Printable View
Good observation, MN-hadn't looked at it that way-just a top-of-the-head thought-one does have to know where to draw the regulatory line.Quote:
Originally posted by MagicNakor@14 August 2003 - 08:35
A commissariat? Why, j2, I never would've thought.
:ninja:
Ah, I wasn't fast enough. ;) Perhaps if we create a commissariat, and dispatch a commissar...
Then we'll need a Secretary General. Things are progressing nicely.
:ninja:
Could be a boon for manufacturers of red paint, too.
Oooh...we better stop this now,, MN. :lol:
Is he? Normally, when such a topic is started in this section of the forum, the person who poses it is expected to give some background, refferences, reasons, alternatives, something more than "Americans are abusing their children and I don't like it".Quote:
Originally posted by balamm+3 August 2003 - 23:25--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (balamm @ 3 August 2003 - 23:25)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-liquidacid@3 August 2003 - 16:46
First and foremost, everyone is entitled to his or her opinion. From what i can see, Neil is stating opposition to the American style 'Boot Camps' for children. I don't understand why this is such a problem.
Are the facts that lead a parent to a decision of strong action not permitted?Quote:
What i find disturbing is that you feel it necessary to refer to emotive subjects, such as rape and child abuse, to win a petty argument, and then resort to name-calling.
Are the details that led to my decision to take strong action with my child not permitted?
My surviving children were both sexually assualted and physically abused by their older sister beginning at age 4 or earlier. Would they also be subject to your rath if they spoke of it?
If I didn't have the knowledge, or first hand knowledge to comment, then I would hope to be responsible enough to know that I had no business passing judgement on those who do.
It's not about winning an arguement. It's about pointing out irresponsible or baseless comments that have the potential to harm others; parents or children.
Look a bit deeper at the range of topics posted by Neil over the past day or two and you will see that he is clearly trying to provoke anti americanism.
I am not American but I still have a problem with this attitude. As I'm sure others might have if I started as many anti British or Europian topics.
I had no thoughts about Neil one way or other before this. As I've said before, he holds himself in too high regard in this matter.
A troll is a troll though and I will point that out in any case!
Your own thoughts on the debate are more thoughtfull and informed however and what I had hoped to see more of in this thread. [/b][/quote]
If you can't see the argument stands for itself they I can't help you
If parents chose to abuse their children then YES they are wrong whatever the facts that lead them there
And why do I have to have had first habd experience to know it's abusive.
And as to name calling balamm
I am above that.
I wish I could say the same for you.
I don't need to provoke anti Americanism it's fully grown and flourishing quite well without my help
Is it a just a coincidence that so many of the things wrong with the world have their roots in america?
Neil
P.S. balamm how's the grudge going. Is it eating you up yet.
If not, Give it time