not one whit from the validity of your knowledgeable assessment
of a system gone berserk.
I refer to an old saw: “Do me once, shame on you. Do me twice,
shame on me!”
I’ve no problem with community support of a young mother and
her “fatherless” child or children, if it’s a multiple birth. It’s when
she does it again that I draw the line.
Boyd
-----------------------------------------------
On 10/11/04 4:36 PM, "Stuntman"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You seem to think that having a large family is a "Right".
I think personal responsibility should include not expecting others to
pay for your wants.
It is SELFISH to place personal "WANTS" over the "NEEDS" when one
brings children into the world.
The "Welfare Entittlement" state of mind has proved to be a poison to
our society. One mistake is understandable, however NO ONE has
the "RIGHT" to expect society to pay for a persons desire to multiply
like a rabbit.
Please quit reproducing if you can't feed and clothe those you already
have! Use protection.
Stuntman
>
> Not all single women have children just to receive a welfare
check every
> month. Do you think it is fun to live like that? There are many
women who
> work full time jobs, and have to have government assistance to
survive. You
> should not have to give up your child because you are financially
unstable.
> By the time I was 19, I had three children. I worked two full
time
> jobs, but still couldn't make it. I had food stamps, and lowered
rent, but I
> deserved my children just as much as a woman who was married and
financially
> stable.
> And for the women who don't work, many times you can't win for
losing.
> If you work, you do not earn enough to to raise a family, and if you
apply for
> benefits, you don't receive enough assistance to even help make a
difference.
> By the time you add child care for when you do go to work, you still
have
> nothing. If you quit your job, you are then eligible for more
assistance, and
> you can live better than if you were working. It is no way to live,
but you do
> what you have to do to survive.
> Now for those women who don't even try to better themselves or the
lives
> for their children, is unexceptable. But they should not have to
adopt out
> their children. Until you have had to live in the system and raise
children, you
> should not judge whether they deserve to have and keep their
children. You
> could one day have to depend on food stamps, welfare, and lowered
rent to raise
> your kids, because you aren't guaranteed a stable life. Would it be
fair to
> say that a mother who is disabled should have to adopt out their
child? No!
> It is a struggle depending on the government to raise your
family, but
> it doesn't make you any less deserving of a family, a bad mom, or any
less of a
> person. If anything needs to change, it is the way the system
works. Better
> assistance should be available for those mothers who are working,
that way
> they can get on their feet, become stable, and come out of the system
and
> poverty. For the mothers who did not want to work, they would have
to become
> employed in order to best utilize their resources, and would see that
working is
> more beneificial than welfare. The welfare system makes it
impossible to get
> back on your feet when you have hit rock bottom.
> As far as teenage pregnancy, yes, it is irresponsible. We have
all
> made decisions as teens that were not responsible, but we are only
human. Who
> are we to judge one another anyway? I do believe that we all have
our flaws!!!
>
> > Well, kids and single women are having babies and living off of the
system.
> > � They get money to raise the baby, money off of rent, food stamps,
and
> > other things they may be eligible for.� It is a shame.� I think
those people
> > should be forced to give their babies up for adoption or after
having a couple
> > they should.� So many of these women have 4,5 or more kids.� I know
a woman
> > from back home that has 7 and doesn't work because she gets so much
help.
> > Stacy
> >
>
>
>
