41 Percent of Pregnancies in New York City Are Aborted

daisypusher wrote: Then, why do those child support queens stay home, have more babies and collect the checks?

This reminds me of a joke. Answer to the above question: Global Warming.

daisypusher wrote: Then, why do those child support queens stay home, have more babies and collect the checks?

A little lesson in economics...obviously you have never been poor with kids at home and no visible means of support. Many of these women are uneducated or undereducated.......any job they could get would not pay enough to even cover their child care much less a roof over their heads plus food. An education is beyond their reach, even if they got 100% of their tuition paid, again the child care costs would be prohibitive. It's a viscious circle, and it is much easier for those who live comfortably to think of them as lazy leaches off of our society than to take a good hard look at how they got where they are and what it would take to get them out. Think for a minute, will that welfare cover birth control pills? probably not, most don't have the money for a doctors visit much less medicine, and what they do have goes to the kids.

Sure, there are those who scam the system, who are lazy and don't want to work (I know a few middle and upper class folks who feel the same) but I would wager the majority would be happy to have a means to make an honest living and support themselves and their kids.....it just isn't very likely the way our society is set up. The few success stories are the exception rather than the rule.

But.....back to the original question, I can think of no logical progression from women wishing to educate and raise their children the best way possible, by being home when they are little and welfare moms. that just doesn't compute.

neptunechimney wrote:

daisypusher wrote:

archer wrote: viking, since many women raise their children alone (and some men) I think financial responsibility is already equally divided. If a woman stays home to raise her children while the man works, is she not contributing at least 50% to those children? How many women give up the raising of children vs the number of men who do?

hmmmmm...I'm not sure I stated that well. I have no statistics but, I would surmise that there are more households with children that have either just a mother or a mother and father, than just a father. So women are indeed taking responsibility for the cost of raising children.

Truly, archer, thinking like that is what drives the new welfare mom model. Have as many children with multiple fathers (you collect more that way), stay at home (you would have anyway if married) and have the government collect the paycheck. And then this woman trains the next generation of unwed child support queens. But, no problem - those men should know better and keep it in their pants.

That reminds me of a joke.
A woman walks into the downtown welfare office, trailed by 15 kids.

'WOW,' the social worker exclaims, 'are they all yours?"

'Yep, they are all mine,' the flustered momma sighs, having heard that question a thousand times before.

She says, 'Sit down Leroy.' All the children rush to find seats.

'Well,' says the social worker, 'then you must be here to sign up. I'llneed all your children's names.'

'Well, to keep it simple, the boys are all named Leroy and the girlsare all named Leighroy.'

In disbelief, the case worker says, 'Are you serious? They're ALLnamed Leroy?'

Their momma replied, 'Well, yes-it makes it easier. When it's time to get them out of bed and ready for school, I yell, 'Leroy!' An' when it's time for dinner, I just yell 'Leroy!' An they all comes a runnin.

An' if I need to stop the kid who's running into the street, I just yell Leroy' and all of them stop. It's the smartest idea I ever had, namin' them all Leroy.'

The social worker thinks this over for a bit, then wrinkles herforehead and says tentatively, 'But what if you just want ONE kid tocome, and not the whole bunch?'

'Then I call them by their last names.'


"

LOL!

archer wrote:

daisypusher wrote: Then, why do those child support queens stay home, have more babies and collect the checks?

A little lesson in economics...obviously you have never been poor with kids at home and no visible means of support. Many of these women are uneducated or undereducated.......any job they could get would not pay enough to even cover their child care much less a roof over their heads plus food. An education is beyond their reach, even if they got 100% of their tuition paid, again the child care costs would be prohibitive. It's a viscious circle, and it is much easier for those who live comfortably to think of them as lazy leaches off of our society than to take a good hard look at how they got where they are and what it would take to get them out. Think for a minute, will that welfare cover birth control pills? probably not, most don't have the money for a doctors visit much less medicine, and what they do have goes to the kids.

Sure, there are those who scam the system, who are lazy and don't want to work (I know a few middle and upper class folks who feel the same) but I would wager the majority would be happy to have a means to make an honest living and support themselves and their kids.....it just isn't very likely the way our society is set up. The few success stories are the exception rather than the rule.

But.....back to the original question, I can think of no logical progression from women wishing to educate and raise their children the best way possible, by being home when they are little and welfare moms. that just doesn't compute.

Well said!

Sunshine Girl wrote:

Whats Up wrote: So major bean, you are saying that any man not wearing a condom wants to reproduce. Women then can stop having abortions because the man that didn't wear a condom will raise that child.
rofllol

Excellent point!

That sort of stupid, irresponsible thinking results in bastards and abortions; just what we have been talkiing about. Women need to think more clearly. Sloppy thinking is not in their best interest and results in raising a bastard or having scars across their bellies.

It seems that women do not know that reproductive choice is applied before conception and before coitus.

Like I said... Required vasectomies for all unmarried males would go a long way to solving the problem. Then we can guarantee "reproductive choice" for a huge segment of the population...

What ever happened to individual responsibility? It sounds as if the age old ploy of women blaming men for their plight is continuing. I thought that several decades ago women wanted to determine their own destinies, be their own person, control their reproductive rights.

Come on! Let's see some of that personal responsibility expressed here by the liberated women. Step up to the plate.

major bean wrote: What ever happened to individual responsibility? It sounds as if the age old accusation of women blaming men for their plight is continuing. I thought that several decades ago women wanted to determine their own destinies, be their own person, control their reproductive rights.

Come on! Let's see some of that personal responsibility expressed here by the liberated women. Step up to the plate.

We have, and we did....but you keep on blaming women for getting pregnant like they are all immaculate conceptions. Then, you complain we don't take responsibility for decisions on our own destinies, but if we do, you bitch that we don't have that right. Make up your mind, if women take all the responsibility for getting pregnant then they can take the responsibility for keeping or aborting that pregnancy.....right?

archer wrote:

major bean wrote: What ever happened to individual responsibility? It sounds as if the age old accusation of women blaming men for their plight is continuing. I thought that several decades ago women wanted to determine their own destinies, be their own person, control their reproductive rights.

Come on! Let's see some of that personal responsibility expressed here by the liberated women. Step up to the plate.

We have, and we did....but you keep on blaming women for getting pregnant like they are all immaculate conceptions. Then, you complain we don't take responsibility for decisions on our own destinies, but if we do, you bitch that we don't have that right. Make up your mind, if women take all the responsibility for getting pregnant then they can take the responsibility for keeping or aborting that pregnancy.....right?

You are saying that women do not have any choices before conception or coitus. They are not responsible for their actions and the results of those actions. THAT is extremely sloppy, childish thinking. It is the woman's body and she should take responsibility regardless of whether or not the man gives it a thought. It may be a group hug but it is not a group responsibility.

major bean wrote: You are saying that women do not have any choices before conception or coitus.

where, exactly, did I say that?