Photos
Blog
NewslettersColumbia, SC , S.C. teen pregnancy prevention program cut
Submitted by lostinsc on Sat, 2008-09-27 12:43.
Columbia, SC
S.C. teen pregnancy prevention program cut
A program aimed at preventing teen pregnancy in South Carolina will be eliminated by the end of the year, despite a recent rise in teen pregnancy rates, the state agency that oversees Medicaid said Friday.
- lostinsc's blog
- Login to post comments
- 2542 reads
because it obviously wasn't effective?
Perhaps if they cut the free-ride for unwed mothers and WIC then there would be less need for a TPPP.
Perhaps if they cut the free-ride for unwed mothers and WIC then there would be less need for a TPPP.
You think that WIC should be cut? Really? So helping low income families (not just unwed mothers or teenagers) provide sustenance for their infants and toddlers is asking too much? Should free lunches be cut, as well? What do you think the tax payer contribution to low income families should be?
Absolutely YES!!!! It might serve to instill some responsibility in our cockeyed world!
Absolutely YES!!!! It might serve to instill some responsibility in our cockeyed world!
So if I understand this view correctly; teen-aged, single parenting is ok as long as you are not a "low income" teen-aged, single parent?
Teenagers and or unwed mothers with low incomes lack responsibility and are causing the world (not just America) to become cockeyed, but those teenagers who make the same decisions, but have parents who will shoulder the majority of the responsibility, are ok?
Interesting perspective.
Poverty must be a crime. Should it also be punishable by law? Or possibly by God?
Makes you wonder...
No, semcdaniels,
Poverty is not a crime. Ignorance and lack of accountability are though. Trust me, I know what I'm talking about here. 80-90% of the "poor girls" that TAKE FULL ADVANTAGE of the WIC, medicaid, free-lunch and section 8 housing are either:
A. fully aware of what they can and will get when they spit out baby after baby with no fiscal, mental or emotional ability to raise them on their own,
or,
B. not cognizant of the implications of unprotected sex.
Tell us why all of them seem to know how to work the system to get WIC, Medicaid, free housing, free daycare, free food, etc... Yet NONE of them seem to want to take advantage of free birth control?
I think all these programs started out with the intention of helping children. How ever, the slant is definitely now more towards helping the parents live a lifestyle that they have grown far too accustomed to.
Keep the programs that help the kids, but I think that the parent/parents should--at minimum-- have to submit to monthly mandatory drug screens, and show at least 3 attempts at employment per week. They should also use some of the money wasted on unnecessary programs to make the parents go back to school and become productive. If they don't/won't comply, POOF! The free ride is over. Take the kids and foster them out to all the antisex-ed proponents and the anti abortion protestors who seem to have time and money on their hands to picket and make signs, bumper stickers, and videos.
Come on! How many chances/opportunities does a person need???
No, semcdaniels,
Poverty is not a crime. Ignorance and lack of accountability are though. Trust me, I know what I'm talking about here. 80-90% of the "poor girls" that TAKE FULL ADVANTAGE of the WIC, medicaid, free-lunch and section 8 housing are either:
A. fully aware of what they can and will get when they spit out baby after baby with no fiscal, mental or emotional ability to raise them on their own,
or,
B. not cognizant of the implications of unprotected sex.
Tell us why all of them seem to know how to work the system to get WIC, Medicaid, free housing, free daycare, free food, etc... Yet NONE of them seem to want to take advantage of free birth control?
I think all these programs started out with the intention of helping children. How ever, the slant is definitely now more towards helping the parents live a lifestyle that they have grown far too accustomed to.
Keep the programs that help the kids, but I think that the parent/parents should--at minimum-- have to submit to monthly mandatory drug screens, and show at least 3 attempts at employment per week. They should also use some of the money wasted on unnecessary programs to make the parents go back to school and become productive. If they don't/won't comply, POOF! The free ride is over. Take the kids and foster them out to all the antisex-ed proponents and the anti abortion protestors who seem to have time and money on their hands to picket and make signs, bumper stickers, and videos.
Come on! How many chances/opportunities does a person need???
Ignorance means lack of knowledge, education, or awareness. If this be the case, with programs being cut, where can lower income teen-aged mothers find this knowledge, education or awareness?
If poverty is not a crime but a systemic epidemic condition that is intergenerational, it is unlikely that certain families have the knowledge, skill or awareness of seeing their lives transformed into middle class success.
I am certain that being considered the scourge of the nation reeks havoc on the self esteem. Without self esteem one will not entertain thoughts of success. Without the hope of success, one accepts being considered the scourge of the nation. And so on, and so on, and so on...
Why not be proactive and lobby for living wages?
I'm talking about the people living off the government as a WAY OF LIFE. That IS their job. These people are not ignorant, nor did they come up in a vacuum. They were given the same opportunity as everyone else where public education is concerned.
The people I am talking about don't have self esteem issues. They have baby showers and Dooney & Bourke handbags, hair-do's that take 8-12 hours to install, and more jewelry on at any given moment than many "middle class people" own. They live in better homes and drive nicer cars than many people who actually have JOBS.
They don't need me to "lobby for living wages"--because they are already getting everything they need WITHOUT A JOB.
Many of them don't have the knowledge, skills, or awareness to transform themselves into "middle class success" as you put it. The reason that they don't is that they are NOT LOOKING. They don't need to. They have a much easier system that works well for them, so why change???
Birth control??? That might mess with my socio-economic plan! Forget that!
I'm talking about the people living off the government as a WAY OF LIFE. That IS their job. These people are not ignorant, nor did they come up in a vacuum. They were given the same opportunity as everyone else where public education is concerned.
The people I am talking about don't have self esteem issues. They have baby showers and Dooney & Bourke handbags, hair-do's that take 8-12 hours to install, and more jewelry on at any given moment than many "middle class people" own. They live in better homes and drive nicer cars than many people who actually have JOBS.
They don't need me to "lobby for living wages"--because they are already getting everything they need WITHOUT A JOB.
Many of them don't have the knowledge, skills, or awareness to transform themselves into "middle class success" as you put it. The reason that they don't is that they are NOT LOOKING. They don't need to. They have a much easier system that works well for them, so why change???
Birth control??? That might mess with my socio-economic plan! Forget that!
First you say that ignorance and irresponsibility were the reasons that lower income teenagers become pregnant. Now it's not about ignorance, it's about cunning.
If your public school is funded by property taxes and you live in a low income area, no you are not receiving the same education as others who live in more affluent areas.
Live in better homes and drive better cars? Then how are you so sure that "these people" are receiving welfare benefits?
Possibly if one really studied the income requirements of such programs, more people would qualify to receive them then I think they'd like to admit.
I suppose "they" don't need you to do anything for them, re: lobbying for living wages, because certainly that wouldn't effect your quality of life for the better as well, would it?
Do me a favor, don't put words into my mouth.This was never a discussion about the morality of teen unwed mothers. Financial status has absolutely no relevance to morality in this situation or any other.
Question : semcdaniels wrote..."What do you think "the taxpayer contribution to low income families should be ?"
Answer : 2 words...TEMPORARY and LIMITED
I do not believe in unemployed, unwed, welfare mothers or families getting "raises" for continuing to reproduce children they can neither support nor educate. That said, perhaps I will condsider adding to my previous answer. How about STERILIZATION ?
Question : semcdaniels wrote..."What do you think "the taxpayer contribution to low income families should be ?"
Answer : 2 words...TEMPORARY and LIMITED
I do not believe in unemployed, unwed, welfare mothers or families getting "raises" for continuing to reproduce children they can neither support nor educate. That said, perhaps I will condsider adding to my previous answer. How about STERILIZATION ?
Isn't that already the case? Are not programs assisting the impoverished already temporary and limited?
Financial assistance is one thing, but where are the programs that attempt to focus on the psychological (and or physical) results of being in a society that attributes value and worth to human beings with wealth and status while intergenerational poverty is the reality of millions of American citizens who, by the way, also pay taxes and have the right to vote?
Again, why not lobby for living wages?
Sterilization? :-) Certainly you are attempting to get a rise out of me. In seriousness though, I'll entertain the thought. Explain how this plan will work and be beneficial to American citizens, if you could please.
No semcdaniels, the free ride doesn't appear to be temporary or limited. As long as you can birth another baby, you get another check. Pretty much that's the main qualification. Not accountability to raise a productive member of society, or feed, clothe, and educate said progeny.
I also think that paying people to be sterilized would be beneficial. $2000.00 to get your tubes tied/nads nipped. Then they could use the money to get some therapy for all that psychological damage that they got while riding the system. (How much ya wanna bet that they won't though?)
Until you spend a career on the front row of this show, watching it happen every day, you have no idea what you are even talking about.
No semcdaniels, the free ride doesn't appear to be temporary or limited. As long as you can birth another baby, you get another check. Pretty much that's the main qualification. Not accountability to raise a productive member of society, or feed, clothe, and educate said progeny.
I also think that paying people to be sterilized would be beneficial. $2000.00 to get your tubes tied/nads nipped. Then they could use the money to get some therapy for all that psychological damage that they got while riding the system. (How much ya wanna bet that they won't though?)
Until you spend a career on the front row of this show, watching it happen every day, you have no idea what you are even talking about.
Are you in the business of teen-aged mothers?
If you deal with Social Services in general and know a bit about it's history, then you should know that in the 1970's one of the major welfare revisions required that no male could be present in the home to help care for the children, if the woman and children were to receive benefits.
This decision has had implications up until this day, and will continue to do so into the future. 'Deadbeat dads' were created. For the lower income, family values was something that was compromised while women worried about the day to day affairs of feeding, housing and clothing their children.
I am beginning to think that there is no true concern for the impoverished, just a sense of righteousness and contempt for them, an unwarranted contempt at that, for the crime of being poor.
Jobs historically have not been created and/or taken away by the least of us in this nation.
No, welfare and financial assistance is neither temporary nor limited. It is a long term way of life. Most of the unwed mothers receiving welfare and WIC today were WIC babies themselves. It is a cycle that no one seems motivated to break. Why would they ?
You are living in a fantasy world if you think there is an ounce of shame attached. Do you grocery shop ? Pay attention next time you are in line. Many have "mac-daddy" cell phones, drive tricked-out Escalades, have $250 weaves and "dos" and have just come from the nail salon. Wic pays for the groceries leaving the cash for the malt liquor and crab legs.
As for sterilization...I wasn't looking for a rise out of you. I believe it is a legitimate option. How about this ? Taxpayers will foot the bill for the first baby and for the mother's care then we will make sure that the child has nutritious food for the first few years. Then...taxpayers will either pay for voluntary sterilization or the next baby (or 6) is on them. No further assistance.
No, welfare and financial assistance is neither temporary nor limited. It is a long term way of life. Most of the unwed mothers receiving welfare and WIC today were WIC babies themselves. It is a cycle that no one seems motivated to break. Why would they ?
You are living in a fantasy world if you think there is an ounce of shame attached. Do you grocery shop ? Pay attention next time you are in line. Many have "mac-daddy" cell phones, drive tricked-out Escalades, have $250 weaves and "dos" and have just come from the nail salon. Wic pays for the groceries leaving the cash for the malt liquor and crab legs.
As for sterilization...I wasn't looking for a rise out of you. I believe it is a legitimate option. How about this ? Taxpayers will foot the bill for the first baby and for the mother's care then we will make sure that the child has nutritious food for the first few years. Then...taxpayers will either pay for voluntary sterilization or the next baby (or 6) is on them. No further assistance.
John LaBruzzo, a Louisiana state lawmaker, proposed giving financial incentives to poor women on public assistance, to encourage sterilization.
What he failed to realize with his proposal was that for past 12 years there has been no additional welfare payment per child, like he and many others claim.
In addition, there has been 20 years of research that claims that lower income women receiving assistance, do not have more babies on average, than women not receiving assistance.
The number of welfare recipients in New Orleans before Katrina were a mere 5000 households in a city of 200,000 households. The numbers have fallen further post Katrina.
So considering sterilization as a solution for economic hardship and deprivation seems an extreme and unwarranted solution, but if that's what you believe in, far be it for me to convince you otherwise.
I do not think that the gov't should offer " financial incentives to poor women on public assistance, to encourage sterilization." That would be unethical and would take advantage of their desperation and position. What I am suggesting is an alternative. Typically it is not the desire of these women to have several children. Many may appreciate the option.
Perhaps we could limit the number of pregnancies,births and well-child care to one or two per unemployed, gov't assisted mother. Any children born beyond that would be "on them"(as it is for most of us)or as a "parting gift" they could opt for voluntary sterilization. I don't claim to have all the answers (not even close)and I would never suggest that we allow any child to not receive proper care and nutrition. I just think that faced with a "do or die" situation, most would step up to the plate and DO what is necesary to care for their families.
Believe it or not, semcdaniels, I am neither a cold nor heartless person.
I just believe that as long as there is a "free ride" people will line up to get on. Independance and self-respect are the greatest gifts the gov't could give. I wouldn't object to gov't funded job training programs or anything aimed at creating financial independence. I don't think that keeping people dependent is the best thing for them. I guess what I'm calling for is "tough love".
This is my two cents and it's not worth much but this is the blogs so I get to say it anyway!!
I think the programs that we offer anyone in need are great! However, there are problems with the programs. We all know it. If you complain about the programs then you are heartless and don't care about those in need. That is not the case! That is not the issue! It is those few that take advantage of the programs that are hurting everyone. To say that there are not those in these programs that keep having babies just so they can use the system then you are blind! But...the programs are set up to make you not want to improve yourself!
Example, along long time ago...a little over 20 years to be exact...I was on my own with a child. I got a apartment based on my income, which I could afford! It was a nice apartment. I was working two jobs, raising my daughter and going to school to try and improve my life. I received my Associates Degree in business, got a promotion at my job! Which is all GREAT--right? Found the man of my dreams and now he is going to school to make a better life for us and everything is great! Not rich! Not poor! But making it! Guess what? Because I had taken the time to improve myself, get an education, work hard at my job to make more money! I was told that I need to leave my apartment and find somewhere else to live. So, now I am paying rent to another apartment building that now is really just taken the new promotion money that I just made! I am not ahead anymore, no way to save money for the house you dream of because now more is going out! And at that point you realize the system is set up to make you want to fail! I did not have WIC, I did not have food stamps. I just had a decent apartment that I could afford!
Thank goodness that I saw past that...but how many people don't! They see...if I stay at this income (in some cases--NO INCOME!), if I do not go to school and try and improve myself, if I just keep having these kids out of wedlock....LOOK at what I get! I think if you are in any of the programs that as you do better for you and your family, as you make better decisions for you and your family. There should be some type of reward for those! Do not know what it could be but something! Maybe financial planning, I don't know! But we keep giving and giving and giving to those that keep abusing the system! We reward the wrong group of people when we do this!
Oops...I hope I didn't upset Asstnuts...just realized I went off the topic. The topic is teenage pregnancies! Again...goes back to what I was saying...instead of spending the money on taking care of baby number 6. Let's come up with a program that awards the girls that make it thru high school without getting pregnant! Let's make it cool to be without baby prior to graduation. Again, do not know what it could be but maybe something like portion of first year of college paid for. I know my husbands thought is you do not reward for something you are suppose to do anyway! But in this case...we need to keep the babies from having babies!
Again, that was just my two cents!
this reminds me of when I was 18, making minimum wage and supporting myself. I had to have a surgery that I couldn't afford. I called the proper office to inquire about Medicaid. She said, "do you have any kids?" I said no. She said, "are you pregnant?" I said no. She said, "We can't help you." And for a brief second, it went through my mind that if I got pregnant, they would help me. Thank goodness I did not act on that. It also occured to me later on that I could have gone to college for free if I had a couple of fatherless children. There is no assistance for responsible people.
I do not think that the gov't should offer " financial incentives to poor women on public assistance, to encourage sterilization." That would be unethical and would take advantage of their desperation and position. What I am suggesting is an alternative. Typically it is not the desire of these women to have several children. Many may appreciate the option.
Perhaps we could limit the number of pregnancies,births and well-child care to one or two per unemployed, gov't assisted mother. Any children born beyond that would be "on them"(as it is for most of us)or as a "parting gift" they could opt for voluntary sterilization. I don't claim to have all the answers (not even close)and I would never suggest that we allow any child to not receive proper care and nutrition. I just think that faced with a "do or die" situation, most would step up to the plate and DO what is necesary to care for their families.
Believe it or not, semcdaniels, I am neither a cold nor heartless person.
I just believe that as long as there is a "free ride" people will line up to get on. Independance and self-respect are the greatest gifts the gov't could give. I wouldn't object to gov't funded job training programs or anything aimed at creating financial independence. I don't think that keeping people dependent is the best thing for them. I guess what I'm calling for is "tough love".
You and I really do not differ that much in personal opinion. I strongly believe in the adage;
"Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach him how to fish and he will eat for a lifetime."
I cannot however stand by the suggestion that children should be denied sustenance because of the behavior of the parents.
I am also of the opinion that many of the programs in place do not work, but if the alternative is abandoning children, I just cannot abide.
Something needs to be done, certainly. There are many that take advantage of the system because of the cycle of poverty which they cannot find nor desire an escape and there are others that are genuinely in need of help, who want better lives and I believe that they should be given that.
Given this country's current economic situation and the government's deregulation of the banking industry that predicated it, it may just come to pass that many will need assistance. As unfortunate as this thought is, programs should be in place for whatever the future may bring.
Yes, we can agree to disagree on this issue. As I'm sure that we both hope for better solutions for the American people, in the end.
How about we discourage living off the government?
How about we require grocery stores to have a separate line for WIC recipients?
How about we require recipients to take regular drug tests?
How about mandatory credit freezes for recipients?
How about regular IRS audits for recipients?
How about we require recipients to at least get a GED?
How about we require recipients to do some community work wearing fluorescent green shirts?
How about we make the free benefits not so free anymore, because it's not free for those of us who pay for them?
There are no qualifiers for WIC. Bristol Palin is more than welcome to avail herself and her baby to that program which has over the years been an overwhelming success.
Applicants must meet all of the following eligibility requirements:
Categorical
Residential
Income
Nutrition Risk
More here: http://www.fns.usda.gov/wic/howtoapply/eligibilityrequirements.htm
My WIC info is certainly dated. Based on the income requirements these folks could use the help.
I was doing a revision lesson in writing today. My topic was "Chocolate". In it I wrote about going to the Chocolate Tree's All-You-Can-Eat-Night. I had a student ask me if I had to pay, and then she replied, "That's messed up." This from a GT student who is used to handouts. My reply was not too kind.
to get WIC or welfare or free housing or any of that "free" stuff. I joined the military when I was 17 and have worked every day since.
My point is that it shouldn't be so easy to continue to get "free" stuff from the taxpayers.
to get WIC or welfare or free housing or any of that "free" stuff. I joined the military when I was 17 and have worked every day since.
My point is that it shouldn't be so easy to continue to get "free" stuff from the taxpayers.
There are military families that can and do qualify and receive WIC and other supplemental assistance, even while receiving BAH and BAS.
Read the WIC income requirements, if you are so inclined.
I think you completely missed Stoney_pe's point.
Unless I'm mistaken, it was not a military issue.
His point is that since the young age of 17 he has worked for a living. WORKED ! He has EARNED what he has and has been financially independent in supporting his family.
Like most who tire of the handouts, he and his wife work for what they have.
THAT'S THE POINT !
As truesoutherner explained, it was not a military issue. It's about work ethic and pride. Nobody owes me a thing. I owe my family.
Also, there's a big difference between someone in the military who signs a blank check up to and including his life, and a lazy, uneducated, unwed mother who procreates with multiple baby daddys for the fun of it and for all those checks the government owes her.
As you and Lostinsc pointed out, let's not overlook the "baby Daddys".
They deserve to be held accountible as well. Unfortunately, the reality is that it's not easy. If there was a way to determine multiple irresponsible paternities, I'd be the first to suggest we make these idiots "pony up" and face their responsibilities. Perhaps they could be "strongly encouraged" to support their multiple children and either face repercussions or accept voluntary sterilization if they don't. As I said, I don't have all the answers, but personal accountability is a good place to start.
As you and Lostinsc pointed out, let's not overlook the "baby Daddys".
They deserve to be held accountible as well. Unfortunately, the reality is that it's not easy. If there was a way to determine multiple irresponsible paternities, I'd be the first to suggest we make these idiots "pony up" and face their responsibilities. Perhaps they could be "strongly encouraged" to support their multiple children and either face repercussions or accept voluntary sterilization if they don't. As I said, I don't have all the answers, but personal accountability is a good place to start.
It seems that accountability is required of both parents in seeking support nowadays.
I bristle at the caricatures of unwed mothers however. I don't think that they are a necessary component to bring to discussions such as these as they tend to undermine their humanity.
That being said, it must be taken into account that these programs (excluding WIC and some others) discouraged fathers from living at home with the mothers and children.
Which leads us to where to lay the blame and the past failures of these programs. I think that we should all have a pretty good idea how these programs came into fruition, shouldn't we? The Great Depression, but I won't get into that.
As I stated earlier, men were discouraged from being in the home since the 1970's.
In 1992 Clinton changed welfare to the new Welfare to Work. After 2 years, at which time women receive job training, they must go to work. There is only a 5 year lifetime limit to being on welfare, actually now changed to Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). That's it. A 5 year lifetime limit. This has been in place for over a decade.
Women must also submit their children father(s) names into the system in hopes of gaining financial support. Hopefully, although it may take time, this may encourage the family unity that has been misplaced since the 70's since father participation is now required. Wishful thinking? Maybe, but it's a start. If nothing else, it encourages accountability.
Things are not like they used to be and haven't been for quite some time, it seems. I just googled this information quite recently so it's all laid out there.
Yet such harsh characterizations persist. I don't understand that. It, in my opinion, undermines the most factual arguments.
semcdaniels,
I am not a social worker. I am a nurse. I take care of these young girls daily. 19 yo having 3rd and 4th babies. 15 yo having first--even second babies. They are all on medicaid and wic. 1 in 10 has a male consort in attendance. Few have even a minimal concept of pregnancy, childbirth, or infant care--let alone, birth control. They think nothing of coming to the hospital for "every little thing"--many time something that is a basic normal part of being pregnant "just to get checked out". It does not even occur to them that it is costing SOMEONE ELSE money when they do this. "It's free!" And woe unto the poor soul who tries to tell them differently.
Yes, some are poor in the extreme. However, many dress far more expensively than I do, carry designer bags, 2 or 3 cell phones, and wear more jewelry than I even own.
This tells me that they have found some way to get around the system.
In fact I personally know several young women with stair-step babies from different fathers who work and receive government assistance. I KNOW what they tell each other about how to get the best section 8 housing, extra grocery vouchers, free/subsidized daycare(ABC), which church is giving away the "Angel Food" this week, etc...In fact, they know the folks that work at DSS and DHEC on a first name basis and have their phone numbers on speed-dial! All the while spending their paychecks on new cars, new weaves, nail jobs, and Baby Phat couture. Almost all of them know the ins and outs of the child support system as well. In fact, several that I know get more child support than they earn in a month themselves.
Now, if they were using the money they made to better themselves--say on education--or to better their children's lives, I could be more forgiving. But it will be the children who lose out here. They will grow up seeing how well this worked out for Mom, so why not do the same? They will have little concept of working to earn a realistic living.
My point is this:
Until there is some means of accountability, the system will go on and on breaking down our underpriveledged/disadvantaged community. The entitlement attitude is a hard one to break.
How about you crawling back under the rock you came from...........
It took me a minute to figure out you were talking to me. You must be one of those people I help support with my hard work and taxes. Why else would you support freebies without any kind of payback?
I don't mean to upset you by asking you to do something to pay back some of the people who have been doing for you. Your bad wishes for me won't get my feelings hurt. That's how parasites work, but instead of being mean to me, I'd prefer a "thank you" from time to time.
Did you have to put your finger on the screen on carolinagirl41's post, then scroll up til you figured out which post she was replying to?
Nice reply.
Sorry, I am trying really hard not to be too chatty or demonstrate too much personal admiration, but sometimes it overcomes me.
trust me! He needs all the personal admiration that he can get!! he he
OOPS! Bet that was considered chatting!
I knew she was talking to me. I wrote "how about" about ten times, so when I saw it on her subject, I knew she was talking to me. Then, I read further and I noticed all her hostility and I knew for sure she was talking to me. I seem to have that effect on people.
I have to confess I did scroll up to make sure, but I rarely give the finger anymore. I am more high tech now. I place the pointer to the left margin of the "floating comment" and then use the scrolling wheel while holding the pointer still and go up. The first comment to the left of the pointer is the one the poster is responding to.
I guess I'm old-fashioned. I hardly ever use the wheel, so I didn't even think of doing it that way. From now on, I'll save the finger for driving.
I actually liked that!! WOW!!
It took me a minute to figure out you were talking to me. You must be one of those people I help support with my hard work and taxes. Why else would you support freebies without any kind of payback?
I don't mean to upset you by asking you to do something to pay back some of the people who have been doing for you. Your bad wishes for me won't get my feelings hurt. That's how parasites work, but instead of being mean to me, I'd prefer a "thank you" from time to time.
You do not have a clue about me I do not require support from you or anyone else I have a Full time Job and No freebies....You are just so negative all the time. How sad that must be for you.
It's a good thing you don't need my support. You sure had me fooled as big an advocate as you are about people continuing to get governemnt assistance. I guess I was wrong, and I stand corrected. If you're not one of those I help support, then you must be one of those Americans with a big heart who doesn't mind giving government money to the "needy". The problem is that the government doesn't have money to give away. In order for them to have money to give away, they first have to take it from people who work for a living, people like me who get up early and go to work and work late every day. You must be one of those generous people who doesn't mind being generous with someone else's money.
You're wrong about me. I'm not negative all the time, just most of the time, especially when someone is demanding what is "owed" them, and it comes from my pocket. Besides, I'm not asking for much more than my employer asks me. I have to stay drug free. I have to dress properly. I have to get work done. People know how I get my money. Why can I ask for the same from the "needy" people with whom I am forced to share the fruits of my hard work?
Besides, I'm not asking for much more than my employer asks me. I have to stay drug free. I have to dress properly. I have to get work done. /quote]
...and dressing properly means no spandex st work, right stoney ?
Sorry, couldn't resist ;)
....people like me who get up early and go to work and work late every day......I have to get work done....
Maybe if you didn't blog for hours every day you could arrive and leave on time!
KT
I think if I napped less at work, I'd get more done than if I blogged less.
Besides, If I blogged less, then who would pay attention to you?
carolinagirl41
I never said I was a BIG advocate for all the freebies. I just think you need to crawl back under your rock Mr. Negative.
Join the clubs. I beleive there's a club who wants me to go back under my rock. They meet regularly for morning coffee and talk about me although only one person does all the talking, until the waitress comes. I beleive you’ll fit right in. The group includes distinguished bloggers like KT, KTOGP32, Haynesworth, Luther, Lisa2, Tengai2006, SkipHunt, fake ahl29907, fake trusoutherner, fake nomerrypoppins, fake stoney, John Rocker and PrimitiveJohn to name a few. Also, I think you’ll fit right in with the self apointed blog police led by allkiNdsofnuts who only wants people he agrees with to blog.
I see you like to post your comments over and over, and you had to make sure to correct your punctuation. The morning coffee club is gonna love you. Do you spell well too? Just curious.
I'm really not that negative. I just save it for the likes of you.
And last, but certainly not least, excuse me for wanting able bodied parasites to do for themselves instead of taking from me. Shoot me.
Join the clubs. I beleive there's a club who wants me to go back under my rock. They meet regularly for morning coffee and talk about me although only one person does all the talking, until the waitress comes. I beleive you’ll fit right in. The group includes distinguished bloggers like KT, KTOGP32, Haynesworth, Luther, Lisa2, Tengai2006, SkipHunt, fake ahl29907, fake trusoutherner, fake nomerrypoppins, fake stoney, John Rocker and PrimitiveJohn to name a few. Also, I think you’ll fit right in with the self apointed blog police led by allkiNdsofnuts who only wants people he agrees with to blog.
I see you like to post your comments over and over, and you had to make sure to correct your punctuation. The morning coffee club is gonna love you. Do you spell well too? Just curious.
I'm really not that negative. I just save it for the likes of you.
And last, but certainly not least, excuse me for wanting able bodied parasites to do for themselves instead of taking from me. Shoot me.
Well I was not aware you were so Paranoid. Have a Nice Day :)
It's true about the morning coffees. One of them told me right here on the blogs. I can't remember if it was KT, KTOGP32, Haynesworth, Luther, Lisa2, Tengai2006, SkipHunt, fake ahl29907, fake trusoutherner, fake nomerrypoppins, fake stoney, John Rocker or PrimitiveJohn who told me, but he told me here on the blogs. I just know you'd fit right in with them.
I'm not really paranoid. I don't lose sleep over them or look over my shoulder as I walk down the street. Why would you be aware of anything I do anyways? Have you been following me? Why would you want me to have a nice day anyways? Do you know of someone who wants me to have a bad day? I gotta go. I think I heard a noise in the...........
Are you sure I'm not carolinagirl41 also? ;)
Confusion reigns on New Orleans Road!
BTW, do clients actually hire people like you to do meaningful work? How does Jay feel about your daily blogging exploits? Enquiring minds want to know!
KT
an old Caravan album(what old people listened to before 8-trac). Todays listening pleasure will be "For Girls Who Grow Plump in the Night". Thanks for sending me in search of a blast from the past.
This blog is about the S.C. teen pregnancy prevention program being cut. If you and John Rocker want to high five each other or hold hands as you walk down memory lane together, go do it somewhere else. Go have morning coffee with him and do it there with all his other friends (KT, KTOGP32, Haynesworth, Luther, Lisa2, Tengai2006, SkipHunt, fake ahl29907, fake trusoutherner, fake nomerrypoppins, fake stoney, and PrimitiveJohn) but please spare us all your chit chat and personal admiration. We have rules about blogging here that the self appointed blog police is pretty strict about. Please stick to them.
Sorry, I could NOT resist! You do seem to follow certain people around the blogosphere. But, I'm with you. Asst is doing just what he complained about everyone else doing.
Gee Stoned. I think you pretty much drove this thread off the track with your little hissy fit with your new BF. and since you dangled the bait with your cute name you made for me (following your most recent scew up)I thought I could squeeze in a personal to PJ. My BAD! Glad to see you are not so busy at work today. I just hate it when you don't post. Give my love to NGW.
Smooches back at ya! Thanks for thinking of me. See, I knew deep down inside you...you really do feel the love!
Smooches back at ya! Thanks for thinking of me. See, I knew deep down inside you...you really do feel the love!
You know stoney has slipped up a few times and posted as you. It must be hard for him having to keep log-ins straight all while hard at work. How does he manage? Good to see you. Better stop this chat. I heard the BG was close to closing this place up several weeks ago. You know when all that personal stuff was all over the place.Let me know if you and Soned ever get a room. Chat room that is. We coul all be BF's.
It is ME!! I am sooooooo excited!! It sounds like you actually missed me! I will stop the chattering but thanks for making my day! We don't have the chat room but we do have the Stoney/KT blog that we can go to and chat anytime you would like!
And you can never have too many BFF's!!
I am reporting you to the self appointed blog police. Prepare to be insulted...You make him mad, and you just don't know what kind of names he might call you.
Also, if you're gonna try to sound cool using all those abreviations the kids use on their texting, at least get them right. You're just making yourself look more ignorant.
...We coul all be BF's...
BF = boyfriend.
Nobody here wants to be your boyfriend...well maybe John Rocker does. Perhaps you two can listen to old records together.
We are having a pleasant conversation here!! DO YOU MIND???
Perhaps if they cut the free-ride for unwed mothers and WIC then there would be less need for a TPPP.
That's more like a 3 way BINGO.
I guess we should just starve the little babies. Anti abortionist christians who hate babies enough so much they would rather see them malnourished and diseased than have to spend THEIR precious tax dollars. Who's money was it before it was yours? Why starve them, why not just have the mothers bring to you so you can sacrifice them to Molech.
Micah 3:6 and 7
Ad, as per usual, you are grossly misinformed and uneducated, particularly in the ways of people.
But go ahead. Embarrass yourself. It's almost as good as Barnum & Bailey.
You know I'm right, you just can't admit it. Never lose sight of where your precious dollars come from and you'll never have a problem helping those less fortunate. Poor folks aren't Samaritans and you aren't Jewish.
Of course maybe they teach differently over at the Big Show.
Nobody wants to finance immorality or abortion but threatening the nourishment of babies (WIC) is just wrong
So you believe that Christians today would leave children to starve when they could be fed? You honestly believe that?
I'm gonna give you credit for not believing it and explain to you that I believe laws should be passed to discourage teen pregnancy....not starve children who are already on the dole. As it is, they are ENCOURAGED to have children out of wedlock. See the diff?
Maybe you don't.
No Christian will ever allow anyone to suffer. That's why no Christian would ever post a post about cancelling programs that insure the nourishment of infants and children. BINGO.
Dang! You DON'T!
Since you seem to be an authority on Christian behavior, let me share with you another thing that a Christian would never do...a Christian would never pass judgement on the faith of another person.
I am a Christian. I am also a taxpayer and a parent. I am suggesting that if the "free rides" were not so permanent, profitable, accessible, people might develop some personal accountability for their actions.
BTW...I am currently speerheading an effort to provide financial assistance to a single, unemployed mother of 3. Her youngest is 2 and is severely disabled. The child is deaf, blind, has heart defects and a permanent feeding tube. The mother needs help with gas money for their many trips to MUSC and other specialists. Care to help ?
You see, I am not against assistance for people in need. I believe public assistance should be a "life ring" for people in crisis. Not their own person "dinghy" to keep them permanently afloat. I would like to see stricter controls in place for those who view public assistance as a long term income.
And you are to be commended. However it's also good to keep it to yourself and not seek your reward here on earth.
But you do not have the resources to help them all. The pitance of tax money used for WIC is nothing compared to what is spent on the war.
I have judged no one. Show me where I judged anyone. I judged some comments.
Do you not believe that everything you have is a blessing from the Lord? Or are you bumping your head on the eye of the needle.
Love your neighbor as yourself.
Children can't choose their parents. If I've got to feed some adult in order to insure the health and nourishment of a child, then I'll count it all as joy.
You want lower taxes, then rail against the war, rail against welfare for corporations, band the churches together and demand that the government allow you to take over all social programs.
But proposing the abolishment of WIC for the sake of a few of your tax dollars is irresponsible, hateful, and greedy.
Your proclamations of what a Christian is and isn't or does and doesn't appear as thinly veiled judgements.
This thread very closely resembles the "gossip game". People often get on their soapboxes so quickly that they are railing against comments never made with a person they are actually pretty close to agreement with. Because you have addressed what you THINK my position is instead of carefully reading my previous posts, your comments don't really even address my viewpoint.
TO CLARIFY:
I NEVER mentioned a desire for lower taxes. I did not "propose the ABOLISHMENT of WIC". I have not said(nor do I believe)that children should be denied proper nutrition or health care.
What I HAVE said repeatedly is that I am FOR instilling personal accountability, strong work ethic, and the desire and training for people to support themselves and stop LIVING off of the system.I merely suggested that the knowledge that there was no long term unlimited "free ride" might be the "kick in the pants" that many need to get off their gov't supported you know whats and take personal responsibilty. Personal responsibility includes finances, sex, parenting and education among other things. I have also admitted to not having all the answers and not knowing how to make these changes.
FURTHERMORE...
To address your "seeking reward here on Earth" and "eye of the needle" accusations... ( both thinly veiled )
Reread the post. I sought neither your nor anyone else's commendation for this project. What I asked for and desire is HELP !
EVERYTHING I have is not only a "blessing from the Lord" but is His. Therefore I seek His will in my stewardship of all I have.
FINALLY ...
I have appreciated the exchange on this thread with semcdaniels. I believe we have respectfully addressed each other's posts until we have learned that we are not that far apart on several issues. I will not continue to repeatedly clarify my statements to those who post "knee jerk" responses to what they think I said instead of taking the time to research it themselves. Those close to me know that I am neither irresponsible, hateful , nor greedy. Finally, I will not continue to defend my Christianity to those to whom I have no responsibility.
....not much you can add to that! Very well spoken!!
You misunderstood the Head Rev over at the Big Show. He was preaching against WICCA not WIC.
So calm yourself.
I have read your reference to the "Big Show" previously and at the risk of ridicule must ask...what are you referring to ?
After a little thought (and no clarification from you :) I have come to the conclusion that by the phrase "Big Show" you are referring to a rather large local church with a rather "charismatic" and "controlling" leader.
If I am correct, I would like to clraify for the record that I think we actually share the same opinion on the "show". Not a member, not a fan, don't want anyone thinking differently.
You're not really angry about this whole WIC thing. This whole thing is a front for you to complain about the war and tax cuts for the rich, your hate for Bush and your class envy.
On the WIC, it is poorly managed and more than often abused. It discourages family values, and creates a culture of government dependency. Government programs don't work. PERIOD! Billions, if not gazillions, of dollars have been transferred from the evil rich to the "needy" poor, and guess what. They're still poor because we told them it is ok not to work hard because we'll take from the "evil" rich and give to them and their children and their children's children. No one on here has said we want children to starve. You sound like a Democrat broken record. How many times do you guys have to repeat it? It has been said for decades that Republicans want to starve children, and it hasn't stuck because simply it ain't true.
On the war, whether you agree for the reasons for having gone there or not, we're there now, and we better finish it right because everyone wanting to knock us down is watching, and they'll be coming to get us again if we surrender like your boy B.O. wants.
On your class envy, should you ever lose your job, don't go to one of those evil corporations you hate so much looking for one, go try to get one from a poor person and tell me how that works out.
and then you'll learn that I can't vote for BO, I'm a confessed racist.
I've stated it here when others couldn't muster the cojones.
Sorry my friend but you miss my point. WIC is probably the best gov program for kids. As I said kids can't choose their birth or their parents. Those of us with means, morality, and responsibility should safeguard their health and nourishment.
I'm sure you have a much more noble reason for not backing BO but I believe in telling it like it is, sorry if it offends.
btw hope we do meet soon since we have some common pals on this blog.
What you're saying is we're all allowed to be Christians when our taxes are going to help the "needy", but we can't pray in school or have a Christmas play. What ever happened to "the separation of church and state"?
You are right though, no Christian will allow anyone to suffer. I would even expand that to say that most Americans will not allow anyone to suffer, but a large majority of those Americans have a real problem being forced under the threat of imprisionment to be charitable to parasites whose only mission in life is to get what is owed to them. Nobody is saying we shouldn't help the real needy, but if the needy are really needy, how is it that they have cell phones, pimp rides, Jordans and are hanging at the club looking for the next baby daddy?
Taxes help bueracrats. People help people. Any tax or tax increase is usually a waste of good money that could be better spent by churches or charities to really help people.
Show me one church that has made a nationwide appeal to the federal gubmint and said:
"please no more money for the poor and hungry, for we, through our charity, will assume full resposibility for the care and welfare of the masses. We will house them, feed them, clothe them, train them, and get them a job. Worry no more for them for the 'Church" is on it".
I'll even take it on a state level.
Before passing judgement, perhaps we should understand just what the program was. If it was "abstinence only", then that certainly tells us something.
In 2004, 2,866 children younger than 18 were arrested in South Carolina, a 111.8% increase from 1,353 arrests in 2003. Of the arrests in 2004, 215 were for a violent crime and 67 were for possession of a weapon.
A 2001 census of juvenile offenders showed 1,398 children in juvenile correction facilities in South Carolina
http://www.cwla.org/advocacy/statefactsheets/2005/southcarolina.pdf
in the 2004 - 2005 report that number had more then tripled to 5,330 And over half of these kids or from singale parent homes . http://www.state.sc.us/djj/pdfs/2005-2006-County-Datasheets.pdf
I could not find a record of prisoners from single parent homes in the South Carolina department of corrections records , but i did find facts that show a part of the never ending cycle
this is the south Carolina department of corrections The numbers : population 22,953 , but of this only 6.978 are married , but 14, 395 have kids
South Carolina Code of Laws
(Unannotated)
Current through the end of the 2006 Regular Session
Title 44 - Health
CHAPTER 122.
COUNTY GRANTS FUND FOR ADOLESCENT PREGNANCY PREVENTION INITIATIVES
SECTION 44-122-10. Definitions.
South Carolina has one of the highest teen birth rates in the nation. Each of these pregnancies --- among girls as young as 10 and 11 years-old --- create substantial social, health-related and economic consequences for the individuals involved, as well as for every taxpayer in South Carolina.
Between 1995 and 2000, the state incurred nearly $51 million in direct costs due to teen pregnancies in the form of economic and housing assistance, foster care and juvenile justice issues
A new law has been passed in the General Assembly in South Carolina titled the Sex Offender Accountability and Protection of Minors Act of 2006. The law was originally intended to make life more difficult for pedophiles through harsher sentencing, constant electronic monitoring and the ability to prevent a pedophile from moving into the same neighborhood as the victim and it has done that and much more. The new law provides pedophiles with an incredible loophole in their defense, by allowing the mistake of age clause. The mistake of age clause allows pedophiles to claim they did not know a child was under the legal age to consent to sexual intercourse.
In another unbelievable fact the new law allows 14 year olds to consent to sexual intercourse. The last minute addition to this law allowing the mistake of age clause to slip quietly into the final bill with out allowing any public debate as to the consensual age of sexual intercourse for children makes this law a threat to all underage children living in South Carolina. In other words, an adult having sex with a ten or twelve year old child, who looks older then their actual age can use the mistake of age clause in their defense, claiming they felt the child was 14 or older, thus legally able to consent to sexual intercourse
http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art13171.asp
In South Carolina, children in low-income families are more likely to live with a single parent.
62% (232,873) of children in low-income families live with a single parent.
45% (128,377) of children under age 6 live in low-income families.
37% (248,666) of children age 6 or older live in low-income families.
States that are strict in enforcing child support have up to 20 percent fewer unmarried births than states that are lax about getting unmarried dads to pay, the researchers found.
"The better the enforcement of child support, the more the cost of childbearing shifts from unmarried women to their partners," said lead author Robert Plotnick, a professor at the University of Washington's Evans School of Public Affairs. "This may make men more reluctant to become unwed fathers."
put them in foster homes , lets not bring the fathers in this . us southern rednecks have better things to do then take care of our children . punish them nasty girls who go off and get pregnent all by them selfs , so they can suck up all that free milk . Hell lets take away their right to vote that will teach them . We all no being poor is a crime in South Carolina less just throw them in jail and their kids with them , their just going to end up there any way , Right ?
STUPID DUMB STUCK IN THE FIFTY'S THINKING LIKE THIS IS WHY SOUTH CAROLINA IS IN THE SHAPE IT IS . SOME ONE PLEASE TELL ME IF I'M WRONG HERE BUT WASN'T THE LAST TIME A BABY WAS BORN WHEN THERE WAS NO MAN INVOLVED WAS JESUS . KEEP THIS STUPID ASININE THINKING UP AND THESE NUMBERS WILL CRAW IN THE BED WITH YOU SOONER ARE LATTER !!!!!
In 2004, 2,866 children younger than 18 were arrested in South Carolina, a 111.8% increase from 1,353 arrests in 2003. Of the arrests in 2004, 215 were for a violent crime and 67 were for possession of a weapon.
Haven't you heard they seem to have that problem in Alaska.
Us "southern rednecks" are tired of paying for the free ride of the ignorants who continue to uncontrollably breed more and more welfare babies. As the old saying goes, If you can't feed em then don't breed em. At least in the fifties we still had stupid dumb concepts such as morality and self-respect. If people are'nt held accountable for their actions the cycle just perpetuates.
Shoot we need a trillion to bail out Wall Street fatcats.
If they would hold men to that in this state instead of just blaming the women for this things would get a hole lot better .It takes two to tangel . But the old souther rednecks in this state seem to stupid to see that and the children pay for that stupidady !
This is one ol' southern redneck that is sick and tired of paying for "baby mama" and "hangdog daddy" to procreate at will with no regard nor forthought as to paying for their progeny. Dey got dey rights an dey gonna get dey free handout. Stupidity is defending the reckless abandon and wholesale irresponsibility of an entire section of society. and PAYING for it!!