Comments on: Tory Councillor On Shannon Matthews And Sterilising People On Benefits

By: biffo

biffo — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 15:43:31 +0000

Say what you like, Karen Matthews is a fine looking woman. My God, I’d like to take her to be & roger her till the bedsprings break.

By: JJ

JJ — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:28:43 +0000

Bloody good idea!

By: Annie_M

Annie_M — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 12:01:36 +0000

Why stop at sterilising people on benefits?

Outrage as ‘joking’ Tory councillor calls for children in care to be euthanised

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=547219&in_page_id=1770

By: Donna

Donna — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 19:10:41 +0000

Well what can be said. I am a single parent with one child. Having been divorced a long time ago. I have always worked, since I was 17 years old in fact.

If I had stayed at home after mt divorce, I would have become a scrounger. I carried on working, with all the problems of a working mother. But on my own. Which turned my child in to a latch key child.

Which was the better option? I ask my self that one, as financially I was worse off.
I’m glad I carried on working, because everything I own I financed my self.

I do not see why I should finance people who have never worked and have never had any intention of working on any level. I pay for my own child thankyou, why the hell should I pay for other peoples life style choice.

Any social financial benefit should obviously be capped at two children. Children deserve to be reared properly, not dragged up on the cheap. Neglected and allowed to become fully unpaid members of this ferral under class of society.

If people had to work to live, then they might start to think about there actions. Instead of going down the social for a cash top up.

Incidently, contraception is still as free as it’s always been. Plenty of choice which you use as well. They also have large size condoms for these men that have eyes bigger than there credentials. . .

By: Mrs Normal

Mrs Normal — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:07:31 +0000

Our cleaner at work is a typical example. She had 2 children by a previous relationship and lived in a 2 bed council flat which she was always complaining about, despite it being a nice flat in a decent area (opposite my road), and her having to pay only minimal rent as she only works a few hours a week. She then moved a new man in and had a baby - cue more moaning about her flat being too small and how the council should rehouse them all. She’s since had 2 more children and guess what - yes the council have moved them to a lovely 4 bed house, still with no bills to pay as her new man is on some kind of invalidity benefits for his “bad back” (doesn’t stop him from waddling down the bookie’s 3 times a week though). Of course she’s still not satisfied as 4 bedrooms aren’t enough for the 7 of them apparently. When one of my colleagues very hesitantly suggested that perhaps having yet another baby wouldn’t help, and that the council might think she had brought the problem on herself, her response was that it was her “yuman rights” to have as many children as she likes. Maybe so, but shouldn’t it be against my “yuman rights” to have to fork out in taxes to subsidise her and her like?
Maybe sterilisation isn’t the way forward, but I’m not sure capping child benefits would work either; these people will always find a way to stretch their income to cover their basic needs (i.e. beer and fags) to the detriment of their children’s health and nutrition. I lived in council housing for a time after my divorce and was disgusted by the way some people choose to prioritise their needs. Down the Post Office to claim their benefits, straight into the “offy” for 100 fags, down the pub for a liquid lunch (with their kids in tow obviously), then if there was anything left, down to the shops to buy the cheapest possible chicken nuggets, frozen chips and fizzy pop with which to feed their children.
I’m not sure anything would change the way this section of society lives - there’s always been an “underclass” that produces too many babies on too little money, except that in “the old days” they didn’t get any help from the rest of us!

By: Devon_Steve

Devon_Steve — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:32:08 +0000

It always amuses me that when someone in the public eye says what we are all thinking they get lambasted for it. Having children is not a right, if you can afford them, excellent, have as many as you want. If you dont work you shouldnt have them at all, why should I pay for your children? I agree with capping child benefit at two. Contarception is free so there is absolutely no excuse.

By: Annie_M

Annie_M — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 08:00:07 +0000

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=544468&in_page_id=1770

By: Annie_M

Annie_M — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 07:58:51 +0000

Morning all
“Topic for debate”, the computer loaded it all by itself eh? I’m glad he’s resigned.
Good riddance. What a nasty excuse for a human being.
Stupid man.

Here’s a topic for debate:

Shameless: Speaker in £100,000 court bid to keep MPs’ expenses secret, and YOU pick up the bill

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?
in_article_id=544468&in_page_id=1770

By: lyn

lyn — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 23:18:20 +0000

Good, he has resigned. Better watch his back now, silly chap.

By: Mic

Mic — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 23:07:04 +0000

Ahhh… The old ‘topic for debate’ ploy, eh?

Hitler was a well meaning chap with sound ideas on social harmony and racial purity.

Sorry…didn’t mean to upset anyone, I was just opening up a topic for debate.

m and a

said he got called away, and it seems the computer loaded it all by itself……

By: Annie_M

Annie_M — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 22:37:27 +0000

“Speaking of unattractive single men, who would be ideally suited to a position of minor officialdom in the Third Reich - meet Tory councillor John Ward….”

http://trannyfattyacid.blogspot.com/

M and A

Seems he’s resigned, and claims it was a topic for debate….

By: Mic

Mic — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 22:22:46 +0000

How many kids have Liz Windsor and Phil the Greek had?

They live in state-provided housing, and don’t exactly put in a hard day’s graft down at the local retail park do they?

Off with his nuts!

By: lyn

lyn — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 22:17:59 +0000

What if John Ward got his own way and had people on benefits sterilized. And, if some won some money and had more than he..well, what would he do then. They would be able to go and live amongst the upper class. so to speak. Having 7 children to five fathers is not uncommon in any level of society. If John Ward wants to do something about the situation, get free birth control for them. The kids don’t ask to be born!

By: sammy J

sammy J — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 22:09:14 +0000

Just wondering how they would actually MAKE people get sterilised? Would it be a case of pumping knockout gas into their house in the manner of The Prisoner, and they wake up in hospital with bits missing? What would happen if they died as a result of this compulsory surgery? Who would pay then?
Now here’s an idea; how about better sex education and a morning after pill that costs less than £22 a pop? 22 quid?? These people are too poor to afford that and they are the very people who are the ‘problem’.
I’ve said my piece.
grr.

By: craig

craig — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 21:31:08 +0000

and before me behold! eight candidates for post natal sterilisation.

By: G.P.

G.P. — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 20:37:55 +0000

Yes, making them work for freedom is far more desirable as an immediate solution than sterilisation. We could start with the gypsies as they often have the largest families that are also usually by far the smelliest of the undeserving poor and then move on to the ugliest chavs. Of course, we must make sure to be very careful only to treat the bad new gypsies in this way; there must be a way to identify them from the good traditional gypsies, the ones we always loved, from their DNA or from the shape of their baseball caps? Sterilising treatment is very expensive; perhaps we should get them to build the next generation of nuclear reactors this father land needs to stay great?

By: shelby

shelby — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 18:25:38 +0000

I believe sterilisation may be a little drastic, but agree with John Ward that bearing additional children is in some instances is seen as a way to extract further income from the state. It is sensible that a strong stance should be taken now before our country becomes too drained of financial resources to support itself. I am of the opinion that Child Allowance/Family Tax Credit etc should be capped at two children only and as such, reduce some of the financial incentive that some individuals see with having further children.

Children should be brought into the world with love and a sense of financial and emotional commitment to them by their parents until they are self sufficent. It is my true belief that by adrdressing the ‘income’ attached to children must only be a good thing for the child and family concerned as well as for our country’s economy!

In response to Sara, I have the upmost respect for you and your husband in taking the decision you did when considering having more children. Your actions are very responsibly and selfless; I hope other families follow your shining example…

By: dairy

dairy — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 15:33:08 +0000

….even the Chinese have given up on the 1 couple 1 child policy now - in the new “communist” society if you have enough money you can get around this.
of course, they’ve got a bit more room than us, admittedly….

By: yampster

yampster — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 15:13:24 +0000

Natural selection at work

By: Monkey's Uncle

Monkey's Uncle — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 15:07:55 +0000

That we are too soft on spongers in this country is absolutely correct, but the real spongers are the overpaid fat cats and high income tax evaders they are the real drain on this nation’s resources. Perhaps politicians would be better putting their own house (and second homes) in order before pontificating to a nation in hardship. A golden trough that far outstrips anything a improverished housing estate malaise could ever tally up.
What, what….