I fully understand how messed up it is for what the parents did. Morally. Lawfully? No. (US)
There's your simple answer then, you're incapable of understanding how the child is endangered between being taught the whys and hows of violence against everyone not her skin color.
No man, I'm saying there is nothing that says they are messed up lawfully. PC wet dream assumptions and what is in black and white on the law books are two different things. I just wish you would just give me a link to a law, from anywhere in the US, that says I can tell my kid that black people are bad, will kill you, and need to die.
And damn it, I'm trying to get ready for work and keep getting sucked back into this. lol
Again, pay attention to what the social worker had to say if you're wondering about what laws are being asserted. If you disagree with them, then it's what I said, you aren't able to connect the dots that the social worker connects.
You either believe it endangers a child or you don't, its that simple, and obviously you don't believe it doesn't.
And 'it' is everything cited in the article and everything not cited in the article that is illegal. No one is bucking constitutional priviledges, only the illegal matters.
You can tell your children whatever you believe; but once you insert violence into the equation and create circumstances akin to sending your child out into public with racist remarks written on them, you'll end up with social worker issues and charges of your own I imagine.
QUESTION: Quote: Originally Posted by Xridnasa: - What's a "grocery store"? Is that like McDonald's? - ANSWER: Quote: Originally Posted by sidimazz: - Kind of, just without the rapist.
I fully understand how messed up it is for what the parents did. Morally. Lawfully? No. (US)
There's your simple answer then, you're incapable of understanding how the child is endangered between being taught the whys and hows of violence against everyone not her skin color.
No man, I'm saying there is nothing that says they are messed up lawfully. PC wet dream assumptions and what is in black and white on the law books are two different things. I just wish you would just give me a link to a law, from anywhere in the US, that says I can tell my kid that black people are bad, will kill you, and need to die.
And damn it, I'm trying to get ready for work and keep getting sucked back into this. lol
Again, pay attention to what the social worker had to say if you're wondering about what laws are being asserted. If you disagree with them, then it's what I said, you aren't able to connect the dots that the social worker connects.
You either believe it endangers a child or you don't, its that simple, and obviously you don't believe it doesn't.
And 'it' is everything cited in the article and everything not cited in the article that is illegal. No one is bucking constitutional priviledges, only the illegal matters.
You can tell your children whatever you believe; but once you insert violence into the equation and create circumstances akin to sending your child out into public with racist remarks written on them, you'll end up with social worker issues and charges of your own I imagine.
I fully understand how messed up it is for what the parents did. Morally. Lawfully? No. (US)
There's your simple answer then, you're incapable of understanding how the child is endangered between being taught the whys and hows of violence against everyone not her skin color.
No man, I'm saying there is nothing that says they are messed up lawfully. PC wet dream assumptions and what is in black and white on the law books are two different things. I just wish you would just give me a link to a law, from anywhere in the US, that says I can tell my kid that black people are bad, will kill you, and need to die. And damn it, I'm trying to get ready for work and keep getting sucked back into this. lol
Again, pay attention to what the social worker had to say if you're wondering about what laws are being asserted. If you disagree with them, then it's what I said, you aren't able to connect the dots that the social worker connects. You either believe it endangers a child or you don't, its that simple, and obviously you don't believe it doesn't. And 'it' is everything cited in the article and everything not cited in the article that is illegal. No one is bucking constitutional priviledges, only the illegal matters. You can tell your children whatever you believe; but once you insert violence into the equation and create circumstances akin to sending your child out into public with racist remarks written on them, you'll end up with social worker issues and charges of your own I imagine.
I was placed with an extremely nice family, however even though I am French Canadian by birth I was put with an English family the province of Quebec, and Quebec tried to rectify that situation twice and neither time worked out. I still keep in contact with that family, as they consider me a family member even though there is a difference in colour.
Luckily this is in Canada, and this is pretty clear cut by Canadian law. So I forsee nothing but death and pain for the Parents and love, sunshine and happyness for the Children.
God I love this place.
PS. anybody who disagrees can say on their own side of the border :P
after 6 or so years, I had to change it a little...
Comments
There's your simple answer then, you're incapable of understanding how the child is endangered between being taught the whys and hows of violence against everyone not her skin color.
No man, I'm saying there is nothing that says they are messed up lawfully. PC wet dream assumptions and what is in black and white on the law books are two different things. I just wish you would just give me a link to a law, from anywhere in the US, that says I can tell my kid that black people are bad, will kill you, and need to die.
And damn it, I'm trying to get ready for work and keep getting sucked back into this. lol
Again, pay attention to what the social worker had to say if you're wondering about what laws are being asserted. If you disagree with them, then it's what I said, you aren't able to connect the dots that the social worker connects.
You either believe it endangers a child or you don't, its that simple, and obviously you don't believe it doesn't.
And 'it' is everything cited in the article and everything not cited in the article that is illegal. No one is bucking constitutional priviledges, only the illegal matters.
You can tell your children whatever you believe; but once you insert violence into the equation and create circumstances akin to sending your child out into public with racist remarks written on them, you'll end up with social worker issues and charges of your own I imagine.
well well well I will just say this :
A Horrible story for a Horrible world.
QUESTION:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xridnasa:
-
What's a "grocery store"? Is that like McDonald's?
-
ANSWER:
Quote:
Originally Posted by sidimazz:
-
Kind of, just without the rapist.
There's your simple answer then, you're incapable of understanding how the child is endangered between being taught the whys and hows of violence against everyone not her skin color.
No man, I'm saying there is nothing that says they are messed up lawfully. PC wet dream assumptions and what is in black and white on the law books are two different things. I just wish you would just give me a link to a law, from anywhere in the US, that says I can tell my kid that black people are bad, will kill you, and need to die.
And damn it, I'm trying to get ready for work and keep getting sucked back into this. lol
Again, pay attention to what the social worker had to say if you're wondering about what laws are being asserted. If you disagree with them, then it's what I said, you aren't able to connect the dots that the social worker connects.
You either believe it endangers a child or you don't, its that simple, and obviously you don't believe it doesn't.
And 'it' is everything cited in the article and everything not cited in the article that is illegal. No one is bucking constitutional priviledges, only the illegal matters.
You can tell your children whatever you believe; but once you insert violence into the equation and create circumstances akin to sending your child out into public with racist remarks written on them, you'll end up with social worker issues and charges of your own I imagine.
I would be very careful about putting my faith in these social workers... they have their own agenda and are well known for creating the evidence they need to achieve their goals www.sosquebec.com/ , www.pa-pa.ca/cases.html and lets see about the safety of where the children are placed www.winnipegsun.com/news/winnipeg/2009/05/05/9350596-sun.html or how about www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060615/messy_foster_mother_060615/20060615 as for my own stint in fostercare I remember beds with no blankets or sheets and being locked in a small room with my brothers most of the time. Simple fact is government agencies are often as abusive or even more abusive then the parents they claim to be saving the children from.
And lets not forget just how much the government is willing to meddle in how you raise your children here in Canada www.cfrb.com/media/739555/Court+overturns+father%27s+grounding+of+12-year-old
I was placed with an extremely nice family, however even though I am French Canadian by birth I was put with an English family the province of Quebec, and Quebec tried to rectify that situation twice and neither time worked out. I still keep in contact with that family, as they consider me a family member even though there is a difference in colour.
--
Michael
Luckily this is in Canada, and this is pretty clear cut by Canadian law. So I forsee nothing but death and pain for the Parents and love, sunshine and happyness for the Children.
God I love this place.
PS. anybody who disagrees can say on their own side of the border :P
after 6 or so years, I had to change it a little...