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.

 

Pass legislation to mandate drug testing for welfare recipients

page: 12
13
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Maslo
 


So what if someone is on welfare for a few months? They need to be sterilized and never be able to have any children for the rest of their lives?

It absolutely is discrimination. If you are going to say poor people can't reproduce, then why not say black people and Latinos can't reproduce? After all, the majority of people in our prisons are black or latino.

EDIT to add: And yes, the government is entirely to blame. It is a mathematical certainty that one day we will all be on welfare under this current economic system.
edit on 23-6-2011 by CobraCommander because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 04:39 PM
link   
So long as this is the economic policy of the United States, poverty and welfare is exclusively the blame of our government. So long as this is our economic structure, there will be runaway compounding interest on national debt and more and more people who cannot afford the basic necessities of life no matter how hard they work...

Vampire Economics



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by CobraCommander
 





So what if someone is on welfare for a few months? They need to be sterilized and never be able to have any children for the rest of their lives?


Look at Chinese population control program for details of how it could work in practice. Sterilization would be used only rarely, for repeated offenders, IMHO.




It absolutely is discrimination. If you are going to say poor people can't reproduce, then why not say black people and Latinos can't reproduce? After all, the majority of people in our prisons are black or latino.


Because melanin level is not important as a condition for having children, poverty is.

As for economy and its causes, that is another topic, and does not change anything I said in the end, whether it is caused by evil banksters or aliens from zeta reticuli.
edit on 23/6/11 by Maslo because: (no reason given)

edit on 23/6/11 by Maslo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 04:54 PM
link   
In my less that sensible times I consider myself to be a right wing nut case, I think the above ideas seem to make perfect sense, why let the lazy drain the workers.

But you can't live in the cartoons all your life, thinking like a rational human being the forced sterilisation and drug testing on the unemployed is so far beyond wrong that I'd prefer to just inhume them all. in fact, why stop there, if we are in a society that actually thinks that this topic is even worth more discussion than a mention and a flat dismissal an grounds of decency, we need a full reset. 2012 yet?



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 04:56 PM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 





PUBLIC benefits, you gave up your 'rights' to privacy....


Maybe in Nazi Germany. You're out of your freakin gord. Do this and you should be the first one to be robbed at gun point. Don't be a fool. This would be anarchy at the highest level. Forget about walk'in down any street in
America.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Maslo
 


So totalitarian Communism is your solution? Besides, the Chinese don't sterilize people as a matter of policy. They simply won't give you money for more than one child.

Having children is not a crime, so your "repeat offenders" comment is way off base. There are many people who were born into poverty and went on to be successful people who have made important contributions to the world.

Economy is NOT another topic at all. We are talking about welfare, that is economics buddy. Stop blaming the victim.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 05:05 PM
link   
Total atheistic, inhuman, android mentality.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 05:09 PM
link   
I'll throw you a bone here Maslo. If you are on welfare, and you have more than one or two kids while collecting benefits, any other children you have will not get you any additional benefits.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by CobraCommander
reply to post by Maslo
 


So what if someone is on welfare for a few months? They need to be sterilized and never be able to have any children for the rest of their lives?

It absolutely is discrimination. If you are going to say poor people can't reproduce, then why not say black people and Latinos can't reproduce? After all, the majority of people in our prisons are black or latino.

EDIT to add: And yes, the government is entirely to blame. It is a mathematical certainty that one day we will all be on welfare under this current economic system.
edit on 23-6-2011 by CobraCommander because: (no reason given)


How many times have I stated TEMPORARY sterilization??? Or birth control?

The point is, no more being rewarded for the extra babies



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by moonrunner
In my less that sensible times I consider myself to be a right wing nut case, I think the above ideas seem to make perfect sense, why let the lazy drain the workers.

But you can't live in the cartoons all your life, thinking like a rational human being the forced sterilisation and drug testing on the unemployed is so far beyond wrong that I'd prefer to just inhume them all. in fact, why stop there, if we are in a society that actually thinks that this topic is even worth more discussion than a mention and a flat dismissal an grounds of decency, we need a full reset. 2012 yet?


Can't wait...

Full speed ahead, I say.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by ButterCookie


How many times have I stated TEMPORARY sterilization??? Or birth control?

The point is, no more being rewarded for the extra babies


No such thing as temporary sterilization. And mandating birth control is not possible. As it is right now, most people on welfare can get free birth control. How do you intend to babysit welfare recipients every day to make sure they are taking their pill or wearing a condom?



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 04:00 AM
link   
reply to post by CobraCommander
 




No such thing as temporary sterilization.


www.masculine.de...

And as I have said, all his is theoretical discussion only relevant if safe and cheap temporary sterilisation becomes possible (if it already isnt). Of course I would never agree with it if the procedure was dangerous or not reliably reversible.
edit on 24/6/11 by Maslo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 05:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Maslo
 


First, I don't trust the government when they tell me our water is safe to drink, I am certainly not going to trust the government to tell me that forced "temporary" sterilization is safe. What's next, forcing welfare recipients to be micro-chipped and tracked at all times? Would seem like a great incentive for the government to actually put MORE people on welfare. Have them all work as sterilized micro-chipped slave laborers producing military gear and living in a converted prison cell.

Second, what you are talking about there is sterilizing men. Not only is that sexist and completely biased, but also completely ignores the fact that men do not bear children. You would have to sterilize women, as it is women who get welfare money for kids, not men.

EDIT to add: Interesting link tho, thanks for sharing.
edit on 24-6-2011 by CobraCommander because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 05:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by CobraCommander
I'll throw you a bone here Maslo. If you are on welfare, and you have more than one or two kids while collecting benefits, any other children you have will not get you any additional benefits.


So how will you ensure they are taken care of, then?



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 05:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maslo

Originally posted by CobraCommander
I'll throw you a bone here Maslo. If you are on welfare, and you have more than one or two kids while collecting benefits, any other children you have will not get you any additional benefits.


So how will you ensure they are taken care of, then?


If CPS finds that you are unable to provide for or are neglecting your children, especially as a result of poor reproductive choices knowing full well that you would get no additional funds, then they would have to place the children in state/foster care. But just to be clear, I have NO affinity for that system either. I have seen terrible things happen to kids in state care. Its usually worse than the situations they came out of. But just the same, I do not see it as rational to give women a financial incentive to reproduce when they are impoverished.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 05:54 AM
link   
reply to post by CobraCommander
 





Second, what you are talking about there is sterilizing men. Not only is that sexist and completely biased, but also completely ignores the fact that men do not bear children. You would have to sterilize women, as it is women who get welfare money for kids, not men.


Again, it is not discrimination if it is justified in reality. Sterilization procedures may be different for men and women, laws would have to reflect that. The important thing is that the rule would be the same for both sexes - do not procreate unless you can take care of the children properly. How it is enforced is another issue.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 05:58 AM
link   
reply to post by CobraCommander
 


This is where I disagree. Society will have to foot the bill, and children will have a bad upbringing. We need to prevent that at the source, and recognize that there is no unalienable right to unlimited procreation.

Not to mention that in many poorer countries, welfare and foster care is at a much lower level than in the US, if any. There is no question about sterilization being the right thing to do under these conditions.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 05:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Maslo
 


Discrimination is discrimination regardless of what justifications one might put forth.

But now we are veering off into another whole topic that I sounded off on in this thread...

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 06:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by CobraCommander
 


This is where I disagree. Society will have to foot the bill, and children will have a bad upbringing. We need to prevent that at the source, and recognize that there is no unalienable right to unlimited procreation.

Not to mention that in many poorer countries, welfare and foster care is at a much lower level than in the US, if any. There is no question about sterilization being the right thing to do under these conditions.


Well, you sure aren't going to get Mexicans to stop reproducing.

But yes, reproduction and a persons sexuality ARE in fact unalienable rights to go right to the very core of what it means to be a human being in the first place. All we can do is de-incentivize poor reproductive choices. If a woman knows that she cannot profit from another kid, and might lose all of her kids by taking the risk, well, she won't take the risk or at least will make damn sure she does all that she can to avoid getting pregnant.



posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 06:03 AM
link   
reply to post by CobraCommander
 


Well, I disagree. Do we discriminate against blind people because they cannot drive a car or fly a plane? Discrimination has to be based on a trait that is unimportant to what is the issue, for example like skin color and getting a job. But biology is not equal, and our laws concerning reproduction and such may be gender-biased in some ways, because reproduction systems are different.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join