Pro-lifers cannot have it both ways

[fncceo]

Do you ask corporations why THEY need taxpayer money? Do you care that they're always looking for subsidies or hand outs and tax breaks?

Totally. Although, I do draw the line at tax breaks ... I believe firmly that everyone deserves those, rich or poor.

But, just like the welfare moocher, the business moocher is not the bad guy in this transaction.

They are merely playing a game created by the people we elect into office. That is why I don't vote for people who support any kind of looting of the taxpayer's wallet. It doesn't matter if the looter is an unwed mother or a corporate sleazebag.

"If you want to know who the whores are in this brothel we call government, it's us, the voters"

-- P.J. O'Rourke, "Parliament of Whores"

 

[Dragonlady]

Totally. Although, I do draw the line at tax breaks ... I believe firmly that everyone deserves those, rich or poor.

But, just like the welfare moocher, the business moocher is not the bad guy in this transaction.

They are merely playing a game created by the people we elect into office. That is why I don't vote for people who support any kind of looting of the taxpayer's wallet. It doesn't matter if the looter is an unwed mother or a corporate sleazebag.

"If you want to know who the whores are in this brothel we call government, it's us, the voters"

-- P.J. O'Rourke, "Parliament of Whores"

Even the ancient Romans knew that the general population had to be kept fed and entertained in order for the elites to govern in peace. If they got hungry, or angry, Senators heads ended up on pikes around the Forum.

You're already complaining about poor people cleaning out high end stores by shoplifting. The people are sick of having to live on the streets because wages are so low, while other people spend $1500 on a hand bag. In the richest nation in the world, no one should be homeless or hungry.

This idea that government assistance is shameful, is ridiculous. Especial given that the Republican Party has created an economy whereby low wages for big corporations are subsidized by government handouts to low wage corporate workers. Republicans get to tell you about the slothful workers getting food stamps, and their corporate donors get the highest profits in history. And YOU pay for it.

What are you paying taxes for if not to ensure a social safety net when the economy goes into the toilet? Given that Republicans crash the economy every time they have the White House, you really need it to survive unless you're a millionaire.

The strength of society is judged on the basis of how well the least among you are doing. You have the worst wage and wealth inequity in the first world.

 

[Confederate Soldier]

I am definitely not surprised by this answer. You definitely adequately reflect the RW.

And you adequately reflect the LW. "But what about?!"

It's a stupid argument. Y'all make it seem like every single woman to get pregnant ever, was a poor McDonalds worker making $5 an hour, and she got pregnant because she was raped by her father. I got news for you, that's not even close to the majority of people who get abortions. It's also unfair to assume that republicans just want to make peoples lives as miserable as possible. Quit reading propaganda.

 

[fncceo]

Even the ancient Romans knew that the general population had to be kept fed and entertained in order for the elites to govern in peace. If they got hungry, or angry, Senators heads ended up on pikes around the Forum.

Ancient Romans knew that a placated people are much easier to control. Give them bread, circuses, and they will let you do anything to them.

The greatness of a society isn't measured by how abundantly it redistributes bread to the masses ... it's measured by how few impediments it places in the way of anyone wishing to earn their own bread.

 

[fncceo]

The people are sick of having to live on the streets because wages are so low, while other people spend $1500 on a hand bag.

Then don't live on the streets. We are being told there is record low unemployment post-COVID. Go out and get a job and you can choose to buy as many handbags as you like.

I have to say, however, $1,500 is pretty cheap for a handbag...

Now, an Hermes Birkin is a much better investment.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Even the ancient Romans knew that the general population had to be kept fed and entertained in order for the elites to govern in peace. If they got hungry, or angry, Senators heads ended up on pikes around the Forum.

You're already complaining about poor people cleaning out high end stores by shoplifting. The people are sick of having to live on the streets because wages are so low, while other people spend $1500 on a hand bag. In the richest nation in the world, no one should be homeless or hungry.

This idea that government assistance is shameful, is ridiculous. Especial given that the Republican Party has created an economy whereby low wages for big corporations are subsidized by government handouts to low wage corporate workers. Republicans get to tell you about the slothful workers getting food stamps, and their corporate donors get the highest profits in history. And YOU pay for it.

What are you paying taxes for if not to ensure a social safety net when the economy goes into the toilet? Given that Republicans crash the economy every time they have the White House, you really need it to survive unless you're a millionaire.

The strength of society is judged on the basis of how well the least among you are doing. You have the worst wage and wealth inequity in the first world.

Republicans didn't create any handouts, it was Democrats that did and continue doing today. Dementia increased food stamp allotment amid a labor shortage. Explain the dynamics of that one to me.

Nobody has to live on the streets. Outside of those with serious mental issues, they made the decision to live on the streets themselves. What are we paying taxes for? Currently hundreds of billions of dollars to fight something we can never win like climate change, and 87,000 additional IRS workers nobody asked for.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Well see you guys don’t actually know how this program works. SNAP also goes to the disabled like the DD population. They depended on it. Are you willing to let them starve?

Funny. My tenant is on disability and he got around $12.00 a month in food stamps.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

They can’t tell an impoverished pregnant woman she has to carry the baby to term and then not have her kids receive any government benefits like SNAP after they are born.

Now the automatic response to this is always “well should have never gotten pregnant!”

Uh yeah no shit. Here’s the issue though: the kids exist. They exist right? Should they starve because of something their mom did? Probably not right? You guys get so caught up in shaming the woman that you forget why they get SNAP in the first place. The benefits they get is a small fraction of the full cost to raise a kid every year therefore it’s ridiculous to suggest the mom is profiting off of having kids.

Now some republicans’ fascist solution to this is to force the mom to put the kids up for adoption. Well that’s obviously a stupid idea. It’s not like people are lining up to adopt the kids huh? Meanwhile such a foster system would cost the government an astronomical amount of money per year. Far more than the cost of SNAP.

Do republicans realize how insane it is to suggest a ludicrous idea like this just so that mere PENNIES will not be taken out of their OWN paychecks to pay for this program?

Yeah really Christian of you guys! Jesus would be proud.

Jesus asked people to give of themselves, not for government to confiscate their money so they can pass it out.

I say we take care of the children that are already here under one condition: if you apply for government assistance, a requirement should be you are fixed first. No more having kids you can't support while on the programs.

I think if that were a requirement, you'd see how fast our welfare rolls would drop. And don't respond with "Hitler" type of shit. Working families have medical procedures done when they have enough children their family income can support. So I'm not asking welfare people to do anything we don't already optionally do ourselves.

 

[theHawk]

They can’t tell an impoverished pregnant woman she has to carry the baby to term and then not have her kids receive any government benefits like SNAP after they are born.

Now the automatic response to this is always “well should have never gotten pregnant!”

Uh yeah no shit. Here’s the issue though: the kids exist. They exist right? Should they starve because of something their mom did? Probably not right? You guys get so caught up in shaming the woman that you forget why they get SNAP in the first place. The benefits they get is a small fraction of the full cost to raise a kid every year therefore it’s ridiculous to suggest the mom is profiting off of having kids.

Now some republicans’ fascist solution to this is to force the mom to put the kids up for adoption. Well that’s obviously a stupid idea. It’s not like people are lining up to adopt the kids huh? Meanwhile such a foster system would cost the government an astronomical amount of money per year. Far more than the cost of SNAP.

Do republicans realize how insane it is to suggest a ludicrous idea like this just so that mere PENNIES will not be taken out of their OWN paychecks to pay for this program?

Yeah really Christian of you guys! Jesus would be proud.

We could just send the mother and all her childrens to Africa. That way the kids never have to experience systemic racism.

 

[dudmuck]

Jesus asked people to give of themselves, not for government to confiscate their money so they can pass it out.

I say we take care of the children that are already here under one condition: if you apply for government assistance, a requirement should be you are fixed first. No more having kids you can't support while on the programs.

I think if that were a requirement, you'd see how fast our welfare rolls would drop. And don't respond with "Hitler" type of shit. Working families have medical procedures done when they have enough children their family income can support. So I'm not asking welfare people to do anything we don't already optionally do ourselves.

Acts 2:44

 

[easyt65]

They can’t tell an impoverished pregnant woman she has to carry the baby to term and then not have her kids receive any government benefits like SNAP after they are born.

Now the automatic response to this is always “well should have never gotten pregnant!”

Uh yeah no shit. Here’s the issue though: the kids exist. They exist right? Should they starve because of something their mom did? Probably not right? You guys get so caught up in shaming the woman that you forget why they get SNAP in the first place. The benefits they get is a small fraction of the full cost to raise a kid every year therefore it’s ridiculous to suggest the mom is profiting off of having kids.

Now some republicans’ fascist solution to this is to force the mom to put the kids up for adoption. Well that’s obviously a stupid idea. It’s not like people are lining up to adopt the kids huh? Meanwhile such a foster system would cost the government an astronomical amount of money per year. Far more than the cost of SNAP.

Do republicans realize how insane it is to suggest a ludicrous idea like this just so that mere PENNIES will not be taken out of their OWN paychecks to pay for this program?

Yeah really Christian of you guys! Jesus would be proud.

Actually a woman can be told she will be limited on receiving govt subsidies / benefits for having children she can't afford.

'My body, my choice'?

Ok, 'your body, your choice, your RESPONSIBILITY!

Women should not receieve tax dollars for every single kid she has. I have no problem paying for 1 kid born out of wedlock because the mother was careless / irresponsible. The money and aid received for the child shod come with counseling on how to prevent from having more children out of marriage,especially ones they can't afford.

1 'oops' - ok.

2 or more - your body, your choice, your RESPONSIBILITY!

With many different types of contraceptives and products like the morning after pill there is no reason why a mother has to have a chimd or kill one.

Democrats always say no one has the right to force their beliefs on them regarding abortions but they have no problem forcing the cost of their choice onto others.

Pro-abortio ists are the ones who should not have it both ways -

'My body, my choice'? NO- 'Your body, your choice, your responsibility!'

 

[OKTexas]

Well see in this fascist scenario where the mothers would have to give up their kids, there would be a massive influx of kids in the system so 2 million parents won’t cut it. Not even close. Also, there is the issue of older kids. Older kids - Take 9-13 as an example age bracket. Those couples do not want to adopt 13 year olds.

You said no one was lining up to adopt these kids and I proved you a liar, now you're calling me names? Also there are literally thousands of organizations to help these mothers with a place to live, child care and job training so they don't have to give up their kids. Of course you commies are going around trying to burn those places down. I also know a pair of vets that adopted 7 siblings at the same time. So yeah, there are families that will take older kids. So take your propaganda, commie talking points and faux outrage and shove it up your ass.

.

 

[OKTexas]

Compared to MAGA Maggots and their politics of hate and ugliness. I would rather have a whole neighborhood of Illegals compared to just one of you hate Nazi's as a neighbor.

So how many illegals are living in your house?

.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Acts 2:44

So WTF is that supposed to mean?

 

[XponentialChaos]

Mr "I'm not partisan" chimes in....

The lost puppy loves to follow me around.

 

[struth]

They can’t tell an impoverished pregnant woman she has to carry the baby to term and then not have her kids receive any government benefits like SNAP after they are born.

Now the automatic response to this is always “well should have never gotten pregnant!”

Uh yeah no shit. Here’s the issue though: the kids exist. They exist right? Should they starve because of something their mom did? Probably not right? You guys get so caught up in shaming the woman that you forget why they get SNAP in the first place. The benefits they get is a small fraction of the full cost to raise a kid every year therefore it’s ridiculous to suggest the mom is profiting off of having kids.

Now some republicans’ fascist solution to this is to force the mom to put the kids up for adoption. Well that’s obviously a stupid idea. It’s not like people are lining up to adopt the kids huh? Meanwhile such a foster system would cost the government an astronomical amount of money per year. Far more than the cost of SNAP.

Do republicans realize how insane it is to suggest a ludicrous idea like this just so that mere PENNIES will not be taken out of their OWN paychecks to pay for this program?

Yeah really Christian of you guys! Jesus would be proud.

nobody said she can’t have SNAP

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

I’ve done extensive volunteer work and I’m an atheist. I seriously doubt you’ve done much at all in comparison.

Sure you have, skippy. Sure you have.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

No they are not. Most donations to Churches go to pay to maintain the buildings, and to pay the salaries of the minister and the church staff. Only a very small percentage of donations go to help the poor.

Most smaller churches keep cost down by sharing ministers or organists. Our church had a 3/4 time minister, and rented out office space to non-profits, but we were still dipping into trust funds just to cover basic expenses. Our 100 year old Sanctuary was expensive to maintain. Our building, which included meeting rooms, community recreation centre, and suites of offices cost $50,000 a year to heat.

Churches do work within their own communities so churches in poor neighbourhoods, just like schools in poor neighbourhoods, have the least amount of donations and other resources to work with, and the greatest amount of need in the community.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

Compared to MAGA Maggots and their politics of hate and ugliness. I would rather have a whole neighborhood of Illegals compared to just one of you hate Nazi's as a neighbor.

Hey, that's megaMAGA to you, bitch.

 

[Rogue AI]

More liberal fearmongering. If government handouts are ended, people will not just sit down and and wait to die. They will change their behavior if they are held accountable for their decisions.