State Sen to pay women $500 not to have an abortion, because that's all it costs to have a child.

[flashlighter]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/03/23/texas.abortion.reut/index.html

"Republican State Sen. Dan Patrick, who also is a conservative radio talk show host, said Friday the money might persuade the women to go ahead and have babies, then give them up for adoption."


Well, I was going to have an abortion, but with $500, all my problems disappear!!

[aquart]

1. $500? What is that? A week's Pampers?

[LiberalFighter]

18. If they were employed before getting pregnant...

and if they worked until the last 2 months of pregnancy. That would be $62.50 a week.

I guess he places a high value of a baby.

[Ilsa]

2. Paying women to have babies.

Are they forced to give them up for adoption if they take the $500? What if they can't pay it back if they decide to keep the baby, do they have to surrender their child as collateral? Can I apply for the $500 even if I wasn't considering having an abortion?

Oh yeah, there's a reason why childbirth anesthesia costs more than $500: it's damned painful and pregnancy is not easy to recover from.

Why don't they just pay women to have babies for their infertile friends?

[flashlighter]

5. But see, your just a woman, and therefore too stupid

to make this decision without someone giving you some money.

Clearly, if you want to HAVE an abortion, your a stupid slut, and will take money for anything....

[Ilsa]

15. Oh gosh, thanks for explaining that to me. Even women with

college degrees, professional careers, and appreciation of their individuality are too stupid to make this decision for themselves.

[Suich]

3. That makes me sick.

No surprise it's a republic male from texas.

Apologies to all DU'ers from Texas!

:)

[jwirr]

4. They took AFDC (welfare) away and now they are going to pay

women to have babies? It costs a hell of a lot more than $500 to raise a child.

[MountainLaurel]

23. But the women don't get to raise the baby

The $500 is a payment for giving up the child for adoption, so some godfearing Christian can raise the baby up right.

[jwirr]

30. So our constitution now allows babies to be sold like slaves.

How wonderful.:sarcasm:

[Lerkfish]

6. spoken like a true right wing male

who has no clue what giving birth is all about, socially, economically, emotionally, not to mention physically.


Tell him to pass a watermelon out of his rectum for $500. Oh wait, that'd probably be no problem for him.

:)

[Mojambo]

7. The only effect it will have is to increase the number of crack babies

Because, honestly, who else (other than a drug addict) is going to be enticed to bring a baby to term for 500 bucks?

Only a freeper could come up with something like this.

[Perky]

8. We are having our second child this coming Tuesday

Going to cost about $15,000 but insureanc covers about 10K

The notion of incentive to carry a child to to term is not abjectly bad....I honestly think that if money is a majore reason for abortions than that is a real solid argument that the fundies could latch on to and get on board.

[flashlighter]

9. Congratulations on the baby!

I agree, making it easier to afford a child will reduce the number of abortions, but giving a woman $500 buck for her baby is pretty sick!

[rasputin1952]

14. Congrat's on the baby...

:woohoo:

As for that asshat from TX, if I had $500, I'd give it to him to leave, or at least shut up and come up with something more than the usual, "we'll try money" stuff.

Pathetic attempt to create a society even more dependent on a gov't, but w/none of the right reasoning...:eyes:

[Clark2008]

17. Wow!! That's a lot!

I'm also pregnant, but it's only going to cost us about $500 out-of-pocket.

And, I'll probably have to have another C-Section, too (since I have toddlers instead of infants. LOL. My first was 10 pounds 2 ounces).

[baldguy]

10. Sounds a little too Lebensborn-y for me.

[merci_me]

11. Oh it's worse than CNN is saying

Check this in the DU Texas forum, where we are on to and reporting every move that JERK takes!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=180x42665

[IChing]

12. Damn, I was guessing which state this came from from the headlines

and lost the bet with my self, I was close though.

Senator Patrick has successfully passed a resolution proclaiming the Senate's unanimous trust in God. The Austin American Statesman reports:
This legislative session's "In God We Trust" sentiment swept into the Texas Senate on Tuesday.

The Senate unanimously approved displaying the four words on its message board at the front of the chamber, to underscore members' faith in a greater power.

But the Senate went further than the House did with its similar resolution last week. Senators asked the State Preservation Board, which oversees the statehouse, to install the words in gold letters on the frieze above the lectern by Sept. 1.

"The purpose of this is that it sends a message to everyone who comes in here," said state Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, who authored the resolution to install the motto.

But that's not all he said. According to the Daily Texan's opinion on this matter, the entire quote should read:
"The purpose of this is that it sends a message to everyone who comes in here that this Senate stands for Judeo-Christian values."

[LiberalFighter]

19. Does that include incest for Judeo-Christian values?

Providing family members to those wishing to do harm?

[fortyfeetunder]

13. Yeah, and what if that baby has a life-threatening disease

is it still as valuable as that $500 to not terminate the pregnancy?????

[Ilsa]

16. Like the baby in Austin that the hospital is taking off a ventilator

agaisnt the mother's wishes. The baby is a vegetable and terminal. But still, these monsters in the lege want women to have babies instead of terminating the pregnancy. They want them to go through that awful experience of risky birthing and watching a baby receive painful treatments and then left to die.

[baldguy]

21. The 'pukes would probably make the mom return the money,

[WorldResident]

20. And they bashed McGovern for wanting to give every American $1000?

Essentially, this is what it's going to come down to. From a pro-life viewpoint, Patrick's position may seem admirable perhaps, but the end result will have to be to pay out EVERY expectant mother, even if she never really was contemplating an abortion. Things will be further complicated by the fact that females will be encouraged to have more children for the $500. (In Patrick's defense, however, poor women already are encouraged to be mothers in order to receive welfare and Medicaid under current law).

[Fleshdancer]

22. So ladies, if you're pregnant and not choosing to have an abortion anyway....

might as well make $500, right? :crazy:

[Manifestor_of_Light]

24. What about that $15,000 C-section?

Etc, etc, hospital bills, prenatal care, babysitters, formula, diapers, cribs, blah blah.

[Fleshdancer]

26. well obviously $500 doesn't cover that....

I'm just saying this sounds like an easy program to exploit for women who have no plans to abort in the first place. They could get $500 for a kid they were going to have anyway. Why turn down $500?

As for thinking that $500 is enough incentive for women to decide against terminating the pregnancy, well that's just stupid and insulting to women. It's as if these people truly believe women go out and abortions because they have nothing better to do that day.

[MN ChimpH8R]

25. This fascist dipshit should be

cranially introduced to the business end of a 16-pound sledgehammer.

Repeatedly.

:grr: :wtf:

[jmowreader]

27. Obviously we've solved the healthcare crisis in this country

Because of the fantastic single-payer health insurance America has implemented, there is a mere $500 deductible for all prenatal care, childbirth and postpartum medical care.

And thanks to great men like the wise and benevolent Senator Patrick, children are no longer dying from preventable diseases, unpayable major medical bills are no longer the number-one precipitator of personal bankruptcy filings, nor are emergency rooms all over America crowded with indigent patients.

All hail the great Senator Patrick!

(Someone pass the crowbar. My tongue's stuck in my cheek.)

[napi21]

28. The Tx legislature only convenes once every two years, and this is

all they have to discuss?

How often does the legislature meet?
The Legislature of the State of Texas, operating under the biennial system, convenes its regular sessions at noon on the second Tuesday in January of odd-numbered years. The maximum duration of a regular session is 140 days. The governor is given authority under the state constitution to convene the legislature at other times during the biennium. Such sessions are known as called or special sessions and are reserved for legislation that the governor deems critically important in the conduct of state affairs. Called sessions are limited to a period of 30 days, during which the legislature is permitted to pass laws only on subjects submitted by the governor in calling for the session.

I lived in Tx for 6 years, andeveryone Iknew was glad they only met for 140 days every two years. At least they did less damage that way.

[gollygee]

29. How many babies are born in the state of Texas a year?

and will illegal immigrants be able to get the $500, or is it OK if they get abortions?