English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

They seem to be so happy that the woman didn't have an abortion, but when she needs some government assistance she's put down. Why?

2007-03-09 17:47:24 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

20 answers

Bingo, nail on the head. Now you better have that baby you can't possibly afford, but don't expect us - who are telling you that you have to follow our morally superior stance - to help you out in any way, that's YOUR problem. I don't notice too many pro-lifer's disrupting their lives by adopting any of these unwanted children either. I must know a hundred people who have pro-life bumper stickers on their car and never hesitate to be self-righteous about their stand. But I don't know one of them who has adopted an unwanted child born to a mother that did what they wanted and went through with the pregnancy, regardless of whether she was fit to be mother or could provide for it.

But God forbid they get their taxes tapped for support of welfare mothers - those bunch of lazy, no job having baby machines that drain the economy. Forget that day care costs so much their whole check goes for it if they work. So they stay home to care for their kids and apply for welfare so they don't starve. But that's their problem right? As long as they do what's morally right, then the pro-lifers can sleep at night on their nice soft mattresses and not worry anymore about that woman whose life is a nightmare - she did what was morally right, and so did they by preaching to her about it. But that's where their moral concern conveniently stops isn't it? Lord I really can't stand the complete and utter hyprocrisy of it. Those people are unbearably self-righteous and chronically selfish.

Oh brother, it just reeks of hypocrisy doesn't it?

2007-03-09 18:01:15 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 3

Because they are neither conservative nor pro-life. To many, pro-life conservative is not an accurate description of their political hearts. It is an avatar. It is not pro-life to favor a government that kills people. It is not conservative to accept a government that tears down the foundation upon which it was built. A true pro-life conservative would understand that a society is judged on how it treats the poorest among it.

2007-03-10 02:12:21 · answer #2 · answered by Mac 3 · 1 0

This is an excellent observation, and one which the former Pope made some years back.

I am not opposed to limited welfare, because I am pro-life. I am against uncontrolled population growth in the welfare rolls, however. The rest of us cannot keep having children we cannot afford to take care of. Why should we continue to allow welfare mothers (and fathers) to have more children they cannot afford? Someone, please answer this question!

2007-03-10 02:05:38 · answer #3 · answered by Shrink 5 · 2 1

There are alternatives to welfare.

It's not every single mother on welfare that doesn't try to better her situation.

Some do, some don't. It's the ones that don't which are at issue.

As for the child, everyone has the right to be born.

2007-03-10 02:30:45 · answer #4 · answered by MoltarRocks 7 · 2 1

If you are a big enough girl to spread your legs and breed, then you should be mature enough to hold down a job and support yourself and whoever else you bring in this world. Welfare is meant to tie you over as a social safety net, not a hammock where you can relax your whole life.

2007-03-10 02:09:32 · answer #5 · answered by Cherry_Blossom 5 · 3 1

You don't know the difference? Really?
I'm a democrat, but I am not so foolish as to deliberately misunderstand the difference between people who have abortions due to recreational sex vs. the concept that "I don't owe every unwed mother to support her for the rest of her life".

Most of us are tired of the constant "you owe them".

We don't. If they want the help, they have to help themselves and leave the support to those who want to volunteer. After all, they CHOSE the life they lead by their actions. This is called personal responsibility.

Likewise, it is your right to choose this, but not to act like everyone else owes you a handout, and that attitude is backfiring more and more.

However, who chooses for the unborn? Do we have the right to choose to kill them just because they are inconvenient and may ruin our lifestyle? Don't we have a right to have unprotected sex and then clean out the unborn fetus so we can do it again?

Actually, I'm pro-abortion, for reasons of my own, but I am educated enough to understand their arguments even if I disagree.

I also believe in helping unwed mothers, but not with handouts, and not for the mother's sake, just for the child's.

Learn both sides.

Your arguments could be much more convincing if you didn't ask things most of us know the answer to.

2007-03-10 01:56:17 · answer #6 · answered by mckenziecalhoun 7 · 3 2

I can't speak for everyone, but I have seen far more welfare fraud than legitimate cases.

To my eternal shame, I did not turn in someone when I *knew* she was defrauding the system. She was living with her boyfriend, and *he* paid the rent. What did her welfare checks go to? SHE BOUGHT A BRAND-NEW TRUCK. Our friendship ended when she had the audacity to whine to *me* about welfare reform. I blew up and pointed out that myself and my ex were both working full-time, yet we couldn't afford a new car. I told her to get her *** into *my* truck and drop it off at *my* house since *I* was paying for it.

I have *NO* problem helping out people truly in need, but would far prefer to see our tax dollars supplementing the income of people who are making an effort. We need to stop rewarding people for making poor decisions and start expecting them to help themselves. If you don't have the skill set for a well-paying job, why is it so bad to expect you to do *something*?

Editing to say excellent post, McKenzie!

2007-03-10 01:56:25 · answer #7 · answered by Jadis 6 · 3 2

Thank you soo much for having the guts to make this point on here. I completely agree with you. I am pro-choice but when I hear anti-choicers (sorry, can't call them pro-lifers) complain when a woman keeps her baby and needs aid, it makes me sick. I guess they think that all these babies that are "saved" should be adopted out to rich childless people.

2007-03-10 01:56:35 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3 2

Because the woman who has a child on welfare probably would of had an abortion if she could have afforded it.

Get a degree and job.

2007-03-10 01:58:32 · answer #9 · answered by SGT 3 · 2 3

Conservatives are not only pro-life but also pro-marriage. And that's why they don't like any single mothers or fathers who have sex and children outside of marriage.

2007-03-10 01:53:11 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 6 2

fedest.com, questions and answers