Quints + whatever God brings

[bananacat]

Seems like walnut is stirring up trouble even after I put him/her on ignore. And yet everyone was quick to jump in and claim that they're not trolling. If not a troll, then either a fundie lite or a Duggar leg-humper. I called it before and walnut is further proving my claim.

As for the whole taxpayer thing, I am just sick to death of this view that children are both the property of their parents and the sole responsibility of their parents. They're people and part of this society and are entitled to all the same rights and benefits regardless of their parents. These children are citizens as much as I am.

[Rachel333]

Seems like walnut is stirring up trouble even after I put him/her on ignore. And yet everyone was quick to jump in and claim that they're not trolling. If not a troll, then either a fundie lite or a Duggar leg-humper. I called it before and walnut is further proving my claim.

As for the whole taxpayer thing, I am just sick to death of this view that children are both the property of their parents and the sole responsibility of their parents. They're people and part of this society and are entitled to all the same rights and benefits regardless of their parents. These children are citizens as much as I am.

Eh, people can have really vile opinions without being any of those three things.

And the second paragraph, absolutely! I see people wanting to control people on welfare (the drug tests in some states required to get government assistance--which actually cost more money than they save--come to mind) and I wonder if they care that they would be hurting the children as well.

I also just really hate the idea that tax payers should be able to control and judge the lives of people receiving assistance. I've met a lot of people who think they should be able to decide what people buy with food stamps and get upset when they see people buying items they don't approve of.

Cracked.com has some surprisingly good articles for a comedy list site, and I really liked their [link=http://www.cracked.com/blog/the-4-types-people-welfare-nobody-talks-about_p2/]article[/link] on welfare, particularly the part about kids.

I don't blame anyone for forgetting about them because when we have the welfare debate, it's almost entirely based on how we perceive its fully adult, able-bodied members. In those exchanges, kids are only brought up as ammunition. "They keep having babies, and I'm the one who ends up having to pay for them!" I've even heard people saying that poor people reproduce so they can get more government money. Just an honest, no bullshit note here: If you're one of the people who think this, you're far too fucking stupid for this conversation. Door's to the left. You can take a lemon bar on your way out.

[Childless]

I absolutely think that the government has the right to tell you what you can and cannot use food stamps to buy. If you want sole decision making in your shopping preferences, use you're own money to buy groceries. If you buy food on the taxpayers dime, the government has the right to tell you that you cannot use it on alcohol, soda, and junk food. If I'm paying to feed your kids, then I want my money spent on healthy foods for them, not Cheetos and Coke.

I have no problem with people using government programs when they need help. It's what the programs are there for. But, you also have to follow the rules set up for those programs. If you don't like the rules, then my suggestion would be to get off the programs as soon as you can or try your best not to have to get on them in the first place.

[Mama Mia]

Have my like, Childless. I know what you're saying. And no, it's not the children that annoy me, they have it pretty bad already, and whether or not she took any fertility meds... five or nine, either number between was too many for them already.

I just hope that whatever these parents cash in, spend on their children (quality food, books, field trips, tutoring, hobbies)... and not on inappropriate and selfish things. Still, the parents grind my gears... jus murmurandi...

And on what are you basing your belief that they have too many kids ? Even based on your belief that financial independence is the most important factor, who is to say they don't have enough? The father works full time, they have a huge house, doesn't that meet your criteria ?

[Childless]

The only people who really annoy me are the ones like Kristina and her husband who are all "The government is EVIL!!!! Government programs are EVIL!!!! God will provide for us." and then they go on a ton of government programs. I'm glad they use them but I want them to just shut the fuck up and realize that without all the ebil government programs their children would starve and have no medical care.

Kristina and her husband drive me nuts. This is just one reason why.

[Mama Mia]

Also kind of interesting how quickly this particular family was jumped on because its assumed they are getting some sort of taxpayer support. They have 9 kids, not 19, what could it possibly be about this family that makes the conversation turn to welfare so quickly ? ..........hmmmm, what could it possibly be ? :roll:

And yes, I know the conversation often goes there, but it seems like a really fast and far jump in this case. From they might have Medicaid due to being preemies to "omg, one-way street welfare and Cheetos with the food stamps I pay for damn it !"

[roddma]

It wouldn't matter even if the preemies were on Medicaid. Medicaid is there to help children and they all deserve it regardless of how they got here. I don't like this attitude that we're suddenly allowed to judge people as soon as they start getting a benefit from living in a decent society. This is the kind of attitude that leads to children starving because their parents are afraid to face the scrutiny that would happen if they used the public benefits that exist precisely to make sure children have food.

I never said children should starve. It is the whole 'what ever amount some Deity will give us attitude' is what I am against. Even if they are well off there are other issues . We already talk about how difficult it must be for Quiverfull to give their kids equal attention and the older siblings giving up childhoods. This is wrong no matter your beliefs. Then you never know when a $100,000 job could be gone. Parents who struggle with two kids on assistance already probably aren't likely to continue having more. I feel women who keep having children regardless are either controlled or trying to fill a void. When is society going to value women for themselves and not fertility?

Blocking those who disagree with you is childish. I could understand if they were explicit but otherwise unnecessary.

[roddma]

I'm not for having more kids than you can afford,but the plus side is that they most likely will grow up to become productive citizens and taxpayers,therefore contributing back to society.

Coming from a big family does not warrant productiveness. We have seen this already. I also think the big family craze will come to a grinding halt. I don't the trying to live as our grandparents thing.

[Stephanie66]

I do get that the parents won't have much time to spend with the kids individually. Nine kids under the age of 6 is going to be extremely demanding.

My point is it is really none of our business how many kids they have, or if they end up using public assistance. They don't seem to be NOW. No one can predict the future...even middle class people with good jobs got nailed in the economy.

[OkToBeTakei]

Seems like walnut is stirring up trouble even after I put him/her on ignore. And yet everyone was quick to jump in and claim that they're not trolling. If not a troll, then either a fundie lite or a Duggar leg-humper. I called it before and walnut is further proving my claim.

As for the whole taxpayer thing, I am just sick to death of this view that children are both the property of their parents and the sole responsibility of their parents. They're people and part of this society and are entitled to all the same rights and benefits regardless of their parents. These children are citizens as much as I am.

:lol:

Walnut blocked me for 'Stalking' ..I did actually take it seriously and look at what I may have said or done to be a stalker considering from my view that I was kind of lost as to what this meant. Turns out I disagreed with her opinions on quite a few occasions. I do hope everybody who I disagree with which is quite a few do not feel I am stalking them .Also as many quite rightly disagree with my opinions and tell me often on here I want you to know I quite like the fact you do...you STALKERS you.

Bananacat you and I disagree quite often, am I your stalker or you mine or are we just disagreeing with our opinions quite strongly at times ...this is exhausting.

I do agree though that she/he does not have to be a troll or a fundie or maybe even a leghumper. As the OP said some just have different opinion and at times they are 'Vile' if it is not yours.

What I do find very sad is the fact that Walnut continues regardless and when faced with opposing or differing opinion or even being outright told WHOAH that is really ignorant carries on regardless in some misguided immature two left feet manner possibly trying to win on the internet? I have no idea really of her/his motivation but I find it sad that blocking or trying to prove a point appears to be more important than actually reading what others are saying.

I have learned a lot on FJ and continue to do so. I still probably totally offend at times but I certainly welcome being told so in a constructive way. Sometimes the kinder FJ is good. But recently I find in that good move we are less likely to say ..and I do mean in a respectful way. NO NO NO AND NO..and here is why.

Am I picking on or piling on Walnut for saying in the past week that people with mental illness should 'off' themselves? Or that blatantly racist comments are OK?

Well I will always voice an opinion when that level of ignorance enters..Stalker? OK OkToBeStalkei :lol:

Now on to the topic..

[OkToBeTakei]

I absolutely think that the government has the right to tell you what you can and cannot use food stamps to buy. If you want sole decision making in your shopping preferences, use you're own money to buy groceries. If you buy food on the taxpayers dime, the government has the right to tell you that you cannot use it on alcohol, soda, and junk food. If I'm paying to feed your kids, then I want my money spent on healthy foods for them, not Cheetos and Coke.

I have no problem with people using government programs when they need help. It's what the programs are there for. But, you also have to follow the rules set up for those programs. If you don't like the rules, then my suggestion would be to get off the programs as soon as you can or try your best not to have to get on them in the first place.

OK.

What is more acceptable in a Welfare state? Or where we pay taxes?

I do NOT use that road so why should my taxes go to a lollipop lady for safety. I drive my kid. Not my problem.

I do not use the library. I don't care if folks can't afford books.

Well he chose to use drugs I hate my tax money goes to help him maybe turn his life around.

WHY should I be responsible for the elderly who did not save for old age. Leeches.

WHY should I pay taxes for those who are obese and don't have medical problems but are a drain on my taxes through their self inflicted health problems?

WHY should I pay taxes for smokers as above?

Why do I pay taxes for a military that wages war I do not agree with?

Why do I pay tax for immigrants?

Why do I pay tax education? I don't use it.

Etc. Etc.

Why do I pay for other peoples poor decisions? I pay because that is what a good welfare state is built on. Are there those that can use and abuse it? Absolutely. Of course it is angering. At what point though do you want to 'dictate' what others do ..do you wish those who continue to have children they cannot afford sterilised? You want to tell them what they can and can not buy? You really genuinely do not want to live in my country then. We do not use food stamps it is just plain old money. (Give or take assisted school meals, baby milk and nappies.) Healthcare is free. Yes my taxes pay for it.

How far do you take it?

Do you want to tell a medically infirm obese person what they should and should not buy with their money?

Do you resent paying for a smoker to have chemo?

Do you resent that those who made or make poor decisions get help? That that is what being a part of a decent society is? I am not having a go pointedly at yourself and I realise my culture is very different but this type of attitude horrifies probably due to the fact that in it's own way and without you realising it's dangerous. Let's control. History and all.

There will always be those who try to work the system no denying it. Seriously though look at it. Would you rather have a life on welfare and it's not so great rewards or strive for better? How sad if the most you can or will achieve in life is that. So no. I do not resent or pity or wish to control. I would like to help and more than anything not judge. Attitudes will not change when people are so derogatory about poor choices and the societal BURDEN they so patronisingly shoulder. Why should people even try to change when faced with that disdain.

[Mama Mia]

OK.

What is more acceptable in a Welfare state? Or where we pay taxes?

I do NOT use that road so why should my taxes go to a lollipop lady for safety. I drive my kid. Not my problem.

I do not use the library. I don't care if folks can't afford books.

Well he chose to use drugs I hate my tax money goes to help him maybe turn his life around.

WHY should I be responsible for the elderly who did not save for old age. Leeches.

WHY should I pay taxes for those who are obese and don't have medical problems but are a drain on my taxes through their self inflicted health problems?

WHY should I pay taxes for smokers as above?

Why do I pay taxes for a military that wages war I do not agree with?

Why do I pay tax for immigrants?

Why do I pay tax education? I don't use it.

Etc. Etc.

Why do I pay for other peoples poor decisions? I pay because that is what a good welfare state is built on. Are there those that can use and abuse it? Absolutely. Of course it is angering. At what point though do you want to 'dictate' what others do ..do you wish those who continue to have children they cannot afford sterilised? You want to tell them what they can and can not buy? You really genuinely do not want to live in my country then. We do not use food stamps it is just plain old money. (Give or take assisted school meals, baby milk and nappies.) Healthcare is free. Yes my taxes pay for it.

How far do you take it?

Do you want to tell a medically infirm obese person what they should and should not buy with their money?

Do you resent paying for a smoker to have chemo?

Do you resent that those who made or make poor decisions get help? That that is what being a part of a decent society is? I am not having a go pointedly at yourself and I realise my culture is very different but this type of attitude horrifies probably due to the fact that in it's own way and without you realising it's dangerous. Let's control. History and all.

There will always be those who try to work the system no denying it. Seriously though look at it. Would you rather have a life on welfare and it's not so great rewards or strive for better? How sad if the most you can or will achieve in life is that. So no. I do not resent or pity or wish to control. I would like to help and more than anything not judge. Attitudes will not change when people are so derogatory about poor choices and the societal BURDEN they so patronisingly shoulder. Why should people even try to change when faced with that disdain.

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

[bananacat]

Also kind of interesting how quickly this particular family was jumped on because its assumed they are getting some sort of taxpayer support. They have 9 kids, not 19, what could it possibly be about this family that makes the conversation turn to welfare so quickly ? ..........hmmmm, what could it possibly be ? :roll:

And yes, I know the conversation often goes there, but it seems like a really fast and far jump in this case. From they might have Medicaid due to being preemies to "omg, one-way street welfare and Cheetos with the food stamps I pay for damn it !"

Every single person in the United States gets taxpayer support. Every single one of us. Never pretend otherwise. If you went to a public school, drove on a road, went to a public park, had safe water and clean air, then you have received taxpayer support. It's called living in a society and nobody gets to feel superior because they receive a different type of support than others.

[roddma]

OK.

What is more acceptable in a Welfare state? Or where we pay taxes?

I do NOT use that road so why should my taxes go to a lollipop lady for safety. I drive my kid. Not my problem.

I do not use the library. I don't care if folks can't afford books.

Well he chose to use drugs I hate my tax money goes to help him maybe turn his life around.

WHY should I be responsible for the elderly who did not save for old age. Leeches.

WHY should I pay taxes for those who are obese and don't have medical problems but are a drain on my taxes through their self inflicted health problems?

WHY should I pay taxes for smokers as above?

Why do I pay taxes for a military that wages war I do not agree with?

Why do I pay tax for immigrants?

Why do I pay tax education? I don't use it.

Etc. Etc.

Why do I pay for other peoples poor decisions? I pay because that is what a good welfare state is built on. Are there those that can use and abuse it? Absolutely. Of course it is angering. At what point though do you want to 'dictate' what others do ..do you wish those who continue to have children they cannot afford sterilised? You want to tell them what they can and can not buy? You really genuinely do not want to live in my country then. We do not use food stamps it is just plain old money. (Give or take assisted school meals, baby milk and nappies.) Healthcare is free. Yes my taxes pay for it.

How far do you take it?

Do you want to tell a medically infirm obese person what they should and should not buy with their money?

Do you resent paying for a smoker to have chemo?

Do you resent that those who made or make poor decisions get help? That that is what being a part of a decent society is? I am not having a go pointedly at yourself and I realise my culture is very different but this type of attitude horrifies probably due to the fact that in it's own way and without you realising it's dangerous. Let's control. History and all.

There will always be those who try to work the system no denying it. Seriously though look at it. Would you rather have a life on welfare and it's not so great rewards or strive for better? How sad if the most you can or will achieve in life is that. So no. I do not resent or pity or wish to control. I would like to help and more than anything not judge. Attitudes will not change when people are so derogatory about poor choices and the societal BURDEN' they so patronisingly shoulder. Why should people even try to change when faced with that disdain.

You are missing the point. Driving on roads, housing, and education are necessary. Anyone with a half brain can use birth control. We have every right to be irate about choices that can be controlled. I sense cognitive dissonance here.

[Feberin]

I do get that the parents won't have much time to spend with the kids individually. Nine kids under the age of 6 is going to be extremely demanding.

My point is it is really none of our business how many kids they have, or if they end up using public assistance. They don't seem to be NOW. No one can predict the future...even middle class people with good jobs got nailed in the economy.

It is impossible to predict the future but the attitude that they will welcome as many blessings as God gives them makes me think that there is no financial planning when it comes to adding to the family. What if she's pregnant again and has triplets next year? That seems to be a possibility to me. I think kids are a huge responsibility and there should be some planning. I think very few people can afford nine children with seven of them being in diapers and probably five on at least some formula. I mean this couple has SEVEN children one and under. Even ignoring the insider tip on this board that says she was using fertility drugs that sounds odd to me.

[Mama Mia]

I see so its only completely necessary activities that should be covered. So if you fall down a mountain while hiking and require extensive, life long medical care and can no longer work....should you get any help ? Hiking is optional after all.

Do I get to withhold my portion of taxes that go to military rations, cause I think that soldier made a stupid choice signing up?

If you choose to walk down the street alone carrying an expensive bag and wearing expensive jewelry talking on your iPhone can I refuse to help pay for the cop who investigates when you're mugged, because it was stupid to be flashing all that wealth?

[OkToBeTakei]

You are missing the point. Driving on roads, housing, and education are necessary. Anyone with a half brain can use birth control. We have every right to be irate about choices that can be controlled. I sense cognitive dissonance here.

REALLY?

So anyone with half a brain can not overeat?

Most people know smoking is harmful?

The only dissonance here is yours. Poor choices are poor choices. You wish to punish one above another because it suits you.

[OkToBeTakei]

I see so its only completely necessary activities that should be covered. So if you fall down a mountain while hiking and require extensive, life long medical care and can no longer work....should you get any help ? Hiking is optional after all.

Do I get to withhold my portion of taxes that go to military rations, cause I think that soldier made a stupid choice signing up?

If you choose to walk down the street alone carrying an expensive bag and wearing expensive jewelry talking on your iPhone can I refuse to help pay for the cop who investigates when you're mugged, because it was stupid to be flashing all that wealth?

No don't be silly. But you should have used birth control FOR FUCK SAKE :lol:

[walnut]

Great... After saying that I want adults to use their freaken brains and be on birth control and not to drop litters of kids, and bananacat still has a big, lesbian crush on me and thinks I'm fundie. Amazing. Trust me, I'm not that interesting, I'm just not too popular with this horrible idea of personal responsibility for your actions, esp. when kids are involved. I'm used to it. Keep on loving me, your love keeps me warm and fuzzy :3 And no, I don't think taxpayers are slaves or anything, they are the only reason this country works. The government does not have any money, what they have is theirs individually. What goes to people comes from people. If they stop shedding their hard earned money, this country will be over.

[walnut]

I see so its only completely necessary activities that should be covered. So if you fall down a mountain while hiking and require extensive, life long medical care and can no longer work....should you get any help ? Hiking is optional after all.

Do I get to withhold my portion of taxes that go to military rations, cause I think that soldier made a stupid choice signing up?

If you choose to walk down the street alone carrying an expensive bag and wearing expensive jewelry talking on your iPhone can I refuse to help pay for the cop who investigates when you're mugged, because it was stupid to be flashing all that wealth?

We don't have a say in where our money goes. We still can have opinions, we are still allowed to think whatever we please, about the usage of our money that we earn and never comes back to us, don'cha think?

[August]

If medicaid paid for IVF, they'd only be paying the medical bills of one healthy full term infant right now.

[August]

I know several people with clomid multiples. I think it happens a lot more than the statistics claim. One intentionally took clomid to conceive multiples and got triplets the first round.

Most of the studies to determine risk were done on women who were taking it because they were having real fertility issues. No one has really done a study on "already fertile but extremely stupid women who buy clomid on the internet".

I know of at least two sets of clomid quads. Google brings up tons, too.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/11/health/ca ... index.html

thelifeofsuz.blogspot.com/2007/03/goshdont-even-know-where-to-start-with.html

coxquads.blogspot.com/2008/12/lets-have-baby.html

And quints

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01159.html

http://www.gainesville.com/article/2013 ... /130129839

http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/05/12 ... plets.html

[Mama Mia]

We don't have a say in where our money goes. We still can have opinions, we are still allowed to think whatever we please, about the usage of our money that we earn and never comes back to us, don'cha think?

To say it never comes back to you doesn't make sense. You get benefits from the taxes you pay all the time. You drive on roads, you drink water that (hopefully) wont make you sick, if you have an emergency you can call a cop.

I would love to see this mythical welfare state you seem to think exists. I don't know where you are located, but in the U.S. cash aid is time limited and tied to work activities unless the person is disabled. It's been this way for the past 15 years. And the amounts of cash are incredibly low. Are there people who still find a way to cheat the system ? Of course. There will always be shady people and con artists, but that isn't the norm.

As for the non-cash benefits like medical care and food stamps, those sort of supports is what allows many people to hold down the kinds of jobs that are absolutely necessary to society. So yeah, you also benefit from being able to afford to eat your food because someone who's kids are on food stamps picked it or packaged it or served it.

By the way I've received government assistance in the past,. I've also paid a boatload in taxes.

[walnut]

I'd like to know what you mean by "the water (hopefully) won't make me sick", but it's OT. I hope that some other time when this subject (tap water) comes up, you'll elaborate - no snark here.

OK, point taken. I'd still be much happier if the family had only had one full term child instead of five little sick ones, that are likely to have to live with the hindrances of being a preemie forever - for the betterment of everyone. Done here.

It was my pleasure to hold my back for all the people that said the same thing as I, yet weren't practically hunted down for their opinions.

[bksprite87]

Wow, that's pretty amazing that she held them for 8 months. And I'm glad they have some money and a decent house, as well. That's a lotttt of kids at once! We'll see if she and he still want more kids after the quints are a year or so old, haha.

I wish them well, though. They look very happy! I hope all of their friends and family show up to help. The other little children are going to need some loving now that they have five tiny babies in the house.