Are Americans really so ignorant they need the government to baby sit them?

reply to post by Jenna

This is the only part that I have a problem with at a glance. There are definitely reasons for children to be removed from the home. Child abuse (whether physical, sexual, or emotional/mental) and dangerous living conditions are valid reasons for a child to be taken away from the parents.

That one's a difficult call but in the type of state we're speaking of there won't be any financial incentives for the state to take the children. I also believe that extended family and family pride makes a huge difference. . But who decides what's abuse? Is yelling at your child abuse? Spanking (not beating?) Taking away the cell phone and video games? In many states this is abuse. I don't think the state should have the right to make that call for my children or anyone else's.

reply to post by Sundancer


Like I said, once you cross the line from discipline to abuse someone needs to stop you. Common sense will tell you that a few swats on the rear end is discipline, beating your child till they are bruised and/or bleeding is not. Taking away your child's phone, toys, or car when they do something they've been told not to is discipline, beating them with their phone or toys and/or telling them they are worthless, useless, and that you wish you'd never had them is not.

Some people are incapable of seeing the difference and think beating a child half to death is discipline. Those are the people who should not be permitted to be alone with their children for the safety of the child.

Originally posted by jitombe


All of your points could become a reality only if states actually had rights that the fed govt could not over-rule as they do now.

They do. It's just hard to tell because they don't exercise them. All that's required is for them to stand up, and draw the line. Some are beginning to.

If that was the case, I would move to the state that was right for me, as long as it's not Alaska. Too damn cold up there and I have no respect for the people of a state whose majority thinks Palin is intelligent in any manner and is fit to be in charge of anything.

Out of curiosity, what first-hand knowledge do you have of Palin's intellect? Or are you drawing conclusions from the talking points of her opposition during the last election?

That's neither an attack, nor a snide remark, I'm really curious as to what you base that conclusion on. Inform me, and perhaps I can reach the same one.

Whatever happened to state's rights and the fed not interfering?

Nothing happened to the "rights", the states have just lacked the intestinal fortitude to exercise them, and jealously guard them from federal interference.

nenothtu out

reply to post by Jenna

Common sense will tell you that a few swats on the rear end is discipline, beating your child till they are bruised and/or bleeding is not.

I agree with you 100 percent. You would think it would be common sense to be able to tell the difference between the two, but there are many people who believe you should have your child removed for spanking or raising your voice. Like I said without the financial incentive for the government to take your children, maybe people would be better educated on what abuse really is. So you are correct there should be someone with common sense looking out for the children and unless they are truly being abused they shouldn't be removed.

Thanks for your input.

reply to post by nenothtu


On Palin's intelligence, it is not based on first hand knowledge. My opinion of her is based upon info received from the msm as well as this site. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who is not her biggest fan - and yes I know she has millions of supporters. As for state's rights, that really is a topic for some other thread.

Back to the topic, (most) Americans really are ignorant and do need the govt to tell them what to do and how to live life. It's ok if I'm the one who turns out to be ignorant, we can't all be right on everything.

You know Sundancer, would truly confuses me is why a politician just doesn't say that. They will become president without a doubt...

Oh wait. Its a giant game. If you do not have money and have an agenda for an entire group of corrupt people, you do not have a voice.