It is time to change why and how one makes a choice in the world and if they make more than one bad choice I feel they should pay for the rest of their mistakes.
2007-01-23 02:35:52 · 4 answers · asked by Gypsy Gal 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
I have a big problem with welfare, I don't think we should pay for most of it. I have to get drug tested at work, but they don't have to... and as for the child thing I think it should be only one then any other kids they have they should give them up for adoption after all they can't take care of themselves how can they take care of their kids.
2007-01-23 02:40:40 · answer #1 · answered by mhireangel 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
cash checks do stop after 2 kids... They can still get medicaid and food stamps . Why should the child not have food or medical treatment because the parent's screwed up.. A lot of people have to have it to live...I worked full time, went to school full time and had nothing left after bills to even buy my son NEW clothes or food... I sure could not have afforded his $1000 a week therapies. and my $800 a month medicine..DO u know a lot of people on the system are there because the husband walked out or they were killed or domestic violence... that' not their fault.. so they suffer. What about elderly, sick, retired , those of disability.. what r we going to do ..shoot them all so we don't have to take care of them. Do u want to know something.. Medicaid will NOT pay for birth control (or didn't) so I wonder why the women keeps getting pregnant.. The govt needs to start educating kids in school about parenting and the cost of taking care of a child.. It would stop some of it. Stats show though that there are more illegals getting the benefits illegally that DON"T deserve them and havn't paid into them than most US citizens... We should concentrate on that
2007-01-24 00:16:47 · answer #2 · answered by chilover 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I wonder whether such a decision might be objectionable to those who hold that the life of every child is sacred.
The difficulty with poor people is that they don't have money. Since it takes money to raise a child, wouldn't reducing the amount available to the poor endanger the life of a child?
Imagine that you're in a position wherein you have to decide, based upon your available resources, which child is fed and which is not.
2007-01-23 10:41:41 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
But then where would Maury find all of his "talent"?
2007-01-23 10:54:42 · answer #4 · answered by cheetah 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋