Kooky Korky 24,287 Views
Joined Feb 12, '10.
Posts: 3,552 (53% Liked)
Not only that, but he clearly believes that children deserve to be punished for the sins of their parents.
Frankly, the whole "welfare queen" excuse for cruelty to low income children was already old when Reagan first told that fairy tale.
I am stunned that you equate "free" services with placing a value on "living" children. The two are not related.
Yes, "free" services are everywhere and available to many people, not just children.
Placing a value on "living" children means they aren't kept in a home, with "parents" which is clearly unsafe because the state is overwhelmed with caring properly for these children.
Placing value on "living" children means that no child is forced to live with drug addicted "parents" or "parents" who beat children or otherwise threaten them because the state is overwhelmed with caring for these children.
Placing a value on "living" children means that aunts, uncles, grandparents, teachers, doctors and nurses report any mistreatment of children. It just isn't good enough to say: We didn't know. Somebody always knows, unless the child is locked in a closet, and usually a parent is aware of what is happening in that case.
I am stunned by the defense offered.
Not in this case, this happened in Auckland and I was living at the other end of the country.
I have however stepped in other circumstances and wouldn't hesitate to do so again.
One problem I have with our justice system is most offenders will eventually get out of jail. I'm more interested in ensuring these people don't wreck that destruction on someone else when they get out.
Unfortunately one of the people convicted of her murder has now had several more children taken off her at birth
Nia lived most of her very short life in utter hell.
Society can argue that abortion is inhumane.
What is more inhumane is to put a child in a clothes dryer and turn it on. To kick, punch and slap that child, to kick, punch and body slam that child, put the child on the roof, hang them from the washing line and spin it until the child falls off and then put them back on the washing line and spin it again.
Did you have capes? Did you live in hospital accommodation to train? Was it AT ALL like Cherry Ames? (Sorry, I love hearing about how nursing used to be). I also apologise if these questions are relevant about 50 years before the 80's, Cherry is my only insight into American nursing history and I am aware she is fictional .
whether a woman, other than your wife, is pregnant, is NONE. OF. YOUR. BUSINESS. that is all you need to know.
Nope, not an excuse ... you, as a citizen, contribute to the problem by way of defunding services aimed at supporting children at risk. The generally proposed excuse for that is that such services represent an unjustified benefit to the childrens' parents. IOW, punishing the parents is more important than protecting and supporting the children. This is why I don't take the forced pregnancy movement (distinct from pro-life) seriously when they carry on about "reverence for life".
Of course you're allowed to have an opinion. What we don't accept is the proposition that your opinions should rule anyone else's life choices.
Nia Glassie's five days of hell - NZ Herald
You are assuming that people don't know what's going on. What is even more scary is the increase in incidents where that people know whats going on and choose not to get involved.
I do have a question Kooky Korky: Have you seriously never noticed that this country places little value on "living" children? But there is a great deal of emphasis placed on the "unborn." Have you thought about why that is?
I will also leave you the story of the big pro-life politician in PA who was forced to resign last week when it was revealed that he pressured his mistress to have an abortion when faced with a pregnancy scare. Why do you think that happened?
My grandpa told me once that his doctor said holding in your farts causes diverticulitis.
Now, I know that is not true, but it's a great defense for being gassy.
And I don't know what they want me to do. They called his mom, he has no digestive disorders.
I'm glad to see that there are some parents who are glad to get their sick kids from school or keep them home in the first place, and who don't give you guys any grief.
Once again, you and the OP are welcome to have any opinion that makes sense to you. The issue arises when that opinion is forcibly imposed on another in his/her own home. IE room assignments in ltc based on the OP's idea of gender identity rather than the resident's own. Or forcing a resident to dress according to the OP's notion of gender-appropriate attire rather than how the resident feels comfortable. This law is about way more than just pronouns. It's about emotional abuse.
The OP is whining about being held accountable if she forces trans residents to re-live - possibly for the rest of their lives - the same distress they experienced before they transitioned. Snowflakes, indeed.
He deserved firing. So did his Lieutenant, who was only downgraded in rank. Respondeat superior. I think the Lt. should have punished at least as seriously as the officer, who did, after all, only follow the Lt's. orders.
Sue, Alex, sue.
Hmmm, brand new member, first post. Is there some agenda here we should know about?
Seems to me that the scenario of an individual who is legally "Andy" but goes by "Amy" would not be that big a deal to sort out with staff, particularly in a long-term care setting, where all the staff become familiar with all the residents (might be a bigger problem in acute care, where staff and clients are coming and going all the time). Since when is identifying individuals by the name they prefer to use heading down a "rabbit hole"?
This exactly. As Elkpark said, it's attitudes such as yours that necessitate this law.
Advertise With Us