Menu
Jump to content

What's with the ads?

nopenope

Members
  • Content Count

    10,368
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

nopenope last won the day on February 7 2017

nopenope had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

31,826 Excellent

About nopenope

  • Rank
    cylon lover

Recent Profile Visitors

619 profile views
  1. I'd get him some milk thistle and not worry about it.
  2. But that sets up the default as abusing others. And the reality is that MOST people who have been abused as children don't go on to abuse kids. It is also the reality that kids are getting abused by perpetrators who were abused and ones who weren't in roughly equal measure. https://www.nichd.nih.gov/newsroom/releases/042115-podcast-child-abuse AND! it's more likely that if you were abused as a child, you will be further abused as an adult, than it it is that you yourself will go on to be an abuser. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/articles/peoplewhowereabusedaschildrenaremorelikelytobeabusedasanadult/2017-09-27 ^^ I just picked up the first two links that came up for those, but anyone can just do the math with the available statistics.
  3. It is not necessary to overcome abuse (whatever that means) in order to not abuse others.
  4. Just now had time to read your link here. Are you seriously trying to link impulsively grabbing a doughnut to tying a dozen kids to beds for months at a time? Let me be clear: someone who does NOT torture kids is morally superior to someone who does torture kids. Yeah. I feel reeeeaaaaal comfortable taking that stand 🙄 But, again, moral superiority wasn't what my post was about. That's completely your jam. If you think people who torture other people just have bad brains, then good for you.
  5. Going off the beaten track a bit, BYL 7 looks great! https://buildyourlibrary.com/purchase-level-7-curriculum/ If you do end up wanting get-it-done American History, I really like MP's: https://www.memoriapress.com/curriculum/classical-core-curriculum/200-questions-about-american-history-module-consumable-5-8/ That's only the consumables because it's the first link that popped up.
  6. Again, my post was about how the legal punishment for a violent, illegal act against other people (I actually specified that too) should not be effected by what happened to the perpetrator in the past and had nothing to do with their victims. <<<---- added that addendum so that no one will shoot back a hypothetical "killed my rapist" story. **we are talking about people who abuse children** I said, too, that compassion because of circumstances is up to God and the victims. But that it can be given while they serve their time as well as not. There is no societal need for accountability for the victims of suicide. Obviously, you know this.
  7. I am saying that perpetrators of violence are AS legally culpable when they commit an illegal act of violence when someone hurt them, as when not. I am not talking about people who don't do it. Though since you keep bringing it up, Maize, yes it is BETTER to not hurt someone and WORSE to hurt someone.
  8. Clearly almost no one in this thread so far has that tendency lol. And yes, you either do something or you don't do something. It can be complicated and gray all day long before and after the fact for the peanut gallery. But you- that is to say, the criminal in question- either did the illegal thing or they did not.
  9. It would if you wanted to do it, but didn't.
  10. I have some vegan guests coming. While I have several 'little" things that we can all eat here and there (Mexican food, salads & slaws, chili, and just bread/nuts/fruit/veg combos) and they always bring their own food, if I could make a nice, big and coordinated dinner or two for all of us to enjoy together, that would make me really happy. But for reasons having to do with our own household, we can not have soy, mushrooms, or any "meat" and "cheese" made out of wheat. Any good ideas?
  11. Yeah, so, if my son slaps his brother in the face unprovoked* I'm not like, oh it's ok brother... someone slapped him in the face last year and now his mind thinks slapping people in the face unprovoked is cool beans. Therefore it's kind of fine. Surely you can see that it's kind of fine? You need to think about how he felt, getting slapped in the face last year. If you do, I'm sure you'll understand why I'm only going to punish him 40% for slapping you in your face. Or, he was having a bad day, so... Or, he has ADD, you know... Or, genetically, he's presdisposed to slapping you in the face, so.... The more heinous the crime, the more complicated people think the motivations are behind committing them. But it's not. They don't happen in a vacuum, surely. Society, while handling the justice side of things, has to continually examine the circumstances in which people are able to commit heinous crimes basically right under everyone's noses. And if you can pinpoint the genes that make someone predisposed to rape or beat and starve kids if they happen to know that's an option, by all means have fun with your new adventures in eugenics! But the individual culpability should NOT be impacted by whether or not that individual has been hurt in the past. *as all child abuse in unprovoked
  12. I understand why other people have a hard time with this. I just don't. At all. I know people who were raped or lived in DV as a child who went on to perpetuate those things on others. I think they are lazy, misshapen people who deserve the full force of punishment that would be rightly meted out if that was not a part of their past. And since I already think that we are already too lax on those people, I definitely don't want to see less being brought into that side of the equation. Further, I think (/know, in some cases) that these people take full, full advantage of society-at-large's inclination to be understanding if they've been hurt themselves. PLENTY of hurt people who've been hurt in big, life-altering ways don't hurt other people. I also have a religious/philospohical stance that while full justice can and should be handed down through society's official channels, only God and their victims have any place offering forgiveness or compassion for the people that hurt them. The State has no place in the moral forgiveness (or compassion, if you like) business, IOW, to my mind. This would apply to violent crimes (including child molestation, which is often child rape by a different name) not other types like theft or drug related charges, for which, ironically, The State tends to over-react if they move from "reacting just the right amount"...instead of under-react like they do (imo) when criminals hurt kids and other vulnerable people. ETA- those kids can forgive the Turpins just as well while they are in a cell as if they are in an apartment downtown, if that's the direction they lean. The forgiveness or compassion freely given, if given at all, does not effect the fact that they did what they did.
  13. yeah There's also the issue of how in some people, they will stop drawing maps (love that reference point!) but will be so relieved to have people off their backs now that they can do exactly as they're told, that they themselves and everyone else will be adamant that the medicine worked beautifully. And sometimes something is lost, everyone does realize it, and it's just worth it because everyone's life is complicated. And among these, some people just have to get through school, or some other discreet period of time, and then they can deal without the meds and go back to drawing maps, while others really can not. The insulin comparison we always use only holds so much water, because plenty of people have taken ADHD meds for a significant amount of time, assuming that since it worked (whatever that means to the individual) they would be on them for life... gone off the meds for one reason or another....and learned how to live and flourish with ADD unrestrained and in full effect. ADD *is* both biological and context-dependent. Some people kind of don't move through different lifestyle contexts, so to speak, with any kind of regularity, though. So they just see what they know, and have always known. Lastly, some people just have ADD without other diagnoses, while plenty of people have a number of differences of mind to deal with at once. I know this os obvious to everyone here, but it muddies the waters quite a bit. I've spoken to people irl several times where they'll be insisting something about ADD and I'll be like, hmm, I don't think so... and they're adamant, but then they'll casually mention oh yeah this person (on whom they're basing everything they say) is also Autistic or is also gifted or traumatized or has a sleep disorder or whatever. In any case, some people have solid reasons* for wanting to avoid meds for ADD. Some people find that hard to believe. Around and around we go. Though, TBH, "wanting to" is good enough reason for almost anything.
  14. Not in our case. It was the meds. It was just the meds. Nothing but the meds. The meds were, universally, negative. I mean, yeah, if the only goal is to sit down, shut up, and do what you're told... they helped with that. Otherwise: no. I don't understand what it so hard for people to understand about the fact that medicines affect different people in different ways.
×
×
  • Create New...