Welfare

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
Since the subjest of lowering taxes & the rich is so unpopular, how about the other end of the spectrum.

Should females on welfare be required to get Norplant?
Norplant implants are 6 matchstick size rods inserted into the upper arm. After you are given a local anesthetic, insertion takes about 7 to 10 minutes. Usually it does not hurt. Norplant implants give off very small amounts of a hormone much like the progesterone a woman produces during the last 2 weeks of each monthly cycle.
Since we're paying the bills, don't we have the right to say whether she adds to the populaltion, thus, increasing her benefits? As for those who say it's sexual bigotry, sorry, I didn't create the birthing process.
 
I think if you have two or more children already, then go on welfare, you should be required to have the implant. For women that have less, they should be able to have two kids.
 
Well, I think it is a good thing. If you are on welfare you should not be allowed to procreate because you have demonstrated you do you not even have the ability to take care of yourself (regardless if it is because of your own laziness or because of a situation you couldn't control). And because those that do work hard and make money pay the bills, we should most certainly have a say in it.
 
Nah, if all the wimens are fixed, we can only knock up rich chicks. :thumbup:
 
Jerrek said:
Well, I think it is a good thing. If you are on welfare you should not be allowed to procreate because you have demonstrated you do you not even have the ability to take care of yourself (regardless if it is because of your own laziness or because of a situation you couldn't control). And because those that do work hard and make money pay the bills, we should most certainly have a say in it.

now you have managed to offend me :mad:
 
It almost sounds good in theory but letting the government tell you whether you can have children is creepy stuff.
 
ugh.. where do i start...

perhaps starting at the thin end of the wedge...

"people on welfare should be prevented from having kids"... small step up to "people in overcrowded places should be prevented from having kids"... up to "people who didn't score 100 on an IQ test should be prevented from having kids" through "people who don't have blonde hair and blue eyes shouldn't have kids"... hey let's go all out and commit mass genocide... 6 million jews sound good to anyone??

melodramatic certainly, but how much of your liberty are you going to give away before men with sticks are knocking on your door at 4am to "dissapear" you??

and that's just one argument...

you're saying, in effect, that *everyone* who doesn't have a job is a blight on society, no good proles who should be dumped upon.

you know where the term "scapegoat" comes from? it was a goat that got driven out of villages carrying all the villager's sins for the year. it may be fashionable to blame single mothers on welfare for all the world's ills, but fuck, nobody *wants* to be poor.

i haven't even gone into other reasons; i could write an essay about it. i'm just touchy about this whole subject for personal reasons, it's one of the few areas i'll actually get riled up about.
 
nambit said:
"people on welfare should be prevented from having kids"... small step up to "people in overcrowded places should be prevented from having kids"... up to "people who didn't score 100 on an IQ test should be prevented from having kids" through "people who don't have blonde hair and blue eyes shouldn't have kids"... hey let's go all out and commit mass genocide... 6 million jews sound good to anyone??

No, you're missing an important part of the original argument. It's because the women are asking for and accepting government aid that they would become subject to the requirement. It's purely voluntary: you want the aid? You have to take the drug. That's a far cry from loading people onto cattle cars. Your slippery slope doesn't slide.

Having said that, I'm not in favor of the idea at all. The solution to the welfare problem is to end welfare, period. No one has a right to other people's money. If they want to ask me for the money via private charity and give me the option of saying no, then I will at least consider it. I would be more likely to contribute to a charity that required single women with children to have the implant, because I don't want to finance a child breeding factory.
 
Ardsgaine said:
The solution to the welfare problem is to end welfare, period. No one has a right to other people's money. If they want to ask me for the money via private charity and give me the option of saying no, then I will at least consider it. I would be more likely to contribute to a charity that required single women with children to have the implant, because I don't want to finance a child breeding factory.
:) EXACTLY!
 
ugh... i expect you're perfectly happy with the idea of poor people not being able to go to university because they can't pay as well...

i'm out of this thread
 
And how long do you think it'll be before honest, down on their luck people turn to crime just to survive.

I'd rather see a food stamps system in place. You get the necessities. Not the luxuries. For food you get no-name brands. Toilet paper, clothes, all noname. No cable, no Nintendo, no pets. No car, no gas. Tokens and coupons and stamps.
 
I'm not sure if Canada is different, but in the US food stamps can only buy food, no toiletries, no diapers, no soap. And you can buy any kind of food you want. $15.00 lb filet mignon, $25.00 lb stone crab claws. Slight flaw in the system, if you ask me.
 
Jerrek said:
If you are on welfare you should not be allowed to procreate because you have demonstrated you do you not even have the ability to take care of yourself (regardless if it is because of your own laziness or because of a situation you couldn't control).

My stepfather is a police constable in the South Yorkshire Police force. He is widely regarded as one of THE best police officers in the area, and has collected several awards for his services to the community. A couple of these are detailed below:

1. 01st October 1998 - he was searching one particular house for a suspect and found him in the loft area. This guy didn't want to go quietly so he escaped through the neighbours house (no idea how). My stepdad chased him until this guy crashed through a greenhouse. Even though he was inevitably arrested, my stepdad could have just left him and said "you get what you deserve", but he attended to his injuries, which later saved his life, as the ambulance was delayed. He was awarded a Superintendent's Commendation.

2.
Sheffield Star said:
A policeman who spent his weekends putting up Neighbourhood Watch warning signs has been commended by judges in a national awards scheme.

Ken Shentall's dedication won him a commendation in the national Neighbourhood Watch awards after judges were told of his success of his work in north Sheffield.

In the nine months he has worked as North West Liaison Officer, he has helped add 37 more groups to the scheme and set up a community Shop Watch in Chapeltown, equipped with two-way radios and detectors to identify forged cash.

PC Shentall even spent his days off erecting 190 Neighbourhood Watch street signs and organised a fun day for shoppers in Chapeltown to raise the cash for CCTV cameras.

His work is more remarkable because he has returned to work from a serious road accident.

Although he was allowed back to work for four hours a week on medical instruction immediately after his recovery, PC Shentall often defied the advice and put in a full week voluntarily. PC Shentall will receive his certificate at a special presentation to be held later in Sheffield.

He was also one of the first officers in the South Yorkshire Police force to be issued with CS gas. He is an advanced driver and before his accident (see below), was regarded as one of the best drivers in the South Yorkshire Police Traffic Unit.

On September 23rd 1999, my stepdad was on the night shift, and was in pursuit of joyriders along a wide section of road near to where I live.

My mum was woken at 6am by a phone call from his Inspector saying that he'd had an accident. The car which he was driving suffered an ABS failure and had caused it to lose control and hit a wall at 90 miles per hour. He called for an ambulance and was found to be sweeping the road of glass and other debris when the ambulance finally arrived.

His colleague in the passenger seat was treated for whiplash, whilst my stepdad has had to go through 3 years of operations on his back, the initial one of which nearly cost him his life. He has a titanium rod supporting his spine. As you can read above, he's now the North West liaison officer for national Neighbourhood Watch - a job which he's not particularly keen on, but cannot help. Add to this the fact that he's on Disability Living Allowance (a state benefit I believe), and he's not been the best person to live with for the past 3 years. Put simply, he cannot stand it.

My stepdad couldn't control these events. He was doing his job, as always, to the best of his ability. He wasn't looking after himself. He was putting others first, as always.

Would you care to respond, Jerrek? Or are you just going to let it go and start another gloriously unintelligent thread such as "so guys, would you mind another guy going down on you?"...

At least have a think about it.

EDIT: Before anyone starts going on about "oh, you're missing the original argument", I don't give a rats ass about the original argument - it's just the particular bit at the top of my post that really fucked me off.
 
Back
Top