Welfare beneficiary contraception outrage

Posted on May 8, 2012 by KG

‘The Government’s plan to offer free long-term contraception for beneficiaries and their daughters is being labelled as an insult and intrusive to women’s right to have children…’
They have a “right” to have children when they pay for them themselves. Sluts opening their legs for the nearest sperm donor in order to live off taxpayer’s hard-earned money should have no effing “rights” at all. The marxist cow who labelled it an “insult” is nothing but a parasitic shit-stirrer and should be treated with the contempt and disgust she so richly deserves.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to Welfare beneficiary contraception outrage

  1. KG says:
    May 8, 2012 at 10:49

    Bradford is probably a Trotskyite rather than a Marxist, but I’m not sure, since classifying the different sub-species of pondlife never interested me much.

    • octagongrappler says:
      May 8, 2012 at 11:54

      KG

      Bradford is a maoist :mrgreen:

      Remember Dr Jim Flynn about 10 years ago suggested that contraception be put in the water supply, and you got the antidote once you proved you could be a good parent??

      This guy was actually a member of the Alliance :wtf

  2. Andrei says:
    May 8, 2012 at 11:28

    Even a stopped watch is right twice a day KG.

    She is right on this matter, for the wrong reasons.

  3. pinkofreezone says:
    May 8, 2012 at 14:02

    The leftie argument today is going something like this: we already subsidise each others children through; free doctors visits for children, WFF, the school system, etc. so we shouldn’t use the “co-ersive power of the state” (hilarious coming out of lefties mouths) to try and eliminate a “women’s right to choose” and a few subsidies.

    The simple immeadite answer? However many children you have at the time you go on the dole, DPB, etc is the most you are allowed to make claims against.

  4. KG says:
    May 8, 2012 at 14:06

    It’s apparently ok to use the coercive power of the state to force people to pay for other people’s children, and to force working people to subsidise dope-smoking layabout sperm donors.
    Because that’s social justice, you see…..

    • pinkofreezone says:
      May 8, 2012 at 14:10

      From today it’s become exceedingly clear that “social justice” means attacking anything, by any means, that could stop the production of dysfunctional, state dependent, labour/green voters that the lefties want to experiment on.

  5. James Stephenson says:
    May 8, 2012 at 14:16

    Does anyone think that if free contraception was being taken away from beneficiaries, it wouldn’t be exactly the same f-wits complaining?

    Knee-jerk, National’s doing it, so it must be bad, muppetry.

  6. Jay says:
    May 8, 2012 at 14:20

    Hypocrisy by Bradford. She advocates for people to have kids, but she wants them to brought up (anti-smacking law) how she sees fit? Fuck off!

    I think this policy is a waste of money, though. If low income people aren’t taking contraception, it’s usually cause they’re irresponsible bludgers who don’t like taking responsibility for their actions.

  7. mara says:
    May 8, 2012 at 14:44

    Bradford is right to oppose this but not for the idiotic reason she espouses. Why? Because it is just more useless welfarism that will not work. Poor people and benes. can already get contraception cheap or free from WINZ or Family Planning. Until law is made to discontinue increased welfare for additional children, nothing will change. And since that will NOT happen, ergo, nothing will change. As for requiring these ladies to seek work after the youngest is 12 months old. .HAHAHAHA! Wipes tears from eyes. Yeah, that’ll work. Seriously, I am hearing so much crap on this topic from both sides of the argument, I could just spew.

    • Andrei says:
      May 8, 2012 at 15:09

      The reason why the left are getting upset over this is because it is a lefty policy and it undercuts them.

      And you get it Mara – it will not make a shred of difference, NZ is awash with contraceptives – kids are propagandarized into their use at early ages FFS.

      Contraception is a sacrament to the left – a most Holy thing.

      This is about transferring more taxpayer money to the repulsive Family Planning people, a deceit in the name of “Welfare Reform”.

  8. KG says:
    May 8, 2012 at 14:47

    Far as I can see, the government is only offering free contraception. Doesn’t seem like anything that ought to get the odious Bradford’s knickers in a twist.

  9. mara says:
    May 8, 2012 at 16:18

    Andrei, …. “propagandarized” ..I love the English language :mrgreen: Now I hear calls that this is an infringement on beneficiaries’ rights to have babies. Sometimes I’m glad that I won’t be around to see the end of this.

  10. KG says:
    May 8, 2012 at 16:27

    “Sometimes I’m glad that I won’t be around to see the end of this.”
    Me too.

    • Cadwallader says:
      May 9, 2012 at 08:07

      Mara/KG you are right. All of a sudden mortality looks practically attractive.

      The dishing out of contraception is likely to be useless for the government paid breeders but if it brings the rate of pregnancy amongst losers down only by a trifling amount it must be good!

    • WAKE UP says:
      May 10, 2012 at 08:42

      No, I want to see it through – when it all implodes, it’ll be the BIGGEST thing that ever happened in my lifetime, and I want to be able to say “Told you so!” :whoop :whoop

  11. mort says:
    May 9, 2012 at 10:00

    isn’t it interesting that its social engineering to offer handout dependent people contraception, and yet the handout dependency has no social engineering ramifications of its own