Jeb Bush In 1995: Unwed Mothers Should Be Publicly Shamed

originally posted by: mblahnikluver

[post]originally posted by: LogicalGraphitti

Regardless of who said it, I agree with this particular point. It seems living off the taxpayer is the "in" thing to do these days.

What a way to generalize everyone on assistance!!



I recently became a single mother. I don't get assistance and I work my butt off! Would some assistance be nice? Hell yea. It would be so I could get back on my feet. Did I plan on being a single mother? No! I was married to a man who mad great money but he was also a liar and someone I grew unable go trust. So I should be shamed for wanting better for my son and I?

You would be better off having the real world getting you up on your feet than becoming dependent on the government. Big money dad should be helping you anyway. Are you saying hes not?

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: Logarock

Are you for abortion? If the answer is no, why do you want to punish the children for being alive?

Punish the children for being alive? Are you saying it would be better to just euthanize them in the womb?

a reply to: Logarock

If you are prolife, but anti government assistance, you are actually probirth, not prolife.

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: Logarock
a reply to: MOMof3


So today we have the unwed mother industry. Maybe they should limit aid to one child only. After that no more excuses and better get your act together a bit.

Yes because women living on welfare are sleeping on stacks of cash.

But they do get a medical card, food assistance and a roof over their head ect.......that sort of incentive goes a long way for a lot of people. Its called the wealth of the minimalist. Like a guy living in his parents basement, gets feed and really doesn't do a whole lot of anything. Ok got an X-box sure. Oh and a cell phone. But no bills.

a reply to: Logarock

I prefer not to punish the children who are alive and need food. Where are the fathers?
Ok, cut food from the mouth of babes and transfer that money to finding the fathers and make them babysit and pay child support.
My 6 year old granddaughter has not heard from or received money from her father in a year. He has a job. She has a broken heart. That is the case 90% of the time with single mother. Fathers desert.

originally posted by: daryllyn
a reply to: Logarock

If you are prolife, but anti government assistance, you are actually probirth, not prolife.

Ok that sounds like the reasoning of a darkened mind. Stop listening to this dark drool. Even someone with a kid and on assistance should try to make the most of life. But when same starts having more kids on assistance they have obviously moved on into a profit centered reasons for having kids. Or at least are looking at the world through a colored flowers and sunshine soda filter.

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: Logarock

I prefer not to punish the children who are alive and need food. Where are the fathers?
Ok, cut food from the mouth of babes and transfer that money to finding the fathers and make them babysit and pay child support.
My 6 year old granddaughter has not heard from or received money from her father in a year. He has a job. She has a broken heart. That is the case 90% of the time with single mother. Fathers desert.

Good ideas here. Are you having problems with the court getting to dad? And by the way are you guys making it easy for dad to be included in the child's life? He is a complete irresponsible ass?

a reply to: Logarock



Nope. I still stand by that statement.

If you are pro-life, but do not support government assistance, you are actually pro-birth.

a reply to: MOMof3

My real problem with what is happening with mothers on assistance or whatever you want to call it are these couples, and I know several, that have families but don't married so mom can get all the benefits. Dad works and comes home at night. This thing is what is the large part of what I call the unwed mother industry. This scam is way down the road from the original intention of aid to mothers. These are dads that are in on this scam. Promoting this scam.

The other is women with many children. The only lesion they learned from the first baby is that babes equal a lifestyle supported by the government.

a reply to: Logarock

I am 64. How many times do you think I have seen this scene played out? You cannot legislate morality. If I had my way, every deserter, mother or father would be in jail. But it is too full of pot smokers. /s

The answer is never to punish a child for the sins of their parents. Food is the most basic, important ingredient for children to grow to their potential. I wish all the deserted children had grandparents as well off as me and could help them all. Our country would thrive again. HOPE is what kept the settlers, pioneers, america different. No hope produces thieves and criminals. Like the counties in the ME.

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: mblahnikluver

[post]originally posted by: LogicalGraphitti

Regardless of who said it, I agree with this particular point. It seems living off the taxpayer is the "in" thing to do these days.

What a way to generalize everyone on assistance!!



I recently became a single mother. I don't get assistance and I work my butt off! Would some assistance be nice? Hell yea. It would be so I could get back on my feet. Did I plan on being a single mother? No! I was married to a man who mad great money but he was also a liar and someone I grew unable go trust. So I should be shamed for wanting better for my son and I?

You would be better off having the real world getting you up on your feet than becoming dependent on the government. Big money dad should be helping you anyway. Are you saying hes not?

Big money dad? Wow what a jerk you are!

Yea my sona father helps. Did I say I was on assistance? No but I don't judge those who are. You don't know my bills or expenses. I owny car and have no credit cards but where I live is expensive. We survive and if I had to and needed it you bet your rear I would get some assistance. I AM A TAX PAYER!

Unless youve ever been in another's shoes you shouldnt judge. You have no idea what someone else's life is like or the hardships one faces on a daily basis especially as a single parent be it a father or mother.

originally posted by: daryllyn
a reply to: Logarock



Nope. I still stand by that statement.

If you are pro-life, but do not support government assistance, you are actually pro-birth.

So the only life you see is in me or someone else, by way of taxes, supporting an unwed mother. And but gosh I better or I am what pro death or something? This is simply the philosophy of a presumptuous generation of entitle hustlers. You get to raise your baby or babies, like a paramour of the state, and I pay for it like I am the father or something without any of the benefits of being the father.

originally posted by: mblahnikluver

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: mblahnikluver

[post]originally posted by: LogicalGraphitti

Regardless of who said it, I agree with this particular point. It seems living off the taxpayer is the "in" thing to do these days.

What a way to generalize everyone on assistance!!



I recently became a single mother. I don't get assistance and I work my butt off! Would some assistance be nice? Hell yea. It would be so I could get back on my feet. Did I plan on being a single mother? No! I was married to a man who mad great money but he was also a liar and someone I grew unable go trust. So I should be shamed for wanting better for my son and I?

You would be better off having the real world getting you up on your feet than becoming dependent on the government. Big money dad should be helping you anyway. Are you saying hes not?

Big money dad? Wow what a jerk you are!

She used that term. Said babies daddy makes big money but wont help.

Women must try as hard as they can, when discussing this issue, not to let anger for a man affect the judgment to much. And remember, I am not that man but am a man helping pay for assistance. I dare say I help women I don't even know more than baby daddy. So none of that man guilt tripping means much to me.

a reply to: Logarock

No, that isn't the only life I see, but logic would dictate that at least a portion of these mothers would need assistance.

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: Logarock

I am 64. How many times do you think I have seen this scene played out? You cannot legislate morality. If I had my way, every deserter, mother or father would be in jail. But it is too full of pot smokers. /s

The answer is never to punish a child for the sins of their parents. Food is the most basic, important ingredient for children to grow to their potential. I wish all the deserted children had grandparents as well off as me and could help them all. Our country would thrive again. HOPE is what kept the settlers, pioneers, america different. No hope produces thieves and criminals. Like the counties in the ME.

Ok but you do realize that legislating money from others, to support children, not responsible is a legislation of morality. i.e. it is immoral to set around and watch kids starve to death ect so we the legislature are going to pinch the publics purse to see that that doesn't happen. That is legislating morality.

However dam the person that suggests that a woman practice a bit of morality which is naturally the other side of that coil. At least after her first baby. I mean we can give her one brake, she wasn't alone in the thing and maybe a bit naïve or something. Ok but now say after 3 children on relief its still not cool to suggest something here?

originally posted by: daryllyn
a reply to: Logarock

No, that isn't the only life I see, but logic would dictate that at least a portion of these mothers would need assistance.

Thats a far cry from what assistance has become is all I am saying. Nobody really likes seeing a woman with a child out scraping like a dog to survive. We know that there is more to the picture, and by the grace of god go many of us, not to understand that help from somewhere should be administered. These ideas from the better angels of our nature are being exploited however by the state and some they encourage to milk the system.

originally posted by: daryllyn
Sooooo..... Pregnancy prevention rests solely on the woman? Even though she could not possibly get pregnant without a man?

Why are men absolved of responsibility in the aspect of birth control? They play an equal role in conception, why aren't they under scrutiny here?

You can't have it both ways...

It's your body if you want an abortion, but it's not your body when it come to pregnancy...Hmmm

You read into my statement with feminism bias already formed...

Where in my post did I suggest it was only a woman's responsibility? When I say protection that means the full spectrum of protection, not only birth control, which BTW doesn't prevent the spread of disease. My post is looking from a family with a girl point of view since that is the OPs point. Now I have two sons and I put a lot of time and effort into their growth including how hard life is outside the home, and how that hard life becomes even harder if they get a girl pregnant before they have attain a foot hold in the world.

I can't control other kids, so if some girl wants unprotected sex with my son I'm hoping it is my influence over the years that will help guide him in making the right choices, and if part of that influence is my disappointment then so be it. This is even more important with women since they will have the responsibility to raise the child in most cases, and it is her body this is being done to. This doesn't minimize the responsibility of the dad but we both know how this typically ends up and the woman gets the brunt of the pain.

originally posted by: daryllyn
a reply to: Logarock

If you are prolife, but anti government assistance, you are actually probirth, not prolife.

How about pro-responsibility

a reply to: Xtrozero

You can't have it both ways...

It's your body if you want an abortion, but it's not your body when it come to pregnancy...Hmmm

You read into my statement with feminism bias already formed...

I never said it wasn't "my body" when it comes to pregnancy. I've managed to prevent pregnancy for six years, and will take permanent measures in the near future, because two kids is enough for me. I cannot handle any more and my health situation makes it a pretty bad idea.

All I was saying, is that men can take preventative measures, too, but the focus on this thread seems to be very much on women when they should not be the only ones taking precaution.

a reply to: Logarock

It is so easy to judge something you will never experience. I know many, many women who birth control fails. All kinds of birth control. And there are dosages and patterns that must be maintained with money, and temps to take. Sounds sexy huh? There are just some things that man cannot "control". Love, whether fantasy or real, is one. The desire to be loved and to please. This side of women has been taken advantage of. If women can say no, why can't men? Let me guess, it is not their nature to say no. I don't know since I will never experience being a man.