On Tue, 18 Apr 2017 20:11:09 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>On 2017-04-18 7:04 PM, Bruce wrote:
>> On Tue, 18 Apr 2017 18:51:42 -0400, Boron Elgar
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 18 Apr 2017 17:41:04 -0400, Dave Smith
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2017-04-18 4:09 PM, U.S. Janet B. wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 18 Apr 2017 10:25:59 -0700 (PDT), "The Greatest!"
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Show me a child who is a product of a MARRIED husband and wife, with one or both parents gainfully employed, and that child will have an exponentially better chance of success in the world. Having a kid in a "shack up" situation (a term I believe Judge Judy uses) should be a crime...
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't you also want to use the term "Welfare Queen?" You're an old
>>>>> fart Reagan Republican, aren't you?
>>>>
>>>> You must think there is some truth to the notion or you would not have
>>>> leapt to that conclusion. I am all for helping people in our society
>>>> who need help, but I am sadly aware of the fact that there are welfare
>>>> queens, the sort of people who have no greater aspirations that to pop
>>>> out a few kids, often by different fathers, and to live off welfare. It
>>>> is grossly unfair to the working people of our society who have to pay
>>>> to support those others.
>>>
>>>
>>> Asshole
>>
>> He's right. Don't have children if you can't afford them. Don't have
>> four children if you can't even afford one. Improve your situation
>> first. This applies equally to men and women.
>
>She probably knows that and could not deny it, so she resorted to name
>calling.

I don't understand how anyone could disagree. The need for name
calling escapes me even more.