When republicans complain about single moms getting food stamps, why don’t they consider the well-being of the child?

[surada]

No, we preach "personal responsibility".

Single mom's should consider whether or not they can afford to raise a child before they get pregnant.

Nothing in our constitution requires or even allows the gov't to take from one family to provide for another.

Most of us considered the costs of raising kids and planned accordingly, starting families only after we were in a position to provide for them.

Sometimes accidents happen, they always have and that when families stepped up to help their kids and grandkids.

Poverty is a big motivator and a great introduction into the concepts of personal responsibility and common sense.

Common sense alone tells us it's irresponsible to produce children we can't or have no intention of providing for on our own.

Parents who chose to make babies they can't or won't support are guilty of child abuse and their children should be taken away if they and their families can't find a way to provide for them or the mothers should take it upon themselves to put those kids up for adoption.

I'm not that old and I remember parents and grandparents sacrificing to help their kids and knew women who knew they were never going to be able to provide a good home for children they'd conceived who gave them up willingly without the state ever getting involved for adoption.

I also know many families that fell at least temporarily on hard times who went to their churches or churches they weren't even affiliated with and got the help they needed to tide them over.

Charity is a wonderful gift given from the heart, welfare programs take by force from those who have been responsible to give to those who are not, that's robbery, not charity.

Foster care is a possibility for the child you give up for adoption and that doesn't have a good record.

 

[Leo123]

Perhaps we should investigate why a woman would have a fatherless child.

 

[surada]

Why do single moms have kids they can't afford?

Because they can't get an abortion.

 

[Leo123]

Because they can't get an abortion.

That's unlikely, but, they had no choice in a sexual partner?

 

[surada]

So, they had no choice in a sexual partner?

Human beings make mistakes. They always have. Unwanted children have been aborted or exposed at birth for thousands of years.

 

[Vastator]

Human beings make mistakes. They always have. Unwanted children have been aborted or exposed at birth for thousands of years.

 

[Devils_Advocate]

Because they can't get an abortion.

The ruling has yet to come down and all we know is what a leaked version of the ruling might have said, so they could have aborted the child but didn’t…

You are trying very hard to excuse the parent for their poor choices in life while demanding society pay for their poor choices in life.

The usage of EBT should be limited and the mother should be put in a Job Training program so she could obtain a higher paying job.

I have been an advocate for JTPA’s and requiring people on any form of welfare that are able to work to be trained in a skilled field so they would not be dependent on welfare.

Now you next argument will be how will the mother pay for childcare, so we should offer pre-school for single mother’s and child daycare so the mother can work and earn and at those facilities the child will be given their meals so the mother will not have to worry…

 

[surada]

The ruling has yet to come down and all we know is what a leaked version of the ruling might have said, so they could have aborted the child but didn’t…

You are trying very hard to excuse the parent for their poor choices in life while demanding society pay for their poor choices in life.

The usage of EBT should be limited and the mother should be put in a Job Training program so she could obtain a higher paying job.

I have been an advocate for JTPA’s and requiring people on any form of welfare that are able to work to be trained in a skilled field so they would not be dependent on welfare.

Now you next argument will be how will the mother pay for childcare, so we should offer pre-school for single mother’s and child daycare so the mother can work and earn and at those facilities the child will be given their meals so the mother will not have to worry…

I know the leak isn't the final decision and I'm not excusing poor choices.

 

[elektra]

There is no such thing as food stamps hence what does the OP know about reslity

 

[surada]

Perhaps we should investigate why a woman would have a fatherless child.

By accident.

 

[surada]

There is no such thing as food stamps hence what does the OP know about reslity

What do you want to call food stamps?

 

[Meathead]

Because they can't get an abortion.

I suggest making abortions available to women who do not have the means to raise their children without the welfare state. If they choose not to, they would not receive any benefits for the child.

That is truly pro-choice.

 

[22lcidw]

Most of those people are elderly, disabled, or kids.

At some point there will be limits placed on payouts and medical care for the unaffordability of it as the government becomes more and more overwhelmed. There have been many warnings from politicians and adherents. Mostly Progs over the years.

 

[elektra]

What do you want to call food stamps?

Why would I want to call food Stamos something other than what they are?

What do you want to call domestic violence?

 

[elektra]

I suggest making abortions available to women who do not have the means to raise their children without the welfare state. If they choose not to, they would not receive any benefits for the child.

That is truly pro-choice.

We could extend that to people who lose their job and require benefits, abort all their children, up to age 15.

 

[Resnic]

Single moms having kids they can’t afford is an easy target. It makes a right winger feel superior by shitting on such a woman. It makes it easy to rail against the idea of food stamps altogether. Such a person judging feels superior because they aren’t on food stamps and have a full time job in comparison. Somebody should probably tell them that it is very common for anyone to have a full time job and not be on food stamps lol. Such people judging aren’t as special as they like to think they are. Food stamps is not the epidemic that republicans like to think it is. They simply pretend that it is because it makes them feel less insecure about themselves. The truth is that few actual able bodied adults are even on food stamps. The ones that are have dependents.

But sure, such irresponsible women do exist.

We can all agree: an impoverished woman should not have kids and she made a mistake when she had one. Okay sure. However, the kid still…. exists. What should we do with that kid? Should the kid suffer because of the mom’s mistakes? Probably not, right? Government assistance is required either way.

New USDA Report Provides Picture of Who Participates in SNAP - Food Research & Action Center

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has been issuing a series of annual reports on the demographic and economic characteristics of households and individuals participating in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). The latest report, covering fiscal year 2019, was released at...

frac.org

“SNAP targets those in greatest need. Among those participating in the program, most are children, elderly persons, or individuals with a disability. In fact, 86 percent of all SNAP benefits go to households that include a child, elderly person, or person with disabilities. In addition, about 92 percent of all SNAP benefits go to households with income at or below the federal poverty line.”

Mom needs to get a job. That's what we tell dads all the time. "Get a job, support your family, take care of yo keeds!" And so on. Men and women are supposed to be equal now right? Well moms can get a job and support their kids and so on also.

My mom worked security at a hospital, went to nursing school and took care of me by herself. So if she can do it, others can do it.

I'm all for helping people who genuinely need help to get over a bad hump in their life or something. But I am not for people who accept help and never do anything to improve their life. They just spend their whole life sucking at the food stamp tit.

 

[westwall]

Single moms having kids they can’t afford is an easy target. It makes a right winger feel superior by shitting on such a woman. It makes it easy to rail against the idea of food stamps altogether. Such a person judging feels superior because they aren’t on food stamps and have a full time job in comparison. Somebody should probably tell them that it is very common for anyone to have a full time job and not be on food stamps lol. Such people judging aren’t as special as they like to think they are. Food stamps is not the epidemic that republicans like to think it is. They simply pretend that it is because it makes them feel less insecure about themselves. The truth is that few actual able bodied adults are even on food stamps. The ones that are have dependents.

But sure, such irresponsible women do exist.

We can all agree: an impoverished woman should not have kids and she made a mistake when she had one. Okay sure. However, the kid still…. exists. What should we do with that kid? Should the kid suffer because of the mom’s mistakes? Probably not, right? Government assistance is required either way.

New USDA Report Provides Picture of Who Participates in SNAP - Food Research & Action Center

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has been issuing a series of annual reports on the demographic and economic characteristics of households and individuals participating in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). The latest report, covering fiscal year 2019, was released at...

frac.org

“SNAP targets those in greatest need. Among those participating in the program, most are children, elderly persons, or individuals with a disability. In fact, 86 percent of all SNAP benefits go to households that include a child, elderly person, or person with disabilities. In addition, about 92 percent of all SNAP benefits go to households with income at or below the federal poverty line.”

Why don't you? Inflation is doing far more damage to the poor folks in this country, but according to you people inflation is good.

Inflation helps the rich....a LOT.

So it is pretty obvious that the democrap party is the party of the rich.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Single moms having kids they can’t afford is an easy target. It makes a right winger feel superior by shitting on such a woman. It makes it easy to rail against the idea of food stamps altogether. Such a person judging feels superior because they aren’t on food stamps and have a full time job in comparison. Somebody should probably tell them that it is very common for anyone to have a full time job and not be on food stamps lol. Such people judging aren’t as special as they like to think they are. Food stamps is not the epidemic that republicans like to think it is. They simply pretend that it is because it makes them feel less insecure about themselves. The truth is that few actual able bodied adults are even on food stamps. The ones that are have dependents.

But sure, such irresponsible women do exist.

We can all agree: an impoverished woman should not have kids and she made a mistake when she had one. Okay sure. However, the kid still…. exists. What should we do with that kid? Should the kid suffer because of the mom’s mistakes? Probably not, right? Government assistance is required either way.

New USDA Report Provides Picture of Who Participates in SNAP - Food Research & Action Center

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has been issuing a series of annual reports on the demographic and economic characteristics of households and individuals participating in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). The latest report, covering fiscal year 2019, was released at...

frac.org

“SNAP targets those in greatest need. Among those participating in the program, most are children, elderly persons, or individuals with a disability. In fact, 86 percent of all SNAP benefits go to households that include a child, elderly person, or person with disabilities. In addition, about 92 percent of all SNAP benefits go to households with income at or below the federal poverty line.”

No you just say we say that, and then go on a 2 paragraph diatribe over your creation.

 

[Mac-7]

What Jesus DIDNT DO is form a political action committee and petition Caesar to feed those hungry people at taxpayer expense

 

[SavannahMann]

No, we preach "personal responsibility".

Single mom's should consider whether or not they can afford to raise a child before they get pregnant.

Nothing in our constitution requires or even allows the gov't to take from one family to provide for another.

Most of us considered the costs of raising kids and planned accordingly, starting families only after we were in a position to provide for them.

Sometimes accidents happen, they always have and that when families stepped up to help their kids and grandkids.

Poverty is a big motivator and a great introduction into the concepts of personal responsibility and common sense.

Common sense alone tells us it's irresponsible to produce children we can't or have no intention of providing for on our own.

Parents who chose to make babies they can't or won't support are guilty of child abuse and their children should be taken away if they and their families can't find a way to provide for them or the mothers should take it upon themselves to put those kids up for adoption.

I'm not that old and I remember parents and grandparents sacrificing to help their kids and knew women who knew they were never going to be able to provide a good home for children they'd conceived who gave them up willingly without the state ever getting involved for adoption.

I also know many families that fell at least temporarily on hard times who went to their churches or churches they weren't even affiliated with and got the help they needed to tide them over.

Charity is a wonderful gift given from the heart, welfare programs take by force from those who have been responsible to give to those who are not, that's robbery, not charity.

First of all, preposterous. The first Governments in history understood that the Government has a responsibility towards the people it governs. Those Governments that did not fulfill that responsibility were overthrown, or destroyed. Pre Christian Roman citizens had money provided to provide for basic sustenance. The word Succor is found as early as the 13th Century, to provide relief and assistance.

The Lord of the Manor was responsible for insuring the Peasants got fed, Greek City States insured the people were fed. As far back as you wish to go, and Governments saw to the needs of their people, at least the ones that lasted longer than the first bad harvest.

Now why do the Governments do that? Simple. It is a lot cheaper to do that, than fend off a Revolution of starving desperate people. See the French Revolution for a more modern example.

So if we go with your plan, then the Military and the Police will spend half their time trying to protect those with, from those without. It is how Communist Revolutions get started. Starving people don’t give a damn who provides them the food the must have, or the political ramifications of their choices, they just want to eat. See the Chinese Revolution if you doubt me. The so called Peasants who are far removed from the cities, who today live as their ancestors did at the time of the revolution, don’t care. All they want is their rice bowl filled at the end of the day. The rest is irrelevant.

Those people start starving, and they’ll not just sit there and starve to death, they’ll get desperate, and they’ll demand food, and then they’ll take it.

Hell, it is one of the tools the Military uses to break down and get candidates to quit advanced training. Rangers, SEAL’s, Green Berets, even Delta. All of them suffer starvation as part of their training, because it is a lot harder to motivate yourself to do some difficult task, when your belly is empty. In my day, people who went to Ranger School, and these were fit people without much body fat, came back twenty pounds lighter, because they were existing on fewer calories than they needed to sustain life.

Starvation is one of the techniques used for breaking a prisoner of war, and making him willing to talk.

But take any jail or prison. Those with bad food, or not enough food, suffer far more riots and assaults on staff than those who provide better food. I love how the Conservatives who are all about supporting the cops and such, are the same ones demanding that the cops be placed in the most dangerous situation possible.

So providing food is a recognized moral duty of any Government in History. Providing food is beyond any religious beliefs, and spans the globe. It predates many religions of today in fact. Historically, failure to do so has caused the fall of Governments.

And before you scoff and say you have guns. You may have guns. But how many are you willing to slaughter to keep from providing basic sustenance? And if you lose, what happens then? We could ask the Royals of France. We could ask a lot of people. If they had not been executed by the crowds.