Posted on 02/11/2009 12:17:19 PM PST by Justaham
I'm not your buddy. You are a seriously misguided person.
You have no bloody idea whether money donated to this lunatic woman is going to benefit her unfortunate children. You simply assume so. You are simply a fool. As I said earlier, in a post you chose to ignore, the proper pro-life stance is not to throw money at this lunatic but to take the children away to be adopted by loving, married couples.
Yet you consider that (adoption-out) to be merely an afterthought. Instead, you climb up onto your throne of moral superiority and insist on MONEY being given to this money, proclaiming that those who do not give it are not pro-life, by your idiotic, frankly immoral "standards."
I'm not your buddy, and thankfully not.
Added you to my short ignore list, with your above quotation for posterity. Your inevitable reply to this will not be read. "Buddy."
Wrong because of the second option you yourself mentioned: take the kids away from this psycho and put them into loving homes.
And by the way, since I know you're going to turn the filter off and read my reply, I never declared any "superiority", just that pro-life people can prove their dedication by sending money, otherwise....well you know what that means....buddy.
Okay, fair enough. To have that, she must be declared unfit. Being too poor to care for your kids is apparently not enough to be declared unfit. So the state will not take them, and she won’t give them up. What’s the alternative? This is a real question, folks, not rhetoric. Pogo didn’t have an answer, which is why he ran away. It seems to me that, given the above, the only vindication of your belief would be to send money. If I’m wrong, I want a cogent, intelligent argument why.
I wish all 14 children healthy and happy lives with enough food, clothes and toys for entertainment to have a good but simple life. I hope when they are old enough the children can understand why people are concerned, annoyed and angry at their mother’s presumption that the public and the taxpayers should take care of her and her children. You know in 15 to 20 years anyone of these kids will be writing a tell all book.
OH don’t worry, they will eat. Probably better than my kids because the state will REWARD her for having so many w/o a father in the picture to care for them. the states depend on women like this to have a socialist voter base. Hubby has been unemployed for 4 months now. I have not even applied for food stamps, (although my church has been generous with what they could do for us). I know many have it much worse than me, so I did NOT go and get this aid so others would be able to. This woman selfishly did this ON PURPOSE without a care in the world as to how she would pay for it. My TAX dollars will pay for her pampers and formula regardless if I donate a penny to her privately. It is too easy today not to take responsibility. Until all entitlements END I am not donating anything to people like this. I will stick with my church food pantry donations, when I don’t need them anymore.
Given that her parents went bankrupt supporting her while she was raking in the $$$ in welfare for her current six, and she could afford very expensive in-vitro for another eight, I’m fairly confident any donations will go to support her lifestyle or for another in-vitro rather than these kids.
I am just hoping child services does their job. She’s raking in the welfare money (IOW, many have already donated by force) and staying with her parents. If she can’t take care of them with all that, then take them away. And it’s not just the money, we have a single mom (by choice) trying to look after 14 kids.
I think that the interview with Nadya’s mother, Angela, is very telling. I watched that interview and was appalled when I heard Angela Suleman say “I did hear that she received money from her insurance. She never told me. But I’ve never seen any money, not for house payments or for feeding the kids.”
This is just so disturbing. Nadya left the childcare of her six children to her mother and did not even give her money to help. I can’t even imagine how a woman who has been unwilling to support the six children she already had could even think about having more children...and to spend her money on cosmetic surgery!
IMO, Nadya Suleman is not capable of raising these children and her grandparents shouldn’t be expected to either. I do feel for the grandmother who I can only imagine is at her wit’s end and I’m sure she loves her grandchildren. CPS needs to step in and see that these newborns are adopted out to good homes. This is a truly horrific situation.
Hmmm you may be on to something except that it was clearly stated by her representative on Dr. Phil today that she is Christian and in fact her strong Christian belief is what led her to refuse to lose any of these children when they were embryos. So that is why you will be spending 8 times the taxes on this Christian family. Oh did I mention that they’re Christian?
The Bible says to be fruitful and multiply so this shouldn’t be surprising. Catholics, Mormons, and wackos on ranches in the Southwest all espouse this breeding policy
Some of the most sane people we know have 10 to 14 children.
Of course, they are Amish farm families. The children have two parents, often grandparents next door or down the road, close-knit churches with a tradition of helping each other. When the children are born one or two at a time, the older ones can help care for the younger ones.
None of that applies to this gal’s situation. I just wonder what will ever happen to those kids.
Good question since the grandmother already said the six her daughter already had given birth to has worn her out and she doesn’t plan to help raise 14.
While I don’t think that’s a bad idea, I suspect there are contracts signed as part of the process that precludes that. Personally, I cannot imagine donating sperm or egg to a stranger to make a baby you will never have any contact with (and won’t know what sort of life it’s having). To donate to someone you know is a little different, although I would still have to think long and hard.
Why would I want to give money to that mother? I would be more than willing to help getting them adopted out to suitable homes, on the other hand. I’m not a fan of enabling people to do stupid things.
Actually, if she implanted all of the embryos at one time, to *save* them, thinking they wouldn’t all make it, isn’t that the same as just throwing some of them away? I don’t think that makes any logical sense (but I’m sure she’s been coached by someone to come up with an excuse that sounds compassionate since she’s getting such bad press).
And you know, I would have had more admiration of her if she had had the babies as a surrogate for some couple who couldn’t have children.
The sad thing that no one wants to talk about is how our technical abilities always supersede our ethics.
You saying something doesn't make it so. You are not the arbiter of who is pro-life and who is not, so get over your bad self!
Ok, since you insist you have the right to define pro-life will you please give us your credentials? Why does what you think trump anyone else?
Why does what you think trump anyone else?
Because I'm right on this, and anyone who disagrees is wrong.
Because I'm right on this, and anyone who disagrees is wrong.
That sounds more like the rantings of a petulant child.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.