If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   New Pennsylvania bill includes provision requiring women to prove they were raped. Want to guess which party inserted the provision?   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 474
    More: Sick, Pennsylvania, Equal Pay Act, welfare benefits, Paycheck Fairness Act, Priebus tried, shiny objects, Priebus, Violence Against Women Act  
•       •       •

8714 clicks; posted to Politics » on 25 Oct 2012 at 1:53 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



474 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-25 10:27:47 AM  

CPennypacker: machoprogrammer:
This is what I am proposing:

If you are on welfare, and you get pregnant while on welfare, the amount you receive does not go up...

This means that if you have 3 kids, then go on welfare, you get the 3 kids amount. If you have 2 kids and are on welfare and you get pregnant, you don't get the 3 kids benefit, you still get 2.

The incentive to not having kids then is you don't get more money for having more kids. Kids are expensive.

How about instead we make it stupid easy both in terms of effort and financially to not have kids in the first place.


I agree 100%.


Brostorm: Lee Jackson Beauregard: Brostorm: cuz birf control is hard.

DEFUND PLANNED PARENTHOOD!

citation needed. Im not even a republican nor do I think planned parenthood should be defunded.


This is Fark politics tab, where if you ever say something positive about anything Republican or anything bad about anything Democrat, then you are automatically a redneck, bible-toting, war on women supporting Republican. There are only two schools of thoughts for most of the mouth breathers on here.
 
2012-10-25 10:28:24 AM  

Brostorm: CPennypacker: Brostorm: You can get free condoms ALL OVER THE PLACE. If you are poor you can get free birth control through medicaid or planned parenthood or any of the other thousands of sources. It is a complete and ridiculous lie that birth control is rare or expensive . Hell college GIVE them away too.

I don't understand, there is an EASY way to not have to pay less for poor kids and still pay the same for each kid and that is for there to be LESS kids. Don't you think something like a free IUD would result in less pregnancies than free rubbers? Then they could hump all they want all day long and all you paid for was a little copper T.

Im for free tubal ligation and free IUD. It will cost much less in the long run. The claim that birth control is rare or expensive is still full of crap.


Cost over child bearing years:

METHOD UNINSURED INSURED WHAT'S INCLUDED
IUDs $5,751 $2,875 Doctor's visit, device, insertion, and follow-up care, every 7.5 years
Implanon $16,931 $7,696 Doctor's visit, device, insertion, and removal, every three years
Injections $25,329 $8,372 Doctor's visit, follow-up care, and four injections, every year
Patch $51,946 $9,230 Doctor's visit and an annual supply of patches, every year
Vaginal ring $51,946 $9,230 Doctor's visit and an annual supply of rings, every year
Sterilization $6,000 $1,500 Doctor's visits, surgery, and follow-up care; one time cost

But WHARRRRRRRRRGARBLE BIRTH CONTROL CHEAP TAKE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY STUPID POORS!
Am I right?
 
2012-10-25 10:28:33 AM  

Brostorm: Lee Jackson Beauregard: Brostorm: cuz birf control is hard.

DEFUND PLANNED PARENTHOOD!

citation needed. Im not even a republican nor do I think planned parenthood should be defunded.


Here ya go, sport!

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/harrisburg_politics/PA-House-lawma k ers-introduce-bill-to-de-fund-Planned-Parenthood.html
 
2012-10-25 10:30:48 AM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Brostorm: citation needed.

The guy who won't back up any of his own claims with citations demands citations from everybody else. We should definitely take this guy Very Seriously.


a citation on if i claimed Planned Parenthood should be defunded is easy to find. Statistics on children born to welfare families is not because there is no incentive to study it outside of "hurting the children." Lets be honest here,any source I post that isnt directly from the government under a democrat written this year by a panel of 51% women will be ignored as biased.
 
2012-10-25 10:31:12 AM  

MsStatement: Brostorm: Lee Jackson Beauregard: Brostorm: cuz birf control is hard.

DEFUND PLANNED PARENTHOOD!

citation needed. Im not even a republican nor do I think planned parenthood should be defunded.

Here ya go, sport!

Link



Now with clicky goodness.
 
2012-10-25 10:33:08 AM  

Brostorm: Statistics on children born to welfare families is not because there is no incentive to study it outside of "hurting the children."


So how do you know it's a "HUGE problem"?
 
2012-10-25 10:37:44 AM  

CPennypacker: Brostorm: CPennypacker: Brostorm: You can get free condoms ALL OVER THE PLACE. If you are poor you can get free birth control through medicaid or planned parenthood or any of the other thousands of sources. It is a complete and ridiculous lie that birth control is rare or expensive . Hell college GIVE them away too.

I don't understand, there is an EASY way to not have to pay less for poor kids and still pay the same for each kid and that is for there to be LESS kids. Don't you think something like a free IUD would result in less pregnancies than free rubbers? Then they could hump all they want all day long and all you paid for was a little copper T.

Im for free tubal ligation and free IUD. It will cost much less in the long run. The claim that birth control is rare or expensive is still full of crap.

Cost over child bearing years:

METHOD UNINSURED INSURED WHAT'S INCLUDED
IUDs $5,751 $2,875 Doctor's visit, device, insertion, and follow-up care, every 7.5 years
Implanon $16,931 $7,696 Doctor's visit, device, insertion, and removal, every three years
Injections $25,329 $8,372 Doctor's visit, follow-up care, and four injections, every year
Patch $51,946 $9,230 Doctor's visit and an annual supply of patches, every year
Vaginal ring $51,946 $9,230 Doctor's visit and an annual supply of rings, every year
Sterilization $6,000 $1,500 Doctor's visits, surgery, and follow-up care; one time cost

But WHARRRRRRRRRGARBLE BIRTH CONTROL CHEAP TAKE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY STUPID POORS!
Am I right?


condoms=free
cost of them and their childrens lifetime of dependency on the government? MILLIONS.
 
2012-10-25 10:38:14 AM  

Genevieve Marie: Alphax: 'Demanding that taxpayers give her free money'. That's loaded language.

Yes it is. This virulent hatred for the people in this country who are the most marginalized is reallly depressing. I'm really tired of people acting like poverty is indcative of some great moral failing and the corollary, that wealth is proof of moral superiority and responsibility.


Donald Trump must be their saint.
 
2012-10-25 10:38:48 AM  

MsStatement: MsStatement: Brostorm: Lee Jackson Beauregard: Brostorm: cuz birf control is hard.

DEFUND PLANNED PARENTHOOD!

citation needed. Im not even a republican nor do I think planned parenthood should be defunded.

Here ya go, sport!

Link



Now with clicky goodness.


what part of I am not a republican did you not understand. The claim was that I wanted it defunded.
 
2012-10-25 10:39:18 AM  

Brostorm: condoms=free


Condoms = 12-17% failure rate.

Congrats you solved nothing.
 
2012-10-25 10:40:14 AM  

Brostorm: CPennypacker: Brostorm: CPennypacker: Brostorm: You can get free condoms ALL OVER THE PLACE. If you are poor you can get free birth control through medicaid or planned parenthood or any of the other thousands of sources. It is a complete and ridiculous lie that birth control is rare or expensive . Hell college GIVE them away too.

I don't understand, there is an EASY way to not have to pay less for poor kids and still pay the same for each kid and that is for there to be LESS kids. Don't you think something like a free IUD would result in less pregnancies than free rubbers? Then they could hump all they want all day long and all you paid for was a little copper T.

Im for free tubal ligation and free IUD. It will cost much less in the long run. The claim that birth control is rare or expensive is still full of crap.

Cost over child bearing years:

METHOD UNINSURED INSURED WHAT'S INCLUDED
IUDs $5,751 $2,875 Doctor's visit, device, insertion, and follow-up care, every 7.5 years
Implanon $16,931 $7,696 Doctor's visit, device, insertion, and removal, every three years
Injections $25,329 $8,372 Doctor's visit, follow-up care, and four injections, every year
Patch $51,946 $9,230 Doctor's visit and an annual supply of patches, every year
Vaginal ring $51,946 $9,230 Doctor's visit and an annual supply of rings, every year
Sterilization $6,000 $1,500 Doctor's visits, surgery, and follow-up care; one time cost

But WHARRRRRRRRRGARBLE BIRTH CONTROL CHEAP TAKE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY STUPID POORS!
Am I right?

condoms=free
cost of them and their childrens lifetime of dependency on the government? MILLIONS.


So you admit condoms aren't working then and we should cover more permanent and effective methods of birth control.

Glad we agree.
 
2012-10-25 10:41:51 AM  

sticky2shoes: What a dumb comment. The law is AGAINST rapists. It gives rape victims a financial incentive to report their rape to the police, which allows the rape to be investigated, so the rapist can get caught and be stopped from raping more women. Rape is already underreported, so they're putting a financial benefit behind speaking out, and at the same time, preserving limited tax resources to help rape victims instead of welfare queens who get pregnant irresponsibly and expect everyone else to pay for their decisions.


KrispyKritter: An observation: TFA said many rapes go unreported. Every unreported rape means that rapists DNA is not put in law enforcement computers. That scumbag is free to rape again without worry of arrest or conviction. Every rapist whose DNA does not go on file has a good chance of never being punished for what he has done.


The flip side of both of these arguments (which are very logical, btw) would be the cases wherein the victim was warned that if they reported the rape they would be killed, beaten, etc. Even if the rapist is caught AND successfully prosecuted, they are still going to get out of prison eventually. Fear is a very powerful thing, especially if you have already been brutally violated.
 
2012-10-25 10:42:12 AM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Brostorm: condoms=free

Condoms = 12-17% failure rate.

Congrats you solved nothing.


Citation needed, because I am pretty sure it is around 3%
 
2012-10-25 10:42:39 AM  
How any woman could vote Republican nowadays is beyond me? Are there any on Fark? Care to explain what could possibly being going through your head?
 
2012-10-25 10:42:46 AM  
I think I've figured out what's behind all this....remember when all the legislators were all like "jobs...jobs...jobs"?

They have new evidence that shows that the key to job creation is spurred from Ovaries! They are trying to get all up in my vagina and every other woman's to create jerbs! I'm so relieved! Here I thought they were starting a "war on women" but now that I've been shown this "expert testimony" I'm convinced that I have nothing to worry about for me or any other American female I know... thank goodness these well-educated legislators will be able to create MILLIONS of jobs thanks to this!

And, this same report also indicates that they have first hand research from the major religious doctrines that shows that this is what "insert deity of your preference" would want for women! Hooray! What a glorious day to be a woman in America. And rape / incest ? Yeah, it's a mite unpleasant, I can't disagree, but think of the wonderous miracle that will appear in just 10 short months. A lifetime of memories from those few unpleasant moments with a stranger / well-known family member / boyfriend / spouse.

I have no idea why anyone would be outraged or unhappy in light of of this new research.

/sarcasm in full force
//legislators should find somewhere else to focus their time outside my hoo-hah
///go make some jobs happen
////Pennsyvanian
 
2012-10-25 10:44:41 AM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Brostorm: condoms=free

Condoms = 12-17% failure rate.

Yes, cutting a worst case scenario 83%(this number is wrong by the way, condoms without human error are far more effective) f children born to people who are already on welfare would solve nothing. What part of people on public assistance are already able to get FREE healthcare do you not understand

 
2012-10-25 10:45:02 AM  

machoprogrammer: Dusk-You-n-Me: Brostorm: condoms=free

Condoms = 12-17% failure rate.

Congrats you solved nothing.

Citation needed, because I am pretty sure it is around 3%


Link

Condoms 15% typical use failure rate
 
2012-10-25 10:46:14 AM  
 
2012-10-25 10:47:58 AM  

keylock71: In fact, welfare fraud among Philadelphia's 95,456 recipients is "minute," according to Peter Berson, assistant chief of the government fraud unit in the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office.

The 200 to 400 cases of welfare fraud in the city each year - down 50 percent since 2002 because of better enforcement and fewer recipients - are not nonworking women having babies to game the government, but working women receiving welfare and working at other jobs without reporting the income, Berson said.

Best info I could find with a quick look-see... Source seems a bit sketchy, but I'm open to seeing more reliable facts.


Having more children to get more money is not illegal nor is it fraud. That is the problem, why would something that isn't considered illegal be listed as illegal? Logic, how does it work?
 
2012-10-25 10:48:22 AM  

CPennypacker: machoprogrammer: Dusk-You-n-Me: Brostorm: condoms=free

Condoms = 12-17% failure rate.

Congrats you solved nothing.

Citation needed, because I am pretty sure it is around 3%

Link

Condoms 15% typical use failure rate


Proper use failure rate: 2%
 
2012-10-25 10:48:41 AM  

machoprogrammer: Citation needed, because I am pretty sure it is around 3%


17%: These have far lower failure rates - around 1 percent or less - than typical use of condoms, at 17 percent, or the pill, at 9 percent. (The one method the Catholic Church approves of, officially termed "fertility-awareness-based methods" has a failure rate of 25 percent.) Link

14-15%: The typical use of male condoms, which is the average way most people use them, has a failure rate of 14-15%. Link

10-18%: The typical use pregnancy rate among condom users varies depending on the population being studied, ranging from 10-18% per year. Link

The 2% stat is for "perfect use": The perfect use pregnancy rate of condoms is 2% per year, from previous link.

See also CPP's post.
 
2012-10-25 10:49:49 AM  

machoprogrammer: Proper use failure rate: 2%

Perfect

use. The world and the people in it are less than perfect. Hence the other real-world stats.
 
2012-10-25 10:50:15 AM  

machoprogrammer: CPennypacker: machoprogrammer: Dusk-You-n-Me: Brostorm: condoms=free

Condoms = 12-17% failure rate.

Congrats you solved nothing.

Citation needed, because I am pretty sure it is around 3%

Link

Condoms 15% typical use failure rate

Proper use failure rate: 2%


Guns have a proper use kill rate of 100%. What matters is how people actually use them friendo.
 
2012-10-25 10:50:53 AM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Brostorm: Statistics on children born to welfare families is not because there is no incentive to study it outside of "hurting the children."

So how do you know it's a "HUGE problem"?

 

Still wondering.
 
2012-10-25 10:51:08 AM  

Alassra: ?


Alassra: I think I've figured out what's behind all this....remember when all the legislators were all like "jobs...jobs...jobs"?

They have new evidence that shows that the key to job creation is spurred from Ovaries! They are trying to get all up in my vagina and every other woman's to create jerbs! I'm so relieved! Here I thought they were starting a "war on women" but now that I've been shown this "expert testimony" I'm convinced that I have nothing to worry about for me or any other American female I know... thank goodness these well-educated legislators will be able to create MILLIONS of jobs thanks to this!


I think, in a round about way, these are about jobs - for men, at least. You see, if women are always pregnant and raising children, they will be out of the workforce. Then they will all be filled by men and unemployment will go down (because women without jobs is just the way it should be).
 
2012-10-25 10:52:39 AM  

roadmarks: Alassra: ?

Alassra: I think I've figured out what's behind all this....remember when all the legislators were all like "jobs...jobs...jobs"?

They have new evidence that shows that the key to job creation is spurred from Ovaries! They are trying to get all up in my vagina and every other woman's to create jerbs! I'm so relieved! Here I thought they were starting a "war on women" but now that I've been shown this "expert testimony" I'm convinced that I have nothing to worry about for me or any other American female I know... thank goodness these well-educated legislators will be able to create MILLIONS of jobs thanks to this!

I think, in a round about way, these are about jobs - for men, at least. You see, if women are always pregnant and raising children, they will be out of the workforce. Then they will all be filled by men and unemployment will go down (because women without jobs is just the way it should be).



quite a leap there.
 
2012-10-25 10:55:37 AM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: machoprogrammer: Proper use failure rate: 2%

Perfect use. The world and the people in it are less than perfect. Hence the other real-world stats.


Either way, I think healthcare should be universal (so free birthcontrol). I don't see the problem with this if that was the case. If you are on welfare, don't have kids. That easy
 
2012-10-25 10:55:51 AM  

Brostorm: keylock71: In fact, welfare fraud among Philadelphia's 95,456 recipients is "minute," according to Peter Berson, assistant chief of the government fraud unit in the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office.

The 200 to 400 cases of welfare fraud in the city each year - down 50 percent since 2002 because of better enforcement and fewer recipients - are not nonworking women having babies to game the government, but working women receiving welfare and working at other jobs without reporting the income, Berson said.

Best info I could find with a quick look-see... Source seems a bit sketchy, but I'm open to seeing more reliable facts.

Having more children to get more money is not illegal nor is it fraud. That is the problem, why would something that isn't considered illegal be listed as illegal? Logic, how does it work?



Just trying to help with proving your statement that it's a huge problem, my friend... Like I said, I'm happy to see the facts you're basing your statement on. No need to be an asshole.
 
2012-10-25 10:56:05 AM  

roadmarks: Alassra: ?

Alassra: I think I've figured out what's behind all this....remember when all the legislators were all like "jobs...jobs...jobs"?

They have new evidence that shows that the key to job creation is spurred from Ovaries! They are trying to get all up in my vagina and every other woman's to create jerbs! I'm so relieved! Here I thought they were starting a "war on women" but now that I've been shown this "expert testimony" I'm convinced that I have nothing to worry about for me or any other American female I know... thank goodness these well-educated legislators will be able to create MILLIONS of jobs thanks to this!

I think, in a round about way, these are about jobs - for men, at least. You see, if women are always pregnant and raising children, they will be out of the workforce. Then they will all be filled by men and unemployment will go down (because women without jobs is just the way it should be).


===========================

Sorry, but a 1 for 1 swap job isn't a NEW job - and not job creation.
 
2012-10-25 11:01:40 AM  

Mock26: I support this bill. For one, the woman does not have to prove she was raped. She just has to prove that she reported it (as in showing a copy of the Police Report, which she will automatically receive a copy of when she reports it). Also, the intent is to prevent a woman from defrauding the government. As it is now a mother can only receive funds for up to and including X number of kids. She is not eligible for additional benefits for kid number X + 1, unless the child was conceived because the woman was raped. Up to now there was no way to vet whether or not this was true. Now all a woman has to do is provide a copy of the police report.


Well, when my DAD raped me, I was a little scared to file a report, so fark you. Don't pretend that this doesn't happen. Want me to prove to you that it happened? Fark you.
 
2012-10-25 11:06:34 AM  

MorrisBird: What if you don't know who raped you? My daughter doesn't. She was drugged. I love the Republicans. They're throwing away their power by waging a war on rape victims. Brilliant.


It says right in the text of the bill "if known". Is reading really that difficult?

So the problem here is that the GOP want women to prove they reported the rape instead of just any pregnant woman trying to rip off the government by claiming she was raped?

*yawn*
 
2012-10-25 11:08:43 AM  

Siochain: Mock26: I support this bill. For one, the woman does not have to prove she was raped. She just has to prove that she reported it (as in showing a copy of the Police Report, which she will automatically receive a copy of when she reports it). Also, the intent is to prevent a woman from defrauding the government. As it is now a mother can only receive funds for up to and including X number of kids. She is not eligible for additional benefits for kid number X + 1, unless the child was conceived because the woman was raped. Up to now there was no way to vet whether or not this was true. Now all a woman has to do is provide a copy of the police report.

Well, when my DAD raped me, I was a little scared to file a report, so fark you. Don't pretend that this doesn't happen. Want me to prove to you that it happened? Fark you.


Damn it, I didn't mean to say "prove," but you get the gist. To make it clearer, you expect my 13 year old self to "show" that I filed a police report against the person who had been abusing me, gee, it's just that easy, isn't it?

*Disclosure: I never got pregnant, so I guess I was "lucky" that I didn't have to go through this process.
 
2012-10-25 11:15:21 AM  

Siochain: Siochain: Mock26: I support this bill. For one, the woman does not have to prove she was raped. She just has to prove that she reported it (as in showing a copy of the Police Report, which she will automatically receive a copy of when she reports it). Also, the intent is to prevent a woman from defrauding the government. As it is now a mother can only receive funds for up to and including X number of kids. She is not eligible for additional benefits for kid number X + 1, unless the child was conceived because the woman was raped. Up to now there was no way to vet whether or not this was true. Now all a woman has to do is provide a copy of the police report.

Well, when my DAD raped me, I was a little scared to file a report, so fark you. Don't pretend that this doesn't happen. Want me to prove to you that it happened? Fark you.

Damn it, I didn't mean to say "prove," but you get the gist. To make it clearer, you expect my 13 year old self to "show" that I filed a police report against the person who had been abusing me, gee, it's just that easy, isn't it?

*Disclosure: I never got pregnant, so I guess I was "lucky" that I didn't have to go through this process.


That's awful, I'm sorry you had to go through that.

And now this thread is dead. Good riddance.
 
2012-10-25 11:19:22 AM  
Republicans: Better a hundred innocent women feel guilty than one fraudulent woman get some free benefits.
 
2012-10-25 11:19:54 AM  

IamAwake: ok honestly - I'm confused. So it's ok for a woman to claim - in welfare benefits - that she was raped...without having actually filed a charge with anyone? The woman isn't required to prove anything other than that she filed a report - the burden of proof of the actual crime isn't on her. Normally I'd be all "ah, another stupid anti-human (both genders, lets be real here) repub law..." but...really? Misleading rewording of headline much, subby? What exactly is /wrong/ about what they're doing here?


Because for many cases there could be consequences to filing. For example, the woman would probably lose her reputation permanently if it got out; the rapist might be in a position to exact revenge even from jail...

/Also, because they're essentially saying 'we will punish you for having babby if we think we can get away with it'. Less about rape, but that's kind of disgusting too.
 
2012-10-25 11:32:16 AM  

keylock71: Brostorm: keylock71: In fact, welfare fraud among Philadelphia's 95,456 recipients is "minute," according to Peter Berson, assistant chief of the government fraud unit in the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office.

The 200 to 400 cases of welfare fraud in the city each year - down 50 percent since 2002 because of better enforcement and fewer recipients - are not nonworking women having babies to game the government, but working women receiving welfare and working at other jobs without reporting the income, Berson said.

Best info I could find with a quick look-see... Source seems a bit sketchy, but I'm open to seeing more reliable facts.

Having more children to get more money is not illegal nor is it fraud. That is the problem, why would something that isn't considered illegal be listed as illegal? Logic, how does it work?


Just trying to help with proving your statement that it's a huge problem, my friend... Like I said, I'm happy to see the facts you're basing your statement on. No need to be an asshole.


Well, you are comparing apples and oranges. Having more kids to get more state money is not (right now, at least) considered welfare fraud, so saying this isn't a problem because welfare fraud is rare is not really a valid comparison, since that isn't welfare fraud (legally, at least).
 
2012-10-25 11:40:59 AM  

Nadie_AZ: A bill in the Pennsylvania House proposing the reduction of welfare benefits for low-income women contains a provision requiring a woman who became pregnant from rape to prove that she reported her assault.

As ThinkProgress reported, the measure, proposed by five Republican state lawmakers, seeks to eliminate an increase in benefits if a child is conceived while a woman is covered under the Temporary Assistance To Needy Family program. A woman can seek an exception to this if the child is conceived as a result of rape. However, she must prove that she reported the incident to the authorities and gave the police her assaulter's identity

Jesus Christ, you heartless bastards.

Ok, this is clearly a unified thing the GOP is pushing. But why? Simply because 'abortion bad, even in case of rape, oh rape is bad, well let's change that'?


This helps protect women you idiot.
 
2012-10-25 12:05:56 PM  

machoprogrammer: Well, you are comparing apples and oranges. Having more kids to get more state money is not (right now, at least) considered welfare fraud, so saying this isn't a problem because welfare fraud is rare is not really a valid comparison, since that isn't welfare fraud (legally, at least).


I don't believe I said it wasn't a problem... I'm just looking for some evidence that it's a "HUGE problem". I went looking for stats and that's what I found.

I'm happy to see some evidence that it's a "HUGE problem". So far, all I've seen in anecdotes and a whole lot of assumptions.
 
2012-10-25 12:06:45 PM  

IamAwake: ok honestly - I'm confused. So it's ok for a woman to claim - in welfare benefits - that she was raped...without having actually filed a charge with anyone? The woman isn't required to prove anything other than that she filed a report - the burden of proof of the actual crime isn't on her. Normally I'd be all "ah, another stupid anti-human (both genders, lets be real here) repub law..." but...really? Misleading rewording of headline much, subby? What exactly is /wrong/ about what they're doing here?


The shouldn't be yanking the rug out from under poor women who just had a kid anyway. Oh, there's another mouth to feed? Well fark you we're cutting your income!

Its goddamn crazy inexplicably punitive nonsense.
 
2012-10-25 12:25:09 PM  

CPennypacker: Siochain: Siochain: Mock26: I support this bill. For one, the woman does not have to prove she was raped. She just has to prove that she reported it (as in showing a copy of the Police Report, which she will automatically receive a copy of when she reports it). Also, the intent is to prevent a woman from defrauding the government. As it is now a mother can only receive funds for up to and including X number of kids. She is not eligible for additional benefits for kid number X + 1, unless the child was conceived because the woman was raped. Up to now there was no way to vet whether or not this was true. Now all a woman has to do is provide a copy of the police report.

Well, when my DAD raped me, I was a little scared to file a report, so fark you. Don't pretend that this doesn't happen. Want me to prove to you that it happened? Fark you.

Damn it, I didn't mean to say "prove," but you get the gist. To make it clearer, you expect my 13 year old self to "show" that I filed a police report against the person who had been abusing me, gee, it's just that easy, isn't it?

*Disclosure: I never got pregnant, so I guess I was "lucky" that I didn't have to go through this process.

That's awful, I'm sorry you had to go through that.

And now this thread is dead. Good riddance.


Thank you, though saying "thank you" has always struck me as a funny response, can't think of a better one :) I have a wonderful family and a happy life now!

I suppose I'm a bit sensitive about all the rape shiat lately, kinda lost it there for a moment. Good riddance to this thread is right, I'm gonna move on!
 
2012-10-25 12:26:23 PM  
I do think that people having more kids to get more government money is a serious issue. So is people having kids they know they can't afford. Generational poverty is a nasty thing.

Unfortunately, I can't think of any solution that's not worse than the problem. Any ideas?
 
2012-10-25 12:54:28 PM  

The Jami Turman Fan Club: I do think that people having more kids to get more government money is a serious issue. So is people having kids they know they can't afford. Generational poverty is a nasty thing.

Unfortunately, I can't think of any solution that's not worse than the problem. Any ideas?


Make sure that reproductive health care and therefore birth control is available cheap or free to any woman who needs it and stop restricting abortion rights?

The idea of having more kids to get more money is laughable. I know it's always part of the conversation on welfare, but seriously- the extra benefits don't even begin to cover the cost of taking care of another child for 18 years.
 
2012-10-25 12:58:36 PM  

Genevieve Marie: The Jami Turman Fan Club: I do think that people having more kids to get more government money is a serious issue. So is people having kids they know they can't afford. Generational poverty is a nasty thing.

Unfortunately, I can't think of any solution that's not worse than the problem. Any ideas?

Make sure that reproductive health care and therefore birth control is available cheap or free to any woman who needs it and stop restricting abortion rights?

The idea of having more kids to get more money is laughable. I know it's always part of the conversation on welfare, but seriously- the extra benefits don't even begin to cover the cost of taking care of another child for 18 years.


You act like its the parents that pay for those 18 years
 
2012-10-25 01:02:02 PM  

Brostorm: You act like its the parents that pay for those 18 years


You think the state provides enough benefits to keep children adequately fed, housed, and clothed? Welfare benefits aren't even permanent- they're also hard as hell to obtain in the first place in a lot of states.

THIS is a more typical narrative about how welfare actually works and what it covers and what life is like for people who use it: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/19/breakdown-tanf-needy-familie s -states_n_1606242.html 
 
2012-10-25 01:04:42 PM  

Genevieve Marie: Brostorm: You act like its the parents that pay for those 18 years

You think the state provides enough benefits to keep children adequately fed, housed, and clothed? Welfare benefits aren't even permanent- they're also hard as hell to obtain in the first place in a lot of states.

THIS is a more typical narrative about how welfare actually works and what it covers and what life is like for people who use it: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/19/breakdown-tanf-needy-familie s -states_n_1606242.html


Not to mention, you know, the work involved over those 18 years. Cuz all you need is a $180 check a week and the kid raises itself.
 
2012-10-25 01:06:38 PM  

CPennypacker: Not to mention, you know, the work involved over those 18 years. Cuz all you need is a $180 check a week and the kid raises itself.


Yup. But being a full time mom is not considered real work unless rich women do it.

 
 
2012-10-25 01:11:20 PM  

TheMysteriousStranger: This is pants on fire. Just because they did not explicitly say in the law "Rapists can't sue victims for custody, is not grounds for saying it allowed. If the law is followed, no one found guilty of rape can possibly get the child.


I did not say there are 31 states where rapists are granted custody, just that in 31 states, being a convicted rapist doesn't bar you from suing for custody. Sometimes they do go to trial, and sometimes those trials last months. For the other responder who requested a link, I provided one. You are free to read it as well.

Brostorm: You know family court doesnt work that way right? Please show me a valid cause of action where the court accepted the rapists argument ad it went to trial PRETTY PLEASE. These scare tactics are hilarious.


K. Link

Although I simply must know: What about anything I said is a scare tactic and to whom is it intended to scare?
 
2012-10-25 01:15:47 PM  

badhatharry: Just kill children you can't afford. That's one solution. The final solution. The handicapped and elderly are expensive too.


Now these are the sorts of Modest Proposals a fellow could get on board with!
 
2012-10-25 01:20:34 PM  
Another bill introduced by the small-cocked, sexually-repressed, woman are teh ebil and should be legitmately raped crowd.

/God gave a clitoris for a reason, farkers
 
2012-10-25 01:41:37 PM  

Genevieve Marie: The Jami Turman Fan Club: I do think that people having more kids to get more government money is a serious issue. So is people having kids they know they can't afford. Generational poverty is a nasty thing.

Unfortunately, I can't think of any solution that's not worse than the problem. Any ideas?

Make sure that reproductive health care and therefore birth control is available cheap or free to any woman who needs it and stop restricting abortion rights?

The idea of having more kids to get more money is laughable. I know it's always part of the conversation on welfare, but seriously- the extra benefits don't even begin to cover the cost of taking care of another child for 18 years.


You act like those people take that into consideration. They just see "Ohh, $180 more!"
 
Displayed 50 of 474 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report