Do you thing limits should be applied to welfare and food stamp receipients?

by Robert Posted 2012/04/15 17:14:11

Related Topics: Pregnant, Food, Sex, Pregnancy, Time, Welfare, Contraception, Fair, Feeding, Taxpayer, House

50 votes
Read all 122 opinions
View Results and Demographics + View Demographics

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	YES	27 votes	54%
	NO	13 votes	26%
	Undecided	10 votes	20%

It's my belief that limits should be set. I think you should only be allowed 2 children. How may times does someone have to get pregnant before she realizes that sex without the use of contraception causes pregnancy. I feel that 2 is more that enough children for this message to be learned. It's just not fair for taxpayers to keep feeding a house full of children that could have been avoided by using some plain and simple common since.

Add a comment above

Deliciously Melicious 2012/04/15 18:34:26 (edited)

NO

+16
This is a slippery slope. First you legislate how many children a person on welfare can have, then it because based on financials, then race, then sexuality. Where does it end? Who decides? What about religious beliefs? Do you think abortion and infantcide will decrease or increase?

China has laws like these, is that what you want?

>> See Replies

Phillip... to Bearish 2012/04/16 00:48:23
Bearish to Phillip... 2012/04/16 01:00:59

+1
shes a lib, Nuff said

reply
Phillip... to Bearish 2012/04/16 01:27:24
Bearish to Phillip... 2012/04/16 10:52:46

I think it may be an issue of not being able to admit they made a mistake?

reply
Phillip... to Bearish 2012/04/16 12:46:11
Bearish to Phillip... 2012/04/16 15:50:45

+1
Generally I try to keep my mouth shut unless I'm sure about the subject.. But when I'm wrong, I will be the 1st to admit it

reply
Phillip... to Bearish 2012/04/17 00:24:17
Cat 1017 2012/04/15 20:09:49 (edited)

YES

+2
There already IS.....

reply
John Galt jr or Ron/jon 2012/04/15 18:59:19 (edited)

NO

+7
no that's what they do in china

and I might be willing to listen to your opinion if you had a better grasp of the english language

reply
Robert to John Ga... 2012/04/16 00:47:08

+2
Double check your replies for errors before commenting on someone elses english. The first word of any sentence should be capitalized sir.

reply
Linnster to Robert 2012/04/16 03:57:49

+1
Well, there should be an apostrophe in "else's," English deserves a capital "E," and I'm pretty sure there should be a comma before "sir." Otherwise, you did well.

reply
Robert to Linnster 2012/04/16 04:40:09

+2
lol

reply
Linnster to Robert 2012/04/16 11:30:00

I'm sorry - I couldn't resist. :))) Have a great day, Robert.

reply
John Ga... to Robert 2012/04/23 22:49:01

and if I am disabled and only have one hand to type with?

reply
Deliciously Melicious 2012/04/15 18:34:26 (edited)

NO

+16
This is a slippery slope. First you legislate how many children a person on welfare can have, then it because based on financials, then race, then sexuality. Where does it end? Who decides? What about religious beliefs? Do you think abortion and infantcide will decrease or increase?

China has laws like these, is that what you want?

reply
oldlady to Delicio... 2012/04/15 18:44:11

+4
Does China still kill girls a birth? Maybe he would be happy if we did the same (((shivers))).

reply
Delicio... to oldlady 2012/04/15 18:45:58

+8
China and India both. :(

reply
oldlady to Delicio... 2012/04/15 18:57:38

+3
:-(

reply
Bearish to oldlady 2012/04/15 23:46:30

+2
But its OK for you Libs to murder millions of babies, As long as its called abortion Not murder? You guys make China seem humane

reply
Delicio... to Bearish 2012/04/16 01:10:02

+9
You just showed your ignorance. "You guys make China seem humane." Rrrriiiiighht. Perhaps you should do your home work and you won't look so foolish.

China has approximately 13 million abortions a year, versus 1.2 million abortions in the United States.

http://articles.cnn.com/2009-...

http://www.christianpost.com/...

reply
Bearish to Delicio... 2012/04/16 01:18:16

OH for Gods sake, I was trying to make a point not a calculation.. OK OK so you only killed1.2 million human beings.. I'm sorry you are not as much a murderer as those in China.. You feel better now? Do you think those 1.2 MILLION babies care if your feelings were hurt?
BTW.. Do the math as far as %s by population?? Those numbers get a lot closer.. You libs crack me up... I'm ignorant because I don't believe in the killing of children.. Thank you God, I'm ignorant

reply
Delicio... to Bearish 2012/04/16 01:24:05

+9
My feelings weren't hurt at all.

I was merely pointing out the facts to you. You are the one who seems quite upset.

reply
Feria~T... to Delicio... 2012/04/16 02:48:04

+8
I love you he said it like you personally killed all those fetus'. Watch out Mel, they'll be coming for ya!

reply
Delicio... to Feria~T... 2012/04/16 02:50:36

+7
I know right? Little does he know, eh? Oh and the "do your math" argument doesn't work so well either.

Let 'em come, I have Feria the BAMF zombie slayer on my side. Together we shall take them down!!!

reply
Feria~T... to Delicio... 2012/04/16 03:04:56

+7
LMAO! True that!

WOOT!

reply
*Mahoga... to Bearish 2012/04/16 04:38:09

+6
The difference is most are forced in China with the one child ruling.

reply
Melizmatic to Delicio... 2012/04/15 19:52:12

+7
Agreed.

reply
Bearish to Delicio... 2012/04/15 23:45:20

+2
Its clear that Robert was saying that only 2 children should be considered when evaluating the amount paid to a welfare recipient.. I don't think he is implying in any way the killing of any children beyond 2 as they do in China..

reply
Delicio... to Bearish 2012/04/16 00:32:48

+6
No? Isn't that how it starts. "Oh crap! I'm pregnant with child #3, I cannot afford it, and I wont get any more assistance... guess I should get rid of it."

Like I said. Slippery slope.

reply
Bearish to Delicio... 2012/04/16 00:40:43

+1
What I'm saying is there are woman (with the mans blessing) who intentionally get pregnant for the additional bennies.. Then they use those very benefits for illegal activities.. It makes me sick.. Maybe if the incentive was gone there would be less
OH CRAPS out there
There are plenty of people looking to adopt.. There is no need to "get rid of it" as you say.. That is another issue society has, Everything is disposable, Even a life

reply
Delicio... to Bearish 2012/04/16 00:42:37

+8
There are plenty of people looking to adopt? Really? If this is true, then why are their so many children lingering and failing in foster care. Why are they not being adopted?

reply
Bearish to Delicio... 2012/04/16 01:04:21

+2
The government has made it next to imposible to get through the red tape..
That is the reason people are going out of country..

So rather than have a kid in foster care we should "Get rid of IT"

reply
Delicio... to Bearish 2012/04/16 01:06:18

+8
Funny. I know several couples who adopted from the Foster system, far faster than adopting a baby. Red Tape wasn't much of a problem.

reply
Ves~Sai... to Bearish 2012/04/16 05:17:30

+3
There are not enough people to accommodate all the children there are in the country/ let alone world, whom have no homes/ in foster care. Yes people who can/want/and will adopt should, but there will never be enough parents vs kids, there are more babies/children out there than any couple could adopt to make up for all those in foster care.

reply
Robert to Bearish 2012/04/16 00:51:39

+1
TY, you are correct. I don't know where someone got the aborting babies idea. In fact I'm pro-life.

reply
Delicio... to Robert 2012/04/16 01:06:37

+7
Who said you weren't pro-life?

reply
Bearish to Robert 2012/04/16 01:09:02

+2
NP The assumptions they made as to the motive of your question are Ridiculous..
It was pretty obvious what you were asking..
*Scratching my head* Some people just enjoy twisting the words of others

reply
Elaine to Delicio... 2012/04/16 02:15:13

This has nothing to do with the question.

reply
Delicio... to Elaine 2012/04/16 02:29:34

+7
What has nothing to do with the question? Arrows fall weird, not sure which comment you are referring to.

reply
Panloker 2012/04/15 18:12:01

YES

+2
I don't know why anyone in their right mind would wanna continue having children while living off the system. I know in inner cities there are women with 5, 6 or more children, often different fathers each who continue collecting welfare benefits. It is not right that they play the system and these children will often follow the same path because that is what they are taught. I have heard of people deliberately getting pregnant to collect benefits. Children are not meant to be meal tickets!! What a way to grow up :(

reply