Rick Santorum To Single Mothers: Government Paternity Tests Or No Welfare

Completely agree with this. OP how could you possibly be all upset that a woman should actually have to know who the father of her child is? I don't like Santorum but this is a good idea.

Originally posted by hangedman13

My biggest complaint is - - - "we" (society) are still in the macho archaic mindset that its OK for men to screw around - - - but if the woman gets pregnant - - it is her fault. This is what needs to be changed - - - by how something is worded.

Well work must be done on how some woman view it too.

I don't mean to cut you off. But my focus is the kid.

Both are 100% responsible - - - and "new" wording needs to reflect that. Enough with blaming the woman.

Ultimately, it's only going to hurt the kids, which is why we give single mothers welfare in the first place.

I'm sure if the government offered to actually do paternity tests at little to no charge, they would have a lot of women taking advantage of the situation without having to force them.

But it does tell you how snobs like him view poor single mothers.

But, then again, the idea that maybe the woman has to go on welfare in the first place because she was abandoned by the father never occurs to people like this.

So what happens if the girl has a one night stand and doesn't even know the guys name?
Or rape babies

reply to post by FlyersFan


Yes, my thoughts exactly! Some states are now requiring drug testing to be eligible for state assistance so why not require DNA testing to establish paternity and hold these men responsible for their children?

Originally posted by Starwise
What this ALL boils down to is: The human population is about to exceed the planets ability to sustain.

The human population is bigger now that at any other time in human history. However, I don't think it has at all been proven that sustainability is a true problem that will face us in the near future.

Women already have fewer children than their predecessors. However, our children usually live past infancy and early childhood now. At one point, 25% of women who gave birth, died in childbirth or shortly after. In fact, our current birthrates are quite low when compared to the past. We also live longer now.

We don't have to contend with malnutrition, poor hygiene, poor or nonexistent medical care, and the lack of advances made during the industrial revolution regarding food production.

Originally posted by RealSpoke
So what happens if the girl has a one night stand and doesn't even know the guys name?

Or rape babies

If the pater has no priors, nothing.
If pater does have a rap sheet, their DNA will be in the data bank.

If it's a rape baby, the courts will do their job.

Originally posted by RealSpoke
So what happens if the girl has a one night stand and doesn't even know the guys name?

Or rape babies

Maybe the guy should have gotten her name - - and checked back in a few months.

Leave it to someone to throw Rape into the mix

On some level, I actually agree with Ol Frothy on this one but being who he is, he goes to a pretty far extreme.

The way our system is set up for single moms, child support, etc etc is completely screwed up and it needs a complete over haul and this is a good start.

Mothers who expect welfare for prenatal care, welfare after the baby is born, etc etc etc should tell the State who the Father is. That would then allow the State to get these funds repaid by the parents who are responsible for bringing this child into the world. I do not think it is something people should be "forced" to do, but if a Mother chooses not to give that information, then she can be solely responsible for the bill she created.

I do not think this should be done at the Federal level of Government, it can easily be done at the State level where this problem exist to begin with. It is a simple matter of retraining and setting new regulations. NOT creating a whole new bureaucracy.

Fact is, the way things are now only one parent (usually the father) shoulders the entire burden. In some States, all it takes is the word of the Mother with no paternity testing required ( ie; Kansas Law), and not only will the "Father" be responsible for child support but also for all repayment of any aid received by the Mother.

So Frothy certainly makes a solid point, but of course he also has it wrong.

reply to post by Annee


What does that have to do with anything?

The mom is stuck with the kid, the father isn't. If the mom or dad doesn't know each others name then how could they ever test for paternity. The dad theoretically wouldn't even know the kid exists. Same if she was raped.

Originally posted by MrWendalFact is, the way things are now only one parent (usually the father) shoulders the entire burden.

The entire burden of what?

Very few child support payments - - - cover more then a weeks worth of food. If that much.

Less Government Rick,Not more.............

Originally posted by RealSpoke
reply to post by Annee

 

What does that have to do with anything?

The mom is stuck with the kid, the father isn't. If the mom or dad doesn't know each others name then how could they ever test for paternity. The dad theoretically wouldn't even know the kid exists. Same if she was raped.

It was sarcasm.

Again -- the poster's attitude was Neanderthal.

If a woman gets pregnant from a one night stand and keeps the child - - - that is her choice. She knows she does not know who the father is. Why would she even thing she had options - - in naming the father?

Human females + concealed ovulation:


....... to obtain male aid in childrearing

..........cuckolded male continues to have paternity confidence in his offspring



Evolutionary adaptation + 21st Century = "Government Paternity Tests Or No Welfare"



Just a different perspective .... just animals doing stuff that animals do .

Originally posted by EvanB
What the hell is wrong with making fathers pay for their kids??? Bloody right they should pay!! Why should the tax payer pay for some feckless parents kids??

Nothing is wrong with making fathers pay for their kids. They should have to. There is nothing right though about punishing a child even if the mother CANNOT make daddy pay.

If you are old enough to have sex then you are old enough to take responsibility for anything that comes from it..

When is someone old enough to have sex?

Here is an interesting article about Male birth control.

But in 2008, there's still no birth control for men. What happened? In a word: money. With the cost of new-drug development hovering in the hundreds of millions of dollars, the pharmaceutical industry decided there wasn't enough of a market to make male hormonal contraceptives worthwhile. www.time.com...

Originally posted by g146541
reply to post by LErickson

 

Ahh I see, the unmentionable reason.
That is quite easy to explain however.
In that case, I'd take a dna sample of the kid and if that dna ever popped up, well we got our man.

That is a pretty big IF

And truly if a woman does not report these kinds of things, they just allow this behavior to continue, as these types will still be on the streets.

Where did that come from? Who is talking about not reporting it?

Santorum is a monster, this has been established. This article is also citing things that happened 18 years ago, let's cut the guy some slack. Even if he harbors the same radical views today, the guy has no chance to be elected president. If he beats Romney, which he won't, he has no chance VS Obama.

Originally posted by Annee

Leave it to someone to throw Rape into the mix

I threw it in long ago. Why is that a problem for you?
Given the specific statement Santorum made it is rather apt.
You do not agree?

reply to post by LErickson


I would say 12ish and older, that's when the hormones really start to kick in. I doubt a twelve year old has any intentions of having children, though I know there are crazy teens out there who want to be moms.