elfkin477—
“Guess what. “Fuck” was my first word.”
HeeHee. I can relate. My mom loves to tell the story about my first word. I was nearly two and had yet to speak a single time. My parents had even had some tests done to make sure I wasn’t defective, so to speak. So one morning I’m in my chair eating cereal and I tipped it all over myself…
“Oh, SHIT!” says baby bella. Mom says she didn’t know whether she was crying from laughter, shock, or relief.
Infidel—
“The only way to limit this kind of behavior is to end ALL welfare for kids born out of wedlock. Thats right, no AFDC, no food stamps, no WIC, no taxpayer subsidized health care, no Head Start, no section 8 vouchers, no “free” school breakfast, no “free” school lunch, and none of the other HUNDREDS of welfare programs which the government offers at taxpayer expense. If these women want to crap out kids that they cant afford, let them take of their own offspring.”
Um, you're kidding right? In the name of saving a few bucks you'd really let innocent children starve in their homes--if they're lucky enough to have a home that is---suffering from untreated medical conditions, undereducated, and without even a single square meal at school to see them through the day? Good thinking. Then all that surplus tax money can go towards hiring the legions of new corrections officers we'd be needing to oversee this entire generation of home-grown criminals, addicts, and dumbasses. I mean, really. The whole reason we have these programs is because of parents who are either unable, unwilling, or just unaware of how to properly care for their children. Some magical fairy godmother isn't going to flit down and *POOF* make up for the lack of education, opportunity, and basic nutrition in these women and children's lives.
And what’s this “these women” shit anyway? Last time I checked it took more than just a vagina-equipped welfare grubber to reproduce. Where are all these fathers? At least the mother’s are sticking around (generalization, yes, but still primarily true) To punish children for their parent’s shortcomings is bad enough. To destroy what little chance they have of overcoming those shortcomings in their own lives is social suicide.
Otto: I am afraid that Infidel is correct, Sanger was a big promotor of the eugenics movement, and all its racialist theories (sorry, not sufficiently motivated to find appropriate site – hope you will take my word for it, I went to school with one of her grandchildren and he used to describe some of her views as the skeleton in the family closet).
As to the OP, it doesn’t get me angry so much as it really, really depresses me. I refer to them as children with children, and when not ignoring them or hitting them, they all too often treat them like toys…
So, why post at all? Another plea for birth control education being COMPULSORY in schools. In our local bibble belt (southern Alberta), the school district where the bibble-thumping parents were able to force the minimum standards in the curriculum (just the simple biological facts) has the highest teenage pregnancy rate in the country. What I draw from this is that all teenagers are going to fuck, but that with a comprehensive education about birth control they have a fighting chance not to be children with children.
See Woman of Valor by Ellen Chesler. Sanger was a proponent of the Eugenics movement. I’s no secret that she was. In fact, Sanger’s initial interest in birth control has been attributed to two sources. The first was her mother’s early death from repeated childbearing. The second was the fear that the poor and uneducated would out-reproduce the middle- and upper- classes.
You just reminded me of a story my mom tells every so often: I attended public kindergarten, but my parents pulled me out and put me in private school upon entering the first grade because they heard more than one kid in my class saying the word “Fuck”. Thing is, I cannot recall every hearing that word at that age.
I was 11 or 12 when I discovered what “fuck” literally means. The sad part was that, thanks to a parochial education, I had no concept of sex whatsoever other than kissing, and even that scared me to death! :eek:
Belladonna- My point was, that illegitimacy would probable be cut by at least 50 percent if we stopped paying unmarried women to have children.
If you go back and look at the history of Federal welfare programs, the first welfare programs were restricted to the children of widows. That is, people who through no fault of thier own found themselves in difficult times.
It was’nt until Johnsons Great Society began paying for illegitimate children that the illegitamacy rate started ballooning out of control. After all, the old saying is true. "
Whatever you reward, you get more of"
So I guess what I’m saying is, if these mothers knew that there was no government welfare system to rescue them from thier poor reproductive decisions, they would probable be more responsible in thier actions. After all, I’m pro choice. I believe a woman has the right to choose whether or not to get pregnant.
Also- Green Bean, sorry about that, it was’nt about you or your post.
Isn’t there a study that indicates the poorer and less educated one is, the more children he/she ends up having? Something along those lines. . .
I wonder about this sometimes. I know a number of people who are single, or living below the poverty line, or both, that have more than two children. And they were single and/or dirt poor before having any kids at all, so it isn’t a bad turn of luck. Why would they do that to themselves, and the children? I can understand one child, and possibly maybe even two. . . but more?
The pregnant girl just found out she’s eight weeks along. This means that the father probably is her boyfriend, as that’s around the time they reconciled. Of course, it’s only just barely in the right time frame, so it could still be someone else, but like a good little tramp she’s in denial about this and insists that it’s her boyfriend’s baby - “I don’t need a blood test!”.
Got to love these real-life soap operas. No doubt, the b/f will stick by her until she does the dirty on him again, at which point he’ll dump her and demand paternity tests. And won’t we all experience a thrill if it turns out NOT to be his???
Meanwhile, Blake is awakening from his coma to find his twin has come back from the dead…
In regards to the posts about sex education, I don’t see what difference that is going to make. In this case, the girl in question is 20 years old, and the daughter of a nurse. She would have had sex education at school, because she went to the same school that I did, and we were taught about it in school. She’s been sexually active for a long time and with a lot of different partners, but as far as I know this is her first pregnancy (all I can say for sure is that she has no other children). Ignorance doesn’t cut it, she knows about birth control and about what causes pregnancy. She chose to be reckless regardless. All the education in the world isn’t going to stop someone who doesn’t care.
About the welfare issue - I know people who have had children because single mothers get more money than unemployed people. The fact that babies cost a fortune doesn’t seem to register with these people. Perhaps babies only cost a fortune if you care about them and look after them properly? Charities will clothe them, and help you feed them, and deadbeat moms don’t take their kids to the doctor anyway.
Yeah, something like that. Damn, I can’t remember which book of mine goes into the statistics in detail. IIRC, the figure may not be as high as 40% born out of wedlock, but it was about that high for children conceived out of wedlock. So, perhaps that would be taken as an indication of a healthy society–people who found themselves “in trouble” got married. But I don’t know that I can agree with that. Good marriages are usually not created via the shotgun.
Infadel,
I see what you are saying–in theory. However, by your own definition “people who through no fault of thier own found themselves in difficult times” are the intended recipients of aid. Doesn’t this also apply to children who through no fault of their own find themselves the offspring of shitty/very young/very poor mothers? I understand you are saying that by removing these ‘incentives’ for over-breeding, you might discourage such activity in the future, but what about all those kids already out there?
What about devoutly catholic Little Suzy who gets knocked up at 15 only to watch Johnny-boy run off and leave her stranded? Should our governmental policy punish faith-based choices? Just because abortion is OK with you, doesn’t mean it’s an option that everyone can consider. And again, what about the fathers? Someone is impregnating these women and, apparently, doing little to care for the resulting children. I hate to think that we would slap all these constraints on reproduction that would
a.) stigmatize and punish innocent children for being “bastards”
b.) target single women who are trying to work/go to school/and care for said children without little or no help from the father
c.)fail to address the issue of where these fathers are and why we taxpayers are supporting their children.
Now, understand, I am not talking about women who intentionally become pregnant again and again and again when they can’t even support themselves–they pretty much disgust me too. But we have to differentiate between these mothers and their children, and between those abusing the system and those who sincerely need help. Accidents can and do happen. When you decide to change things because of the abusers, don’t forget that it is the most deserving who will really be feeling the sting.
This is a complicated problem, and it can’t be solved in an across-the-board, black & white manner. Case by case, situation by situation is really the only humane way to deal with this.
OK, sorry I’ve gone on so much but this is something I’ve always felt strongly about. I am a single mother myself and unless you’ve been there, there is no way you can appreciate how difficult it can be. I’m struggling and I have a decent job and supportive family. It kills me to think of all those women who have neither; and I would hate to see them kicked, yet again, while they are down.
Ahem… if Little Suzy was so devoutly Catholic, she wouldn’t get knocked up at 15.
Make any case you want about girls whose boyfriends run off on them the minute they get in trouble, but don’t give religion as an excuse. Devout Little Suzy must have missed all those bits in the bible that forbid pre marital sex. It’s a laughable situation - pregnant Catholic girls arguing that they couldn’t use a condom because of their religion. Like they’re not going to hell for sleeping around, but if they used protection, it would be eternal damnation for them. It’s a cop out and an excuse, and not a very good one at that.
A better scenario would be Little Suzy’s boyfriend only lasts until the fun stops and the nappies start, and then he takes off with Good Times Nancy, leaving Little Suzy holding the baby. I’m sure we’ve all seen that played out before.
Nom de clavier,
“Ahem… if Little Suzy was so devoutly Catholic, she wouldn’t get knocked up at 15.” Yes, I had thought of that. I think it’s a pretty thin excuse, too. However, I also realize that defying religious strictures about premarital sex is quite a bit less objectionable than those about abortion. With the first you’re a sinner, but with the second you’re a murderer (the church’s standpoint, not mine) So aside from the outside pressures, it’s also a very touchy issue from a personal standpoint. As for using religion to excuse not using birth control in the first place, that’s just stupid. As you pointed out, if you’re going so far as to jump into bed, how far of a reach is it to wear a condom when you do? I was mentioning religion as a personal deterrent to abortion, not birth control and pre-marital sex. Call me crazy, but I think there is a huge difference, for most people, between the two. As an afternote–I grew up Catholic (I’m still recovering, thank you) which included the traditional nun-stocked school and sex-ed providing priest, and never once have I heard a girl use religion to excuse lack of birth control, but I have seen it factor into abortion-related decisions.
Gazoo,
Yes, the Catholic church forbids birth control of all kinds. The reasoning being that the only sanctioned purpose of sex is reproduction, and if that’s not what you’re going for you shouldn’t be messing around in the first place. I am always amused that this line can be spouted by religious types who then turn right around and espouse the rythym method as the way to go. Hello? I thought “non-reproductive sex=bad bad bad”. For that matter, wouldn’t this line of reasoning say that sex at any time outside of the woman’s fertile period is wrong?
Ah, those crazy Catholics!!
I went to school at F.P. Walshe in Fort Macleod. I was not taught ‘just the simple biological facts’; I had a very comprehensively taught sex education course.
Sex Ed for me was in 1983. Has it changed that much since?
What on earth are you talking about?
Yes, I had thought of that. I think it’s a pretty thin excuse, too. However, I also realize that defying religious strictures about premarital sex is quite a bit less objectionable than those about abortion. With the first you’re a sinner, but with the second you’re a murderer (the church’s standpoint, not mine) So aside from the outside pressures, it’s also a very touchy issue from a personal standpoint. As for using religion to excuse not using birth control in the first place, that’s just stupid. As you pointed out, if you’re going so far as to jump into bed, how far of a reach is it to wear a condom when you do? I was mentioning religion as a personal deterrent to abortion, not birth control and pre-marital sex. Call me crazy, but I think there is a huge difference, for most people, between the two. As an afternote–I grew up Catholic (I’m still recovering, thank you) which included the traditional nun-stocked school and sex-ed providing priest, and never once have I heard a girl use religion to excuse lack of birth control, but I have seen it factor into abortion-related decisions.