It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Do poor women have a right to have children

page: 17
19
<< 14  15  16    18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 10 2019 @ 09:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

Awe.. come on...
I mean you seem to have already gone there...




posted on Sep, 10 2019 @ 10:15 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

If you say so Straw Man/Women/Whatever .......



posted on Sep, 11 2019 @ 09:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: SeaWorthy

OK. So what's your solution without controlling peoples lives?

Are you incapable of understanding that taking property from one person, at gunpoint, to give to someone else, because they say they 'need' it, is 'controlling people's lives' (the people whose property is being stolen)?

So you, by advocating for extortion payments to poor people because they 'need' it, are advocating for controlling people's lives in the most vile and despicable way.



posted on Sep, 11 2019 @ 09:40 AM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl

Are you incapable of understanding that it's been going on and accepted since before the American colonies? The amount of kindness may have shifted back and force, but it's been generally accepted that weather its providing the poor with at least the most basic of necessities, of leaving the poor on the own, roaming the streets, throwing them in jail or workhouses, whatever.. society pays a cost!! Even letting the starve on the streets.



posted on Sep, 11 2019 @ 10:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
Anyone else notice the op seems to be directing their gripe at just the mothers, like one day they just decided they wanted a child and by just their amazing mental powers their bodies just kicked into baby making mode... no male spermie needed?

I guess the op disagrees with that other thread that's been running where people seem to be trying so hard to get men out of any responsiblity as far as child support? Because if women are the ones wihe final say when it comes to abortion, and get to avoid the responsibility then that should negate any responsibility they might have.

Ya, let's force hormonal birth control onto poor women...
That will take care of the problem...
No it wont, at least not to 100 % efficiency rate. So, what happens when it fails? Yous gonna start forcing abortions? And, what about those women who have a valid medical reason to avoid hormonal birth control? I suppose them being poor is a valid justification to endanger their health..

I doubt if every women can obtain effective birth control at no cost. The mandate in Obamacare was compromised to the benefit of company's "sincerely held religious beliefs". They said that the title x program would be able to fill in the gap for those this decision affected. Then, they tried to place a muzzle on the title x providers and whole states, the ones in charge of doling out those funds to the providers in their states decided to pull out of the program..

Here's an idea, how about you keep your noses out of women's healthcare? Stop trying to section it off as something separate and not as worthy for insurance coverage or govt social programs. Because, to be quite honest, some of yas are not only starting to sound like hypocrites, but worse. Yous sound like you dont really have a problem with the govt providing birth control, or with men coercing women onto getting abortions. As long as its men who gets to decide and controls which women should or shouldn't be having kids, you have no problem at all.. your problem is women holding the bulk of the power themselves to decide what is best for them personally.
Because women deciding for themselves isnt a good tool for eugenics, for that you need planning and decision making on a larger scale. You have to remove the ability to control birth rates from one portion of the population while you force them down the throats of another.
Which is why you have what really is starting to seem like a hypocritical double speak coming from some conservatives.
They want the govt out of their bedrooms, but then, maybe those low income housing units should have cameras installed in the bedrooms just so they can validate that the man properly slapped his condom on...
They want their freedom uninfridged, but will happily forfeit the freedom of their fellow men and women. And, of course, they believe they will always be in that special class that gets to enjoy those freedoms. They don't realize that they are forfeiting their own.



Just cus your comment bears repeating.



posted on Sep, 11 2019 @ 10:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: tanstaafl

Are you incapable of understanding that it's been going on and accepted since before the American colonies?

Voluntary charity, yes, of course.

We are talking about extortion. Theft of personal property by land pirates, at gunpoint, wherein they pass on 5% or so of their take to those 'in need'.



posted on Sep, 11 2019 @ 10:39 AM
link   
a reply to: FyreByrd




Here's an idea, how about you keep your noses out of women's healthcare?


Believe me I would LOVE LOVE LOVE to do this the second they Keep their hands out of my pockets! $$$$$



posted on Sep, 11 2019 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl

Charity did not build the poor houses and workhouses. And, the colonies did accept responsibility for the poor and used taxation to assist them..



posted on Sep, 11 2019 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl

Charity did not build the poor houses and workhouses. And, the colonies did accept responsibility for the poor and used taxation to assist them..



posted on Sep, 11 2019 @ 02:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: tanstaafl

Charity did not build the poor houses and workhouses.

Ummm... I'm sure they built quite a few. Maybe even most.


And, the colonies did accept responsibility for the poor and used taxation to assist them..

I'm not saying they didn't. I'm saying it is immoral to take from someone at gunpoint and give it to someone else. It is theft, plain and simple.



posted on Sep, 11 2019 @ 04:04 PM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl

It's been the number one favorite practice of kings and queens since the beginning of time. Rape the peasants of the fruit of their labor, keep all but a fraction of what they took to pass among their friends and family, have lavish parties and feasts.. and return a small pittance back to those who come to find out, you've taken far more than you should have to avoid losing your head to the angry mob.



posted on Sep, 11 2019 @ 04:55 PM
link   



posted on Sep, 11 2019 @ 05:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: tanstaafl

It's been the number one favorite practice of kings and queens since the beginning of time. Rape the peasants of the fruit of their labor, keep all but a fraction of what they took to pass among their friends and family, have lavish parties and feasts.. and return a small pittance back to those who come to find out, you've taken far more than you should have to avoid losing your head to the angry mob.


Ok maybe that was true back then, but in my OP there are no fruits and most definitely NO labor going on.

If poor people really want to rise up, one of the best ways to do that is to not have children until they are in a financially sound place. The best way to get in that place is by education, which will also show them why having a lot of kids in poverty will only keep them in poverty.



posted on Sep, 11 2019 @ 08:02 PM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

Ahh.... ya.... mommy and daddy are just sitting around all day long watching soap operas and reality game shows while the kids are left roaming the streets and climbing up on the counter tops to rummage the cupboards looking for the near empty box of cereal.
First thing I want to point out is that even if mom isnt working outside the home, taking care of kids is work!!
But outside of that, if you are including the parents of that 70% or 80% of kids on the school lunch program..... most of them have at least one parent working...
You just want to caste the image that they are all just sitting around all day non-productive.



posted on Sep, 11 2019 @ 08:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: JAGStorm

Ahh.... ya.... mommy and daddy are just sitting around all day long watching soap operas and reality game shows while the kids are left roaming the streets and climbing up on the counter tops to rummage the cupboards looking for the near empty box of cereal.
First thing I want to point out is that even if mom isnt working outside the home, taking care of kids is work!!
But outside of that, if you are including the parents of that 70% or 80% of kids on the school lunch program..... most of them have at least one parent working...
You just want to caste the image that they are all just sitting around all day non-productive.


Even if one parent is working, if they simply do not make enough to take care of a child they shouldn't.
Why is this so complicated?
If they fully can't take care of that child they are dependent upon the state and basically other people to pitch in. Those people who are responsible sometimes put off having children for years, yet have to pay for these irresponsible people. That isn't right. Try to defend it all you want but everyone knows deep down it is wrong.

If you want a kid, great, just take care of it... very very simple. Also my examples in my OP were not about the working poor, it was about people that are not working at all, so yes indeed mom and dad are sitting around being non-productive, not actually... they are quite productive in baby making...

Oh there are more REAL stories too. There is a mom here that is on baby number 8.. somewhere along the line she got tired and just decided to stop working and became homeless. What is the solution for her, just keep championing her to keep pumping out the babies??



posted on Sep, 11 2019 @ 09:03 PM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

And I know plenty of stories too...
Bus drivers, factory workers, resturaunt managers,...

And the reason why it is so complicated is that you cant actually shove a baby back inside your tummy a couple of years later if daddy decides to skip town or his job fails to keep up with the ever rising cost of living!!

Its complicated because the human body is complicated and one size fits all cookie cutter solutions dont work too well when it comes to healthcare, which seems to be what you want! Just force them all to get an estrogen based implant just to make sure they dont have kids...
Not to mention the reaction from the "but my sincere religious beliefs" christian right reaction would be.. ya, that would be rather hypocritical wouldn't it? No, we cant force your employer to carry insurance that covers birth control... but we can force you to be on it! Sorry, your sincerely held religious beliefs dont matter to us.. we only care about your employer.

Do I agree that people shouldn't have kids they cant afford, ya, I do. Do I actually expect anyone to actually listen to my advice? Not really. People will do what the are gonna do.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 02:18 AM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar




And the reason why it is so complicated is that you cant actually shove a baby back inside your tummy a couple of years later if daddy decides to skip town or his job fails to keep up with the ever rising cost of living!!


Oh I agree with you on that, but guess one you can do, Don't have any more babies!
If you have one baby and are struggling, having two or eight will not make your life easier.

BTW I am not religious or against birth control in any manner. I think it should be encouraged.




Do I agree that people shouldn't have kids they cant afford, ya, I do. Do I actually expect anyone to actually listen to my advice? Not really. People will do what the are gonna do.


I think that is part of the problem. Somewhere along the line people stopped holding themselves and others accountable for their actions.



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 08:43 AM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl

What are you talking about?



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 08:55 AM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

Dude...
I dont agree with the asking for everything, although most countries in the world do offer benefits to newborns.
At least here is Europe that the population is getting extremely old, people no longer go to the parks to play with children, only dogs and old people in wheelchairs. So the only people having children are emigrants or poorly educated people.
If it wasnt for them our economy would crash, educated people will not work for low payed jobs, that are necessary for the system to run.
So if they dont have children, who is going to do those jobs? You? Will you learn how to clean, make bread and shoes, and work for peanuts? I dont think so...



posted on Sep, 12 2019 @ 09:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bitxushanty
a reply to: JAGStorm

Dude...
I dont agree with the asking for everything, although most countries in the world do offer benefits to newborns.
At least here is Europe that the population is getting extremely old, people no longer go to the parks to play with children, only dogs and old people in wheelchairs. So the only people having children are emigrants or poorly educated people.
If it wasnt for them our economy would crash, educated people will not work for low payed jobs, that are necessary for the system to run.
So if they dont have children, who is going to do those jobs? You? Will you learn how to clean, make bread and shoes, and work for peanuts? I dont think so...


HAAAAAAA if this doesn't convince anyone of the problem I don't know what will............... Read this VERY carefully, this guy is basically spelling it out for you.

Keep on having babies, keep on bringing them in, we need people to do the menial work that nobody wants to do........

Yes sir, you proved my point!







 
19
<< 14  15  16    18  19 >>

log in

join