Posted on 07/27/2006 7:23:24 AM PDT by grundle
I dont agree with forcing all women to work but I do think there should be some contingencies to getting welfare funds for pregnancy at such a young age:
Completion of school makes sense.
Cohabitation with the father (with exceptions for incest or rape).
Probably even some basic parenting classes.
Really I think this sort of thing was better handled was it was expected women wouldn't work. Society and charities took it upon themselves to address.
Now society presumes women will work and so the prescribed methods are condoms and if those fail abortion.
Making pregnancy a quick shot to a free income stream with no sorts of responsibility is of course vile and will only contribute to the deterioration of society (in a way its the same reason parents are forbidden from taking out massive life insurance policies on very young children who could then be looked at as easy money).
I agree that the best case scenario is for mothers to be at home with their babies. I dislike daycare for the most part but there must be some consequences for ones actions. A teenager should be required to finish school first, the state will pay to take care of the baby while she does that but then she must work, it will teach her responsibility and her child responsibility. Also, the father should immediately have his wages garnished the minute he gets a job. Unless of course he does the right thing and marries the girl and provides a loving home for the child.
Call me crazy, but I don't think minors should be allowed to keep their babies unless some responsible person is willing and able to provide for them. I remember seeing a story on the news with some homeless girl from Toronto living in a shelter with her baby. How can being homeless with a baby not be considered child abuse. How can someone who can't even support themselves be allowed to take on the responsibility of caring for a baby? Bleeding hearts will cry that you can't deprive people of their children just because they're poor, but when their poverty is a result of their own unwillingness or inability to provide for themselves, I think "Yes, you can."
Don't they know that the welfare money would not even pay part of the upkeep of raising a child right. I don't get it. I believe that they think they will have extra funds to party and have no idea that you actually need to spend money on the baby. Well at least Europe is getting a few kids out of it....very sarc.
Stop me if you've heard this one before...
this younger female generation is making a solid case for the islamist view of women. these girls need to learn to keep their legs crossed or go get fitted for burkhas.
I hope everyone can forgive me......:) LOL!
No wonder there are 40,000 births, there are no consequences. You got yourself knocked up (where are the 'fathers' of the babies) and you get accomodations made for you to even continue school. And a 'checque'.
Under islamist view, these 14-15 year old girls would still be mothers, albeit in a marriage to an older man, maybe as one or more "wives". Western society may have its problems, but lets not look at the extreme situation as normal. Most 14 year old girls are not having sex, never mind getting pregnant.
Huh. That's how the Democrats here in the US destroyed the urban black family unit.
I prefer to say that upon finishing school, young people are tossed, bound and gagged, onto the street of life.
For the first 18+ years of their lives (the school years), children suffer no real consequences of their poor decisions, if they're allowed to make any significant decisions at all. Is it any wonder then that they have such poor judgement?
The crowd who thinks demography is destiny should be all in favor of this, eh wot?
Someone, cannot remember who, wrote the following phrase in reference to the same group of young people, in particular those from divorced and/or single-parent homes:
"these kids litter the social landscape"
Sad, but true when you think about it. Someone (i.e. the taxpayer) has to take care of them, pick them up, put them somewhere, keep them from blowing around, but still, they are a nuisance and expensive because no one is accountable, just like litter.
While it's true that not all kids from these homes end up "littering the social landscape," the fact remains that the overwhelming majority of kids who burden the social welfare and law enforcement systems are NOT from original, intact, nuclear families. That is a fact that simply cannot be denied, no matter how much the liberals want to.
Well, that child can look forward to some good times. /rolls eyes
That is so true and sad.
Ditto....
Chav! Awesome! I learned a new word! Google "chav" and quite a few humorous sites come up. My favorite (so far) is from Urban Dictionary. Lots more to go though!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.