Should birth control be a requirement for welfare benefits?

anyone on welfare for an extended period of time should live in state run homes.

children are sent to school, parents are given the boot from the building at 9am to look for work or attend school or any social counseling they may need.... the home remains locked until lunch and locked again until after school. every night is mandatory family dinner and family time before lights out.

the only money given to people are stipens to buy Clothing for children and themselves for job interviews. clothing at pre-approved stores. and metrocard for travel expenses.

people like the idea of the State being God and perpetually taking care of their needs?... Give them exactly what they want. want dignity? get a job.

Actually, yes. Some people on welfare are there because of bad luck, bad timing or other causes not their fault. But let's be honest...a LOT of people end up on welfare because they're just not responsible enough to take care of themselves...let alone raise a child...who consequently grows up lacking responsibility and gets on welfare themselves.

A dramatic but effective way to help break that cycle is to enforce birth control on welfare recipients. It could be regarded as government interference (to which I am opposed) but on the other hand, if you are going to rely on the government, it's not unreasonable to ask the government to do something in return.

In the same vein, I think the government should be more vigorous in pursuing the dead-beat dad's of these children for reimbursement.

No one at the top wants to reduce the birth rate... they want MORE poor people to create a glut in the labor market to stagnate wages. That is the reason they are so lax about illegal immigration. And look what that has done to US wages over the last 20 years (adjust for inflation)

But yes I DO think birth control should be mandated... not just for those on welfare... but for those who would also need welfare if they did become pregnant. ALL unmarried girls 16 and up. ALL of them. I don't care what color they are, who their parents are, what religion they belong to, ALL of them.

That's the only way to be fair... just like Rick Perry mandated all girls to get immunized for an STD. Look up the term "legal precedence."

RESPONSE----------------------------------------------

You clearly have very little experience with welfare and the people that collect. Welfare families are on average SMALLER than those who are not on welfare. If you haven't noticed birth rates go down when there is economic hardships and poverty is a permanent state of economic hardship. While there is a small percentage of women that have more children for the sake of benefits, its rare. Having a baby is painful, destroys your body and is more actual work than most jobs. The thought of getting pregnant just to collect an extra hundred dollars a month for a few years is kind of stupid.... and yes the few woman that have done this ARE stupid.

You mentioned octomom responding to someone else... using that "bee itch" to represent the majority of poor women is an insult. She is an abnormality with a criminal doctor who were looking for the fame and fortune that they thought would come from having a large litter of children.

The statement that the majority of welfare is going to illegal immigrants is also false. Again... there is a small percentage being spent on illegals I don't deny that, but let's do a little math here. If there are 20 million illegals in the US and the population is 330 million... that's less than 1% of the population. With me so far? MK... now we know for a fact that the folks collecting are roughly one third white, one third black and one third hispanic. We can figure 99.999% of the whites and blacks are here legally... and the majority of the hispanics are also going to be legal. As for citizens with multiple kids taking a larger share... that is probably true... the average family has 2 kids and 2 is "multiple."

The final point... birth control mandates across the board is NOT going to far and would NOT result in extinction of the human race. What it would do is cause mothers to be older and married when they did become pregnant... they would CHOOSE to have a child and be better prepared. How do I know this? There are multiple studies comparing family sizes for young woman that used birth control before their first child to women who didn't... they ended up being the same. The big difference between the two groups was wealth, marital status and age. Using birth control lead to old but richer mommys who were married to the daddys.

Is that really a bad thing?

No, but benefits are held at the current kid count plus any in the oven.

Any new puppies after that aren't on the government's dime.

It's about personal responsibility. Refusing benefits for any new pregnancies helps form that trait.

It looks like some people don't want those on welfare to learn responsibility.

So you want government to decide who can and can't have children?

If anything, I think tax policy should be changed to not give credits/breaks for more than a 2-3 children. Why incentivize and give a break for increased population and increased use of our commons?

It would be unenforceable.

We should however deny any increase in welfare benefits for those who get pregnant after the receiving it.

You cannot force people do the right thing, but you don't have to reward what is wrong.

That is right wing propaganda .

First of all Welfare does not exist on the federal level .

On the state level it is certainly not much financial help at all .

And very few people qualify for state assistance now days any way.

Very few people take advantage of the system and the system makes it very hard to do so in this age of Big Brother .

Increasing the risk of stroke, heart attack, etc. for those already consuming public funds based on forced usage of hormonal birth control? So that we later have to pay the exorbitant funds associated with those issues?

No thanks.

Not even to mention that you're advocating the government the ultimate say on who can have children/how many they can have... we're not China.

Can't mandate birth control...ask any Republican. If you can't require insurance companies or institutions to provide it because of their religious beliefs, how can you require an individual to?

And yet the right still wants to cut access to free or low cost birth control. Strange huh?