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.

 

Bill Would Reduce Welfare Benefits For Women Who Cannot Prove They Were Raped

page: 5
21
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 08:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cuervo

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Rape is an under-reported crime by a lot of studies.

Couldnt these be viewed as an incentive to report your assault?

In the process of filing a report you generally sign a statement. Two birds.

Also, shouldnt cases of incest be investigated?

I suppose this could also encourage false reporting and make for a whole lot of trouble.

You could interpret this as a huge incentive to actually report and investigate crimes if you wanted to.

I guess it depends on your politics.


Exactly my thoughts. It would encourage reporting rapes and convicting more rapists but it might also encourage false accusations.

All in all, it is a damaging bill. When it comes to topics as horrible and sensitive as rape, it's best to just give the benefit of the doubt to the victim and simply work around that framework to make modifications.


It wouldn't necessarily increase the number of reported rapes or the number of convictions. Most women don't report rape for a reason.

In many states, if a woman becomes pregnant by her rapist, guess what? The rapist is entitled to visitation AND custody. In order for the woman to gain full custody of the child, she has to drop the rape charges against her attacker.

And now PA will deny benefits of these children who a) didn't ask to be born; and b) were conceived under the most violent circumstances possible.

But that's the GOP for ya. They'll fight tooth and nail to keep you from getting an abortion, but the minute the child is born, they don't give a damn what happens to it.




posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 08:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by HappyBunny

But that's the GOP for ya. They'll fight tooth and nail to keep you from getting an abortion, but the minute the child is born, they don't give a damn what happens to it.


Boy, ain't that the truth.

Maybe those rich republicans should open up orphanages throughout the country and then They can support all of the unwanted babies.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 08:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hope4peace
Maybe those rich republicans should open up orphanages throughout the country and then They can support all of the unwanted babies.

Nope, at that Point those babies are part of the 47%, and the GOP wants no part of them.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 08:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hope4peace

Originally posted by HappyBunny

But that's the GOP for ya. They'll fight tooth and nail to keep you from getting an abortion, but the minute the child is born, they don't give a damn what happens to it.


Boy, ain't that the truth.

Maybe those rich republicans should open up orphanages throughout the country and then They can support all of the unwanted babies.



Yep, think of all the tax credits they'd get. Why, they might even be in the 47% after scamming the government out of so much money. After all, isn't that why so many welfare mothers have more kids, to get the tax credits?

/sarc



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 08:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by 3chainz
reply to post by NavyDoc
 



The idea of the bill is to discourage people from having more children than they can afford to take care of and is based on the principle of it not being right to have more children if you cannot take care of the ones you have.


I get the point of the bill. If you read the OP you would understand what the thread is about.
edit on 30-10-2012 by 3chainz because: (no reason given)


I read the OP, I understand what the thread is about, and I rolled my eyes at the premise and jumping to conclusions of the salacious opinion piece that was the OP.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 08:38 AM
link   
Here's an idea. PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. Novel concept I know.

People grasp onto the "documented rape" cases as a validation of the entire population on assistance.

Why for the love of god (just a saying) would you want another child when you CANNOT support the ones you already have?



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 08:46 AM
link   
I'm not a fan of either of the main two parties. I disagree with many things on both sides of the aisle. That is why I went on a long search for a new political philosophy...and I became a Libertarian. I believe in freedom above everything else.

That being said...lets talk briefly about the two parties and their unrealistic views.

The Dems have a big heart, but their grasp on the reality of the system is tenuous. You cannot endlessly take care of people that are quite capable of taking care of themselves. What you need to do is make sure they have the freedom to do so. You do that by reducing fees and regulations to start a business. The Dems are Nanny/police state. Politically correct speech, over regulation and basically "the mob rules" mentality.

The Repubs...well...while I can agree with fiscal responsibility, I don't like their social policies at all. They say they are for small government and a return to the Constitution and Bill of rights, but they are in everyone's private life...and that is not "small gov". They say they are pro-life...I disagree with that statement. They love their wars for oil and resources and they have no problem letting returning vets suffer on the streets...starving, homeless...waiting for the winter to kill them. I'm afraid that is not "pro-life". I think there is an ugly and secret agenda here.

What is that? A return to the "poor farms" and debtor prisons. You know prisons are now privately owned "businesses" that score profit from your tax dollars by incarcerating people. The more people, the more profit. I also believe they are hoping for a new generation of dumbed down citizens that will accept slave wage jobs, live on their poor farms and feed the greed and gluttony of the top percentile.

No, the Republicans are NOT pro-life. They are "pro controlling your life"...just as much as the Democrats, but in a totally different way.

This whole ruse is to get more poor children who will grow up to be mildly educated work horses that will tolerate whatever scraps and crumbs the "rich" cast down from their tables. Rather than cracking down on foreign imports and imposing rigid tariffs, they would rather slap our citizens back to the stone age in order to be "competitive"...neither party is going to fix anything.

This is not the country I love...it is not the vision of our founding fathers. This is ugly and corrupt and there are very few solutions to it now. We have slept while the foxes guarded the hen-house...the only way to fix it is to flush it all away and start over. Remove all incumbents and replace with people that can think beyond political party rhetoric.

/rant over



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by 3chainz

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by 3chainz
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


What is your point?


My point was condoms are a helluva lot better contraceptive method than none at all.


And people still get pregnant due to condom failure, so you have no real point.


I guess you're right. The only fool-proof, 100% method available is abstinence.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 09:11 AM
link   
with all this bickering over who deserves the kind help of our over bloated gov't.....
there is one aspect of this picture that seems to be missed!!!

why are so many people working in full time jobs and still coming home on payday and NEEDING THE GOV'T HELP OR ANYONE'S to pay the bills and put food on the table????

pay too low,
cost of living too high.
or are we americans just too danged stupid and do such a terrible job budgeting our finances???

or maybe all three???

whatever, but seems to be bickering about who deserves the help and eliminating those who are deemed not to deserve the help does nothing to solve the actual problem!!!
we need higher paying jobs
we need lower cost of living
we need more intelligence when it comes to our finances!!!

actually addressing those three issues might help some!!!
eliminating people from access to those programs isn't going to, and well, will just create more problems down the road...
and in this case one of those problems, at least half the country it seems thinks it a problem... is abortion!!!



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 09:21 AM
link   
reply to post by 200Plus
 

in order for people to be "personally responsible" , they need an avenue to the independence that is required to be so!!!

in this case...
jobs that pay enough to pay the bills...
higher education that doesn't leave them 20 or so thousand dollars in debt or more...
easily accessible birth control at a very low cost...
and gee...
religious institutions that didn't push a dogma at women trying to coerce them into being obedient little servants to their husband would be nice!!!
having this "well, he needs a job, he has a family to support, she doesn't need a job, she has a man supporting or or danged well should have!!"" get wiped out of the human consiousness would be nice also!!!



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 09:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by 3chainz

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by 3chainz
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


What is your point?


My point was condoms are a helluva lot better contraceptive method than none at all.


And people still get pregnant due to condom failure, so you have no real point.


I guess you're right. The only fool-proof, 100% method available is abstinence.


In the history of mankind tell me where that mindset has worked? Do you honestly think that is a realistic expectation?



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 09:33 AM
link   
Who the hell in the world says anyone should get jack$%^& for anything done to them. So sick of the stance people take like something is owed to them.
i mean should we just replace everyones money when they get jumped and wallet stolen on what they report stolen? oh yah i had 6k large in that wallet?gtfo
To the person with the facts, you can easily stay on welfare for a good portion of your life, all you need is some crap job, act like a idiot and get fired, go back to the line and get back on, yay another 5 years of pretending to look for a job. Let alone if you have any kind of disability bam score!! Or children with disabilities bam score! I hear the damn stories all the time from people at work that come from not so nice areas, that's just the tip of the iceberg as to how far you can "soak the system". Just ten years of listening to story after story of how his cousin, uncle(drug dealer) ex wife, and half his ghetto "fooling" the system.

Did I rape her? No I didn't. Sure its a great thing to do for someone but lets face it, its not free! And IM not even talking about the victim, IM talking about the dumbazz that raped someone, why should I pay for his kid? If she doesn't report it, he'll do it again. Do I get to keep paying for this guy to have 60 kids spanning 50 states and territories? What if the kid turns out unhealthy,from some crackhead who raped her, now we get to pay for a disabled kid till 18 AWESOME. Do I get to pick the kids school, how they act, what they dress in, do I get updates on how the child I help support is doing, do I get a profile to even see if she is a fit mother and not some crack head hooker who gets pregnant every other year?

It doesn't say they aren't getting anything, it says REDUCED as in if you want more money for a kid others are going to have to pay for, report the damn thing. Sure someone could say someone raped them, what's stopping a female/male from doing that now. And when you do a DNA test on the kid, you'll find out its not, and counter the claim with false accusations, slander, libel, ect.

Rape is a heinous act I don't think anyone will dispute that (that's right in the head) and its a horrible thing to "relive" but nothing says you have to run right down to the police or hospital the minute it happens, you may not find out pregnant for weeks months in which case there would be no rape kit involved or poking and prodding, and as for the name of the person, IM sure a lot are done by people the victim knows, but IM also sure a lot aren't, so a name wouldn't even have to be given, just give a description, a statement, and a doctors follow up, IM sure would please the records. It even says right in the wording " IF KNOWN" so don't give me this BS its a bill against woman and children. If it was they wouldn't get jack $%^& the way mother nature intended it. So I think we're still doing a OK in the taking care of people I don't know, or care about department. Its designed to get rapists off the streets and help stop people abusing a system that's already ABUSED.

Everyone runs into bad luck, a bad person, or just the wrong place, wrong time. I believe everyone should also get a helping hand in any manner of life, but I also don't think any single benefit should go over a year. Work, kids, disability, home ,health. Everyone deserves a chance to "live the life" but when its on someone else's back, I could really care less whether your quality of life sucks or not, especially when most of us are barely scraping by ourselves.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by 3chainz

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by 3chainz
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


What is your point?


My point was condoms are a helluva lot better contraceptive method than none at all.


And people still get pregnant due to condom failure, so you have no real point.


I guess you're right. The only fool-proof, 100% method available is abstinence.


Which doesn't work and is totally unrealistic. The biggest number of teen pregnancies come from the Bible Belt states where they teach abstinence-only.

And the red states have the most people on the dole. We all know that. And yet they rant about others getting welfare.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 10:03 AM
link   
reply to post by 3chainz
 


I like it how you throw a chart in there and put some numbers together and make everyone believe that everyone on welfare is old people and not young people with alot of kids who just don't want to work.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by HappyBunny
 


How about you prove these facts. I'm tired of people throwing around numbers without proving proof.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ancient Champion
reply to post by 3chainz
 


I like it how you throw a chart in there and put some numbers together and make everyone believe that everyone on welfare is old people and not young people with alot of kids who just don't want to work.


Can you come up with a chart proving that all welfare recipients are young people with a lot of kids who don't want to work?



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ancient Champion
reply to post by HappyBunny
 


How about you prove these facts. I'm tired of people throwing around numbers without proving proof.


Teen pregnancy rates, top 10 states:

womensissues.about.com...

www.msnbc.msn.com...

Abstinence only does not work:

en.wikipedia.org...

Abstinence only and teen pregnancy:

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...


Using the most recent national data (2005) from all U.S. states with information on sex education laws or policies (N = 48), we show that increasing emphasis on abstinence education is positively correlated with teenage pregnancy and birth rates. This trend remains significant after accounting for socioeconomic status, teen educational attainment, ethnic composition of the teen population, and availability of Medicaid waivers for family planning services in each state. These data show clearly that abstinence-only education as a state policy is ineffective in preventing teenage pregnancy and may actually be contributing to the high teenage pregnancy rates in the U.S.


www.foxnews.com...

The number of districts teaching abstinence-only is dropping, because it doesn't work. I think Obama abolished the funding for it anyway, but I could be wrong about that.


edit on 10/31/2012 by HappyBunny because: (no reason given)


ETA: About welfare:

wiki.answers.com...


39% white 11,661,000 of 29,900,000 recipients

38% black 11,362,000 of 29,900,000

17% Hispanic 5,083,000 of 29,900,000

The strictest sense of the term though would be those getting income directly from the U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services which is about 8% of the total population that receives some form of assistance and 1.7% that receive most of their income (50% or more) from these programs.


1.7% nationwide. Yep, let's take an axe to the whole program, eh?


edit on 10/31/2012 by HappyBunny because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by 200Plus
I can see this type of law being used to counter that. Is there a way to see the percentage of women on welfare in Penn that claim the child is a product of rape?


Yes. We could give them jobs that pay significantly more than welfare does along with top-notch child care for single mothers while they are at their new jobs so they don't apply in the first place.

People are funny that way. They just LOVE money and if you offer them lots more to do something productive and contribute to society than their basic subsistence living on social programs...they will leave the welfare rolls in DROVES.



As far as this having an effect on low income women because they do not have access to affordable contraception. I call that fornicating bovine feces. A women that has 20 billion in the bank has access to the same affordable contraception as a 16 year old with no job. Keep your legs closed. ITS FREE


Yep. It's free. And guess what? IT DOESN'T MATTER. It's not a moral argument...it's a practical one. No matter how loud you shout on the rooftop and no matter how many abstinence seminars you hold you will still ALWAYS have less unplanned, unwanted, babies on the welfare rolls by giving out 100% FREE birth control than you will if you charged even a penny for it. So...what we think people "ought" to do is irrelevant.

As a taxpayer, you have ONLY three choices.

1. Pay for free birth control to lower the amount of people having kids who cannot support them.
2. Support a bunch of unwanted kids for 18 years at a crack because you were too cheap to buy free birth control.
3. Pay for NEITHER of the above instead support those unwanted kids in the prison system for THEIR ENTIRE LIVES. And if you think foodstamps and condoms are expensive...go check out what it costs to lock somebody up for a year.

And you know what? It sucks. These are three options which we all WISH wasn't the case. In Utopia, everybody is perfectly responsible, can recognize the wisdom of protected sex, and will forestall their own sexual gratification should they not have birth control in the nightstand and ready to go. They also ride unicorns and are best buddies with leprechauns. Utopia doesn't exist. Never has...never will.

Hell, if you want your tax bill to go DOWN we shouldn't be just making free birth control accessible...WE SHOULD MAIL A BOX OF CONDOMS, AND A MONTHS BIRTH SUPPLY OF BIRTH CONTROL PILLS TO ANYONE WHO SIGNS UP ONLINE FOR ONE. That way...they don't even have to remember to run down to planned Parenthood....it just shows up in the mailbox.

Don't get me wrong...it would be REALLY COOL if such a thing wasn't necessary. But that's not the way that it is. Period.

We have to be willing to accept reality before we can deal with it.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ancient Champion
reply to post by 3chainz
 


I like it how you throw a chart in there and put some numbers together and make everyone believe that everyone on welfare is old people and not young people with alot of kids who just don't want to work.



Did you read the OP? He provided a link for his information. These are not some numbers he made up.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by 3chainz

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by 3chainz
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


What is your point?


My point was condoms are a helluva lot better contraceptive method than none at all.


And people still get pregnant due to condom failure, so you have no real point.


I guess you're right. The only fool-proof, 100% method available is abstinence.


Coming from a guy whose religion is BASED UPON abstinence not being able to prevent pregnancy.

How ironic.




top topics



 
21
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join