popsjumper 2 #51 June 4, 2012 Quote My question (probably rhetorical) is how we effect policies that dissuade this kind of behavior while protecting children. In this case, how do we withhold money from irresponsible people while not leaving the children behind? Yes, I presume there are state social programs being utilized here. I have no evidence of it other than 45 years of life in the South. But I'll put my next paycheck against yours and then investigate if you like. I agreed with you in my post and asked a question regarding who is being wronged. You answered "the children"...and I agree with that. You can calm down now, eh? As far as the paycheck....you sure you want to do that? I assure you you wouldn't think much of the payoff...but I'm sure I would think of it as a good deal! But to save you the trouble, yes, there are state programs to help the kids. I don't believe there is a state in the union that would let the kids go uncared for in some way. There are even be privately-funded means to care for themMy reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #52 June 4, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteI see no reference to race by anyone. QuoteI guess you didn't see TK's reference to the guy being black. Right, he complained about race being introduced when he was actually the first one to do so in that post. QuoteAs far as we know, some of these women could very well be white, asian hispanic or some other racial mixture. Yes. Your point is? My point is that nobody mentioned race until he did. Would you say this guy was more likely an Obama supporter or a Romney supporter? Which guy?My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
usedtajump 1 #53 June 5, 2012 They must be Catholics.The older I get the less I care who I piss off. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #54 June 5, 2012 Quote They must be Catholics. You insist on inserting race into the issue? Protestants are going to be all over your butt. My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #55 June 5, 2012 No, we haven' lost it yet but we, as a nation, do seem to be trying very hard. Sometimes it's best for personal sanity to just turn off the TV, shut down the 'puter, refuse to read the papers before one puts it in the bird cage and just read a good book. Life seemed so much less aggravating before the world shrunk so much. We can thank all those idiots in the communications business. Oh...wait...that would have included me. My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,122 #56 June 5, 2012 Quoteher bad decision does not relieve him of his legal obligations. Nope, but if she decides to fuck a guy making $10 an hour who has 29 children with 10 women, she shouldn't complain he is unable to pay child support. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #57 June 5, 2012 QuoteQuoteher bad decision does not relieve him of his legal obligations. Nope, but if she decides to fuck a guy making $10 an hour who has 29 children with 10 women, she shouldn't complain he is unable to pay child support. I doubt he is so forthcoming. This is getting dangerously close to 'the bitch shouldn't wear a mini skirt if she doesn't want to get fucked.' Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,122 #58 June 5, 2012 QuoteThis is getting dangerously close to 'the bitch shouldn't wear a mini skirt if she doesn't want to get fucked.' Really? You want to compare the results of a mutually consensual act with rape? QuoteI doubt he is so forthcoming. Maybe don't spread your legs until you know who your partner is. So much for being responsible for your own actions. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #59 June 5, 2012 Quote So much for being responsible for your own actions. which part of 50% is confusing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marinus 0 #60 June 6, 2012 QuoteMaybe don't spread your legs until you know who your partner is. That would be a great plan, and while one's not spreading her legs, it might be a good idea to have some condoms etc. ready anyway. Sex-drive has the tendency to overwrite common sense. I don't know about this case, but the abstinence only approach is a great way to have loads of teen pregnancies, STD-s and other fun stuff. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #61 June 6, 2012 This is not a question of personal freedoms, but abuse of a government support system. Allowing someone to do something vs. supporting their actions are two totally different things? If one wants to have large numbers of children with multiple partners, have at it. Just don't expect government assistance. I like the idea proposed above of reversible sterilization for anyone on government assistance based on a time on assistance and/or number of children criteria.Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #62 June 7, 2012 Quote I like the idea proposed above of reversible sterilization for anyone on government assistance based on a time on assistance and/or number of children criteria. Unbelievable. Forced sterilization was done in the past and was deemed repulsive to the Nth degree. Maybe we HAVE totally lost it. My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #63 June 7, 2012 Quote Quote I like the idea proposed above of reversible sterilization for anyone on government assistance based on a time on assistance and/or number of children criteria. Unbelievable. Forced sterilization was done in the past and was deemed repulsive to the Nth degree. Maybe we HAVE totally lost it. See the problem is when it's institutionalized sterilization. A kick in the nuts would be more appropriate and acceptable. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #64 June 7, 2012 Quote See the problem is when it's institutionalized sterilization. A kick in the nuts would be more appropriate and acceptable. Right on and just so... My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,122 #65 June 7, 2012 Quotewhich part of 50% is confusing? Except that it isn't 50% in practice. I know that you have been educated in the US, so sex ed and basic biology might be lacking, but it is generally the mother who gives birth and ends up with the baby. So if you are going to end up with 100% of the burden, you clearly also have more of the responsibility to check prior to fucking. At least if you believe in taking responsibilities for your own actions that is. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #66 June 7, 2012 QuoteQuotewhich part of 50% is confusing? Except that it isn't 50% in practice. I know that you have been educated in the US, so sex ed and basic biology might be lacking, but it is generally the mother who gives birth and ends up with the baby. So if you are going to end up with 100% of the burden, you clearly also have more of the responsibility to check prior to fucking. At least if you believe in taking responsibilities for your own actions that is. So again, the bitch in the miniskirt deserved it, you're saying. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #67 June 7, 2012 Quote Quote I like the idea proposed above of reversible sterilization for anyone on government assistance based on a time on assistance and/or number of children criteria. Unbelievable. Forced sterilization was done in the past and was deemed repulsive to the Nth degree. Maybe we HAVE totally lost it. It's not forced, it's conditional. Those who don't want to be sterilized just don't get further government aid. The alternative is supporting/encouraging people who can't support the children they have, to have more. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #68 June 7, 2012 Quote It's not forced, it's conditional. Those who don't want to be sterilized just don't get further government aid. once you start applying this sort of financial coercion, it's not free will anymore, and that slope gets slippery real fast. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,122 #69 June 7, 2012 QuoteSo again, the bitch in the miniskirt deserved it, you're saying. Deserved what? Deserves the situation she put herself in, due to the consequences of her own consensual act, with a partner of her choice? She chose to fuck a dead beat, so she deserves the consequences. That is taking responsibility for your actions. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #70 June 7, 2012 Quote Quote It's not forced, it's conditional. Those who don't want to be sterilized just don't get further government aid. once you start applying this sort of financial coercion, it's not free will anymore, and that slope gets slippery real fast. It goes the other way too. Once you start financially assisting someone and maintain or even increase assistance when they make more bad decisions... It's all about balance. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #71 June 7, 2012 QuoteQuoteSo again, the bitch in the miniskirt deserved it, you're saying. Deserved what? Deserves the situation she put herself in, due to the consequences of her own consensual act, with a partner of her choice? She chose to fuck a dead beat, so she deserves the consequences. That is taking responsibility for your actions. referring to rape victims. The only difference between them and this situation is the 50% legal responsibility. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #72 June 7, 2012 Quote Quote Quote I like the idea proposed above of reversible sterilization for anyone on government assistance based on a time on assistance and/or number of children criteria. Unbelievable. Forced sterilization was done in the past and was deemed repulsive to the Nth degree. Maybe we HAVE totally lost it. It's not forced, it's conditional. Those who don't want to be sterilized just don't get further government aid. The alternative is supporting/encouraging people who can't support the children they have, to have more. Won't hold up to court scrutiny, so pretty pointless to argue about here."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,122 #73 June 7, 2012 Quotereferring to rape victims. The result of consencual sex and rape are not even remotely similar. The fact that you are trying to relate the two for the sake of an internet argument is rather disturbing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #74 June 7, 2012 Quote Quote Quote Quote I like the idea proposed above of reversible sterilization for anyone on government assistance based on a time on assistance and/or number of children criteria. Unbelievable. Forced sterilization was done in the past and was deemed repulsive to the Nth degree. Maybe we HAVE totally lost it. It's not forced, it's conditional. Those who don't want to be sterilized just don't get further government aid. The alternative is supporting/encouraging people who can't support the children they have, to have more. Won't hold up to court scrutiny, so pretty pointless to argue about here. It's more constitutional than Obamacare... Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #75 June 7, 2012 QuoteQuotereferring to rape victims. The result of consencual sex and rape are not even remotely similar. The fact that you are trying to relate the two for the sake of an internet argument is rather disturbing. I find your lack of respect for the law and contempt for these women equally disturbing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
