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 58 of 80 FirstFirst ... 848565758596068 ... LastLast
Results 571 to 580 of 792

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

  1. #571
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,180

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

    Quote Originally Posted by minnie616 View Post
    Long term Birth control options are much more expensive than pills or condoms.
    $700-$800 one time for about 5 years for long term BC vs. $10-$50 a month for BC pills.
    $700-$800 for a 5-year long solution? That's actually cheaper if pills are more than $13/mo.

    Project Prevention, which I've referenced several times in the thread, also offers cash for long-term birth control.

  2. #572
    Pontificator
    iliveonramen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    On a Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:34 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    9,158

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

    Weird...never thought I'd see so many "Libertarians" supporting a policy that would intrude on the most fundamental "natural rights" a person has.
    “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

  3. #573
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,180

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

    Quote Originally Posted by iliveonramen View Post
    Weird...never thought I'd see so many "Libertarians" supporting a policy that would intrude on the most fundamental "natural rights" a person has.
    Haha, I hear ya. Earlier in the thread I acknowledged this is one of my least libertarian stances.

    The flip side is that I never thought I'd see so many liberals objecting to the prevention of unwanted pregnancies and intergenerational poverty cycles. Makes it seem like they don't want to end the cycle of poverty, but rather preserve it by letting it breed and continuing to feed it.

  4. #574
    Pontificator
    iliveonramen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    On a Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:34 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    9,158

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    Haha, I hear ya. Earlier in the thread I acknowledged this is one of my least libertarian stances.

    The flip side is that I never thought I'd see so many liberals objecting to the prevention of unwanted pregnancies and intergenerational poverty cycles. Makes it seem like they don't want to end the cycle of poverty, but rather preserve it by letting it breed and continuing to feed it.
    I think there are limits to what route you go to in order to prevent intergenerational poverty. Striping away reproductive rights is one of those things.
    “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

  5. #575
    Sage
    minnie616's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    14,942

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    Haha, I hear ya. Earlier in the thread I acknowledged this is one of my least libertarian stances.

    The flip side is that I never thought I'd see so many liberals objecting to the prevention of unwanted pregnancies and intergenerational poverty cycles. Makes it seem like they don't want to end the cycle of poverty, but rather preserve it by letting it breed and continuing to feed it.
    I am not rejecting preventing unwanted pregnancies.
    I reject mandating that welfare recipients be sterilized or use long term BC.
    That would be taking away their rights 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.

  6. #576
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,180

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

    Quote Originally Posted by iliveonramen View Post
    I think there are limits to what route you go to in order to prevent intergenerational poverty. Striping away reproductive rights is one of those things.
    All rights have limits and no right is unconditional. As the general rule goes, the limits to one person's rights ends where another's begins. To hold reproductive rights as absolutely sacrosanct is to neglect the right of the developing baby in some cases. As a society we are pretty much ignoring this issue.

    Quote Originally Posted by minnie616 View Post
    I am not rejecting preventing unwanted pregnancies. I reject mandating that welfare recipients be sterilized or use long term BC. That would be taking away their rights to privacy.
    I think people naturally are losing rights/autonomy when they sign up for benefits. It's not always as drastic/controversial as a surgical procedure (for example), but once people depend on society's redistribution to make ends meet, they have stepped onto the slippery slope toward the loss of privacy rights and various other rights. For example, let's say I've demonstrated the case that I direly need money for food, but then I'm seen purchasing liquor and cigarettes all the time. Society, or some government agency or whatever, is eventually going to object and get all up in my business for that. It would be seen as abusing the system. Whereas if I was not accepting redistribution it would not be the slightest bit of anyone's damn business whether I wanted to blow my cash on liquor and cigarettes or not.

    It's the disturbing reality of the welfare state that beneficiaries invariably end up losing the same types of freedom that people in a freer society will enjoy. The societal safety net is always full of hidden little thorns, basically.

  7. #577
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,689

    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.
    Daniel Patrick Moynihan while serving in the Nixon administration was approached by his aide in regard to the failures of welfare policy. The aide said, "These policies are doing damage to the population in much the same way as it is helping. We should scrap the program entirely." Moynihan, who had been studying welfare policy for decades as a sociologist, and was well aware of the problems surrounding welfare, looked up at his young aide and said one word: "Oh?"
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

  8. #578
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    07-16-14 @ 01:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    47,571

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

    Quote Originally Posted by minnie616 View Post
    I am not rejecting preventing unwanted pregnancies.
    I reject mandating that welfare recipients be sterilized or use long term BC.
    That would be taking away their rights to privacy.
    Did you know that when you sign up for welfare benefits that you HAVE to give the name (or names!) of the biological father (or potential fathers) of your child/children. That means that if you don't know who the father of your child is because you slept with multiple partners, you are expected to give the names of each and every person you had sexual intercourse with who could possibly be the father. Of course, a lot of girls probably lie and say they can't remember because they were too drunk or whatever (or actually were too drunk?).

    However, that has to be the BIGGEST invasion of privacy, and that is something that is REQUIRED of you in order to receive services. Long-term birth control requirement would certainly not be any more of an invasion of privacy. When you collect taxpayer monies, you are just going to have to sacrifice a little bit. The taxpayers do make the sacrifices afterall.

  9. #579
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    07-16-14 @ 01:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    47,571

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

    Also, when you are collecting governmental services, the government has a right to know everything about your financial and your living situation, including any assets you might have. EVERYTHING!

  10. #580
    Sage
    minnie616's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    14,942

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL View Post
    Did you know that when you sign up for welfare benefits that you HAVE to give the name (or names!) of the biological father (or potential fathers) of your child/children. That means that if you don't know who the father of your child is because you slept with multiple partners, you are expected to give the names of each and every person you had sexual intercourse with who could possibly be the father. Of course, a lot of girls probably lie and say they can't remember because they were too drunk or whatever (or actually were too drunk?).

    However, that has to be the BIGGEST invasion of privacy, and that is something that is REQUIRED of you in order to receive services. Long-term birth control requirement would certainly not be any more of an invasion of privacy. When you collect taxpayer monies, you are just going to have to sacrifice a little bit. The taxpayers do make the sacrifices afterall.
    You are misunderstanding the rights to privacy thewhich is the peoples right to privacy about reproductive rights . The "privacy" precedent was set back in 1965 in the case Griswold v. Connecticut, That case nullified laws restricting a couples' right to be counseled about the use of contraceptives.
    Last edited by minnie616; 02-26-13 at 04:31 PM.
    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 58 of 80 FirstFirst ... 848565758596068 ... 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
  •