Is "equal protection under the law" a complete and total lie?

[Angel]

"Retard" Welfare and WIC are completely seperate programs.

I gave you a local WIC office number. Call it.

Men obtain WIC benefit vouchers FOR THEIR CHILDREN, as do WOMEN.

 

[Angel]

I have a feeling that even if LT walked into a WIC office and got the exact same answer from the office director, he still wouldn't believe it, because then he couldn't bitch about it.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

"Retard" Welfare and WIC are completely seperate programs.

I gave you a local WIC office number. Call it.

Men obtain WIC benefit vouchers FOR THEIR CHILDREN, as do WOMEN.

Still confusing that with food stamps, eh?

 

[Angel]

You really are mentally handicapped. WIC doesn't issue food stamps. (Or as we're in California who no longer issues food stamps, an EBT card.)

 

[Le Jacquelope]

You really are mentally handicapped. WIC doesn't issue food stamps. (Or as we're in California who no longer issues food stamps, an EBT card.)

Well I gotta admit one thing, if nothing else, you sure as hell know what an EBT card is.

 

[Angel]

Yes, it kind of helps to be informed about the types of payments and vouchers my employees take.

I could sit and scan all the Ralphs WIC/EBT manuals in here for you, but I'd get sued.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

Yes, it kind of helps to be informed about the types of payments and vouchers my employees take.

I could sit and scan all the Ralphs WIC/EBT manuals in here for you, but I'd get sued.

Nice dodge. You already admitted your family's been on welfare for God knows how long. Although the bit about your stepfather was a highly entertaining stretch. You should submit a story at Lit, ya know... you're good at this fiction stuff!

 

[Peregrinator]

Jesus Christ, LT, give up. You were mistaken. It's okay. Angel is --well, she started out gently anyway--trying to let you know that your info was imprecise, that's all. Learn, thank her, and leave it alone. Earn some respect for admitting your errors. It desn't take away--that much--from your original premise, I think.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

Jesus Christ, LT, give up. You were mistaken. It's okay. Angel is --well, she started out gently anyway--trying to let you know that your info was imprecise, that's all. Learn, thank her, and leave it alone. Earn some respect for admitting your errors. It desn't take away--that much--from your original premise, I think.

What mistake? Since when are WIC vouchers the same as food stamps? It's not just that she's pushing this fallacy insistently... you know why she's even here at all, she is just another fool trying to prove that it's the whole world against womankind and in her mind men have it so fucking easy.

Look past the fallacy and see the agenda behind it.

 

[Peregrinator]

What mistake? Since when are WIC vouchers the same as food stamps? It's not just that she's pushing this fallacy insistently... you know why she's even here at all, she is just another fool trying to prove that it's the whole world against womankind and in her mind men have it so fucking easy.

Look past the fallacy and see the agenda behind it.

Nope. You can't make me. I'll look at arguments like I always do.

The mistake to which I refer was using WIC as evidence of inequal rights/aid for women; I don't feel like going back and c&p-ing it all, but you're a smart enough dude to remember that you posted it. Angel points out that the only benefit of WIC that men are ineligble for is the one for breastfeeding mothers. You start with the "poopyhead" ad hominem stuff. Signifying ain't winning an argument. Calm the fuck down and bolster the rest of your argument, rather than calling poopyhead for this one bit. "Why is there WIC and no "MIC?" because the only benefit for women only that's given by WIC is for breast-feeding ones. Men cannot, physiologically, breast feed, so they don't get the bene. That's all. It's not evidence of the sexism you were posting about. That doesn't mean that sexism doesn't exist; I've been saying all along that I agree that it does.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

Nope. You can't make me. I'll look at arguments like I always do.

The mistake to which I refer was using WIC as evidence of inequal rights/aid for women; I don't feel like going back and c&p-ing it all, but you're a smart enough dude to remember that you posted it. Angel points out that the only benefit of WIC that men are ineligble for is the one for breastfeeding mothers. You start with the "poopyhead" ad hominem stuff. Signifying ain't winning an argument. Calm the fuck down and bolster the rest of your argument, rather than calling poopyhead for this one bit. "Why is there WIC and no "MIC?" because the only benefit for women only that's given by WIC is for breast-feeding ones. Men cannot, physiologically, breast feed, so they don't get the bene. That's all. It's not evidence of the sexism you were posting about. That doesn't mean that sexism doesn't exist; I've been saying all along that I agree that it does.

Ok, I'll quit calling poopyhead just this one time. IIRC she said in California WIC bennies extend for 3 years according to her story about her stepfather. How many mothers do you know breastfeed for 3 years? Her stepfather didn't breastfeed. Something is inconsistent about the "facts" in this "rebuttal".

 

[Peregrinator]

Ok, I'll quit calling poopyhead just this one time. IIRC she said in California WIC bennies extend for 3 years according to her story about her stepfather. How many mothers do you know breastfeed for 3 years? Her stepfather didn't breastfeed. Something is inconsistent about the "facts" in this "rebuttal".

So ignore her anecdote and read the law. Then compare the law to your original premise. I don't know what the particulars are of her stepfather, etc. And you and I both know that benefits are often awarded on a case-by-case basis, unequally, whether we like it or not. Maybe her step just made a convincing case, or there was some special clause or something. Who knows, and again, just look at the laws themselves.

And thanks for suspending the trash talk. It's the best way to lose my attention from a thread. That shit is just so boring.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

So ignore her anecdote and read the law. Then compare the law to your original premise. I don't know what the particulars are of her stepfather, etc. And you and I both know that benefits are often awarded on a case-by-case basis, unequally, whether we like it or not. Maybe her step just made a convincing case, or there was some special clause or something. Who knows, and again, just look at the laws themselves.

And thanks for suspending the trash talk. It's the best way to lose my attention from a thread. That shit is just so boring.

(2) The following priorities based on categorical eligibility shall
be applied when vacancies occur after the local agency has filled all caseload, except that these priorities shall not apply to the minimum protected caseload assigned under Sec. 247.10(a) (2)(i).
(i) Priority I. Pregnant women, breastfeeding women, and infants.
(ii) Priority II. Children ages 1 through 3.
(iii) Priority III. Children ages 4 through 5.
(iv) Priority IV. Postpartum women.
(v) Priority V. Elderly persons.

I'm, like, not seeing where this has anything at all to do with WIC benefits for men, but hey, that's just me.

 

[Angel]

Actually, I said that my stepfather received WIC benefits FOR MY STEPSISTER, which is exactly what happened, and happens for non-breastfeeding/pregnant parents applying for WIC benefits - male or female.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

Actually, I said that my stepfather received WIC benefits FOR MY STEPSISTER, which is exactly what happened, and happens for non-breastfeeding/pregnant parents applying for WIC benefits - male or female.

But WAIT!!! You previously said they were for breastfeeding mothers. These U-turns are murder, baby!

 

[Angel]

But WAIT!!! You previously said they were for breastfeeding mothers. These U-turns are murder, baby!

I can go back and quote every single post I made in this thread if you'd like.

Again, since you're either too stupid, too stubborn, or too convinced you're correct to understand:

WIC benefits are FOR CHILDREN UNDER THE AGE OF 5.

WIC benefits are also for breastfeeding and pregnant women, to NOURISH THEIR CHILDREN.

Women who are not pregnant or breastfeeding and Men are eligible for WIC benefits for their children.

I've only said ALL Of this 40 times.

I think your refusal to listen is deliberate and can easily be solved by calling the local number I gave you 10 posts ago - They'll tell you the exact same thing I have.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

Easy with the shouting there, Einstein. Yer gonna pop something in your head.


(2) The following priorities based on categorical eligibility shall
be applied when vacancies occur after the local agency has filled all caseload, except that these priorities shall not apply to the minimum protected caseload assigned under Sec. 247.10(a) (2)(i).
(i) Priority I. Pregnant women, breastfeeding women, and infants.
(ii) Priority II. Children ages 1 through 3.
(iii) Priority III. Children ages 4 through 5.
(iv) Priority IV. Postpartum women.
(v) Priority V. Elderly persons.

^^^^
Ok so where in this "priority list" do you see men with children under age 5?



God, I'm glad you don't breed...

 

[Angel]

The parent or legal guardian of any child, LT. ( That means Mommy, Daddy, Grandma, Lady up the street who has custody of your children because you're a crackwhore.) Obtains WIC benefits for their children.

I also provided you links to a couple state WIC program websites that go out of their way to be specific on the Men/Guardian issue.

Like I said. Call the Sac WIC office.

 

[Angel]

LT, you don't know what you're talking about.

Walk your happy little ass into your local WIC office and get some information before you run your mouth, because, again, you have no idea what you're talking about.

Women who are not pregnant or nursing are eligible to recieve WIC benefits FOR THEIR INFANTS AND CHILDREN (This would be the I.C. part of WIC) up to the age of 5.

Men are eligible to recieve WIC benefits FOR THEIR INFANTS AND CHILDREN (This would be the I.C. part of WIC, yet again) up to the age of 5.


Women who are pregnant or nursing are ONLY eligible for benefits for themselves WHILE THEY ARE PREGNANT OR NURSING to provide nutrition to their children with their bodies. Hence the W part.

LT -

Sacramento County WIC Program
2251 Florin Road, Suite 100
Sacramento, CA 95822
(916) 427-5500

There you go.

They'll be able to tell you everything that I just posted above. I can post 500 links and you're still going to have the same stank assed attitude because it came from me and you were incorrect.

I don't know why exactly it's so difficult for you to comprehend that voucher benefits are for children. Therefore ANY parent or legal guardian is eligible to obtain them regardless of sex.

The only women who are eligible for WIC benefits for THEMSELVES are women who are pregnant or nursing.

Seriously, you were wrong about the WIC. Why is it so hard for you to accept it?

1) http://www.cchealth.org/fmch/wic.html
"Fathers: Men can apply for WIC benefits for their children."

2)http://www.tdh.state.tx.us/wichd/gi/eligible.htm
"Parents, step-parents, guardians, and foster parents of infants and children under five can apply for their children"

3)http://www.maine.gov/dhhs/wic/dads.htm

 

[Oscuridad]

I didn't realize men needed adequate nutrition while pregnant with their unborn children.

Or while breast feeding.

*laughing*

 

[Le Jacquelope]

The parent or legal guardian of any child, LT. ( That means Mommy, Daddy, Grandma, Lady up the street who has custody of your children because you're a crackwhore.) Obtains WIC benefits for their children.

I also provided you links to a couple state WIC program websites that go out of their way to be specific on the Men/Guardian issue.

Like I said. Call the Sac WIC office.

They were a bit confused about all your contradictions, too.

 

[Angel]

I haven't contradicted myself once in this thread. I've been saying the exact same thing, over and over and over again.

The problem is that you know it, and you're trying to be a dick.

 

[Oscuridad]

It takes determination, dedication and real bloodymindedness to ignore an argument and fight the one you insert in it's place.

 

[Angel]

It takes determination, dedication and real bloodymindedness to ignore an argument and fight the one you insert in it's place.

He reminds me of those psycho-feminists who insist that every single action anyone takes is anti-women, only he's the reverse.

 

[Oscuridad]

He reminds me of those psycho-feminists who insist that every single action anyone takes is anti-women, only he's the reverse.

I was thinking very similarly but on a different topic on another thread about a week ago.

He's very focused.