View Poll Results: A license to have children?

Voters
122. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    31 25.41%
  • No

    85 69.67%
  • Undecided

    6 4.92%
Page 55 of 80 FirstFirst ... 545535455565765 ... LastLast
Results 541 to 550 of 792

Thread: A license to have children [W:81]

  1. #541
    Sage
    minnie616's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    14,950

    Re: A license to have children [W:81]

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL View Post
    Another BIG difference here Minnie is that those who are NOT on welfare are paying for and providing for their OWN. Those who are collecting welfare are not paying for and providing for their own. They are relying on taxpayers for that.

    Where is the logic to allowing people who are collecting public services to continue to have children that they cannot afford to support? It is NOT unreasonable to ask that those people stop procreating while they are receiving services until they can provide for their own.
    It is NOT unreasonable to ask peopleto stop procreating while they are receiving services until they can provide for their own

    However , making it mandatory is taking away thier right to privacy.
    When it comes to matters of reproduce health, Politicians and the religious dogma of another faith should never interfere with religious liberty of an individual or her faith.

  2. #542
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Goldsboro,PA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,596
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: A license to have children [W:81]

    Quote Originally Posted by Josie View Post
    We already have laws on child neglect. Children are taken away from their parents in those cases. Being on welfare isn't child abuse.
    Obviously, the "child protect" laws need to be improved.

  3. #543
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Goldsboro,PA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,596
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: A license to have children [W:81]

    Quote Originally Posted by minnie616 View Post
    It is NOT unreasonable to ask peopleto stop procreating while they are receiving services until they can provide for their own

    However , making it mandatory is taking away their right to privacy.
    Then, which takes precedence ?
    The tax payers money
    The welfare of children
    Or "privacy".
    IMO, one's "privacy" is out the window when they are living off government dole..

  4. #544
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,792

    Re: A license to have children [W:81]

    Quote Originally Posted by minnie616 View Post
    It is NOT unreasonable to ask peopleto stop procreating while they are receiving services until they can provide for their own

    However , making it mandatory is taking away thier right to privacy.
    If they want privacy, they should get jobs. So long as I, as a taxpayer, am paying their way, I get a say in what they do.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  5. #545
    Pontificator
    iliveonramen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    On a Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    9,207

    Re: A license to have children [W:81]

    Quote Originally Posted by Alyssa View Post
    Should people be required to qualify and obtain a license to have children? If so, what should be the standards to qualify and why?

    People need a license to drive, hunt, fish, etc and society is inundated with government regulations as it is, and yet people can breed freely without regard for their ability to provide for their children and regardless of genetic health. Personally, I think it would be disastrous to give the government control over reproduction, especially considering the lousy job it does with everything else. And yet, it is illogical for unhealthy and/or poverty stricken people to breed.
    If instituted would probably be a line create that would potentially make me think that a revolt is in order.
    “Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.” John Maynard Keynes

  6. #546
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Where I am now
    Last Seen
    09-11-17 @ 03:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,386

    Re: A license to have children [W:81]

    What is to stop someone who is on welfare - but wants a baby - from going off welfare, having the baby and then going back on it?

    And what is to stop her doing this over and over again?

    Or are you people actually forcing women to be permanently sterilized to be eligible for welfare?

  7. #547
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    03-11-13 @ 07:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    420

    Re: A license to have children [W:81]

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    If they want privacy, they should get jobs. So long as I, as a taxpayer, am paying their way, I get a say in what they do.
    Actually, no you dont. Im also a taxpayer or rather my husband is now, You are not reaching into your pockets and handing me money... in fact for the most part China is! You're not paying a dime towards welfare in all likelihood. You probably paid for some nonsensical mealworm experiment. Who are you to control anything pertaining to my life, especially anything pertaining to my health or natural rights? BC can have horrible side effects. Depo causes blood clots, osteoporosis and BMD loss, migraines and can increase breast cancer risks. IUDs can cause cervical cancer and become imbeded i the uterus requiring surgery. Most progesterone BC in pill form cause risls for blood clots, pulmonary and other embolisms, problems with the liver and kidneys, along with the ever present risk of allergic reaction and life threatening ectopic pregnancies. If taken too long into the first trimester some raise risks of chromosomal abnormalities in the fetus. And tubal ligation is much more dangerous than a vasectomy.

    Why should whatever minute contribution your personal taxes might make to welfare funding give you any right to control or coerce me into possible health risks?

  8. #548
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Gina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    31,924

    Re: A license to have children [W:81]

    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    This person should be OK to have kids, eh?



    I lot of liberals don't seem to care if all the welfare help out there enables people to devote more resources toward their drug habit. To my mind, welfare does at least as much harm to active addicts as this charity, except this charity prevents harm in the process as well, whereas welfare doesn't.

    How would you feel if you saw a mother injecting its baby with heroin or force-feeding it alcohol? Would that mother's reproductive rights be more important than the baby's right not to have that harm done it it?



    I know your view. Reproduction is sacrosanct. FASD, substance-induced static encephalopathy, babies born addicted to drugs, etc. are all less important than people's fertility.

    I sincerely hope Project Prevention is promulgated and replicated all over the world. I plan to donate.
    We cannot prejudge what a person will do. It's been said many times in this thread, being on welfare is not a crime. Taking advantage, exploiting a person's desperation is immoral.

    The mother that injects drugs, feeds a baby alcohol or in any way harms the child is going to jail for abuse. They've committed a crime and should be punished.

    What you are refusing to acknowledge is the right for us not to have the government assault our bodies and how dangerous a precedent that sets. You think you and yours would always be in a "protected" class so it's good and proper to target other classes of people you pre-judge to be unworthy with a permanent answer to a problem not all welfare recipients will have. Especially in these times, when millions of our fellows lost jobs and homes and lives they worked diligently to earn and now must count on welfare until they can find a way to rebuild what they lost.

  9. #549
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Gina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    31,924

    Re: A license to have children [W:81]

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL View Post
    Welfare as it is now has been tried and abused as well. Time for a different tactic.
    The abuse of taxpayer's money cannot be considered equal to the abuse of of our most vulnerable citizens, Chris. It just can't.

    While I agree we need to keep trying to find new and better solutions to poverty, allowing the government this power over our bodies is not the answer.

  10. #550
    Sage
    minnie616's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    14,950

    Re: A license to have children [W:81]

    Quote Originally Posted by earthworm View Post
    Then, which takes precedence ?
    The tax payers money
    The welfare of children
    Or "privacy".
    IMO, one's "privacy" is out the window when they are living off government dole..
    I understand your opinion but opinion aside a mandate against a person's privacy will not hold up in court.

    We have the right to privacy, which was extrapolated from language in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
    Here are three well known cases which set the" privacy" precedent .
    Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965),the Eisenstadt v. Baird case(1972) ,
    and in Roe v. Wade (1973).
    When it comes to matters of reproduce health, Politicians and the religious dogma of another faith should never interfere with religious liberty of an individual or her faith.

Page 55 of 80 FirstFirst ... 545535455565765 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •