Fundies and Government Aid

[Elle]

Elle, can you afford to send your kids to private school? If not, then by your own standard you are selfish and mooching off the system by having kids you can't afford and taking advantage of free public school. You might think that's different because it's welfare that is offered to every child, but frankly I think medical insurance should be offered to every child too, and I wouldn't object to free food for every child of every income class. We already have the automatic tax breaks for children which is basically a way to give welfare to people who are too proud to take it.

We are going to be homeschooling. Also we are taxpayers, and our taxes pay to fund those public schools anyway. Also society benefits from having our kids educated so that they can (hopefully) go on to be taxpayers themselves and not take from the system. Schools are an investment in all of our futures.

Our taxes pay for medical care for other people's kids. We are pretty damn tight on money, but don't qualify for a penny in aid. Our own daughter is uninsured. We have to pay for her medical out of pocket, thankfully she rarely gets sick, but it costs less than insurance we can't afford. I have some medical needs, but can't afford to see a doctor about them, and so suffer on a daily basis. When medical bills get racked up, we pay for them.

Food for kids is a right, but that doesn't mean it's right for people who aren't making ends meet to keep having more kids for the taxpayers to support. It shouldn't be up to the taxpayers to buy every single thing a kid needs when the parents won't. And if the parents are trying and just can't, then they shouldn't keep having kids until they can support the ones they have because our system can only handle so much being taken before it collapses. There are obligations parents have, and supplying for their kids all that they can is one of those obligations. It is a parent's obligation to provide their children's shelter, clothing, and food, and if they can not provide those things, or will not, then it falls to the taxpayers, but it is taking advantage of the system to decide that you'll have the kids you want and screw everyone else, they can pay up and shut up.

Parents NEED to do their part to pay for what they can, and if they can't afford the basics, then they need to stop taking advantage of those who are going to be paying for their kids and not intentionally making more mouths to feed. It's selfish to think that they are so special that everyone else should pay.

Here's an idea. Let's all pool our money and divide it among everyone depending on how many kids they have since kids deserve everything and it doesn't matter who pays for it. it doesn't matter if their parents refuse to work. The more kids you have, the more you get from the pot. What do you think would happen? Exactly what's already happening. Some people having fewer kids or even none because it's hard to afford them, some people people have all the kids they can because it means more money. Communism sucks, and usually results in everyone being in poverty.

[desertvixen]

And the simple truth is that the vast majority of us could never afford to have kids if it weren't for the massive welfare that we all get. It's not just people who get food stamps, Medicaid, and WIC. Most of us got a free education and will get the same for our own children. Most of us couldn't afford to educated our kids if we had to pay for it ourselves.

This, exactly.

Money spent on children especially leads directly to money saved in the future. It's an investment.

I'll agree with this. Also, I don't like the idea of kids going to bed/going to school hungry - call me a bleeding heart liberal if you like. I also donate to food bank programs, particularly the one on-post, because it bothers me to think of kids not getting enough.

[feministxtian]

"Here's an idea. Let's all pool our money and divide it among everyone depending on how many kids they have since kids deserve everything and it doesn't matter who pays for it. it doesn't matter if their parents refuse to work. The more kids you have, the more you get from the pot. What do you think would happen? Exactly what's already happening. Some people having fewer kids or even none because it's hard to afford them, some people people have all the kids they can because it means more money. Communism sucks, and usually results in everyone being in poverty."

NO! I raised mine. I'm DONE! I still pay plenty enough in taxes for the schools, etc. I'll be dammed if I'm going to work so someone else can pop out kids that they can't afford. If you can't afford them, I'll adopt them. But...no, I'm not paying for someone else's stupidity or short-sightedness. A little responsibility goes a LONG way. If you can't pay for 'em, don't breed 'em. Its that simple.

Oh wait...that would imply taking responsibility for one's actions and realizing that today's actions have long term implications...what was I thinking? I'm looking for intelligence and critical thinking skills...nevermind...

[Witsec1]

it is taking advantage of the system to decide that you'll have the kids you want and screw everyone else,

Actually, I think it is wrong to have all the kids you want, and screw everyone else, even if you can "afford" them. Just because you got your hands on a wad of dough doesn't mean you get to suck up all the resources. I don't think my ethics should trump a woman's right to choose, though. Luckily most women who actually care about their kids choose to limit their families.

Here's an idea. Let's all pool our money and divide it among everyone depending on how many kids they have since kids deserve everything and it doesn't matter who pays for it. it doesn't matter if their parents refuse to work. The more kids you have, the more you get from the pot. What do you think would happen? Exactly what's already happening. Some people having fewer kids or even none because it's hard to afford them, some people people have all the kids they can because it means more money. Communism sucks, and usually results in everyone being in poverty.

You know that many European countries with generous social welfare and child bonuses have lower birth rates than the US, right? And not everyone is in poverty.

[Witsec1]

We are going to be homeschooling. Also we are taxpayers, and our taxes pay to fund those public schools anyway. Also society benefits from having our kids educated so that they can (hopefully) go on to be taxpayers themselves and not take from the system. Schools are an investment in all of our futures.

Our taxes pay for medical care for other people's kids. We are pretty damn tight on money, but don't qualify for a penny in aid. Our own daughter is uninsured. We have to pay for her medical out of pocket, thankfully she rarely gets sick, but it costs less than insurance we can't afford. I have some medical needs, but can't afford to see a doctor about them, and so suffer on a daily basis. When medical bills get racked up, we pay for them.

Food for kids is a right, but that doesn't mean it's right for people who aren't making ends meet to keep having more kids for the taxpayers to support. It shouldn't be up to the taxpayers to buy every single thing a kid needs when the parents won't. And if the parents are trying and just can't, then they shouldn't keep having kids until they can support the ones they have because our system can only handle so much being taken before it collapses. There are obligations parents have, and supplying for their kids all that they can is one of those obligations. It is a parent's obligation to provide their children's shelter, clothing, and food, and if they can not provide those things, or will not, then it falls to the taxpayers, but it is taking advantage of the system to decide that you'll have the kids you want and screw everyone else, they can pay up and shut up.

Parents NEED to do their part to pay for what they can, and if they can't afford the basics, then they need to stop taking advantage of those who are going to be paying for their kids and not intentionally making more mouths to feed. It's selfish to think that they are so special that everyone else should pay.

Here's an idea. Let's all pool our money and divide it among everyone depending on how many kids they have since kids deserve everything and it doesn't matter who pays for it. it doesn't matter if their parents refuse to work. The more kids you have, the more you get from the pot. What do you think would happen? Exactly what's already happening. Some people having fewer kids or even none because it's hard to afford them, some people people have all the kids they can because it means more money. Communism sucks, and usually results in everyone being in poverty.

I'm sorry about your medical needs. Earlier you said you lost your house and are living in one room. Do you not qualify for Healthy Families? In CA your income can be pretty high, almost $4,000/month.

Providing health care and a decent education to all our kids is not something that is going to break the bank of this country. I accept there will be freeloaders in any system, that's human nature. Freeloaders off child welfare programs are small potatoes compared to corporate welfare freeloaders.

[JesusFightClub]

Oh, for fuck's sake. Lotsa myths here.

For a start, and this may come as a surprise, making babies is natural to humans whereas working in a call centre is not. You might as well say, Elle, that if someone can take a shit they can work answering phones. It doesn't work that way.

Secondly, "the system teetering on the brink of collapse" isn't true and if it was it wouldn't be because of ebil welfare suckers.

*sigh*

[Witsec7]

I accept there will be freeloaders in any system, that's human nature. Freeloaders off child welfare programs are small potatoes compared to corporate welfare freeloaders.

This

I get really tired when people ignore the millions in corporate welfare that costs each and every single taxpayer in this country. Its easier for them to rail against someones kids getting a reduced priced breakfast or how someone spends their SNAP.

[Witsec5]

I thought about this particular thread all day. I know it sounds weird to be thinking about this stuff at work. Anyway, I like where this thread is going. I agree with experiencedd. I never could understand in a country where the standard of living has gone WAY down for most working people how people can continue to nix social programs that benefit them and swallow wholesale an agenda that cuts them to the core. Healthy nourished children learn and think better and become better citizens later on. Some people are downright draconian (or I should say gringrichian) in their attitudes. What are we supposed to let kids starve because their parents are idiots? Look my parents were selfish and often brainless and that was bad enough--I didn't need to be going hungry on top of all the other crap I had to put up with.

[Clementine]

So when fundies say "God will provide", they really mean "there are always handouts from the government we can use"?

Would that be the same evil government that they love to badmouth, work against, do their best do not pay taxes to, think that it should go away and not interfere in people's lives and in general think is a bad thing, that's why they vote republican?

The hypocrisy is burning. Plus I think it's very poor taste to bite the hand that feeds you.

[abba12]

Oh, for fuck's sake. Lotsa myths here.

For a start, and this may come as a surprise, making babies is natural to humans whereas working in a call centre is not. You might as well say, Elle, that if someone can take a shit they can work answering phones. It doesn't work that way.

Secondly, "the system teetering on the brink of collapse" isn't true and if it was it wouldn't be because of ebil welfare suckers.

*sigh*

I don't have much more to say about welfare, there's no point in arguing, I only wanted to state another perspective.

But I would like to thank JFC for this comment as it basically says all I was thinking.

Not all disability affects your ability to have children, cerebal palsy, no legs, no arms, the deaf and the blind suffer no issues in childbirth, but in employment? It's damn hard to find an employer willing to take you on. That's what I am, blind. Actually in my country blindness entitles me to a lifelong pension whether I am working or not, the only one not income/asset tested. Don't ask me why, I don't understand it myself, it just does. So technicly all blind people in Australia, unless they refuse their entitlments, are leeching off the government.

And I'm also going to blame my poor spelling on the visual impairment, so nyah :P

I did NOT say I wasn't capable of work, what I DID say was that no employer would take me in this ecconomic climate where they have 100 resumes from able bodied people to pick from. If I could pick up part time work I would consider it. I would not consider full time work, but you can't tell me that only fundies think it's ok to take payments to be stay at home mums, my country dosen't even require mums on parenting payment to look for work until their youngest is 7. Our social system is not the same as yours, I don't know how different or what american social security thinks about stay at home mums, but it is definitely different in some ways. I still think the core concept is comparable.

And ultmately, I'm pretty sure the amount that I, and other people of 'debatable eligability' take from the tax payers is far, far less than the money tied up in red tape, absurd bonuses, and assorted coporate stuff. We're about to be the only country in the world with a 'carbon tax', and I can assure you that tax money isn't coming our way! Yet we managed to spend millions on a payroll system for the nurses that didn't work, and many millions more on a toll bridge that pretty much no one uses. (yes, these are state expenses, welfare is federal, I know the difference before any australians pop up and tell me as much, but since our prime minister is too busy trying desperately to stop her political party from caving in on itself to do anything, and our state and federal politicians are much more closely linked than american ones seem to be, I will use them as examples. It's all tax money in the end after all, whoever gets to spend it)

[formergothardite]

I don't have much more to say about welfare, there's no point in arguing, I only wanted to state another perspective.

But I would like to thank JFC for this comment as it basically says all I was thinking.

Not all disability affects your ability to have children, cerebal palsy, no legs, no arms, the deaf and the blind suffer no issues in childbirth, but in employment? It's damn hard to find an employer willing to take you on. That's what I am, blind. Actually in my country blindness entitles me to a lifelong pension whether I am working or not, the only one not income/asset tested. Don't ask me why, I don't understand it myself, it just does. So technicly all blind people in Australia, unless they refuse their entitlments, are leeching off the government.

And I'm also going to blame my poor spelling on the visual impairment, so nyah :P

I did NOT say I wasn't capable of work, what I DID say was that no employer would take me in this ecconomic climate where they have 100 resumes from able bodied people to pick from. If I could pick up part time work I would consider it. I would not consider full time work, but you can't tell me that only fundies think it's ok to take payments to be stay at home mums, my country dosen't even require mums on parenting payment to look for work until their youngest is 7. Our social system is not the same as yours, I don't know how different or what american social security thinks about stay at home mums, but it is definitely different in some ways. I still think the core concept is comparable.

And ultmately, I'm pretty sure the amount that I, and other people of 'debatable eligability' take from the tax payers is far, far less than the money tied up in red tape, absurd bonuses, and assorted coporate stuff. We're about to be the only country in the world with a 'carbon tax', and I can assure you that tax money isn't coming our way! Yet we managed to spend millions on a payroll system for the nurses that didn't work, and many millions more on a toll bridge that pretty much no one uses. (yes, these are state expenses, welfare is federal, I know the difference before any australians pop up and tell me as much, but since our prime minister is too busy trying desperately to stop her political party from caving in on itself to do anything, and our state and federal politicians are much more closely linked than american ones seem to be, I will use them as examples. It's all tax money in the end after all, whoever gets to spend it)

But if you could find a job you wouldn't take it, correct? Because you don't want to work. How exactly is that different than the surfer dude you were complaining about.

[apple1]

@abba-

1- Quit mis-applying what JFC said.

2- American social security is a retirement and a disability program (that you have to have paid into, or have a spouse that has paid into for a minimum of 40 quarters before you are eligible for benefits). It doesn't have one thing to do with SAHMs.

3- SAHM supported by your government for 7 years? I don't know if that is true or not, but, wow, just wow.

4- I repeat. INTENTIONALLY conceiving more children while you and your SO are currently unemployed and cannot even afford to care for the ones you already have is POOR PLANNING. PERIOD.

[freejoytoo]

I would rather my money went to welfare than unjust wars. I'm not very happy about people who choose to have endless children for the sake of it but what annoys me more are fundies who insist on neglecting their children because they refuse to take from the government. It's not the children's fault that they were born into such families and everyone deserves food and shelter, and if you start talking about people having large families not deserving it I feel that it goes into the realm of forced sterilisation and such and, seeing as I have been on benefits in the past and probably will be in the near future as I currently need a job, I don't think it's my place to judge.

[geniebelle6901]

I'm with Elle on this one. If you can't afford them, then don't have 'em. I don't really care if your religious belief calls for having a lot of kids. It is selfish and leeching off the system to keep having kid after kid just because you can. Either get on birth control or abstain. I'm so sick of hearing the "it's my right" excuse. How about it should be my right not to support somebody's lazy ass because they want to be a SAHM having as many little blessings "as God sees fit to give". Also, Like Elle, I find it awfully hard to believe that somebody who is disabled can pop out baby after baby but yet can't find a job doing something (yes, even in this economy, and no not necessarily in a call center). Ever hear of work at home jobs?

Yeah, making babies is natural, and it's just as natural to avoid having them, it's called self control. While the system may not be on the brink now, I can easily see that happening over time, especially with this type of mentality. This is one case where I say screw choice, and be responsible.

[formergothardite]

Geniebelle? Are you back?

[geniebelle6901]

Yes, it's me, and I'm back after recovering from surgery.

[Boogalou]

Wow. People who are blind have the highest unemployment of any disabled group in Canada, with 70% of them unemployed. I would imagine these numbers are fairly similar in other Western nations. The idea that a person who is blind can just hop to it and get a job especially in this economy is naive at best. And the last time I checked being blind had little to do with one's reproductive system.

On another note, I hope your recovery is going well geniebelle. I hope everything went ok with your surgery. But what happened to your original account?

[formergothardite]

Yes, it's me, and I'm back after recovering from surgery.

Yes, why did you start a new account? It is against the rules.

4. No sock puppets or multiple accounts. Socks will be outed or possibly beaten with plumbing line. Those who use socks to troll or otherwise harass members will be banned.

[geniebelle6901]

Sorry, didn't mean to create a puppet account, I just couldn't login using my former username. Can the mods fix that and give me my old username back? I looked in the FAQ, and just gave up, and thought the easiest thing to do was to create a new account.

ETA: If I were going to create a ghost account or be unrecognized, I would have been more creative than using my old username with just some numbers on the end. I wasn't deliberately trying to break the rules.

[formergothardite]

I'm just surprised you are back since you seem to think we are all evil people who support rapists. Of course, nothing I say is worth anything since I was raised in a cult and then left....

[geniebelle6901]

Mods,

I'll leave this to you to decide. If you think I deliberately created a ghost account, then ban me. I'm sorry I didn't read the rules. If I were attempting to hide myself, I wouldn't have used my former username with just a few numbers on the end. I had a change of email address, and oops I forgot to change that here before closing my old email account. That's what I think screwed my login up. I tried to PM this to a mod rather than posting it here, but the system thinks I'm a new member & the PM feature isn't available yet.

[geniebelle6901]

I'm just surprised you are back since you seem to think we are all evil people who support rapists. Of course, nothing I say is worth anything since I was raised in a cult and then left....

I think I said many times I wasn't going anywhere. I just took a leave of absence to recover from surgery.

[nomi]

You know, I would rather a hypocritical fundie family take welfare than a fundie family to go without. My parents went without and there were nights when I would cry myself to sleep because I was so hungry. I remember finding a box of graham cracker crumbs to make pie crusts and my sister and poured them into a cup and ate them because we were so hungry. Then there were the times when food would get clearanced because they were no longer stocking/selling the item and my dad would buy every single box of whatever it was. We had cinnamon swirl cereal, cases of it, and at times I would eat cinnamon swirl cereal for breakfast, snack, and dinner (I went without lunch at school until my father finally agreed to allow us to get free lunch my junior year of high school). To this day I cannot stand any cinnamon flavored cereals...and I used to love Cinnamon Life so much.

If my parents had swallowed their pride and accepted food stamps we would have eaten well.

I just applied for SNAP for my children. I pay between $350-$450 a month to feed us all (me and the kids) because they do NOT stop eating. I'm scared about how this summer is going to be because when they're home they literally do not stop eating. They went through a brand new bag of apples in one weekend. Even on sale, apples aren't cheap anymore. I pay between $3-$5 for a bag of apples depending on if anything's on sale that week, and we don't go without apples in this house. My son hit a growth spurt about a month back and he would eat a bowl of cereal and a bagel for breakfast and sometimes an orange or apple to boot. Then I would pack a sandwich, a piece of fruit, some snackie food like pringles or fig newtons, and then carrot or celery sticks. He got a carton of milk at school. Then I'd have to pack him a snack for snack time which was usually pretzels or a piece of fruit. He came home and would eat a snack, sometimes an entire container of strawberries or half a bag of grapes. Then he'd get a spoonful or three of peanut butter and maybe a PB&J sandwich to tide him over until dinner where he would eat more than me. Then he'd usually eat another snack or two before bed. He ate like that for over a week and my grocery bill went up almost $100 more than usual to keep him fed. I actually had to put groceries on the credit card last month. I can't wait to get approved for SNAP.

eta - this is not something I planned for either. We were upper middle class and then the ex decided to cheat on me and divorce me a year later after I tried to pull things back together. I'm living on maybe 1/4 of what we used to live on.

[Witsec1]

You know, I would rather a hypocritical fundie family take welfare than a fundie family to go without.

Absofuckinglutely. I think what really gets me angry is the disconnect between the fundie royalty blathering on about every child is a blessing, and the families that are trying to feed a family of 15 on $500. Their stories aren't really heard.

The hypocrisy of the Quiverfullers not living up to their claim of self-sufficiency is annoying, but please be hypocritical rather than let your kids experience hunger and food insecurity. And having more children while on welfare is not really optimal planning in my opinion, I don't think that the fact that you are on welfare gives me any more or less right to criticize you. I don't think anyone has the right to hog resources, whether they can "pay" for them in money or not.

What is really dangerous about Quiverfull is that nothing is regarded as sufficient excuse to limit one's family, not even mom's physical or mental health.

[bananacat]

Sockpuppets are a clear violation of the rules. She should be banned. It's unfair to try to get around ignore lists by creating new accounts just to annoy people. I have no patience for this crap.