Originally Posted by blaen99
(Post 845329)
My solution offends the hell out of everyone. Use implanted contraceptives.
However, you are using extremely faulty logic to go from Point A to Point B. "But food stamps!" is patently ridiculous as a reason for women to be having an out of wedlock birth. Another potential solution is: first off, gov't doesn't pay for you to have a baby, but secondly this: Each individual is entitled to one "financed" abortion. That is to say that the gov't will loan you money to have an abortion with the expectation that you pay all of it back. I'll even throw in the possibility that it be an interest free loan. A second option allows the mother the opportunity to have the gubment pay for half of the abortion, and she pays for/finances the other half of it. All half-paid abortions come with free, compulsory, permanent, irreversible, birth control. |
And that's the point you lose me at, broski.
Implanted contraceptives are reversible. I will grant you there are documented incidences of certain abuse of the system with respect to having children. My solution to it is to nip it in the bud (Get rid of their ability to abuse it via contraceptives), but is also fully reversible for when they are no longer receiving benefits from the system. Aka, if you want to have more kids? GTFO the system. But permanent and irreversible? I have a problem with that. |
im so confuses.
|
Originally Posted by blaen99
(Post 845324)
F. You are framing the argument in absolutes and trying to make it that a vastly small minority of the people (See: Welfare fraud incidence, which is incredibly low (<1%)), are the majority.
|
Originally Posted by Scrappy Jack
(Post 845408)
I'm not taking a side here, but I think you are misrepresenting his position a little bit. He said nothing about welfare fraud and only welfare recipients.
I contra-argued with the only hard data I have on hand (welfare fraud) for a problem that IMO is as overexaggerated as welfare fraud. However, I do not believe there is any way to get hard data on his claims. With that said, I think even you will agree that black women who have out of wedlock births for the "free handouts" are a vanishingly tiny minority in the system. |
But that's besides the point.
|
Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 845414)
But that's besides the point.
P.S. Welfare fraud, and what Foogy are complaining about are due to state, not federal laws normally, as the states set their own standards and administrate the system their own way. One great example? If you go on welfare in my state, you have to pay it back and only can be on it for so long. |
What do we use to decide who gets the implanted contraceptives?
|
Originally Posted by fooger03
(Post 845425)
What do we use to decide who gets the implanted contraceptives?
Like I said, IMO, if you want kids, GTFO the system. |
How do we deal with the middle/high school aged children whose parents are the recipients of the benefits? Do they received compulsory contraceptive implants too? Your idea has merit to it, but I want to close the loopholes.
|
Originally Posted by fooger03
(Post 845434)
How do we deal with the middle/high school aged children whose parents are the recipients of the benefits? Do they received compulsory contraceptive implants too? Your idea has merit to it, but I want to close the loopholes.
Note: By "they", I mean the children. |
How do we prevent the children from bearing kids themselves and becoming new recipients of government welfare? Or do we prevent it at all? Condoms in the classroom? Have free condoms historically reduced pregnancy?
|
Originally Posted by fooger03
(Post 845434)
How do we deal with the middle/high school aged children whose parents are the recipients of the benefits? Do they received compulsory contraceptive implants too? Your idea has merit to it, but I want to close the loopholes.
|
That's typically the impression i give the ladies.
|
I'm 100% for preventing pregnancy in people that shouldn't have kids, but I'm also 100% against the authoritarian thing. At least blaens experiment provides a choice.
|
how about this:
come in and get a vasectomy and we'll give you either A) an Escalade or B) free food for 10 years. good food too, not gubmint cheez. |
wtf, id get a hysterectomy
|
Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 845471)
wtf, id get a hysterectomy
|
Originally Posted by fooger03
(Post 845467)
I'm 100% for preventing pregnancy in people that shouldn't have kids, but I'm also 100% against the authoritarian thing. At least blaens experiment provides a choice.
Choice is required. I have no problem with giving someone the choice of benefits and contraceptives vs. no benefits. I do have a serious problem with giving someone no choice - i.e., forced sterilization as Joe mentioned. I have no problem with say, someone donating a kidney to someone who pays them $$$ - or part of a liver either. I have a major problem with criminalizing this behavior. This is also very similar to where I get so heated on the abortion or contraception topics on here. You don't ------- take someone's choice away. |
Originally Posted by blaen99
(Post 845477)
You have a vagina now, Brainy?
i'm the <1% that abuses the system. |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:17 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands