I understand all your points, but you're missing mine. This is all about precedent. I don't think she should have had 14 kids, especially if she can't afford them all, but when you bring the government in because she can't afford them, in legal terms it sets a precedent, which in some extreme cases (such as one child), the government could come in if they feel a mother of 1 doesnt make enough money.Unless there is concrete proof the children are being harmed, you really DON'T want the government to intervene.Now if your problem is that she's taking money from the state, then maybe we should say the state should stop paying for the kids and force her to rely on personal donations. If she wasn't on welfare, would there really be such an outcry?
This poll and the votes to take her kids away is absolutely sickening. You CANNOT allow the government to take anyone's kids away because they can't AFFORD them. Suleman is a very extreme case, but where in the world do you draw the line?
What happens if, in this recession, YOU lost your job, and the government decided that because you don't have a job, you can't afford to pay for your ONE child? Do you want them to come and take YOUR kids away?
This would set a horrible precedent that could be very far reaching during this recession we're in. Now, if Octo mom is beating her kids, or doing drugs, that's an entirely different story, but to take them away because she's already on welfare? That's very dangerous and very disturbing.
She probably just mentioned something about having a baby - not being pregnant. The woman is breast feeding. As a mother, you know you can't drink while you're breastfeeing. It gets into the milk supply.
Wait, one more logic question. WHO in their right mind, outside of maybe a Republican, would run for President and throw it all away on something that could VERY simply be checked by going to HI's hall of records? Birth certificates ARE public documents.
I mean, who in god's name does that make sense to?
What happens if, in this recession, YOU lost your job, and the government decided that because you don't have a job, you can't afford to pay for your ONE child? Do you want them to come and take YOUR kids away?
This would set a horrible precedent that could be very far reaching during this recession we're in. Now, if Octo mom is beating her kids, or doing drugs, that's an entirely different story, but to take them away because she's already on welfare? That's very dangerous and very disturbing.
I mean, who in god's name does that make sense to?