[Ezekiel]

Here’s a question to ponder: If a man has 25 kids with 18 different women and isn’t paying child support on hardly any of them, should that man be allowed to keep having kids?

If the government didn't pay the 'ho's, those 18 wouldn't have had much incentive to procreate with a deadbeat.

To paraphrase LTJG Holden, "In conception there is profit."

[kingu]

If the government didn't pay the 'ho's, those 18 wouldn't have had much incentive to procreate with a deadbeat.

Crudely put, but nails the head with the hammer. Yet again, government policy creates an unintended horror. Of course, RomneyCare's solution is a $50 abortion.

[Tax-chick]

As conservatives, our first instinct should always be to remove a government intervention, rather than to add a government imposition. In this case, take away the money that keeps Reality from kicking people in the teeth when they stupidly have sex without marriage, instead of saying, “Since you get the money, we’re going to increase the level of control.” Just stop the money, and the costs of stupid behavior will make a big difference in the outcomes.

(Got the “Operation Petticoat” reference; it’s a favorite movie here.)

[PapaBear3625]

If the government didn't pay the 'ho's, those 18 wouldn't have had much incentive to procreate with a deadbeat.

A hundred years ago, black children were predominantly born in wedlock and were raised in two-parent families, and there was no talk about "legacy of slavery".

The crucial difference between then and now, is that there was no welfare then. A single mom had to either work to support herself and the kid, or give the kid up for adoption. This was a large disincentive against sex outside marriage.