Posted on 02/22/2008 10:43:29 AM PST by Sopater
For the second time in two years, an Argentine teenager has given birth to female triplets, BBC News reports.
The 16-year-old, who goes only by the name of Pamela, first gave birth to triplets at the age of 15.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Wowzers!That is amazing. I would imagine she needed help taking care of them. There's no way she could have done it all by herself. THAT would have been a full time job, and we know that she spent plenty of time in the sack, or she wouldn't have 69 kids. LOL! IF it was just her husband and children that would make 71 people living in one house.
The word “vagina” is funny in all contexts, as are “adenoid”, “sphincter”, and “coccyx”. Some parts of the body are just hilarious.
Einige Leute sind auch griesgrämig alte Knackers...
Oh really, with that many deductions, how much income tax you think he pays? They are subsidized by the non child producers.
Yes, heaven forbid we should post funny graphics on FR. I hope you called abuse on #22, #28, #41 & #109 since that was the graphic that accompanied those comments. What would we do without you anti-humor Church ladies ?
Good point - plus think about the $$ being handed out in May. $1200 per couple and then $300 for every child under 17- and he has how many under 17 years? 14 or 15 of them?
If there is even more than one parent around. Usually just a single mother who had the child when she was quite young (or underage) herself. I’m rather of the opinion that nobody should have children before they’re 30. Most don’t have the maturity or financial security to do so.
Honestly,
because the girl was 19 and the mother was long gone...we never really discussed her. I think the assumption was she was dead.
The girl was declared mentally incompetent to care for herself, which was a blessing.
Or flat out raped.
Sick.
get thee to confession pronto !! :)
thanks spot!
Was this a woman or a Russian wolfhound?!!!
It depends on how much money he makes that decides how much of a break he gets. I don’t know if he meets the threshold or not.
He declares the dependents, but if he makes too much he doesn’t get the credit at the end.
If I remember correctly, he also has employees?
As far as claiming that he is being “subsidized”
hmmm..is there a difference between keeping more of the money you earn as opposed to receiving a government check?
I think there is a difference.
On top of that...this nation is about to experience what it is like to have the majority of the population aging out of the workforce and expecting to live a comfortable retirement.
Anyone who is resentful now of large families will get their revenge eventually when these kids have to fork over a large percentage of their income in order to support the elderly.
So even those who didn’t have any kids, will someday benefit from the young Duggars out there in the workforce.
After two sets of triplets, I think tuba might be more accurate than you’d first think...
“I’m rather of the opinion that nobody should have children before they’re 30.”
first one here at age 21. 3 by age 27.
we just don’t see eye to eye on much tonight do we?
Well, you might be a success with raising your children in that regard, but I’ve seen far too many young women that had children in their teens or early 20s with their men having either abandoned them, divorced, or ended up in jail, all hunting around for new daddies for their babies. A very sad spectacle. Some of them conceded they lacked the maturity at the time to be having children, the rest don’t believe they made a mistake at all. I’m in my early/mid 30s and have yet to have any children, if I ever do.
well - there are couples out there who married young, had children young, and stayed together.
Unfortunately it does seem today that the trend is to “experiment” first. “Hook up” with someone. Move in together and try it on for size - a type of test drive.
They think it is the wise thing to do - except that babies get conceived during this process and don’t go away when the live-in relationship doesn’t work out.
I think there has been a great diminishment in how young people today view marriage and family.
But I also see people in their 30’s, 40’s, and 50’s who are just as bad.
I’m not so sure it’s an age thing as it is our culture is changing.
If everyone had to pay the same, say $1000/yr tax, regardless of income, of course he would not be subsidized. Since people with kids, "statistically" pay less per person than a single person, then yes, singles subsidize (cost of gov) those with kids. There will always be exceptions to the rule.
“Someone needs to explain to her that it’s a uterus, not a clown car.”
That’s the best I’ve read in a while!
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.