When you're willing to go to jail.... - Page 2

Merrida · 20-Nov-07, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pierini

Query and growth food for thought: do you have a similar feeling when you see parents being abusive towards their children? What about an elder-abuse situation? Might be too personal so no post reply is necessary.

Oh absolutely! I think I actually may have mentioned it in one of my previous (lengthy as all get out) posts. When discussing abuse, I mentioned spousal abuse, child abuse, S/O abuse,....and while I did not mention abuse of the elderly, I absolutely feel hot under the collar about that as well.

In case it isn't evident, I have "control" issues. And when people (such as children, women, partners, the elderly) or animals, are not in a position of control, and other people take advantage of that helplessness, it most definitely angers me.

It's because I feel so strongly about this that always throughout my life I have volunteered,....at animal shelters, at learning centers, and at nursing homes.

And also in my private little fantasy world, I wish that the people who inflicted these abuses on the innocent would have to suffer the same injustices.

**LiftGirl** · 20-Nov-07, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Merrida

I do not think we should pay women to be baby factories. These women on welfare who only stay on welfare as long as they're either pregnant or have a child under 2 is just reinforcing them to go out and randomly get pregnant and have herds of children in housing which,.....we pay for, eating food which,....we pay for. There is no incentive. If there was a 2 child cut-off, then if these women get pregnant again, they're on their own....we take the children from them, they're put in foster homes, up for adoption, and the women no longer receive any financial support but must get a job and pay for their own living arrangements (all because they couldn't keep it in their pants).... They'd be more careful and wouldn't procreate after 2 kids just for the sake of qualifying for welfare. Her other option would be: We'll pay you to get sterilized,-- the caveat being: Time for school, your diploma, some technical training not to exceed 2 years, and then you get a job where you must then pay for 60% of your housing and food (again, with a time limit)....then 100%. By then, a sufficient number of years have passed where you should be able to support yourself.

Just because women can get pregnant doesn't mean they should.

It's a priviledge to bring children into this world, and it's a lot of responsibility (emotionally, physically, and financially) to raise them. It is not a right just because the man's sperm is viable and the woman's ovaries are ready. That does not make it okay. As long as we have contraception, there is no reason for "woops, I'm pregnant."

What about the men/fathers? Are they not just as responsible? Should they not also be required to get jobs and go off welfare?

Dan C · 20-Nov-07, 08:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Firehawk

Dan what do you think about CPS? What I mean is, do you feel it is right for the govt to tell people how they can discipline their children? Obviously this opens up a heavy debate on what is reasonable and what is abusive. Over the recent years, that definition has changed drastically. Getting the belt is now considered abuse and warrants a judge to pull your children away. When I was a kid, it was how people disciplined. In this day many believe you should never have to ever lay a hand on your kid.

I think parents and non parents will have a different view as well, probably one of which changed when they weren't parents, or those that have become parents.

I just ask because of what you said about the government interfering with pregnancy (which I agree with you on).

Not sure what CPS is... Child Protective Service, maybe? If that's what you're talking about I think it's good to have some kind of agency like that in place.

Either way though, parents should be disciplining their kids. I don't think a belt is out of line, nor a paddle or a wooden spoon. It's all about how you use it though. Your hand could just as easily be taken to the point of abuse and where that line is drawn could be fuzzy, so I don't think it's a horrible idea to "prohibit" belt (or other foreign object) disciplining.

Having your child taken away because you smacked their ass with a belt is ridiculous though... some consequences are more severe than others, and sometimes a belt is warranted, IMO.

And those people who believe you should never lay a hand on your kid are foolish and no doubt have bratty kids. Time-out my ass!

Dan C · 20-Nov-07, 08:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LiftGirl

What about the men/fathers? Are they not just as responsible? Should they not also be required to get jobs and go off welfare?

Yes, they are just as responsible. And they do have to get jobs and pay child support, or they go to jail.

**MAURER** · 21-Nov-07, 12:55 AM

i do think that your intentions are admirable. i also agree with most of the principles behind your statement. still, you'd find that if we had a law for everything that anybody cares strongly about, we wouldn't be living in a very free country.

Merrida · 21-Nov-07, 06:01 AM

Of course men are just as responsible, but somehow, under the table or not, they find a way to combine usually disappearing from the mother's life or popping into visit. Remember, if they get married, the woman's benefits cease. I've seen women with 7 kids, with 7 different fathers,...it's harder to track down and enforce.

**LiftGirl** · 21-Nov-07, 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Merrida

Of course men are just as responsible, but somehow, under the table or not, they find a way to combine usually disappearing from the mother's life or popping into visit. Remember, if they get married, the woman's benefits cease. I've seen women with 7 kids, with 7 different fathers,...it's harder to track down and enforce.

I think it's because, like it or not, it's much more obvious who the mother is than who the father is.

Your_Crazy · 24-Nov-07, 07:24 AM

Is this the thread on animals or children.
Did you know that PETA kills 82% of their animals in their shelters? Food for thought on a group known for ethical treatmant of animals. I don't believe in animal abuse. It is not exceptable. It also causes a problem if the animal has been abused and finds a new family. You never know what that dog will do. You always hear about dogs snapping and the owner always saying that the dog was nice.

I have a true problem with the baby issue. It makes me so made I can't even talk about it.

ajarvis · 24-Nov-07, 10:45 PM

I completely agree on the animal abuse. I'd try and find a video camera to tape whats going on. Is it a pure bred dog? There are many pure bred shelters that aren't widely advertised that may be able to take the dog. A license to own a dog is a great idea too!

As for a license and facing a panel, being investigated etc. to have a child I don't agree. I don't feel I should have to prove to anyone before I'm a parent how good a parent I'll be. There is no testing for that. Most people aren't prepared. Who would we give that much power too? Who would enforce that? What happens if you get pregnant "without permission"? while it's something that sounds good when you're hearing, seeing, or reading about abuse I don't think it's practical. What needs to happen is when people see abuse they need to report it. My friend saw a man take his little girls head and smash it off the side of their shopping cart because she wouldn't be quiet. I'd be calling the police. Too many people just ignore what is happening.

As for CPS I think they go way overboard alot, but it's a necessity to have when it comes to protecting children.

**MAURER** · 25-Nov-07, 12:17 AM

at the end of the day, people have the right to have children and thats not a freedom you can take away.

Khaine · 25-Nov-07, 05:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MAURER

at the end of the day, people have the right to have children and thats not a freedom you can take away.

They don't... That's the point... Having and raising children takes sacrifice... They understood that before... A lot of parents these days are too egotistical to make that sacrifice and so the child suffers... If you aren't willing to make that sacrifice for your child, then you shouldn't have one... This would be easier to understand if it wasn't for the misconception that you have an absolute RIGHT to have children... And that's how you end up with "8:30: work - 17:00: gym - 19:00: latin class - 20:30: pick up dinner - 22:00: raise kids"... The child takes a backseat to the parents' self-realization... It shouldn't be acceptable...

As for the 'free country' thing, that's just misguided... Nothing is free... Restrictions are made so that you can feel free, but by definition, you're not... Humans can't have freedom, certainly not today, we're too destructive... Ben Franklin was wrong...

**MAURER** · 25-Nov-07, 07:13 PM

no you're misguided. you can't control or change the way people choose to lead their lives just because they don't suit your ideals. do i think people should spend more time with their kids? yes. take the responsibility of raising a child more seriously? yes. my mom stayed home to raise me for example. i am really lucky and i wish more people would do that. but that doesn't give me the right to tell people thats how they need to do it.

Khaine · 26-Nov-07, 05:55 AM

Of course it does... People get told what they're allowed to and not all the time... Why draw the line at children...? Certain people already aren't allowed... It's really just a matter of moving the goalposts...

For instance, if we have the RIGHT to have children, then by proxy, we have the RIGHT to have sex... Clearly, this isn't the case... So then you might say 'two people that love each other' have the right to have children, and you've already set a restriction...

**MAURER** · 26-Nov-07, 11:13 AM

you've twisted the facts a little bit because there is a difference between what a society values and what it actually does. people who don't love each other have sex all the time. sure we have protected minors from being abused by adults. however, two consenting adults do have the right to have sex. therefore, they have the right to reproduce. who are you or anyone else to say that there is an exact standard that people need to adhere by in order to have children. someone from a rich family might say, "Hey, I am able to stay home and care for my children, pay for my kids' college, give them a good financial start, and support all their needs throughout life. If you can't do the same, you really don't deserve to have children." Where do you draw the line with your standards? There are plenty of poor parents who show nothing but love for their children and they turn out to be much better people than your "model" parents. Do you want everything in our society to be controlled? And who is the authority to control it?

**LiftGirl** · 27-Nov-07, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MAURER

And who is the authority to control it?

Exactly! Who administers the test to see if you'll be willing to sacrifice enough for your children? And what if you get pregnant without a license? Forced abortion? Ship them off to an orphanage as soon as they're born?