Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Wisconsin Bill Claims Single Moms Cause Child Abuse by Not Being Married

Posted 6 years ago on March 5, 2012, 11:18 p.m. EST by gestopomillyy (1695)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

is this believable? with idiots like this being elected by a majority ,, its no wonder the fabric of freedom in america is coming unraveled . who votes for idiots like this? of course its a republican... guess i answered my own question. the entire country is going broke, economic disaster in the near future,, no jobs, and what are the republicans thinking about? how to denigrate women.




Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by bensdad (8977) 6 years ago

This IS the state that elected walker
Lets do everything WE can to help them erase this koch clown

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (22863) 6 years ago

All of this focus by Republicans on social and women's issues is an attempt to divert attention from the seeming economic recovery (which I don't necessarily believe is really occurring but it's out there in the MSM) which only helps Dems.

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 6 years ago

no i dont think its an attemp.. i think they really think this way in thier darkest of hearts. maybe its just that they think everyone is so focused on other things that this is the time to state these things when people wont have interest enough to lynch them

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (22863) 6 years ago

Really interesting. You may just be right.

[-] 3 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 6 years ago

that does it... I'm registering as a democrat ... been Independent for 30 yrs...

these new republicans are REALLY a HATEFUL bunch of crap

[-] -3 points by JesusDemocrat (193) 6 years ago

Bless you my child. I command you now to kick up the double tithes for there is much work to be done.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 6 years ago


Unbelievable. Wisconsin needs to clean house.

[-] 1 points by 1sealyon (434) 6 years ago

What member of the household is the most common perpetrator of child abuse?


[-] 1 points by elf3 (3892) 6 years ago

Is it possible these type of postings have to do with cognitive distortion computer programs - are they real do we have any articles to show that they have infiltrated this website to get the movement off topic?

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 6 years ago

You are missing the real essence of the republiclan approach
EVERY problem we have requires SPENDING money
to SPEND we must TAX
and grover will not let America tax the rich or the corporations
so the repbliclans tie up government with
flag burning, abortions, birth control pills, union supression, gay rights, voter supression -
ANYTHING that does not cost anything

...........................................IT REALLY IS THAT SIMPLE

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 6 years ago

i think you give them too much credit.. they arent smart enough to be using these as diversion tactics.. they really do believe in this stuff

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 6 years ago

I think they are ( koch - boehner - mcconnel - cheney - atwater - romney - gingrich - rove - cantor - coors - norquist )
and they ARE smart enough to delude the programmable lemmings

[-] 1 points by HoarFriday (27) 6 years ago

One question, is there any truth to the premise that the "traditional family nucleus" is more conducive to successfully raising children?

If the answer is, NO, then what advantages do children raised by single parents have over those raised by "traditional families"?

Those questions being asked, I certainly am opposed to such a measure and find it highly Unconstitutional as well as very draconian just as I find the large number of breeders who seemingly make copulation trophies, of which they are poorly equipped to raise, disdainful and irresponsible.

I don't have any desire to subsidize or be involved with the raising of others children, who do not belong to me, nor do I desire any interference, or need any help, with my raising of my own.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 6 years ago

social issues often replace financial issues

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 6 years ago

social issues often hide financial issues


[-] 0 points by XenuLives (1645) from Charlotte, NC 6 years ago

true. Notice all of these wedge/social issues bills being debated right as Occupy starts to pick up steam?

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 6 years ago

I guess it is a wedge issue unless you live in the state. In-state it is probably an ongoing drama fest and It signals where he is wanting to throw money at as if it is the great problem solver. There aren't enough resources to play around with and he wants to waste money on a myth that will have to be repaired later on. You can tell by his attitude in the clip that he is a clown.


[-] 0 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 6 years ago

A married couple can raise a child better than a single parent. Single parent families are more likely to be undereducated and poor. So kids are better off with married parents.

[-] 4 points by bensdad (8977) 6 years ago

you are so right - thank you for supporting gay marriage
and providing more money to poor single parents
to decrease the number of poor single parents

you really are a caring human being.

[-] -2 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 6 years ago

Nothing wrong w/ gay marriage. Prevention is probably the best way to help single parents, get at least a high school education and since there are so many ways to avoid getting pregnant, maybe wait to have kids till you have a partner. Also would help is the media stopped glamorizing single parents as its easier for some stupid hollywood rich star to raise kids w/o a spouse than it is for the average person.

[-] -1 points by JesusDemocrat (193) 6 years ago

I'd rather see non-breeding sinners marry than gutter trash procreate wholesale knowing their neighbors will have to foot the bill for their heathen mistakes.

I'm sending them all to hell regardless.

[-] 2 points by ARod1993 (2420) 6 years ago

It really depends on the situation; a family with an unhappy marriage or an abusive parent is generally a whole lot worse than having a single, strong, loving parent willing to work with a child in an attempt to raise them right. Single parenting is a hell of an ordeal for the parent, and if done wrong can prove to be quite damaging to both parties, but done right it can produce amazingly strong children and incredibly tight bonds between parent and child. That's leaving aside the fact that widows and widowers are also by definition single parents, and something like this is a flat-out slap in the face to women everywhere who have lost their husbands, including wives of soldiers, policemen, and firefighters who died serving their country and their community.

Furthermore, if you want to address single parenting as an issue, then penalizing it is hardly the way to go. Your complaint with single parents is that they do not have the resources available to them to adequately parent a child and hold down one or more jobs at the same time. As far as I can tell, the easiest answer to that problem is to provide those resources where possible (starting up and/or supporting community support groups for single parents, providing additional means-tested childcare assistance and widow's/widower's stipends where applicable, fixing our nation's school system) rather than to attack an already beleaguered and undersupported subset of the population (which this bill does).

Finally, if you really see single-parent households as a form of child neglect and you want to punish the people who chose to subject the child in question to life in such a household, then why attack the single parent? Behind almost every teenage girl who got knocked up there is almost always an idiot who didn't bother to use a condom and proceeded to bail when the consequences came knocking, and this proposal does nothing to address that problem. By attacking single parents rather than their deadbeat and/or abusive counterparts all you're doing is providing the latter with a whipping boy rather than trying to get them to clean up their act.

[-] 2 points by forourfutures (393) 6 years ago

It takes a village to raise a child. Our communities are highly dysfunctional since media took over our social education.

We have a lot of unlearning and relearning to do as a people. It's all a part of sustainability tho. In order to get media on our side we'll have to amend the constitution through an Article V. That's were we start ending the exploitation that is ruining us. These people are putting out some good strategy.


The plan in the amendments forum to prepare for an Article V kicks ass. The real deal.

[-] -2 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 6 years ago

no, it takes a family to raise a child, basic history. i don't see villages raising any kids, i don't see any villages! that's Hillary Clinton rubbish. Did a village raise her child? No.

[-] 2 points by forourfutures (393) 6 years ago

Correct, but what if it is a dysfunctional family? What I have said is comprehensive. When the family is dysfunctional, the village does it and the problems are not passed on.

Correct we have no villages, but an immense amount of dysfunctional families and messed up kids. Guess why.

This is a cognitive distortion, 3 & 9.

"Hillary Clinton rubbish."


  1. All or nothing thinking: Things are placed in black or white categories.

  2. Over generalization: Single event is viewed as continuous.

  3. Mental filter: Details in life (positive or negative) are amplified in importance while opposite is rejected.

  4. Minimizing: Perceiving one or opposite experiences (positive or negative) as absolute and maintaining singularity of belief to one or the other.

  5. Mind reading: One absolutely concludes that others are reacting positively or negatively without investigating reality.

  6. Fortune Telling: Based on previous 5 distortions, anticipation of negative or positive outcome of situations is established fact.

  7. Catastrophizing: Exaggerated importance of self's failures and others successes.

  8. Emotional reasoning: One feels as though emotional state IS reality of situation.

  9. "Should" statements: Self imposed rules about behavior creating guilt at self inability to adhere and anger at others in their inability to conform to self's rules.

  10. Labeling: Instead of understanding errors over generalization is applied.

  11. Personalization: Thinking that the actions or statements of others are a reaction to you.

  12. Entitlement: Believing that you deserve things you have not earned.

[-] -1 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 6 years ago

oh god give me a break. you don't think families (w/2 parents) are important, i do. OK? Good luck if you have kids and if you a single parent i hope that you can if needed get help.


[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 6 years ago

regardless.. you cannot legislate opinions

[-] 1 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 6 years ago

come on you fools, it a stupid piece of legislation that is never going to pass, so calm down. its like when liberals want to pass the a law prohibiting racism. good idea but it doesn't work that way.


[+] -4 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 6 years ago

(cuss word) you.

[+] -4 points by shamefuldays (-42) 6 years ago

It's true. Illegitimacy is one of the greatest social disasters in the history of the country. The most resilient human organization ever invented is the family: one dad, one mom and then the children. Yet even the overwhelmingly obvious has to now be explained to liberals.

Occupy Poverty... Occupy Drop-Outs.... Occupy Dysfunctional and Failure..... OCCUPY ILLEGITIMACY.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 6 years ago

Actually, the nuclear family was reserved for middle to upper class. The lower classes and people of color never operated in that manner. Many people did not marry and women in this category did not play SAHM.

I firmly believe that this is why marriages fail and people split up. The fictional plastic world only works in a fictional setting in a fictional book found in the fiction section of a library.

[-] -3 points by JesusDemocrat (193) 6 years ago

I believe you must be one of those hard middle of the road Atheist Republicans, come out of the closet and ye shall be publicly stoned.

Verily I saith unto you, sex is only for making babies by a married man and woman. Infidels have children like you.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 6 years ago

Try again.

[+] -4 points by JesusDemocrat (193) 6 years ago

I know everything about you including the exact number of hairs on your pointed pin head (about 74 and try to put down the crack pipe) and that you only have three rotten teeth left.

Repent republican harlot!

[-] 3 points by GirlFriday (17435) 6 years ago

You don't know anything because you are a graduate of MSU. Don't have information? You Make Shit Up. Nice job.

Hold still........these nails won't hurt a bit.

[+] -4 points by JesusDemocrat (193) 6 years ago

I speak only the truth.

Repent Republican Harlot are you will certainly be cast into the lake of republican hell fire.

[-] -1 points by Chugwunka (89) from Willows, CA 6 years ago

Are you saying a child is better off without a father?

[-] 2 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 6 years ago

if u're not offended by this ass holes bill ... then yes... any child would be better off than with u as the father

[-] 2 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 6 years ago

in many cases yes.. but even if the guy wasnt a loser.. why is it.. the guy isnt considered a single parent? if a women with kids is on welfare , its becuase the father is too much of a loser to support his kids. . dont blame a guy.. are you a republican?

[-] -1 points by Chugwunka (89) from Willows, CA 6 years ago

Not a republican by a long shot. And there are many good single fathers. But that ain't what is at issue here. Some retards here actually equate good parenting with a political party.

[-] 3 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 6 years ago

its not about parenting.. its about one more control issue the republicans think they need to control. about one more freedom they want to shave off the face of freedom. if this thinking is acted upon, taken up by the majority.. soon it will be legal to jail unwed mothers(but not fathers of course, they are innocent) its unbelievable that a supposedly educated amercan man would say something like that much less try to impose civil law about it. all the while never mentioning the man.. as though these women all are giving virgin birth.

[-] 1 points by Nevada1 (5843) 6 years ago

Hi gestopomillyy, Good post. Best Regards

[-] -2 points by Chugwunka (89) from Willows, CA 6 years ago

Good enough. Now please listen carefully: unwed mothers aren't going to jail. You and your ilk can quit worrying.

[-] -1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 6 years ago

i love the internet