So, by Mitt Romney’s logic, my mom, dad, and my seven adopted babies and the unfortunate ones we foster temporarily are all lazy, entitled government moochers who aren’t adding anything to American society.
Mitt can kiss my formidable posterior.
My mom and dad were recognized by the KC Channel 4 ‘Pay it Forward’ program for their generosity in raising seven adopted children and fostering dozens of others.
I’m pretty sure that whatever I accomplish in life, I’ll never do as much good in the world as they have.
Listen, how about we stop policing other people’s bodies and worry about our own goddamn selves, ok? And don’t claim to be a feminist then turn around and try to take away anyone’s rights.
The GOP would love that shit. All for the horrific crime of being of color, you can have your children taken away and not only have a forced surgery performed on you, but have control of your body taken away! Pro life forever!
This isn’t going to win me any liberal points, but as someone who’s been heavily involved in foster care and adoption, I actually do agree. The ‘mother’ of two of our adopted children has had five kids, all of whom she’s put into the system and made no effort to be a part of their lives other than harassing the people goodhearted enough to care for her children and provide them with an opportunity to succeed.
I think that if a person establishes a pattern of neglect or apathy towards their children, the state should have a right to surgically sterilize them. Ideally, after putting three kids into the system. However, I don’t think this should be applied solely to women, but to men as well.
I see nothing wrong with permanently revoking reproductive rights to someone who’s willing to dump their kids like garbage.
For those of you that aren’t on my facebook, here’s what my babies look like. My family adopted all of these children from 1998 to 2010. We have a total of eighteen kids in our family, because my mother already had eleven of her own.
So, suffice it to say, I have more experience parenting and changing diapers than any other thirty year-old bachelor in the world.
They’re the loves of my life, and believe me, those little girls have my heart wrapped around their finger.
According to HHS, there were approximately 420,000 children in foster care in 2010. So, naturally, the hypocritical ‘pro-life’ movement is going to expend all of their energy tightening restrictions on abortion, while the lawmakers they elected cut programs that support child development and help to ease child poverty.
Unless you’re a fetus, their philosophy is: “Sucks to be you”.
Per Mother Jones:
The law, HB 125, would outlaw all abortions (except in medical emergency) after a heartbeat could be detected: roughly 6 to 8 weeks after conception. This is so early in pregnancy that many women would not even know they were pregnant before the chance for abortion had passed… which is undoubtedly the point. Attacking first-trimester pregnancies is important for anti-abortion activists because 88% of all abortions occur before 12 weeks gestation.
HB 125 is a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade, and that’s exactly what supporters like the Ohio pro-life group Faith2Action are hoping. But state legislators and some supporters aren’t so sure now’s the time. Ohio’s House Health and Aging Committee delayed the vote on HB 125 last week, with Committee chair and sponsor Lynn Wachtmann saying the bill “wasn’t quite ready.” (One could argue that just because the bill isn’t quite ready doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be considered the same as one that is, kind of like how an embryo at 8 weeks should be considered just as viable as a fetus at 40 weeks, but that would be silly.) Ohio Right to Life director Mike Gonidakis told the Springfield News-Sun that while he agrees with the sentiments of the bill, he fears it could be struck down as unconstitutional and would thus become precedent for later anti-abortion laws. “(It’s) going to be another precedent setting decision by the Supreme Court we’re going to have to overcome in the future,” Gonidakis said. A vote is expected on the bill this Wednesday.
There is no place in British law for Christian beliefs, despite this country’s long history of religious observance and the traditions of the established Church, two High Court judges said on Monday.
Lord Justice Munby and Mr Justice Beatson made the remarks when ruling on the case of a Christian couple who were told that they could not be foster carers because of their view that homosexuality is wrong.
The judges underlined that, in the case of fostering arrangements at least, the right of homosexuals to equality “should take precedence” over the right of Christians to manifest their beliefs and moral values.
In a ruling with potentially wide-ranging implications, the judges said Britain was a “largely secular”, multi-cultural country in which the laws of the realm “do not include Christianity”.
“We sit as secular judges serving a multicultural community of many faiths. We are sworn (we quote the judicial oath) to ‘do right to all manner of people after the laws and usages of this realm, without fear or favour, affection or ill will’.”
The judges acknowledged that there was a “tension” in the case of Mr and Mrs Johns between the rights of individuals to maintain their religious beliefs and the rights of homosexual people to live free from discrimination.
However, when fostering regulations were taken into account, “the equality provisions concerning sexual orientation should take precedence” over religious rights, they said.
Controversial, to say the least. I agree with the judge’s final statement; that GLBT rights reign over religious rights. Religion is a choice; sexual orientation, gender identity, and physical gender are not.
