im coming around to abortion. The more I know abot the abortees the more I begin to see the benefit

What took you so long?

[HonestChieffan]

Originally Posted by Brock

What took you so long?

I guess i still oppose killing little kids. Im not there yet
Must be a dad thing. A child is a gift. Mine is anyway. We dont always agree but I love him unconditionally. Im torn between my view and the rational view that maybe we as a countey and society are better off with open free abortions. But i have reservations that we should not do such a horrible act.

Babies are special and every baby has the potential for amazing things. Is it rational to kill them before the potential expresses itself?

[Brock]

Originally Posted by HonestChieffan

I guess i still oppose killing little kids. Im not there yet
Must be a dad thing. A child is a gift. Mine is anyway. We dont always agree but I love him unconditionally. Im torn between my view and the rational view that maybe we as a countey and society are better off with open free abortions. But i have reservations that we should not do such a horrible act.

Babies are special and every baby has the potential for amazing things. Is it rational to kill them before the potential expresses itself?

Is it rational to keep paying and paying and paying for worthless generation after worthless generation of people who will never be anything but a burden for the rest of us?

"Babies are special". Pfft. If you really think that, you'd quit bitching about freeloaders.

[Rain Man]

Ah, good point that abortion is a fourth option in my scenarios. But how do you do it? Is it free for any woman who wants, or covered under insurance or whatever? Is it counseled among women who clearly don't have the capacity to support the child (and who makes that judgment)? I don't think you can mandate it, so that's out.

Do you pay women to get an abortion if they clearly can't support the child? I think you'd have a tough time getting that passed.

The other issue is that a lot of women have a child when they can't afford it, but within a few years they settle down and move out of poverty. So it would be hard to make any kind of judgment based on current situation.

I guess the only real options in this regard would be to either subsidize with counseling, counsel it without subsidizing, or just allow it and let women decide themselves.

[lewdog]

Originally Posted by Brock

Is it rational to keep paying and paying and paying for worthless generation after worthless generation of people who will never be anything but a burden for the rest of us?

"Babies are special". Pfft. If you really think that, you'd quit bitching about freeloaders.

Yup, all for abortion for unwanted or soon to be neglected children of unfit mothers.

If you think adoption and foster care is a good option, I strongly disagree. Kids raised in foster care are almost twice as likely to develop psychological and mental health issues. And I find it worse to bring a child into this world, someday knowing it was not wanted, than to abort one before it develops the ability to define that rationalization.

[nstygma]

I feel that limiting abortions to those of a pre-birth status is a discriminatory practice.

[ThaVirus]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

So I have a question. What do we as a society do about these kids? I see only three options:

1. If the woman can't provide food and shelter for them, take them away and do the foster home thing or some sort of state home for the Children Of The Stupid.

2. Give them (and her) food and shelter at taxpayer cost, recognizing that we're subsidizing stupidity.

3. Step out of it, and let Mr. Darwin handle the kids.

If someone has a fourth option, feel free to offer it. But which of these options would you pick?

In this particular case, Option 1 seems good. You don't want those kids growing up with that woman as an example. But then you have to draw a line. What if she's stupid and irresponsible and has 1 kid? What if she's caring and unlucky and has 9 kids?

Philosophically, I like Option 3. But I'm not sure if Option 3 produces 15 petty thieves and prison residents in the long run.

Is #2 really the best option? And can you do it under the condition that she gets sterilized?

These are some good questions here..

1. You take all of the children away from their mother and each other. They grow up in a more stable environment, but psychologically I think you do more harm than good.

2. You reward these types of women for being whores.

3. You get to keep a few more dollars each paycheck, but they'll become your problem when they're on the corner begging you for change, breaking into your car, or robbing you at gun point.

For the record, I don't like any of these options, but I can't help but judge the people that complain about "going to work everyday to support Shaniqua and her 4 kids". I know they work hard for their money, but the most important thing here is the children, which I think (hopefully) a lot of people forget about. It's either that or they just don't care, which would be a sad reflection on your character. Nobody asked for these women to deem themselves the breeders of society and these children certainly didn't ask to be born into that type of situation. Sadly, when they grow up like that, they end up like that.

Originally Posted by Rain Man

Ah, good point that abortion is a fourth option in my scenarios. But how do you do it? Is it free for any woman who wants, or covered under insurance or whatever? Is it counseled among women who clearly don't have the capacity to support the child (and who makes that judgment)? I don't think you can mandate it, so that's out.

Do you pay women to get an abortion if they clearly can't support the child? I think you'd have a tough time getting that passed.

The other issue is that a lot of women have a child when they can't afford it, but within a few years they settle down and move out of poverty. So it would be hard to make any kind of judgment based on current situation.

I guess the only real options in this regard would be to either subsidize with counseling, counsel it without subsidizing, or just allow it and let women decide themselves.

Some more good questions..

Who ****ing knows?

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by ThaVirus

Who ****ing knows?

That's kind of where I end up. It's really easy to criticize every option. Every option is terribly flawed. But then what do you actually do about it? I'm at a loss.

It does seem like there's some sort of trade that's possible of food and shelter for Norplant or whatever the latest version is called. That might help to avoid the situation going forward, but it doesn't help the kids who are already around.