|
rulemylife -> RE: Tom Tebow's Mom. (1/27/2010 5:22:20 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy.
But getting back to "women don't see it that way" broadstroke... 100's of millions of women are opposed abortion and will absolutely see this ad as a celebration of life.
Yes, truly a celebration of life.
Until the time comes for supporting the child.
But the same same people who advocate this celebration of life are also those opposed to any social welfare programs to children born to poor mothers who cannot afford to support them properly.
Learn more about Aid to Families with Dependent Children Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) was a federal assistance program in effect from 1935 to 1996,[1] which was administered by the United States Department of Health and Human Services. This program provided financial assistance to children whose families had low or no income.
The program was created under the name Aid to Dependent Children (ADC) by the Social Security Act of 1935 as part of the New Deal; the words "families with" were added to the name in 1960, partly due to concern that the program's rules discouraged marriage.[2] By 1996 spending was $24 billion per year. When adjusted for inflation, the highest spending was in 1976, which exceeded 1996 spending by about 8%.[3]
Criticism
Libertarian author Charles Murray suggested that welfare causes dependency. He argued that as welfare benefits increased, the number of recipients also increased; this behavior, he said, was rational: there is little reason to work if one can receive benefits for a long period of time without having to.[4] While this approach drove policy,[5] the data are not entirely clear. State statistics are hard to evaluate since different demographic and economic conditions limit the effectiveness of direct comparison.
In the 1960s through 1980s, physicist William Shockley argued that AFDC and other similar programs tended to encourage childbirth, especially among less productive members of society, causing a reverse evolution (dysgenic effect), founded on the premises that: there is a correlation between financial success and intelligence; and that intelligence is hereditary.[6]
Shockley, whose initial fame came from his electronics designs, was abrasive and not a credible spokesman;[7] however, he and others were influential in bringing recognition to their hypothesis among the public and Congress.[8] The later work of Murray, Richard J. Herrnstein, and others suggested possible merit to the theory of a dysgenic effect,[9] however, without definitive proof.[10] In the end, this argument, right or wrong, was among the stepping stones leading to the modification of AFDC toward TANF.
Reform
In 1996, President Bill Clinton negotiated with the Republican-controlled Congress to pass the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act which drastically remade the program. Among other changes, a lifetime limit of five years was imposed for the receipt of benefits, and the newly-limited nature of the replacement program was reinforced by calling AFDC's successor Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). Many Americans continue to refer to TANF as "welfare" or AFDC.
|
|
|
|
