Not one of these states has committed to holding the woman accountable for seeking it.
It's never enough for you? What a shock!
Only the provider. By that logic, someone can hire a hitman to take out their shitty ex-wife so they don't have to pay alimony, and only the hitman would go to jail.
It appears that the states have a good deal more sense and see the differences.
I don't get your joke.
Was it a joke? Women are professional assassins trying to kill you, innit?
Because bribing people to not murder children is a joke.
So the tax credit for dependents is also a bribe to not murder your kids?
That's not far off, if it's not here already. I've definitely read articles somewhere making the argument, "Well, criminals don't commit crimes as much if we give them money, so we should have a tax-funded program to give money to convicted criminals to reduce crime."
It is indeed already here, at least on a very limited scale. I think it's San Francisco (of course), as well as a few other big Democrat cities (but I repeat myself), who pay a small number of criminals not to murder. I think SF is paying one or two dozen gangsters to not murder anyone each month.
Title is incorrect. You can claim it as a dependent and then go have an abortion in another state.
Never? It took me all of 7 seconds to discover that Georgia has a 6 week abortion ban.
People active on Tinder?
If you believe that a fetus is a human, and you do, why exactly are you outraged, outraged that they are now considered humans for tax purposes?
It's never enough for you? What a shock!
It appears that the states have a good deal more sense and see the differences.
Was it a joke? Women are professional assassins trying to kill you, innit?
So the tax credit for dependents is also a bribe to not murder your kids?
Check court records for a restraining order against ya.
I call BS. Why don't you produce a poll showing that 'women' want this.
Pregnancy and childbirth is quite expensive in the US, or so I hear.
That's not far off, if it's not here already. I've definitely read articles somewhere making the argument, "Well, criminals don't commit crimes as much if we give them money, so we should have a tax-funded program to give money to convicted criminals to reduce crime."
It is indeed already here, at least on a very limited scale. I think it's San Francisco (of course), as well as a few other big Democrat cities (but I repeat myself), who pay a small number of criminals not to murder. I think SF is paying one or two dozen gangsters to not murder anyone each month.