Page 9 of 22 FirstFirst ...
7
8
9
10
11
19
... LastLast
  1. #161
    Quote Originally Posted by Roose View Post
    A single child over what you can afford to support is too many.

    What happens if you lose your job because of the economy? Government takes away your kids?


  2. #162
    The Unstoppable Force Rukentuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Mini Soda
    Posts
    23,054
    Quote Originally Posted by Purlina View Post
    What happens if you lose your job because of the economy? Government takes away your kids?

    You're moving goalposts. We aren't talking about a woman who 'lost her job', she had more kids when she couldn't afford any more to begin with.
    Quote Originally Posted by GreatOak View Post
    Hey, as a transabled, transethnic, non-binary, genderqueer, neo-communist, indoor-capable republican otherkin I am offended by your callous display of ignorance.
    Quote Originally Posted by Eroginous View Post
    I wouldn't expect someone who thinks science provides proof to know that.

  3. #163
    Quote Originally Posted by Themius View Post
    So let's get this straight.

    Her bills are in excess of 100k a year

    You don't think she should get welfare,

    which means you don't think her children need to eat, or need to go to the doctors, or need to go to the dentist.

    A regular job isn't going to cut it to pay for her bills lol. Not at this point.
    NO SHE SHOULD NOT GET WELFARE. You should not be rewarded for doing nothing and having more and more kids. Why should we keep working and paying our taxes while she sits there and does nothing and handed money? I'm sorry but if you can't afford to take care of the 6 kids you already had *which she couldn't* why would you take all the money you had to pay a doctor *which is expensive* TO HAVE MORE KIDS!? So your telling me she made a bad descision like she admitted to and since she brought all these kids into the world we should be footing the bill for them? My Wife has 3 kids in which she was the only parent working for the whole 13 years her oldest has been a live. Her husband at the time refused to work and they did not get welfare when she was the only one providing.. To many people i know refuse to work and have children and say, "why should I work when I get money from the state?". We are promoting people to have kids and not have to do another because the state will provide healthcare, dental care, money for food/rent/electricity.

    So again You're telling me WE should foot the bill because she was dumb enough to have that many kids? Having 6 kids alone is way to much money per year that she couldn't afford, so the only logical thing is to try and add 2 more on! Yep that makes so much sense I'm sorry the government needs to step in and give the kids to relatives or foster homes and put her ass in jail until she pays back all the money she got from us. She OBVIOUSLY doesn't give a crap about being able to provide for the kids otherwise she would have never had 6 kids let alone 14!!!! That is just plain FACTS and simple LOGIC that everyone should have. Can't provide for the 6 you have DON'T HAVE ANYMORE!!! Don't agree I don't care because I sure as hell know as a taxpayer I should have a say so in this one.

  4. #164
    Scarab Lord Roose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Tuscaloosa
    Posts
    4,945
    Quote Originally Posted by Purlina View Post
    What happens if you lose your job because of the economy?
    Stop making shit up. Any person with a brain takes that into consideration when PLANNING to have a child. If your future job outlook is sketchy at best, do not have a child.

  5. #165
    Quote Originally Posted by Roose View Post
    Stop making shit up. Any person with a brain takes that into consideration when PLANNING to have a child. If your future job outlook is sketchy at best, do not have a child.
    Yep, I am sure the average joe can easily foresee recessions...

    Everyone saw this last one coming a mile away!

  6. #166
    Quote Originally Posted by Purlina View Post
    Then what was your point? No additional savings are had...
    If they choose to adopt one of the octo-mom babies over any foriegn born baby then it is a savings to the tax payer. That is my whole point.

  7. #167
    Quote Originally Posted by petej0 View Post
    If they choose to adopt one of the octo-mom babies over any foriegn born baby then it is a savings to the tax payer. That is my whole point.

    It doesn't matter because there are plenty of other US babies to adopt.

    Instead of adopting US baby A, you adopt US baby B.

    In the end it doesn't make a difference...

  8. #168
    Quote Originally Posted by Purlina View Post
    I fixed that, but the point still stands. We would not save any money if her children where put up for adoption.
    Adoption means they take custoday of the child and they pay for everything meaning no longer the state's responsibilty to pay for. So what the hell are you talking about this is not saving us money? As long as you do your checking and making sure the couple/person taking the child can afford it then you will not be paying anymore money from the state!

  9. #169
    Mechagnome Sarthan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    608
    Quote Originally Posted by Themius View Post
    Actually it ''IS'' the doctors business lol. The fact that he put MORE EMBRYOS and lied about it, is clearly the doctors business. The fact he didn't care about her mental state ''IS'' the doctors business.
    Themius if the Doctor would have said no because she is not mentally stable you would be here complaining about how the mean doctor took away her rights.

  10. #170
    Banned sandmoth12's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,767
    First the cold logic approach: take the children from her since she seems to be mentally unstable. Place the children into foster care. Forcefully restrain her into custody and cut her tubes so that she can never have children again.

    Now the approach with a little more emotion: urge her to get her tubes cut, and start a donations program so that she can feed her children.


    Personally I see this woman had many chances so I would go with the first option.
    Last edited by sandmoth12; 2013-01-08 at 08:35 PM.

  11. #171
    Quote Originally Posted by Purlina View Post
    Yep, I am sure the average joe can easily foresee recessions...

    Everyone saw this last one coming a mile away!
    Clueless are we? They are stating that if you are sitting well and can afford a kid and want a kid at the time go for it! SHE COULD NOT AFFORD TO PAY FOR HER 6 KIDS ALREADY SO SHE HAD MORE!!!!!!!! She didn't lose her job until she got pregnant with 8 babies and spend all her money on getting pregnant which means she had no money for her 6 kids while she was pregnant. She caused herself to lose her job, which is her own doing, then she spent all her money on getting pregnant which was her own doing.. EVERYONE was her own doing and now she is expect us to give her money via taxpaying dollars because SHE SCREWED UP SEVERAL TIMES and we have to pay or you call us horrible people? NO she is the horrible person for bringing 14 kids into this world not being able to take care of them NOT US. So take your bull and eat it.

  12. #172
    Quote Originally Posted by OrcD3vil View Post
    Adoption means they take custoday of the child and they pay for everything meaning no longer the state's responsibilty to pay for. So what the hell are you talking about this is not saving us money? As long as you do your checking and making sure the couple/person taking the child can afford it then you will not be paying anymore money from the state!

    You missed the point, there is an OVERABUNDENCE of babies to adopt in the US. Putting one more baby up for adoption does not create a savings.

    Why?

    Because the number of babies being adopted is less then the number of babies up for adoption.

  13. #173
    Pit Lord HeatherRae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    2,313
    I think what I find most amusing about this entire thread is that Themius keeps saying, "She was pro-life, she had to implant those embryos or they'd be destroyed!"

    But that's not true at all. First, she apparently told the doctor she wanted fresh embryos, not the ones already in storage. He implanted 6 fresh embryos AND the 6 frozen ones, from what I can tell. Second, does no one understand that you can donate those embryos? Yeah, you can. You can donate them to other people who want to have children but are unable to conceive. There's no reason that the embryos have to be destroyed. She could have even paid to have them stored indefinitely.

    So saying "she was pro-life so she HAD to get them implanted" is a cop-out at best, and downright ridiculous.
    Tiriel <Demise> of US-Kel'Thuzad

    Thank you to Yoni for this AMAZING signature!

  14. #174
    This conversation is ridiculous. When does personal responsibility kick in?

    The woman had six children, as a single mother that is a very taxing thing. Pro-life or not, she's a mother, your responsibility is no longer to yourself and your values, it's to your children. It no longer matters what you want, it matters what is good for them. Regardless of the fact the doctor put in more than she wished, she wanted him to implant six, which gave her the very real possibility that all of them would take. Even if half did, that is still three, pushing her to nine. Additional children tax income and take away from what your current children have. There was no need for that, with each one added, their lives get worse individually. They could have been donated to women in need.

    She was selfishly looking after her own interests instead of what was good for her current children, to me, that's the sign of a poor mother. I don't care she did porn, had nudes of herself made for money. You do what you need to do for your kids. She just made that distinction way too late, and now the rest of the people have to pay for it.

    Fiscal responsibility is the part of a parent. It's part of what makes a -good- parent, providing for your children. Purposefully trying to have more when you know you can't afford it is living beyond your means.

    Someone losing a job, having a crisis, going from healthy to sick... those are reasons you need help. Being irresponsible? That's on you.

  15. #175
    Scarab Lord Roose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Tuscaloosa
    Posts
    4,945
    Quote Originally Posted by Purlina View Post
    Yep, I am sure the average joe can easily foresee recessions...

    Everyone saw this last one coming a mile away!
    And smart people that saved and are not supporting kids they can't afford are doing fine. Yes, you can always prepare for recessions. They happen. You know, saving for a rainy day. Something that people who do not have kids they can't afford do.

    Kids are really fucking expensive. Having kids is a very serious decision. People should not have kids unless they can support themselves and their children through rough economic times like today.

    Idiocracy.

  16. #176
    Quote Originally Posted by Purlina View Post
    Yep, I am sure the average joe can easily foresee recessions...

    Everyone saw this last one coming a mile away!
    Why don't we put all "what-if's" aside, shall we? Because, in this case, the post was about "Octomom." And the facts are as follows:

    1. She had six children that she was struggling, at best, to care for financially. As I recall she was already on assistance at this point.
    2. Knowing her current circumstances SHE decided that SHE wanted more children.
    3. Now she needs more assistance.

    I don't see any sort of mystery here. There was nothing that was unforseen. She couldn't afford to care for six and she decided to have more.

  17. #177
    Quote Originally Posted by Purlina View Post
    Why the heck not? Let's say you have 0 kids, and the doctor makes you have 8 instead of 1? Who is to blame, you or the doctor?
    I fail to see your point. Everyone agrees the doctor is at fault for planting more embryos then was required for a normal IVF. Regardless Suleman ASKED for all remaining embroys to be planted. Well, 8 were planted, not the 6 she thought, it makes zero difference 12 kids or 14 kids, she still cant afford them.

    Your point about going from zero to 8 is moot because the doctor in either case does not care how many children you already have.

  18. #178
    Quote Originally Posted by Roose View Post
    And smart people that saved and are not supporting kids they can't afford are doing fine. Yes, you can always prepare for recessions. They happen. You know, saving for a rainy day. Something that people who do not have kids they can't afford do.

    Kids are really fucking expensive. Having kids is a very serious decision. People should not have kids unless they can support themselves and their children through rough economic times like today.

    Idiocracy.

    A rainy day is 6 like months, people have been out of work for much longer then that due to the recession.

    I would the last recession a freaking tsunami.
    Last edited by Purlina; 2013-01-08 at 08:29 PM.

  19. #179
    The Lightbringer bergmann620's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Stow, Ohio
    Posts
    3,563
    Quote Originally Posted by Themius View Post
    The doctor should be sued, there should be a lawsuit, he could be sued I believe, and the doctor IS to blame for her having this many kids. He lied and implanted more than he should have.

    You think taking a child away from their home and sticking them in foster care when they're older which will likely mean they won't get adopted and instead spend time between homes until they're 18, is better? It would be fucking traumatic.
    You don't think living in a home with 13 other kids, a mom who's in the news for doing porn or nudes or whatever every third week, etc is fucking traumatic?

    Coming from the abusive-as-fuck home I grew up in, I'll tell you straight up: The homes I stayed in felt like vacations compared to my house. I'll bet 9 or 10 of those kids feel the same. Every one of them, by 13, would likely trade damn near anything just for some anonymity.
    Life: bergmannity.com/ | Gaming: indignantgoat.com/
    XBL: Indignant Goat | BattleTag: IndiGoat#1288 | SteamID: Indignant Goat

  20. #180
    Bloodsail Admiral Melanieshaman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    Posts
    1,103
    My nephew and his GF did this..she had 2 kids from her ex, and they had another ..for more money from the government..they refuse to get married as they would have to add his income to hers...hers alone (which now that i think about it, i don't think she works)... is what keeps her on it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •