Honestly, now that Obama is the nominee........

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by ajmccarrell

I basically agree with you. I would support radical welfare reform and a cessation of all funding of anything else. In my perfect world, you would be required to apply for at least 10 jobs a day, or seek a four year degree to qualify to be on welfare. The degree would have to be in a field that pays on average more than $40,000 per year upon graduation. The business, legal and medical fields all have degrees that do this. You would be required to go to a REAL school and not some crappy DeVry or University of Phoenix program that no one accepts. You would be on birth control, be subject to drug and alcohol tests, maintain a C average and lose the ability to vote while on welfare. Harsh?! Yes. Effective? Yes.

I would be for putting the subdermal or some other relatively long lasting birth control in any pubescent girl on demand, without parental consent, and on the govt.'s dime.

[ajmccarrell]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I would be for putting the subdermal or some other relatively long lasting birth control in any pubescent girl on demand, without parental consent, and on the govt.'s dime.

That is WAY too much of an infringement of the parent's rights as far as I'm concerned. Our children are OUR children and not the governments. If the government takes control of the parent's job, the parent is less likely to do so, which means more kids on government programs. Not a good idea.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by ajmccarrell

That is WAY too much of an infringement of the parent's rights as far as I'm concerned. Our children are OUR children and not the governments. If the government takes control of the parent's job, the parent is less likely to do so, which means more kids on government programs. Not a good idea.

I don't really care about the parents' rights. I am more for the woman's rights. She has to carry the baby and we have to (usually) pay for it.

[ajmccarrell]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I don't really care about the parents' rights. I am more for the woman's rights. She has to carry the baby and we have to (usually) pay for it.

Not with you there either. If we're going to have abortion rights, I think the man should have say in that matter also. If he doesn't want to support the child, he should have a say in aborting it. Otherwise, it's a sexist law. I mean, a woman who doesn't want to be a mother is called pro-choice, but a man who doesn't want to be a father is called a dead-beat or any variety of other things. I mean, you can deduct alimony, and alimony can be subtracted from your income for low-income housing qualifications, etc. However, child support cannot be. The law is set up in a very discriminatory fashion. If you don't want a kid, do what every married woman does and stop having sex.