posted on May 22, 2005 08:59:52 PM
So they would get the love and nurturing they deserve in a home where the parents can't afford to care for them?
On the other hand some children's homes have done wonders for the children and they have turned out to productive members of society.
Seems some people still have that Dicken's idea of a home. Child Protective Services here in my area does a great job.
We have archaiac adoption laws and need to look at that also.
posted on May 22, 2005 09:15:24 PM
I agree that if parents can't provide for their own children, those child should be removed from the home until then can. I'm not talking about someone who loses a job...and is looking for another one and might need temporary aid/help/assistance. I'm speaking to those who have been on welfare for years.
IF we, as a Nation, would quit accepting this irresponsibility from able-bodied people who just refuse to take responsibility for themselves and those they bring into this world ...things would change VERY quickly, I believe.
If they were any kind of parents at all...and they knew IF they didn't provide for their children...those children would be removed from their home....I'd bet you'd all be surprised just how quickly the majority would get their rears in gear and take care of them.
But with the way it's set up now...they know they don't have too. Just be willing to live a much lower standard of life and the government will keep taking care of all their needs...BECAUSE they have children.
We're doing it all wrong. And to prove that point, just look back a couple of generations where people USED to take PRIDE in themselves...didn't want public aid. No longer....now it's 'the government' owes them.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on May 23, 2005 03:47:37 AM
Kraft-you statement is an oxymoron.
If your "pro choice" that means you're for abortion.If you are a "right to lifer" that means your against abortion-you cant be both.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Baseball season has started,but they have it all wrong.3 strikes and you're out,4 balls you walk.I can tell you right now a man with 4 balls could not possibly walk
posted on May 23, 2005 04:59:23 AM
No, classic, no one is FOR abortions.
Pro-choice means you believe a woman has a right to not have the government tell her what she can and can't do with her own body.
Would YOU like the government telling YOU what YOU should do with YOUR re-productive system or any other part of your body ?
You say,"If you are a "right to lifer" that means your against abortion-you cant be both."
I see the oxymoron as people who say they are against abortions but say they don't care if children already born die.
Or they are against abortions and suck up to people who think children dying is just "thinning the herd". ....one of the most uncivil , barbaric statements ever made in this chat room....an insult to the entire human race.....and the epitome of evil.
posted on May 23, 2005 05:27:46 AM
cf, it stands to reason that if you are pro-choice you advocate the means to facilitate said choice.
Thinning the herd goes with that scientific species theory, crowfarm, get a grip. Not everything people say or talk about is a big emotional cavity for your brawling and balling.
I see the oxymoron as people who say they are against abortions but say they don't care if children already born die...
..and what the hell does already born die mean>?????
..
..
[ edited by dblfugger9 on May 23, 2005 05:31 AM ]
posted on May 24, 2005 12:32:37 AM
Oh the weary arguments about welfare....let's ignore the ultra rich who seldom pay their fair share of taxes and jump all over those greedy welfare moms. After all , it's so much easier to look down your nose at those "below" you and so much scarier to take on those "above " you.
I especially like all the blanket statements from the "experts" who know just how EVERYONE ELSE should live.
I knew a woman who was married and had three children...not rich but making a living until her husband left...and please don't talk about dead beat dads and the law...you can only apply the law IF you can FIND the father.
She was forced to go on welfare but worked very hard, got a grant and went to school. Graduated and got a job....a feat in itself but she had three young children to care for and was battling diabetes and bi-polar disorder. She worked very hard , her "vacation" days were used only for staying home with a sick kid or two or three.
But child care costs proved too much and she couldn't pay her bills even with her job. So she went back on welfare and spent OUR money on luxuries like food, electricity, heat, rent, and of course, the ultimate luxury, bus fare (she never could afford a car).
She never had a decent house, no new clothes, hand me down appliances nobody else wanted, nobody to help with household chores. But she was the sweetest, funniest, cheerful, most kind hearted person I ever knew.
Now, I know exactly who will come in here mocking her efforts with ridiculous songs and "prove it" demands, and heartless "who cares", but that's to be expected from the less than brilliant.
I wonder how, with her great sense of humor and her experiences, she would view someone who thought that being called a name in a chat room was a great problem.
posted on May 24, 2005 12:40:39 AM
I forgot to add "the rest of the story" about this "lazy welfare mom"....she went back to work after the children got old enough to take care of themselves......she died from a heart problem walking to work.
posted on May 24, 2005 05:56:13 AM
Like the woman in your story, most welfare recipients are hard working responsible people trying to afford the high cost of living. The right likes to point out a few abusers of the system and leap to the conclusion that everyone on welfare is undeserving and irresponsible. Assuming that jobs are available, there is an increasing gap between earnings and needs. Basic needs such as health care, child care and housing are too costly for someone making low wages today.
posted on May 24, 2005 06:16:52 AM
Looks to me like people like washington and dblfugger9 worship one of their Gods the all mighty dollar more than life. That is way I find people like that PHONIES on issues like abortion.
posted on May 24, 2005 06:43:50 AM
Helen, in case you didnt know, there are multiple, multiple, factions of what is considered a belief in Christianity.
But seriously, somebody needs to tell big-peepa whats going on. He is slumming with colin before he figures out colin is way over his tolerance line,and then he has decided in his mind who I am because I agree with Linda and Libra on some cultural and social issues.
The man is bouncing off the wall with blind shots. Its embarassing.
posted on May 24, 2005 09:11:11 AM
Oh the weary arguments about welfare....let's ignore the ultra rich who seldom pay their fair share of taxes and jump all over those greedy welfare moms. After all , it's so much easier to look down your nose at those "below" you and so much scarier to take on those "above " you.
I especially like all the blanket statements from the "experts" who know just how EVERYONE ELSE should live.
I knew a woman who was married and had three children...not rich but making a living until her husband left...and please don't talk about dead beat dads and the law...you can only apply the law IF you can FIND the father.
She was forced to go on welfare but worked very hard, got a grant and went to school. Graduated and got a job....a feat in itself but she had three young children to care for and was battling diabetes and bi-polar disorder. She worked very hard , her "vacation" days were used only for staying home with a sick kid or two or three.
But child care costs proved too much and she couldn't pay her bills even with her job. So she went back on welfare and spent OUR money on luxuries like food, electricity, heat, rent, and of course, the ultimate luxury, bus fare (she never could afford a car).
She never had a decent house, no new clothes, hand me down appliances nobody else wanted, nobody to help with household chores. But she was the sweetest, funniest, cheerful, most kind hearted person I ever knew.
Now, I know exactly who will come in here mocking her efforts with ridiculous songs and "prove it" demands, and heartless "who cares", but that's to be expected from the less than brilliant.
I wonder how, with her great sense of humor and her experiences, she would view someone who thought that being called a name in a chat room was a great problem.
I forgot to add "the rest of the story" about this "lazy welfare mom"....she went back to work after the children got old enough to take care of themselves......she died from a heart problem walking to work.
posted on May 24, 2005 09:27:01 AMBut with the way it's set up now...they know they don't have too. Just be willing to live a much lower standard of life and the government will keep taking care of all their needs...BECAUSE they have children.
Hey Linda, on a serious note...Who or what is your perception of this said "they" because if its a majority of African Americans youre inclined to think about, I'd like to tell you I heard on the news the other day, the highest percentage of people on government assistance is young white females.
Not sure if you were aware of these stats or if you find them to be true?
posted on May 24, 2005 09:42:28 AM
[grinning here]
No, dbl, I've been aware for the past few years that more whites than blacks receive welfare. Race has nothing to do with it in my opinion.
This is a 'colorless' issue to me.
What is has to do with to ME, are those who make choices to not get educated...to have children out of wedlock...to not WANT to work...think they don't get paid enough for their total lack of qualifications...and feel the government OWES them. They get a LOT of different charity, paid for by our tax dollars. And I'm saying IF they can work...they should be working, and most could be. But when they continue to have children....just makes it harder for them to pull themselves up out of where their own decisions placed them.
Again...not speaking about people who have life-changing events happen to them...and need a helping hand for a year or two. Just the 'generations' of welfare receipients who HAVE decided the government should take care of them from cradle to the grave.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on May 24, 2005 09:48:49 AM
""""to not WANT to work...think they don't get paid enough for their total lack of qualifications...and feel the government OWES them. They get a LOT of different charity, paid for by our tax dollars. And I'm saying IF they can work...they should be working, and most could be""""
posted on May 24, 2005 11:49:11 AM
Well Linda, I am glad you knew that because I sometimes get the feeling others think its a racial cultural issue.
I agree with what you said about generations, but I also will note that new ones are being born. That the living wage has not kept pace with inflation. I was just reading an article this morning about a certain sect of people who for whatever reason are near homeless but even to live in a dive motel costs about 800.00 a month. How many hours would you have to work on 5.65 (or whatever it currently is) just to keep a roof over your head?
.
gremilins
.
[ edited by dblfugger9 on May 24, 2005 11:51 AM ]
