Why is it that Republicans love babies before they are born, but after they are born the love seems to fade?

Question

You would think Republicans would be all for social programs helping economically disadvantaged families, thereby helping the "no longer fetus" babies/children. Yet, they want to cut social programs left and right and call those who apply for them "lazy", etc. I know many single mothers who had to rely on them, at least temporarily because raising a kid can be so darn expensive these days. So, why the fetal fascination and then the cold shoulder to the born?

Answer 1

It's the ultimate in hypocrisy. As long as that mother doesn't choose to abort her fetus, and she follows the "morals" of the pro-life people, that's all they care about. They don't want to hear about realistic things such as daycare that is so expensive a single mother can't afford to work so she stays home and uses social programs to survive. Their morality seems to hit a wall when it comes to giving more than lip service. I must know a hundred people with pro-life bumper stickers on their cars who rail on about the murder of our children, but I don't know one of them that has adopted an unwanted child, or approves of social programs to help single mothers and disadvantaged families survive. How dare we tap their income for taxes to pay for those "lazy" people who can't support their children in this economy - but they damn sure shouldn't be having abortions for any reason. It is this type of hypocrisy that makes many people look at those who feel they are morally superior with a jaundiced eye. Their responsibility ends when you do what they want. What happens afterward is your problem, not theirs.

Answer 2

I don't think its because of "lazy" people. But, I have seen a lot of people abuse the system by having more kids. Prior to the change from unlimited years to only 5 years, I saw people having more kids just to extend getting welfare. Also, people who aren't drug addicts claim that they are so they can get money from the government. Getting over $2000-3000 in aid. When another family of 2 (single parent and child), get denied because he/she gets $25 more than what's allowed and not factoring in other bills and rent/mortgages. Not getting help with childcare because of making a dollar over minimum wage. I do realize its hard to raise a child on your own. I have for a few years. Try raising a child in Hawaii when everything is expensive (example=gallon milk $6.00, gas $2.75/gal). I'm a Republican and I do have love for fetuses, babies, children, and teens (I'm 23). They don't want to cut social programs left and right but right now we're in deficit (look at the numbers). They are trying to lay more rules down so that people don't abuse it. As we all know, we're sending troops to different countries (Iraq primarily) and we're spending money to send them and resources there to help rebuild. So..... yeah. that's all I have to say on that.

Answer 3

You statements are laughable and do not represent the reality of what is being said in the debate. Republicans are not against assistance for the needy. What they are against are lifetime entitlements which reward people for not taking responsibility for their own lives. If you need assistance take it, then get back on your feet. What Democrats call for are lifetime entitlements where there are no stigmas. The can't or won't help yourself, we will do it for you model. This is not workable and it is not preferable. These programs have destroyed our cities and killed the family structure in impoverished neighborhoods by replacing the father figure with a welfare check. People have to take responsibility for their own lives, if more would do this there would be plenty of money to help all who need it. However, the debate will rage on because it has always appeared to me that Democrats by and large are all for responsibility for anyone who doesn't support them, but anyone who might vote for their destructive feelgood policies are exempted as they attack the other side in silly manners like this. Rather than engage a real honest debate about the problem in our inner cities, what created those problems and how best to fix them.

Answer 4

They are all for new babies to grow to be new tax payers. They expect everyone to make it on their own. Those that are rich they don't want to share with the poor. The rich want to get richer. They like standing up like they are god and like to look big. their money makes them feel good. Republicans are pusging religious believes to be married and not have abortions. Keep having babies and not depend on the government for help for anything. They want large families to be big tax payers. If you a unwed parent they think raising a child should be a punishment for you for not being married.

Answer 5

Please tell us just what social programs the Republicans want to cut left and right ?

Making sweeping generalizations is meaningless without any facts to back it up.

So, I'll provide you some facts :

Food Stamp funding has increased from 17.5 billion in 2001 to 37.5 billion in 2006, that's a 114% increase !!!

WIC ( supplemental nutrition funding for women and infants) funding has increased from 4.3 billion in 2001 to 5.46 billion in 2006, a 27% increase !!

National School Lunch funding has increased from 9.8 billion in 2002 to 12.7 billion in 2006, a 29% increase !!!

Federal Education funding has increased from 41 billion in 2001 to 88 billion in 2007, a 113% increase.!!!

Medicare Funding has increased from 237 billion in 2001 to 374 billion in 2006, a 57% increase !!!!

Medicaid Funding has increased from 129 billion in 2001 to 180 billion in 2006, a 39% increase.!!!

It doesn't seem the Republicans are cutting social programs to me !!!!!!!

And by the way, remember all the complaining about Bush giving all the corporations such huge tax cuts ?

Well they were a myth to:

Corporate Federal tax revenue has went from 151 billion in 2001 to 353 billion in 2006, a 133% increase !!!!!

Corporations now pay 14% of all Federal Tax's, back in 2001 they only paid 7.5% of all Federal tax's.

Thats the highest percentage in over 30 years.

Answer 6

Some people who apply for them ARE lazy, and those people make it harder for those who really do need help to get it.

Answer 7

Your question contains a false premise.

Republicans don't support destroying babies by surgical dismemberment or chemical burning AFTER they are born, either.

Answer 8

Shame on republicans. It's totally unrealistic to expect a mother to carry a child until it's born and then care for it herself, without the help of taxpayers.

Answer 9

Hold up ! Stop distorting facts.....Republicans have overhauled welfare programs - better known as welfare reform. But, still allowed people to be on that assistance for five years...now be logical and intellectual when speaking from a subject matter. It is a shame when our government allowed people to make welfare a career choice. Stop blowing all that hot air needlessly. Although you mention that your friend had help when she needed it, you cross over and project it as not being there for the needy. Try being a realist and grow up!!

Answer 10

Republicans don't have a problem with people helping THEMSELVES.