Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That was a crappy article. Read it earlier today. I have a hard time feeling sympathy for someone who knowingly has 13 kids. I think they could have found other folks who were more sympathetic to further the cause.

Or the 19 year old who has a 5 year-old, 2 year-old, and 6 month old. I feel sorry for the kids but not the mom.

really? you don't feel sorry for a girl who had a child at the age of 14? yeah. she probably brought it on herself.

A 19 year old with a 5 year old? Yes I would feel sorry for her. However to go on and have TWO more children - no, I no longer feel sorry for her. I weep for her kids. What chance do they have?

Uh, so what are we doing to give the little ones a chance while people hate on their mom?

In other news, didn't the First Lady look so lovely reading the Oscar award the other night?

That dress could have fed a lot of kiddos, and it'll never be worn in public again.

Yeah, I'm going there.

Anonymous wrote:I'm not being rude and I'm deeply saddened by this article, but what exactly can we or I, do about this situation?

Support free abortion to anyone and everyone who wants it. Free birth control pills and condos, without the need of prescription. Free vasectomies.

I feel compassion for the mothers, young and old mothers and mothers of many children and mothers of just a few. I just cannot judge a person based on the family size. That is just stupid.
Nobody descides that they will live under the bridge with their brood of 8 children, and the family has not been homeless for their entire existence. Anybody can fall on hard times, loose their job, end up in disability and so on.

The posters here must be the worst women/mother haters. Did anyone wonder if a man is needed or think that the father should be absolved ?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Montgomery county won't let homeless families stay on the street. If apartments and family shelter space aren't available, then families are immediately put in motels. Trust me, DC is doing a far worse job than Montgomery and Fairfax.

If DC had the same number of per capita homeless families as Montgomery & Fairfax, DC would be doing just fine. But we don't because of 100 years of racially discriminatory housing policy followed by policies to ensure that the poor live in the city center--where suburbanites don't have to contribute their fair share.

When the per capita homeless in Montgomery and Fairfax is the same as it is in DC, then you can talk about doing your share. Til then, you're just shirking your responsibilities--and patting yourself on the back.

What? Now DC government is now racist? You can't blame everyone else. Aren't they trying to gentrify and have the lesser move out of the city?

You misunderstood. The racist policies were used to establish a homogenously white, middle-class suburbia. Blacks were just beginning to be allowed access in the late seventies. It's only in the last couple of decades that the poor have had any accommodation at all in the burbs. If DC got rid of all but a handful of poor citizens, and consequently had a tiny homeless population, I'm sure they'd have a national model of homeless services as well. Numbers count.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Montgomery county won't let homeless families stay on the street. If apartments and family shelter space aren't available, then families are immediately put in motels. Trust me, DC is doing a far worse job than Montgomery and Fairfax.

If DC had the same number of per capita homeless families as Montgomery & Fairfax, DC would be doing just fine. But we don't because of 100 years of racially discriminatory housing policy followed by policies to ensure that the poor live in the city center--where suburbanites don't have to contribute their fair share.

When the per capita homeless in Montgomery and Fairfax is the same as it is in DC, then you can talk about doing your share. Til then, you're just shirking your responsibilities--and patting yourself on the back.

What? Now DC government is now racist? You can't blame everyone else. Aren't they trying to gentrify and have the lesser move out of the city?

DC contributes far more than its share in the fight against regional poverty. Suburbs have spent a century perfecting the art form of shirking its responsibilities--then having the chutzpah to critique DC's efforts. Again, when there's anywhere in the burbs with the same per capita numbers of homeless/poor, then you can wag your finger. Til then stop patting yourselves on the back.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Montgomery county won't let homeless families stay on the street. If apartments and family shelter space aren't available, then families are immediately put in motels. Trust me, DC is doing a far worse job than Montgomery and Fairfax.

If DC had the same number of per capita homeless families as Montgomery & Fairfax, DC would be doing just fine. But we don't because of 100 years of racially discriminatory housing policy followed by policies to ensure that the poor live in the city center--where suburbanites don't have to contribute their fair share.

When the per capita homeless in Montgomery and Fairfax is the same as it is in DC, then you can talk about doing your share. Til then, you're just shirking your responsibilities--and patting yourself on the back.

What? Now DC government is now racist? You can't blame everyone else. Aren't they trying to gentrify and have the lesser move out of the city?

Anonymous wrote:Really sad. Frustrating that folks show more care for dogs and cats than they do human life. Hypocrites (and idiots).

Dogs and cats are blameless. Stupid people get themselves into stupid situations, like having babies at 14, 17 and 19. That is a dim move.

I feel sorry for the children, but UNLIKE a dog and cat one cannot just adopt these unfortunate kids from these human baby mills. It is not so easy.

Really sad. Frustrating that folks show more care for dogs and cats than they do human life. Hypocrites (and idiots).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That was a crappy article. Read it earlier today. I have a hard time feeling sympathy for someone who knowingly has 13 kids. I think they could have found other folks who were more sympathetic to further the cause.

Or the 19 year old who has a 5 year-old, 2 year-old, and 6 month old. I feel sorry for the kids but not the mom.

really? you don't feel sorry for a girl who had a child at the age of 14? yeah. she probably brought it on herself.

I feel sorry for the child who at 14 had a baby. I no longer feel sorry for the 17 and 19yr old who had the next two babies.

YES, she brought it on herself, unless she is birthing the next messiah(s)- which I doubt.

there is a lot you can do.

some.org is just one of many organizations helping the needy in this area. check out their website.. they have a fundraising dinner next week and lots of other things you can do, like providing easter baskets for low-income seniors or volunteering.

Congress funds the vast majority of programs across the country serving homeless people. Ever heard of HUD? They provide funding for the section 8 housing vouchers. Duh. And the sequester will only make things worse.

Anonymous wrote:Montgomery county won't let homeless families stay on the street. If apartments and family shelter space aren't available, then families are immediately put in motels. Trust me, DC is doing a far worse job than Montgomery and Fairfax.

If DC had the same number of per capita homeless families as Montgomery & Fairfax, DC would be doing just fine. But we don't because of 100 years of racially discriminatory housing policy followed by policies to ensure that the poor live in the city center--where suburbanites don't have to contribute their fair share.

When the per capita homeless in Montgomery and Fairfax is the same as it is in DC, then you can talk about doing your share. Til then, you're just shirking your responsibilities--and patting yourself on the back.

Congress funds the vast majority of programs across the country serving homeless people. Ever heard of HUD? They provide funding for the section 8 housing vouchers. Duh. And the sequester will only make things worse.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That was a crappy article. Read it earlier today. I have a hard time feeling sympathy for someone who knowingly has 13 kids. I think they could have found other folks who were more sympathetic to further the cause.

Or the 19 year old who has a 5 year-old, 2 year-old, and 6 month old. I feel sorry for the kids but not the mom.

really? you don't feel sorry for a girl who had a child at the age of 14? yeah. she probably brought it on herself.

A 19 year old with a 5 year old? Yes I would feel sorry for her. However to go on and have TWO more children - no, I no longer feel sorry for her. I weep for her kids. What chance do they have?