I can't think of a single reason that isn't valid.

Faulty logic considering those "technicalities" are actually rules.

She was in the house, correct? Sorry, but if my nephew's stepfather was talking about punching him at family gatherings, I would be concerned as well.

Honestly? Your husband was way out of line with his comment about punching your son, and following it up with physical contact (intentional or not) was not very bright. I can see why a mandatory reporter would have to ponder what to do after witnessing a seen like the one you described.

That is a bit dramatic.

That changes it, but my response would be based on what has happened in the past.

Does one obnoxious comment posted on Facebook really count as bullying?

It isn't remotely similar.

Put me squarely on Team Spy Car. I wish I was stunned by the response of the majority of those in this thread, but I am not.

Although it may be condescending, it is accurate. Spending "many, many hours" researching is fairly pointless if someone doesn't know how to filter the information and fully comprehend complex topics. Based on the comments that appear frequently in these discussions, anti-vaxxers who actually have the background and knowledge needed to do so are very, very rare.

Can you please list the "new, fresh diseases" that are appearing due to vaccinations and/or the over use of medications?

See? I was right.

Yeah, you do.

The timing is suspicious. Joe is 84, and fairly wealthy. It seems strange that an estate planner would have waited this long to suggest this move if it was for tax benefits. Considering it seems to have limited value under PA law, questions will be raised. 1.) It doesn't seem to be under PA law. 2.) If he *is* moving assets, then it does look like he is concerned about his liability. Would you say the same thing if Sandusky made the same move?

Of course, by "protecting" his wife, he is also protecting himself. I don't see the nobility in hiding assets.

What Joe admitted to knowing in the information through the grand jury is enough to indicate to me that he deserved to be fired, and I have absolutely no pity for him. None.

His finances are news due to the likelihood of civil lawsuits directed against him personally. The pension became news when some were shocked how large his state pension was to be. He is a public figure embroiled in a scandal, so details of his personal life will become subject to speculation and scrutiny.

^^^This. We help a few families every year, and typically do gift cards. The exception is for someone we know who is unable to prepare a full meal, in which case they get the gift card and a note ahead of time with the information about a meal that is being prepared for them.

You are not making a very compelling case for your view point. The driving force in these scandals/cover ups (PSU, Catholic church, etc) is always money and power. Paterno had built a cult of personality and a power base at PSU through sports, but it wasn't the culture of sports that lead to what happened. Religion/the culture of religion was not part of the equation in the sexual abuse by priests either.

The saddest comment I read about this on a message board was regarding the statement from the GA that when he walked into the shower, both Sandusky and the boy he was abusing saw him. The poster said "That poor child probably thought he was about to be saved, but then the man walked away. I can't even imagine that feeling." Taking that a step farther, the chances of that child ever reporting the abuse drops dramatically when he knows someone saw what was happening and didn't stop it.

I believe the father and son were protecting their own careers. Sandusky was a family friend, and I believe the father was concerned about what would happen if they tried to go head to head with Joe and his cronies, and instead used this as leverage. I believe the GA/son was hired as a full time coach not long after he reported the incident to Paterno....

If you read the grand jury report you can see that is patently false. Paterno covered himself legally by reporting the incident he was told about to his supervisors, but Sandusky was still allowed on campus in the company of young boys years later. The PSU administration and Paterno participated in a cover up that cost numerous children their innocence.

That was intended as a general "you". I say again without hesitation or reservation, that any parent who has to beat their teenage child with a belt has failed as a parent. And some of those children have been "switched", and that abuse is what sometimes generates the behaviors you see.

Really? Wow. If you have to beat your teenage daughter with a belt, you have completely and utterly failed as a parent. Period.

What you just posted is beyond disturbing.