|
On Thu, 09 Dec 2004 22:53:19 -0800, Scott en Aztlán
wrote: On Thu, 9 Dec 2004 22:23:56 -0800, "ajpdla" wrote: That's bull****. It's the MOM'S phone, she can damn well listen to ANYONE talking on it! Nice try, but not true. Why is it OK for an employer to monitor their adult employees but not OK for a mother to monitor her minor child? The legal term is "a reasonable expectation of privacy". No I am not a lawyer but here's my somewhat educated layman's take on how it works: In a workplace environment, you are using your employer's resources to perform work for hire. In order to protect the employer from legal problems such as sexual harassment and simply to ensure that people are doing the work they contracted for (taking a job is a contract, you agree to work for pay), the employer has some fairly broad rights regarding monitoring and searching of desks and so on. The employer owns the equipment,t he office space and pays for the services. In a private environment such as a home or even a hotel room, you have a much stronger expectation of privacy regarding your affairs. A hotel could not legally listen in on your phone calls as one example. Note too, the court merely said (absent reading the opinion) that the evidence obtained could not be used against the defendant. This is not quite the same as saying listening in was illegal on the face of it. I suspect it might have gone differently if the defendant was the minor child rather than her boyfriend, but I'd not like to wager on that as I just do not know enough law. Children are not property, they have some rights separate from their parents. This is why, despiter bibilical permission, a parent cannot beat her child to death for disobedience as one example. I suspect the principle used here had more to do with reasonable expectation of privacy than the fact that it was her daughter she was snooping and would have applied to anyone's conversation she was listening in on. Would you be happy knowing your neighbor listened in when you norrowed her phone? Jim P. |
On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 17:19:37 -0800, Jim wrote:
On Thu, 09 Dec 2004 22:53:19 -0800, Scott en Aztlán wrote: On Thu, 9 Dec 2004 22:23:56 -0800, "ajpdla" wrote: That's bull****. It's the MOM'S phone, she can damn well listen to ANYONE talking on it! Nice try, but not true. Why is it OK for an employer to monitor their adult employees but not OK for a mother to monitor her minor child? The legal term is "a reasonable expectation of privacy". No I am not a lawyer but here's my somewhat educated layman's take on how it works: In a workplace environment, you are using your employer's resources to perform work for hire. In order to protect the employer from legal problems such as sexual harassment and simply to ensure that people are doing the work they contracted for (taking a job is a contract, you agree to work for pay), the employer has some fairly broad rights regarding monitoring and searching of desks and so on. The employer owns the equipment,t he office space and pays for the services. In a private environment such as a home or even a hotel room, you have a much stronger expectation of privacy regarding your affairs. A hotel could not legally listen in on your phone calls as one example. Note too, the court merely said (absent reading the opinion) that the evidence obtained could not be used against the defendant. This is not quite the same as saying listening in was illegal on the face of it. I suspect it might have gone differently if the defendant was the minor child rather than her boyfriend, but I'd not like to wager on that as I just do not know enough law. Children are not property, they have some rights separate from their parents. This is why, despiter bibilical permission, a parent cannot beat her child to death for disobedience as one example. I suspect the principle used here had more to do with reasonable expectation of privacy than the fact that it was her daughter she was snooping and would have applied to anyone's conversation she was listening in on. Would you be happy knowing your neighbor listened in when you norrowed her phone? Jim P. You are missing the fact that the employer must also notify the customer that the call is being monitored. |
Jeff wrote:
"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message ... Because the treatment of the child is wholly responsible for how the child treats the parent and in fact wholly JUSTIFIES that same treatment!! YOU GET WHAT YOU DESERVE FROM YOUR KIDS! If you can't trust them, YOU did it! If they hate you, YOU MADE THEM! If you were unable to justify their love for you, then you deserve their hate!! If you don't give them what you were supposed to, AND in a mode and manner so that they WANTED TO RECEIVE AND ACCEPT IT, then you DESERVE ALL the results!! Anyone who pretends they deserve to GET differently than they GAVE, is LYING! If you can't incur the love of your children so that they want you PROTECTED, then you don't DESERVE IT!! Steve Spoken by a true non-parent. ----------------- You're delusionally wrong. I've got two raised and off on their own in their late twenties and early thirties. Son 31 and daughter 28. You are so full of **** you must have brown eyes. ----------------- The only **** you see is in YOUR head, behind YOUR eyes. Parents can and some do "everything" right and still have a problem child,,, -------------------- Nope, nonsense, never ever seen it. Just becuase you have never seen it doesnt mean it never happens. ---------------- Me having never seen it in no way indicates it happens. It most certainly does happen,, more than "you" may think, in that tiny little pompous ass brain of yours. ----------------- My brain is larger and more powerful than yours, you're jealous and your insults sound immature and juvenile. Nope. Nonsense. Things are caused, and the closer you look the more you see this is true. Kids have no reason to mistreat someone who treats them properly. Now if you treat them ****ty and CALL it "proper" and don't care what they think, well I can see how you could delude yourself about that. Go spend some time at a counselling facility for kids and just see how kids can choose the wrong path in life all by themselves. --------------------------- Doesn't happen, ever. They are harmed, and everyone *I* have known in 54 years who has worked with kids has said this! They're not abused or mistreated kids, many come from very normal loving homes, Christian homes where the parents really do practice what they preach. ---------------------- So-called Xtian homes are abusive homes, that's what I mean above about you deluding yourself. FYI I work in hospital enviroment and have for more than 20 years now, and I see this kind of stuff quite often. ------------------------- Lemme guess. You're the janitor. You write like an ignorant religiously deluded janitor. In fact, what you think doing "everything right" then MUST BE WRONG, ****head!! You have some psychologically DEFECTIVE pet notions that YOU just don't want to see go down in FLAMES, but they do! They really do!: You see, control freaks like you **** up everything you touch, your marriages, your children, your lives. obviously you have NO experience at this ---------------------- WWRRRRONNGGGGOOO!!!! You post all this "crap" in the manner that you post it with all your "all caps" and stupid exclamation points and you expect "anybody" to believe you. --------------------------- Yours is crap, mine is fine, and you know it, you're merely desperate! And you call ME a control freak?? ------------------------- Yup, all Xtian child-control bigots are abusive deluded monsters. Again what an absolute pompous ass. I would suggest you are the acting control freak here. ------------------------- Your suggestion is merely your desperation. which is when some really start to rebel. ---------------------------- Hint!: Hey, King Big****. Your "colonists" don't rebel unless you TREAT THEM LIKE ****! Absolutely untrue, rebelling is actually quite normal for preteens and teens, its part of growing up and establishing their own independence. ------------------------ Doesn't happen at all in other cultures where kids are respected and are not coerced. But having not studied Anthropology, of course, you'd never have learned that "adolescent rebellion" is strictly a phenomenon of child-abusive societies. Its what a parent does about it that counts. ------------------------- No, rather parents CAUSE it, or else they KNOW BETTER! Like I said get a real education on the subject. --------------------------- A paltry little janitor like you is the one in need of education. Mine didn't at ALL, because they NEVER HAD TO! It isn't a necessity, you know! Well no, you don't know, do you? Rebellion is a symptom of ABUSE in a chronically child-abusive culture like THIS one! What total BS this is,, all rebellion is from abuse huh. Now you have just blown any tiny little shred of credibility you "may" have had, blown,,, gone . Like I said before read a book, get a life --------------------------- Now you're wildly thrashing about, saying nothing of content, making no reasoned point, merely flailing. All of your stupid all caps remarks and all the stupid exclamation marks tells me you have an agenda, ------------------------------- Damn straight, the RIGHT ONE! I want to see the people like you who **** up children STOPPED! My kids are all grown and gone,, all of them are decent law abiding, tax paying, successful citizens. They arent screwed up freaks like you are soooo desperately trying to imply. ----------------- So YOU say, Most Americans have dire problems with maturity and self-esteem and fractured creativity because of the ****ty way they were raised, and with your ignorance apparent they should be precisely of that constellation of problems, if you had enough courage to admit this. What you call "normal" is DAMAGED! Man you must come from the twilight zone or somewhere. The mere fact that you are trying to imply my kids are mental defectives because of my parenting skills without knowing a thing about me or my familiy really speaks volumes about YOU. ---------------------------------- You wish, unfortunately it *IS* about you and your sort and the mess your kind always make of your relationships with your kids. And if YOU had you'd know that they agree with ME, you child-abusive dip****. Jesus you are quite taken with yourself arent you?? ----------------------- My name isn't Jesus. Once again you call me a control freak????? You call me a child abuser?? Do you know my distant past??? have you spoken with my children??? NO . ------------------------- I don't need to. I've seen your kind on every street corner in this country. I've seen your damaged product everywhere. Steve |
dragonlady wrote:
In article , "R. Steve Walz" wrote: When one of my children was clearly getting out of control, I handled it differently: I TOLD her that her behavior had cost her her privacy rights, and that I would search her room or listen in on her phone calls at my discretion. I did not want to prevent her from ever using the phone -- she did have some friends who were good for her -- but continuing to eavesdrop from time to time kept me aware of what she was doing. -------------------------- People who dishonor their children that way GET dishonored BY their children. A friend of mine who hated her father used to plant things in her father's sock drawer for her mother to find, receipts carefully altered, porno, etc. Those who **** with their kids are destined to be ****ed BY their kids. Steve Steve, I started out honoring her: I had to change my ways when she started DIShonoring me (and herself) ----------------------- Nope, she was doing what was her RIGHT, and YOU simply didn't LIKE it! She can't possibly "dishonor herself", that's YOU talking and making judgements you don't even have a RIGHT to make. and doing things that were dangerous. ----------------- Her RIGHT, NOT YOURS! I've seen what many pricks like you SAY is "dangerous", it being anything that YOU don't happen to favor, nothing more! If you hadn't been abusing her rights she'd have had no desire to do anything truly dangerous. It is your dishonoring abuse of her equality that made her want to take risks merely to contradict your overbearing attempts at control! I did what I felt I had to do to keep her alive -- and that is NOT an exageration. ---------------------- You drove her to it and then justified it, like chasing a child toward a cliff. It turned out she was severely depressed, but adolescent depression manifests in odd ways, which I did not recognize: in her case, it was mostly phenominal anger along with acting out. ---------------------------- You don't even grasp WHY she was depressed and angry. And "acing out" is a misused term by parents like you, more excuse for what YOU want. You're incapable because her MIND and THOUGHTS violate your stupid ****ing little religion. And I think violating their privacy OPENLY does honor them ------------------------------ Nonsense, you're deluding yourself to avoid taking the blame that is rightfully YOURS for dishonoring her! -- you tell them what you are doing, and why, and don't hide it. Sneaking is dishonorable, but I never did that. ---------------------------------- Sneaking or overt abuse is irrelevant, abuse is abuse. If they shouldn't do it to you, then you shouldn't do it to them, or you will certainly incur their hate, wrath, and their urge to harm you by self-destruction. FWIW, it worked: I managed to keep her out of several really dangerous situations, and eventually, the depression was diagnosed and appropriately treated. She's almost 19 now, not anxious to move out, going to college, and just came in, told me I looked wonderful, gave me a kiss on the cheek, agreed to drop me off later today (so DH and I wouldn't be somewhere with two cars; as a side benefit, it means she gets to use MY car for the rest of the day), and stayed for a short chat with me (and her boyfriend) before the two of them went back to her room. ---------------------------------- Play-acting. She hates your guts. I think our relationship is good. ----------------------------------- You think what she wants you to. Child becomes the parent. I know you think your kids never got into serious trouble because you are such a wonderful parent. It's a lovely theory. But at some point, other things influence your kids as well -- and when things start to go badly, you sometimes need different tools. ---------------------------------------- Kids "get into trouble" with illegitimate authority. Everybody does. Parents who don't try to assume unrightful authority never become illegitimate, and kids never find cause to rebel against one who is not trying to interfere with them. I remember one conversation with this particular daughter, where I said that, in spite of everything, I thought I'd been a pretty good parent. She said, "In spite of WHAT?" I didn't want to be insulting -- I mean, what could I say? After a moment, I said, "In spite of the fact that my kid's lives are not exactly what I'd dreamed they'd be." She put her hands on her hips and said, "Well! YOUR job isn't to dream for us. YOUR job is to just keep us alive until we grow up enough to have our OWN dreams." I figure as long as a teenager can put me in my appropriate place like that, I've done a pretty good job of parenting. Not perfect, Lord knows, but pretty good. ---------------------------- Now, if you only understood ALL that she meant by that, but she has given up on that with you, now you're to be coddled and otherwise ignored. She caught herself and stopped short, having long ago decided that you're not worth it, and that she shouldn't bother. Steve |
In article ,
"R. Steve Walz" wrote: dragonlady wrote: Nope, she was doing what was her RIGHT, and YOU simply didn't LIKE it! She can't possibly "dishonor herself", that's YOU talking and making judgements you don't even have a RIGHT to make. and doing things that were dangerous. ----------------- Her RIGHT, NOT YOURS! I've seen what many pricks like you SAY is "dangerous", it being anything that YOU don't happen to favor, nothing more! If you hadn't been abusing her rights she'd have had no desire to do anything truly dangerous. It is your dishonoring abuse of her equality that made her want to take risks merely to contradict your overbearing attempts at control! Well, since her activities landed her in the hospital, and came close to killing her, I'm sure I'm not imagining that they were dangerous. Nor am I imagining that she'd rather be alive. Even you admit that intervention to pull a child from in front of a speeding car is appropriate. I believe that what I was doing fit that category -- it beat the heck out of letting her die due to some misplaced values that put her presumed rights over her life. All I did was keep her alive. I did what I felt I had to do to keep her alive -- and that is NOT an exageration. ---------------------- You drove her to it and then justified it, like chasing a child toward a cliff. It turned out she was severely depressed, but adolescent depression manifests in odd ways, which I did not recognize: in her case, it was mostly phenominal anger along with acting out. ---------------------------- You don't even grasp WHY she was depressed and angry. And "acing out" is a misused term by parents like you, more excuse for what YOU want. Since it turns out that virtually ALL the women in my family struggle with depression, I suspect it's because she's inhereted lousy brain chemistry. Contrary to your apparent beliefs, much depression is NOT situational. And given her immediate and dramatic response to psychotropic drugs, it seems clear that the primary cause was bio-chemical. She took the drugs for about 3 years, and no longer needs them. You're incapable because her MIND and THOUGHTS violate your stupid ****ing little religion. And which religion would that be? The one that thinks alive is better than dead? I'm not a member of any mainstream religion, and am not a theist. Or even a dieist. Or at least I don't believe in any of the things most people in our current culture mean when they say "God" (Don't consider myself an atheist, either.) ---------------------------------------- Kids "get into trouble" with illegitimate authority. Everybody does. Parents who don't try to assume unrightful authority never become illegitimate, and kids never find cause to rebel against one who is not trying to interfere with them. You are delusional. Your ivory tower must be a great place to live: "kids only have serious problems due to bad parents. If the parenting is good, the kids will always be just fine." Get over it: kids are independent beings with their own thoughts, desires, and wills. Their parents are NOT in control of those things, nor, unless they keep them completely away from the rest of the world, are they the only influence on their kids. Life happens, and other things influence them as well. I remember one conversation with this particular daughter, where I said that, in spite of everything, I thought I'd been a pretty good parent. She said, "In spite of WHAT?" I didn't want to be insulting -- I mean, what could I say? After a moment, I said, "In spite of the fact that my kid's lives are not exactly what I'd dreamed they'd be." She put her hands on her hips and said, "Well! YOUR job isn't to dream for us. YOUR job is to just keep us alive until we grow up enough to have our OWN dreams." I figure as long as a teenager can put me in my appropriate place like that, I've done a pretty good job of parenting. Not perfect, Lord knows, but pretty good. ---------------------------- Now, if you only understood ALL that she meant by that, but she has given up on that with you, now you're to be coddled and otherwise ignored. She caught herself and stopped short, having long ago decided that you're not worth it, and that she shouldn't bother. Steve It must be nice to be so omniscient that you know everything without ever meeting me OR my daughter. She's a great kid. Fortunately, your "announcement" that she hates my guts won't change how she really feels about me. -- Children won't care how much you know until they know how much you care |
dragonlady wrote:
In article , "R. Steve Walz" wrote: dragonlady wrote: Nope, she was doing what was her RIGHT, and YOU simply didn't LIKE it! She can't possibly "dishonor herself", that's YOU talking and making judgements you don't even have a RIGHT to make. and doing things that were dangerous. ----------------- Her RIGHT, NOT YOURS! I've seen what many pricks like you SAY is "dangerous", it being anything that YOU don't happen to favor, nothing more! If you hadn't been abusing her rights she'd have had no desire to do anything truly dangerous. It is your dishonoring abuse of her equality that made her want to take risks merely to contradict your overbearing attempts at control! Well, since her activities landed her in the hospital, and came close to killing her, I'm sure I'm not imagining that they were dangerous. Nor am I imagining that she'd rather be alive. ----------------- You induced those behaviors in her in the first place. Even you admit that intervention to pull a child from in front of a speeding car is appropriate. I believe that what I was doing fit that category -- it beat the heck out of letting her die due to some misplaced values that put her presumed rights over her life. All I did was keep her alive. --------------------------------- Calling 911 is fine, giving someone reason to take poison is not. I did what I felt I had to do to keep her alive -- and that is NOT an exageration. ---------------------- You drove her to it and then justified it, like chasing a child toward a cliff. It turned out she was severely depressed, but adolescent depression manifests in odd ways, which I did not recognize: in her case, it was mostly phenominal anger along with acting out. ---------------------------- You don't even grasp WHY she was depressed and angry. And "acting out" is a misused term by parents like you, more excuse for what YOU want. Since it turns out that virtually ALL the women in my family struggle with depression, I suspect it's because she's inhereted lousy brain chemistry. Contrary to your apparent beliefs, much depression is NOT situational. --------------- Some is not, but that some does NOT lead to "acting out". Also, a supposedly familial predilection to depression can be related to the persistent familial religion or political bullying. And given her immediate and dramatic response to psychotropic drugs, it seems clear that the primary cause was bio-chemical. She took the drugs for about 3 years, and no longer needs them. --------------------------------- Uh-huh. Pretending that mind and body are not related doesn't work: In schizophrenics that needed niacin, the chemical need for niacin decreased to normal after successful psychotherapy. You're incapable because her MIND and THOUGHTS violate your stupid ****ing little religion. And which religion would that be? The one that thinks alive is better than dead? I'm not a member of any mainstream religion, and am not a theist. Or even a dieist. Or at least I don't believe in any of the things most people in our current culture mean when they say "God" (Don't consider myself an atheist, either.) ------------------------------- That doesn't matter, what the parent imagines to be sinful or disreputable is religious in nature, even if they don't THINK they are "religious". And the effort to control another implies a religious hierarchy of dominance and dishonoring. Kids "get into trouble" with illegitimate authority. Everybody does. Parents who don't try to assume unrightful authority never become illegitimate, and kids never find cause to rebel against one who is not trying to interfere with them. You are delusional. --------------------- Nope. You are. Your ivory tower must be a great place to live: "kids only have serious problems due to bad parents. If the parenting is good, the kids will always be just fine." ----------------------------- They won't always be "just fine", but the parents' role won't have played a part. Get over it: kids are independent beings with their own thoughts, desires, and wills. Their parents are NOT in control of those things, nor, unless they keep them completely away from the rest of the world, are they the only influence on their kids. Life happens, and other things influence them as well. -------------------------------------- The actions of parents steer them toward rebellion toward problems or coerce them toward non-genuine lives in which they are depressed. The parents' actions and attitudes are the first and most influential on children's development. I remember one conversation with this particular daughter, where I said that, in spite of everything, I thought I'd been a pretty good parent. She said, "In spite of WHAT?" I didn't want to be insulting -- I mean, what could I say? After a moment, I said, "In spite of the fact that my kid's lives are not exactly what I'd dreamed they'd be." She put her hands on her hips and said, "Well! YOUR job isn't to dream for us. YOUR job is to just keep us alive until we grow up enough to have our OWN dreams." I figure as long as a teenager can put me in my appropriate place like that, I've done a pretty good job of parenting. Not perfect, Lord knows, but pretty good. ---------------------------- Now, if you only understood ALL that she meant by that, but she has given up on that with you, now you're to be coddled and otherwise ignored. She caught herself and stopped short, having long ago decided that you're not worth it, and that she shouldn't bother. Steve It must be nice to be so omniscient that you know everything without ever meeting me OR my daughter. She's a great kid. Fortunately, your "announcement" that she hates my guts won't change how she really feels about me. --------------------------------- I don't have to be ominiscient to know alot more than you do. Steve |
--------------------------------- I don't have to be ominiscient to know alot more than you do. Steve Ya know, you sit there and type **** about people you don't even ****ing know. Derogatory things. I hope to hell you are sued out your ass for the libelous - defamatory things you've said. The responses you have been giving - derate any sort of professionalism you claim. YOU are acting on the same scale you're putting those debating you - on. It sure must suck to be you, because you're so full of it you must stink so bad no one can stand to be around you. Some day - some one will knock you off your high horse. I didn't say throne, because the only throne you own is the white porcelain one you park your ass on - trying to expel some of the stuff you're so full of - but obviously constipated - by your head stuck up there. HOW DARE you act like some GOD and put people down you've never met or know nothing about - as to how their children came up in life. In case you've not heard the news reports in past few years, there have been quite a few teens - who've had the best of homes, end up dead or in jail - why? BECAUSE - they went their own way - contrary to the goodness their parents tried to instill in them. You obviously never heard of the drug epidemic that kids get caught up in, the drinking and so on. PEER PRESSURE, NOT JUST BAD PARENTING can do it. For you not to acknowledge those facts, you are the one who is clueless. There are countless tales on TV and radio of teens who've gone astray or died - due to their decisions. Decisions to get involved in things their parents had no clue of. WHY? BECAUSE - those "loving parents" as you say - trusted their children. They could do no wrong. Kids who had the best of homes. A GOOD HOME - does NOT guarantee a GOOD KID. Get your head out of your ass for a change. Expel some of the crap you're so full of. Open your eyes once wiped clean of the crappy film - blow your nose of the fecal matter you inhaled, clean your throat - then take a nice long look at and deep breath of "REALITY". Contrary to your "perfect" bringing up of kids, I've personally seen kids in loving homes - trusted - end up in trouble. I've also seen many kids who's asses were beat for doing wrong - like stealing or disrespecting their elders/authority figures and grew up to be fine outstanding people - like many of the older population can attest too. Ask some of them how many times they were taken out behind the barn and had their asses tanned. They'll tell you how much better off they are for it. Those who don't believe in correcting a child, are the pussies in this society who are now reaping what they sow - disobedient children. The same children who will tell their parents, teachers, ministers, police officers and so on - to go **** themselves. They have NO respect for authority. The candy asses of this country have placed them above any form of correction. This isn't the "Leave it to Beaver" or "Ozzie and Harriet" - age. I'm not saying kids need to be, should be or deserve to be "abused", but they do NOT grow up trouble free - without proper guidance and correction as needed. You're suggesting that if you treat your children right, they won't even need corrected. MAN, THAT IS SOME CROCK.... IF you are the professional you say, obviously, you've missed a few classes along the lines and shut your life off to the rest of the world - to see what is REALLY going on. Used to be, kids in my school days duked it out, got over it. Today, they take bombs, guns and so on - to blow half their class mates away. I know "Preacher's" kids who were raised in a loving home - end up in jail. Strict Christian/Catholic kids going to school - needing corrected for getting into trouble. THERE IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM HERE! IT ISN'T ALL "JUST" THE PARENTS. It is sex, drugs, etc. THIS - THE COMPUTER - is a large part of the problem, what with cook books for bombs available online and so on. Information which they'd never had before. Sexual exploitation also. Parenting is a key, but it isn't the only key. There is more to this than meets the eye. You seriously need to open your eyes and mind up a lot more to see the "reality" of this world. You're living in a clouded world. You claim to have written chunks of books on the subject. CHUNKS? So you're not even a true author in the sense of a complete book works? Your works are buried in with someone else's? Tell us, was it points you've made being dispelled by those truly in the know? Using your uh hem - examples of life according to you as an example of what not to believe? Tell us, which books did you "help" produce, so we may check the books to see if the credits list your name. They DO list your name, right? IF SO, let us see. IF you're the professional you claim to be and did do the writing, you should be proud to have us know about it. So, lets have it... Give us some book titles we can check out. Show us your credentials. You're not ashamed of them are you? You shouldn't be. Instead of cutting down on those you know nothing of, try defending your own words for a change. DO as the saying goes. PUT UP OR SHUT UP. YOU are the one claiming to have written on the subject and know it all. SO SHOW US. PROVE IT. You CAN do it, right? Instead of condemning others here of being abusive parents - people you know nothing about, show us what gives you your right to claim your superiority. The way you talk, you are probably the founder of the "KIDS, REPORT YOUR PARENTS FOR CHILD ABUSE - IF THEY DON'T GIVE YOU YOUR WAY" routine. It is time for the parents to reclaim the home and the rule IN that home. As long as that parent is paying the bills to keep that child clothed, fed, medically cared for, that PARENT should be the one in charge. THEY should have the final say - NOT THE KID. A child is too young to make informed decisions. DM |
|
R. Steve Walz wrote: wrote: I have to laugh, I think Dave C. is a lawyer. The minute I remove the phones from my house because I can't trust my kids, then when there is an emergency and something happens to my minor child, I will be considered an irresponsible parent because they can't call 911 and I'll be sued by my kid and the child welfare department. Where is the common sense here. Parents are responsible for their minor childs actions.....PERIOD. Parents, do what you must to keep your kids safe! ---------------------------- You simply don't grasp this deeply enough. Here's what parental responsibility ACTUALLY means! Actually: The parent deserves everything their child decides to inflict upon them!! And why? Because the treatment of the child is wholly responsible for how the child treats the parent and in fact wholly JUSTIFIES that same treatment!! YOU GET WHAT YOU DESERVE FROM YOUR KIDS! If you can't trust them, YOU did it! If they hate you, YOU MADE THEM! If you were unable to justify their love for you, then you deserve their hate!! If you don't give them what you were supposed to, AND in a mode and manner so that they WANTED TO RECEIVE AND ACCEPT IT, then you DESERVE ALL the results!! This, of course, assumes that children are fully functional, rational, thinking people. We, of course, know better than to assume something as ridiculous as this. Hell, there are many adults who don't fall into this category. The difference is, the adults that don't fall into this category are (usually) held responsible for their actions, where as the parent of the child who falls into this category can be held responsible. So since the parent can be held responsible, the parent should have enough authority over the child to prevent such behavior. |
wrote in message oups.com... R. Steve Walz wrote: wrote: I have to laugh, I think Dave C. is a lawyer. The minute I remove the phones from my house because I can't trust my kids, then when there is an emergency and something happens to my minor child, I will be considered an irresponsible parent because they can't call 911 and I'll be sued by my kid and the child welfare department. Where is the common sense here. Parents are responsible for their minor childs actions.....PERIOD. Parents, do what you must to keep your kids safe! ---------------------------- You simply don't grasp this deeply enough. Here's what parental responsibility ACTUALLY means! Actually: The parent deserves everything their child decides to inflict upon them!! And why? Because the treatment of the child is wholly responsible for how the child treats the parent and in fact wholly JUSTIFIES that same treatment!! YOU GET WHAT YOU DESERVE FROM YOUR KIDS! If you can't trust them, YOU did it! If they hate you, YOU MADE THEM! If you were unable to justify their love for you, then you deserve their hate!! If you don't give them what you were supposed to, AND in a mode and manner so that they WANTED TO RECEIVE AND ACCEPT IT, then you DESERVE ALL the results!! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You're wasting your time with this clown. He's a loon from square 1, havent you seen the signs in the parks?? Dont feed the animals?? ----- errrr I mean trolls. Jeff --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.802 / Virus Database: 545 - Release Date: 11/26/2004 |
"R. Steve Walz" wrote: dragonlady wrote: Nope, she was doing what was her RIGHT, and YOU simply didn't LIKE it! She can't possibly "dishonor herself", that's YOU talking and making judgements you don't even have a RIGHT to make. and doing things that were dangerous. ----------------- Her RIGHT, NOT YOURS! I've seen what many pricks like you SAY is "dangerous", it being anything that YOU don't happen to favor, nothing more! If you hadn't been abusing her rights she'd have had no desire to do anything truly dangerous. It is your dishonoring abuse of her equality that made her want to take risks merely to contradict your overbearing attempts at control! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Your're never going to make any points with this cretin,, dont waste your time. He is a wacko from the word go.... A self made one at that. Jeff --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.802 / Virus Database: 545 - Release Date: 11/26/2004 |
wrote:
R. Steve Walz wrote: wrote: I have to laugh, I think Dave C. is a lawyer. The minute I remove the phones from my house because I can't trust my kids, then when there is an emergency and something happens to my minor child, I will be considered an irresponsible parent because they can't call 911 and I'll be sued by my kid and the child welfare department. Where is the common sense here. Parents are responsible for their minor childs actions.....PERIOD. Parents, do what you must to keep your kids safe! ---------------------------- You simply don't grasp this deeply enough. Here's what parental responsibility ACTUALLY means! Actually: The parent deserves everything their child decides to inflict upon them!! And why? Because the treatment of the child is wholly responsible for how the child treats the parent and in fact wholly JUSTIFIES that same treatment!! YOU GET WHAT YOU DESERVE FROM YOUR KIDS! If you can't trust them, YOU did it! If they hate you, YOU MADE THEM! If you were unable to justify their love for you, then you deserve their hate!! If you don't give them what you were supposed to, AND in a mode and manner so that they WANTED TO RECEIVE AND ACCEPT IT, then you DESERVE ALL the results!! This, of course, assumes that children are fully functional, rational, thinking people. ----------------- They are indeed, every bit as much as any adult. Reason is what humans do, they aren't capable of anything else. What YOU might call them being illogical is merely a logic that happens to be inconvenient to your agenda. We, of course, know better than to assume something as ridiculous as this. ------------------ You're not nobility, quit trying to speak for anyone but yourself. Hell, there are many adults who don't fall into this category. ------------------- Then we should definitely keep those people from abusing the rights of their children. The difference is, the adults that don't fall into this category are (usually) held responsible for their actions, -------------------- There's nothing whatsoever wrong with punishing crime, but a child deciding other than YOU would prefer them decide does NOT amount to an adult crime!! where as the parent of the child who falls into this category can be held responsible. -------------------- If they assault or coerce a child they should be punished, just as a child who assaults a parent who does not oppress them should be punished. But when a child opposes their parents' oppression, that is NOT crime, but VIRTUE!! So since the parent can be held responsible, the parent should have enough authority over the child to prevent such behavior. ---------------------- The parent is virtually never held to any responsibility for the crimes of children. No one can be held responsible for any assault on another than their own, and only if it is not justified violence against oppression. Steve |
Da-man wrote:
--------------------------------- I don't have to be ominiscient to know alot more than you do. Steve Ya know, you sit there and type **** about people you don't even ****ing know. ------------------- I know them, I read the **** their minds spew. Derogatory things. I hope to hell you are sued out your ass for the libelous - defamatory things you've said. -------------------- Ain't any. Now you're being delusional. The responses you have been giving - derate any sort of professionalism you claim. --------------------- I don't charge. Once again you're confabulating wildly. YOU are acting on the same scale you're putting those debating you - on. ------------------------- Study english composition. It sure must suck to be you, because you're so full of it you must stink so bad no one can stand to be around you. --------------------- Blah blah, childish nonsense. Some day - some one will knock you off your high horse. --------------------- It won't be you, you're on your knees in ****. I didn't say throne, because the only throne you own is the white porcelain one you park your ass on - trying to expel some of the stuff you're so full of - but obviously constipated - by your head stuck up there. ------------------- More immature blah-blah. HOW DARE you act like some GOD and put people down you've never met or know nothing about - as to how their children came up in life. ------------------------------ Simple, after studying people for over 50 years I know them by the **** they spew. In case you've not heard the news reports in past few years, there have been quite a few teens - who've had the best of homes, end up dead or in jail - why? -------------------- Because the idiot writing the story asked their PARENTS, instead of their child's friends and neighbors, OR THE KID. When it comes to honest reportage as to the state of homelife, PARENTS PATHOLOGICALLY LIE, LIE, LIE!!! More than a century of recorded psychiatric interviews in the science of penology has demonstrated that EVERY SINGLE PARENT OF A MASS MURDERER THINKS THEY DIDN'T DO ANYTHING WRONG, and you can be deluded into believing them if you stopped there and didn't ask anyone ELSE who knew them, but once you DO IT BECOMES BLOODY ****ING OBVIOUS WHY AND HOW THEY WARPED THE **** OUT OF THEIR KID!!! BECAUSE - they went their own way - contrary to the goodness their parents tried to instill in them. --------------------------- Classic LIES to excuse abuse. All abusive authoritarians or wannabe abusers say this kind of moronic ****, when every single systematic and scientific approach to the psychology of parents and children produces results that refute it. This is the kind of sick Xtian mind-control crap they try to brainwash people with in sunday school, to keep the collections coming in that pay their priests to anally abuse more acolytes. You obviously never heard of the drug epidemic that kids get caught up in, the drinking and so on. ------------------------------ **** lady, we ****ing STARTED it! Except we were more interested in the drugs that reveal the mind's deeper nature, like pot and acid. PEER PRESSURE, NOT JUST BAD PARENTING can do it. ------------------------------ That's every bit as moronic as each parent believing that THEIR child was corrupted by "those creeps he hangs around with", when ACTUALLY HE'S THEIR DEALER!! Abusive parents are what interests kids in altering their minds toward unconsciousness, it's self-medication of the poor self-esteem that this parental abuse CAUSES!! For you not to acknowledge those facts, ------------------------ You HAVE NO "facts". You merely blather! you are the one who is clueless. There are countless tales on TV and radio of teens who've gone astray or died - due to their decisions. ------------------- Which "decisions" they make because they are abused by their parents. Decisions to get involved in things their parents had no clue of. WHY? ------------------------ Because their parents don't need to have a clue about drugs n order to instigate drug abuse. BECAUSE - those "loving parents" as you say - trusted their children. ----------------------------- They abused them and hoped for the best, you mean!! They THOUGHT/WERE TOLD they were doing the best for their child by abusing the **** out of them, but somehow it JUST DIDN'T WORK OUT!! Why? Because kids are NOT like cattle, which can be steered left and right with a cattle prod or a stick. When dishonored by being coerced, threatened, belittled, controlled, kids turn and fight back against the insult, even if they have to take their hands off the "steering wheel" of their Life to do it!! The certain way to cause a child to hate you and intentionally do the reverse of what you want is to behave JUST LIKE YOU DO! They could do no wrong. Kids who had the best of homes. A GOOD HOME - does NOT guarantee a GOOD KID. -------------------- Ain't a "good home" then, that was just a LIE! Get your head out of your ass for a change. Expel some of the crap you're so full of. Open your eyes once wiped clean of the crappy film - blow your nose of the fecal matter you inhaled, clean your throat - then take a nice long look at and deep breath of "REALITY". --------------------------- More immature blah-blah bull****. Contrary to your "perfect" bringing up of kids, I've personally seen kids in loving homes - trusted - end up in trouble. ------------------------ Then they weren't perfect, now were they! The proof IS that they didn't do what WE did! I've also seen many kids who's asses were beat for doing wrong - like stealing or disrespecting their elders/authority figures and grew up to be fine outstanding people - like many of the older population can attest too. Ask some of them how many times they were taken out behind the barn and had their asses tanned. They'll tell you how much better off they are for it. --------------- These aren't achievers, they are psychological cripples who secretly hate the **** out of their lives and have no creativity or capacity to love. Beating someone till they tell you what you want to hear merely makes an ingrown secretive deceptive personality who play-acts at everything their whole life and has no ethics. This is why many more Rightist Xtians get caught in corruption and criminal scandals than Leftists who were raised with acceptance. This is why the "red" states have all the divorce and corruption, and the lowest divorce rate is in MASSACHUSETTS! Those who don't believe in correcting a child, are the pussies in this society who are now reaping what they sow - disobedient children. ------------------- No, that's just a myth used to try to justify child-abuse. Actually exactly the reverse is true, a child whose decisions are accepted and who is loved for his independence loves you back, and would never hurt you, while children you beat on will kill you in your sleep and burn your house down, and good riddance to you! You Rightist clowns always claim crime is caused by "permissiveness", but all the actual socialogical data proves that you're merely LYING! Now why would you LIE about something like that? Here's why!: When someone is beaten they will never feel adult and recover their inner humilation until they get to beat on someone smaller than them so as to attain the position their parents held, that of abuser, rather than abusee!! This is the familiarpsychological phenomenon of cognitive dissonance, ala the Stockholm Syndrome, where weak people who are abused come to worship their abusers and seek to be just like them. The whole criminal bully psychology comes FROM child abuse, it isn't PREVENTED by it! The same children who will tell their parents, teachers, ministers, police officers and so on - to go **** themselves. ---------------------- Only people who hate you tell you to **** your self. Now just ask yourself WHY they hate you. You abused them, that's why, there is NO other possible reason to wish to abuse others back, if they have been nice to you! They have NO respect for authority. ------------------------ There is no "authority", your kind are too stupid to deserve it, and nobody with a brain who's not damaged even wants it. The candy asses of this country have placed them above any form of correction. ---------------------- If they've managed it they ain't so candy, now are they, you little corn-hole. All Free people do that, it's called rebellion against illicit authority. Remember King George IV? This isn't the "Leave it to Beaver" or "Ozzie and Harriet" - age. I'm not saying kids need to be, should be or deserve to be "abused", but they do NOT grow up trouble free - without proper guidance and correction as needed. ------------------------ Ain't any "proper" or "correction", and no such "guidance" is needed. The Majority of other cultures on earth totally do without anything like that with respect to children. You're suggesting that if you treat your children right, they won't even need corrected. MAN, THAT IS SOME CROCK.... ---------------------- So lessee, because you're crippled from your childhood abuse, now you don't even believe that you have the brains to treat someone nice who treats YOU nice? I'll believe that because you're damaged, but can you see why only a damaged person like you could ever believe such crap?? Every child I've seen loved people who loved and respected him and his wants as an equal. In fact that's all that children and other people actually want, if they haven't been damaged by ****heads like you, and that's to be nice to people who are nice to them!!! IF you are the professional you say, obviously, you've missed a few classes along the lines and shut your life off to the rest of the world - to see what is REALLY going on. Used to be, kids in my school days duked it out, got over it. Today, they take bombs, guns and so on - to blow half their class mates away. ----------------- You just couldn't afford the guns and bombs, or you'd be the same. I know "Preacher's" kids who were raised in a loving home - end up in jail. ------------------- That's because Xtianity preaches your kind of abusive crap, and it abuses children. There are NO "loving" preacher's homes. Strict Christian/Catholic kids going to school - needing corrected for getting into trouble. ---------------------- The viciousness that Xtianity pumps into kids is abusive and dishonoring. You pump that **** into anyone and they'kll be damaged by it too! THERE IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM HERE! IT ISN'T ALL "JUST" THE PARENTS. ------------------------- No, YOU just have a delusion that religion makes for a "good home", when it does THE OPPOSITE!!! It is sex, --------------- There's nothing wrong with sex, kids should be having sex with their friends at home in their rooms with their parents' blessings. MY kids did! drugs, --------------- SOME drugs are GOOD for you! etc. THIS - THE COMPUTER - is a large part of the problem, what with cook books for bombs available online and so on. --------------------------- Nobody bombs anybody if they don't deserve it. Abusing kids means deserving it. The Computer is information that destroys the superstitions of stupid Xtian Antisex and Capitalist Feudalistic enslavement. Information which they'd never had before. Sexual exploitation also. -------------------- Nonsense, people need lots MORE sex, not less. There is no "exploitation" of kids who are sexually informed. Parenting is a key, but it isn't the only key. There is more to this than meets the eye. ------------------------- Yours. You seriously need to open your eyes and mind up a lot more to see the "reality" of this world. You're living in a clouded world. You claim to have written chunks of books on the subject. CHUNKS? So you're not even a true author in the sense of a complete book works? -------------------------- Pro-writers write specific chapters and sections, very few books today are written by solitary authors. Your works are buried in with someone else's? Tell us, was it points you've made being dispelled by those truly in the know? Using your uh hem - examples of life according to you as an example of what not to believe? Tell us, which books did you "help" produce, so we may check the books to see if the credits list your name. They DO list your name, right? ------------------- My nom de plume. ;- I do that to keep my private and public lives totally separate, and so that ****heads like you can't interfere. IF SO, let us see. IF you're the professional you claim to be and did do the writing, you should be proud to have us know about it. So, lets have it... Give us some book titles we can check out. Show us your credentials. You're not ashamed of them are you? You shouldn't be. Instead of cutting down on those you know nothing of, try defending your own words for a change. DO as the saying goes. PUT UP OR SHUT UP. YOU are the one claiming to have written on the subject and know it all. SO SHOW US. PROVE IT. You CAN do it, right? Instead of condemning others here of being abusive parents - people you know nothing about, show us what gives you your right to claim your superiority. ---------------------------------- Writing books doesn't prove anything. Nor will I bother. I enjoy having social effect without any responsibility. The way you talk, you are probably the founder of the "KIDS, REPORT YOUR PARENTS FOR CHILD ABUSE - IF THEY DON'T GIVE YOU YOUR WAY" routine. ----------------------- Gee, if I were, you'd have never heard of it yet. Instead, it's the major social question of the age. It is time for the parents to reclaim the home and the rule IN that home. ------------------ That was lost half a century ago, join the future. As long as that parent is paying the bills to keep that child clothed, fed, medically cared for, that PARENT should be the one in charge. ----------------------------- You owe your child that. You don't get to push around those you OWE a debt! If you don't like that, then don't have kids! THEY should have the final say - NOT THE KID. A child is too young to make informed decisions. DM -------------------- Nonsense, they make most of them from the very beginning. They learn by doing. Dishonor them and you cripple them. You're an immature whiner who never learned to live with equals. And if you try to prevent their autonomy, you'll just have them knocking your ass out on the floor. Or you'll never see your grandchildren or receive their help when you're old. They'll be adults in your life a LOT longer than they'll be kids, and they remember every slight! Don't **** up your family! Steve |
Jeff wrote:
"R. Steve Walz" wrote: dragonlady wrote: Nope, she was doing what was her RIGHT, and YOU simply didn't LIKE it! She can't possibly "dishonor herself", that's YOU talking and making judgements you don't even have a RIGHT to make. and doing things that were dangerous. ----------------- Her RIGHT, NOT YOURS! I've seen what many pricks like you SAY is "dangerous", it being anything that YOU don't happen to favor, nothing more! If you hadn't been abusing her rights she'd have had no desire to do anything truly dangerous. It is your dishonoring abuse of her equality that made her want to take risks merely to contradict your overbearing attempts at control! Your're never going to make any points with this cretin,, dont waste your time. He is a wacko from the word go.... A self made one at that. Jeff ----------------------- You mean One you can't argue with successfully. Steve |
"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message ... Da-man wrote: --------------------------------- I don't have to be ominiscient to know alot more than you do. Steve Ya know, you sit there and type **** about people you don't even ****ing know. ------------------- I know them, I read the **** their minds spew. Derogatory things. I hope to hell you are sued out your ass for the libelous - defamatory things you've said. -------------------- Ain't any. Now you're being delusional. The responses you have been giving - derate any sort of professionalism you claim. --------------------- I don't charge. Once again you're confabulating wildly. YOU are acting on the same scale you're putting those debating you - on. ------------------------- Study english composition. It sure must suck to be you, because you're so full of it you must stink so bad no one can stand to be around you. --------------------- Blah blah, childish nonsense. Some day - some one will knock you off your high horse. --------------------- It won't be you, you're on your knees in ****. I didn't say throne, because the only throne you own is the white porcelain one you park your ass on - trying to expel some of the stuff you're so full of - but obviously constipated - by your head stuck up there. ------------------- More immature blah-blah. HOW DARE you act like some GOD and put people down you've never met or know nothing about - as to how their children came up in life. ------------------------------ Simple, after studying people for over 50 years I know them by the **** they spew. In case you've not heard the news reports in past few years, there have been quite a few teens - who've had the best of homes, end up dead or in jail - why? -------------------- Because the idiot writing the story asked their PARENTS, instead of their child's friends and neighbors, OR THE KID. When it comes to honest reportage as to the state of homelife, PARENTS PATHOLOGICALLY LIE, LIE, LIE!!! More than a century of recorded psychiatric interviews in the science of penology has demonstrated that EVERY SINGLE PARENT OF A MASS MURDERER THINKS THEY DIDN'T DO ANYTHING WRONG, and you can be deluded into believing them if you stopped there and didn't ask anyone ELSE who knew them, but once you DO IT BECOMES BLOODY ****ING OBVIOUS WHY AND HOW THEY WARPED THE **** OUT OF THEIR KID!!! BECAUSE - they went their own way - contrary to the goodness their parents tried to instill in them. --------------------------- Classic LIES to excuse abuse. All abusive authoritarians or wannabe abusers say this kind of moronic ****, when every single systematic and scientific approach to the psychology of parents and children produces results that refute it. This is the kind of sick Xtian mind-control crap they try to brainwash people with in sunday school, to keep the collections coming in that pay their priests to anally abuse more acolytes. You obviously never heard of the drug epidemic that kids get caught up in, the drinking and so on. ------------------------------ **** lady, we ****ing STARTED it! Except we were more interested in the drugs that reveal the mind's deeper nature, like pot and acid. PEER PRESSURE, NOT JUST BAD PARENTING can do it. ------------------------------ That's every bit as moronic as each parent believing that THEIR child was corrupted by "those creeps he hangs around with", when ACTUALLY HE'S THEIR DEALER!! Abusive parents are what interests kids in altering their minds toward unconsciousness, it's self-medication of the poor self-esteem that this parental abuse CAUSES!! For you not to acknowledge those facts, ------------------------ You HAVE NO "facts". You merely blather! you are the one who is clueless. There are countless tales on TV and radio of teens who've gone astray or died - due to their decisions. ------------------- Which "decisions" they make because they are abused by their parents. Decisions to get involved in things their parents had no clue of. WHY? ------------------------ Because their parents don't need to have a clue about drugs n order to instigate drug abuse. BECAUSE - those "loving parents" as you say - trusted their children. ----------------------------- They abused them and hoped for the best, you mean!! They THOUGHT/WERE TOLD they were doing the best for their child by abusing the **** out of them, but somehow it JUST DIDN'T WORK OUT!! Why? Because kids are NOT like cattle, which can be steered left and right with a cattle prod or a stick. When dishonored by being coerced, threatened, belittled, controlled, kids turn and fight back against the insult, even if they have to take their hands off the "steering wheel" of their Life to do it!! The certain way to cause a child to hate you and intentionally do the reverse of what you want is to behave JUST LIKE YOU DO! They could do no wrong. Kids who had the best of homes. A GOOD HOME - does NOT guarantee a GOOD KID. -------------------- Ain't a "good home" then, that was just a LIE! Get your head out of your ass for a change. Expel some of the crap you're so full of. Open your eyes once wiped clean of the crappy film - blow your nose of the fecal matter you inhaled, clean your throat - then take a nice long look at and deep breath of "REALITY". --------------------------- More immature blah-blah bull****. Contrary to your "perfect" bringing up of kids, I've personally seen kids in loving homes - trusted - end up in trouble. ------------------------ Then they weren't perfect, now were they! The proof IS that they didn't do what WE did! I've also seen many kids who's asses were beat for doing wrong - like stealing or disrespecting their elders/authority figures and grew up to be fine outstanding people - like many of the older population can attest too. Ask some of them how many times they were taken out behind the barn and had their asses tanned. They'll tell you how much better off they are for it. --------------- These aren't achievers, they are psychological cripples who secretly hate the **** out of their lives and have no creativity or capacity to love. Beating someone till they tell you what you want to hear merely makes an ingrown secretive deceptive personality who play-acts at everything their whole life and has no ethics. This is why many more Rightist Xtians get caught in corruption and criminal scandals than Leftists who were raised with acceptance. This is why the "red" states have all the divorce and corruption, and the lowest divorce rate is in MASSACHUSETTS! Those who don't believe in correcting a child, are the pussies in this society who are now reaping what they sow - disobedient children. ------------------- No, that's just a myth used to try to justify child-abuse. Actually exactly the reverse is true, a child whose decisions are accepted and who is loved for his independence loves you back, and would never hurt you, while children you beat on will kill you in your sleep and burn your house down, and good riddance to you! You Rightist clowns always claim crime is caused by "permissiveness", but all the actual socialogical data proves that you're merely LYING! Now why would you LIE about something like that? Here's why!: When someone is beaten they will never feel adult and recover their inner humilation until they get to beat on someone smaller than them so as to attain the position their parents held, that of abuser, rather than abusee!! This is the familiarpsychological phenomenon of cognitive dissonance, ala the Stockholm Syndrome, where weak people who are abused come to worship their abusers and seek to be just like them. The whole criminal bully psychology comes FROM child abuse, it isn't PREVENTED by it! The same children who will tell their parents, teachers, ministers, police officers and so on - to go **** themselves. ---------------------- Only people who hate you tell you to **** your self. Now just ask yourself WHY they hate you. You abused them, that's why, there is NO other possible reason to wish to abuse others back, if they have been nice to you! They have NO respect for authority. ------------------------ There is no "authority", your kind are too stupid to deserve it, and nobody with a brain who's not damaged even wants it. The candy asses of this country have placed them above any form of correction. ---------------------- If they've managed it they ain't so candy, now are they, you little corn-hole. All Free people do that, it's called rebellion against illicit authority. Remember King George IV? This isn't the "Leave it to Beaver" or "Ozzie and Harriet" - age. I'm not saying kids need to be, should be or deserve to be "abused", but they do NOT grow up trouble free - without proper guidance and correction as needed. ------------------------ Ain't any "proper" or "correction", and no such "guidance" is needed. The Majority of other cultures on earth totally do without anything like that with respect to children. You're suggesting that if you treat your children right, they won't even need corrected. MAN, THAT IS SOME CROCK.... ---------------------- So lessee, because you're crippled from your childhood abuse, now you don't even believe that you have the brains to treat someone nice who treats YOU nice? I'll believe that because you're damaged, but can you see why only a damaged person like you could ever believe such crap?? Every child I've seen loved people who loved and respected him and his wants as an equal. In fact that's all that children and other people actually want, if they haven't been damaged by ****heads like you, and that's to be nice to people who are nice to them!!! IF you are the professional you say, obviously, you've missed a few classes along the lines and shut your life off to the rest of the world - to see what is REALLY going on. Used to be, kids in my school days duked it out, got over it. Today, they take bombs, guns and so on - to blow half their class mates away. ----------------- You just couldn't afford the guns and bombs, or you'd be the same. I know "Preacher's" kids who were raised in a loving home - end up in jail. ------------------- That's because Xtianity preaches your kind of abusive crap, and it abuses children. There are NO "loving" preacher's homes. Strict Christian/Catholic kids going to school - needing corrected for getting into trouble. ---------------------- The viciousness that Xtianity pumps into kids is abusive and dishonoring. You pump that **** into anyone and they'kll be damaged by it too! THERE IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM HERE! IT ISN'T ALL "JUST" THE PARENTS. ------------------------- No, YOU just have a delusion that religion makes for a "good home", when it does THE OPPOSITE!!! It is sex, --------------- There's nothing wrong with sex, kids should be having sex with their friends at home in their rooms with their parents' blessings. MY kids did! drugs, --------------- SOME drugs are GOOD for you! etc. THIS - THE COMPUTER - is a large part of the problem, what with cook books for bombs available online and so on. --------------------------- Nobody bombs anybody if they don't deserve it. Abusing kids means deserving it. The Computer is information that destroys the superstitions of stupid Xtian Antisex and Capitalist Feudalistic enslavement. Information which they'd never had before. Sexual exploitation also. -------------------- Nonsense, people need lots MORE sex, not less. There is no "exploitation" of kids who are sexually informed. Parenting is a key, but it isn't the only key. There is more to this than meets the eye. ------------------------- Yours. You seriously need to open your eyes and mind up a lot more to see the "reality" of this world. You're living in a clouded world. You claim to have written chunks of books on the subject. CHUNKS? So you're not even a true author in the sense of a complete book works? -------------------------- Pro-writers write specific chapters and sections, very few books today are written by solitary authors. Your works are buried in with someone else's? Tell us, was it points you've made being dispelled by those truly in the know? Using your uh hem - examples of life according to you as an example of what not to believe? Tell us, which books did you "help" produce, so we may check the books to see if the credits list your name. They DO list your name, right? ------------------- My nom de plume. ;- I do that to keep my private and public lives totally separate, and so that ****heads like you can't interfere. IF SO, let us see. IF you're the professional you claim to be and did do the writing, you should be proud to have us know about it. So, lets have it... Give us some book titles we can check out. Show us your credentials. You're not ashamed of them are you? You shouldn't be. Instead of cutting down on those you know nothing of, try defending your own words for a change. DO as the saying goes. PUT UP OR SHUT UP. YOU are the one claiming to have written on the subject and know it all. SO SHOW US. PROVE IT. You CAN do it, right? Instead of condemning others here of being abusive parents - people you know nothing about, show us what gives you your right to claim your superiority. ---------------------------------- Writing books doesn't prove anything. Nor will I bother. I enjoy having social effect without any responsibility. The way you talk, you are probably the founder of the "KIDS, REPORT YOUR PARENTS FOR CHILD ABUSE - IF THEY DON'T GIVE YOU YOUR WAY" routine. ----------------------- Gee, if I were, you'd have never heard of it yet. Instead, it's the major social question of the age. It is time for the parents to reclaim the home and the rule IN that home. ------------------ That was lost half a century ago, join the future. As long as that parent is paying the bills to keep that child clothed, fed, medically cared for, that PARENT should be the one in charge. ----------------------------- You owe your child that. You don't get to push around those you OWE a debt! If you don't like that, then don't have kids! THEY should have the final say - NOT THE KID. A child is too young to make informed decisions. DM -------------------- Nonsense, they make most of them from the very beginning. They learn by doing. Dishonor them and you cripple them. You're an immature whiner who never learned to live with equals. And if you try to prevent their autonomy, you'll just have them knocking your ass out on the floor. Or you'll never see your grandchildren or receive their help when you're old. They'll be adults in your life a LOT longer than they'll be kids, and they remember every slight! Don't **** up your family! Steve Oh boy, I got your number now - numb nuts. Drugs are ok? Bombs are ok? AND NO IDIOT - THE BOMBS WEREN'T MEANT FOR THE PARENTS, I'M TALKING FELLOW SCHOOL STUDENTS. EVER HEAR OF COLUMBINE - ASS HOLE? MAN YOU ARE ONE SICK MAN. NO BOOK TITLES to back up your claims. YOU just lost every ounce of credibility. Oh and as for proper English, you made a few slips yourself, so go **** off......... You are hereby PLONKED. You're not worth my time. I don't know what kind of drugs you may be on, but that is one hell of a trip....... I hope you have a safe landing. DM |
Sorry, if some duplication of previous post is included here.
There is a conflict of laws. Mother listening to her child on the phone. She overhead the friend or her was going to commit a crime. By law (unless it your spouse) she has to report it or she would be commenting a crime. Other the mater of the State Law. Maybe she did violated here privacy rights. However, the State forgot to go by Federal Wiretapping Laws. As long as one person is aware you are allowed to tape the conversation. Just tell your kids. That you conversations will be taped or listen too. Federal Laws always overrides State Laws. For your parents who don‘t allow kids the use the phone. Tell them they can’t use the phone unless it is an emergency. Greg R |
"Da-man" wrote in message erio.net... "R. Steve Walz" wrote in message ... Da-man wrote: Oh boy, I got your number now - numb nuts. Drugs are ok? Bombs are ok? AND NO IDIOT - THE BOMBS WEREN'T MEANT FOR THE PARENTS, I'M TALKING FELLOW SCHOOL STUDENTS. EVER HEAR OF COLUMBINE - ASS HOLE? MAN YOU ARE ONE SICK MAN. NO BOOK TITLES to back up your claims. YOU just lost every ounce of credibility. Oh and as for proper English, you made a few slips yourself, so go **** off......... You are hereby PLONKED. You're not worth my time. I don't know what kind of drugs you may be on, but that is one hell of a trip....... I hope you have a safe landing. DM ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------- This guy is "seriously" whacked in the head. Its obvious he has a major anger problem, along with the delusions of grandeur. He also seems(is) one of those who believe quite simply whatever they "think" to be true,, is true. They call that delusional, or even psychotic. Its scary that this idiot may have actually raised kids...... I also find it interesting he has not answered your requests for "confirmed" contributions to any serious publication and/or book............ Batman maybe, Pschology Today, I dont think so,,,,, Dr. Spock he aint. (its a 50's - 60's) thing. Jeff --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.802 / Virus Database: 545 - Release Date: 11/26/2004 |
Da-man wrote:
"R. Steve Walz" wrote: Nonsense, they make most of them from the very beginning. They learn by doing. Dishonor them and you cripple them. You're an immature whiner who never learned to live with equals. And if you try to prevent their autonomy, you'll just have them knocking your ass out on the floor. Or you'll never see your grandchildren or receive their help when you're old. They'll be adults in your life a LOT longer than they'll be kids, and they remember every slight! Don't **** up your family! Steve Oh boy, I got your number now - numb nuts. Drugs are ok? ----------- Some. Bombs are ok? ------------ Some. AND NO IDIOT - THE BOMBS WEREN'T MEANT FOR THE PARENTS, I'M TALKING FELLOW SCHOOL STUDENTS. EVER HEAR OF COLUMBINE - ASS HOLE? ------------------- You're very confused by what you read. MAN YOU ARE ONE SICK MAN. NO BOOK TITLES to back up your claims. YOU just lost every ounce of credibility. ---------------------- Lots of people write books, moron, where do you think they all come from, hmmmm???? Don't tell me you worship book authors as Gawds! Oh and as for proper English, you made a few slips yourself, so go **** off......... ---------------- S'yeah right. Mine are typos, yours are because you're stupid. You are hereby PLONKED. You're not worth my time. I don't know what kind of drugs you may be on, but that is one hell of a trip....... I hope you have a safe landing. DM ------------------- You're a poor desperate little **** who is now finding that he is unable to express his badly thought-out ideas, just like all you ignorant little pricks. Steve |
"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message ... Da-man wrote: Bombs are ok? ------------ Some. So what bombs are ok genius? |
DeWayne wrote:
"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message ... Da-man wrote: Bombs are ok? ------------ Some. So what bombs are ok genius? ----------------- The ones used on **** like you, of course. Steve |
Da-man wrote:
WOW... this idiot proves my point more - every time he speaks..... Maybe all should delete his ass - I have! ------------- Liar. I'm only seeing his stupid crap via other's messages. He seriously appears to be showing signs of needing some help. Ya got to love it. To summarize - He chastised - no - make that defamed, libeled - others who he didn't know - publicly calling them Child Abusers - claiming them to be bad parents. Suggested "most" parents are bad. --------------------- They ARE! Then he says "bombs" are ok? ---------------------- Don't you think some are? Really? How about the ones we drop on Fallujah? Especially when it was said in the context of kids having them in his initial inference - uprising against the parents! He thinks allowing teens to be screwing in the next room is ok - it is a controlled atmosphere so to speak! ---------------------- Is there something wrong with sex, in the next room or in the living room, I see no problem with it. He thinks children are proper in uprising against their parents! Man... He really showed his "professionalism" there. ------------------------ What's this "professional" baloney of yours. Everybody gets paid for something. NOT! Yes, I'd say he has dug his grave with showing his sincere lack of professionalism and more so - moral character. -------------------------- What you think is sex, "immoral" *I* say is MORAL! As to being a writer or contributor to books regarding parenting, moral values or whatever the hell the specialty was to have been - I'd have to suggest it sounds like all talk - er uh make that Bull ****. For all we know, it may have been nothing more than a few recipes for a fund raiser cook book. "Maybe" he is brilliant - I'll give him that inkling of benefit of doubt. ----------------------------- You're blathering. It wouldn't be the first time a "brilliant" person has gone goofy.... Case histories are many. Then too, there is nothing to suggest that "brilliant" people are the "best" parents - either. -------------------------- Pop Anti-Intellectual Wish-Fulfillment Nonsense. There are many issues in our society to which there are no quick or easy answers. ---------------------- Global warming, nuclear proliferation, terrorism, etc. This man - claiming to be professional - ----------------------- Professional means what, that I'm PAID for something? So ****ing what? speaking out in his own - so called beliefs and experiences ------------ Gee, what else SHOULD I call them, dip****!? - sure is not presenting any "realistic" answers to the problems. --------------- You mean the brand from Radio Shack? Of course they'r realistic, it's simply YOU who are not, which is WHY these problems exist! He instead casts blame to anyone he sees fit - even those he knows absolutely nothing about - accusing them of a serious crime which "he" can't prove has happened. ---------------------------- You're blathering wildly again. Then, condoning the use of drugs, ------------------- Some drugs, sometime. bombs, -------------- The right bombs in the right place, at the right time. teen sex - all the things which are a large part of the problem of our society. ---------------------- Sex isn't a problem, you **** are. Signs of a truly confused person. ---------------------- You mean you. Yessiree, he has been deleted...... Not only in my computer but it would appear in his own moral values as well. DM ---------------------- Liar. Steve |
Dan Lanciani wrote:
In article . com, (Curtis CCR) writes: | Dan Lanciani wrote: | In article .com, | (Curtis CCR) writes: | [...] | | In California, any phone call going over the public network | | cannot be monitored or recorded without consent of BOTH parties. | | [...] | | The restrictions extend to the call center operations here too. | | Customers hear "your call may be monitored or recorded..." The | | montoring system records all calls on the customer service reps | phone, | | as well as what they are doing on their computer during the call. | In | | addition to the line for call queues, there is also a line for the | CSR | | to use for direct incoming calls or to make outgoing calls. The | | monitoring system records all calls on the CSR's phone regardless | of | | what line is used. | | | | When recordings are reviewed by management, they are always | reviewed by | | two people. The privacy policy requires that as soon as they | identify | | anything they hear as personal or otherwise not related to customer | | service, they stop listening and move on. The direct line on the | CSR | | phone does not have a monitoring notice so the privacy has to be | | extended to third party. | | Are you saying that they do record the direct line even though there | is | no notice to the person on the other end? If that is the case, | hasn't the | law already been violated even if the people reviewing the tapes try | to | avoid listening to "personal" content? | | Nope. It works out because of the way the law is written. The | recording connection to the phone is authorized, and they don't listen | to personal communications. I'm still a little confused about this. First, just to clarify, they do record the direct line without notice to or consent of the person on the other end, right? Yes. It's a physical wiretap. Though multiple lines appear on the phone, there is only one pair of wires going to it. The system phyically taps those wires and records everything. The primary purpose of the tap is to record incoming call center calls to the customer service rep. The other calls are recorded are, I guess you could say, a by-product of the legitimate wire tap. No, unless the agent advises whoever he is taking to on the "direct" line that the call may be recorded, the second party does not know. So are you saying that the two-party-consent requirement applies only to personal communications and that it is ok to record everything as long as you don't listen to the personal parts? No, I said no such thing. The calls coming into the the customer service agent on the call center lines have an announcement that the call may be recorded. The elements of the California wiretap law say that it's a crime to make an unauthorized tap, or, in an unauthorized manner and without consent of all parties, attempt to learn the contents of a confidential communication. First, the wiretap is authorized and the employees knows his phone is tapped. Second, no attempt is made to learn the contents of any confidential (personal) calls. If they come up during a review, as soon as it is known they are no-notice calls, the playback is stopped and the review moves to the next call. Who exactly is authorized to make the personal/non-personal distinction? The persons that are authorized to review calls. They don't work for me, nor do I operate the call monitoring system. I cannot say what position these people hold. In California, am I as an individual allowed to record all of my phone conversations without notice to the other party as long as I review only the non-personal parts? If you want to record your phone calls without giving notice, you should consult an attorney about the legalities of it. As non-attorney I would say no. I suppose you could record all of your calls without notice, but then you couldn't allow anyone else to listen to those recordings. Go back to what I originally described. The only recordings here that are reviewed are those that come in on the CSR's call center line. Those calls have notice to all parties that they may be recorded. ddl@danlan.*com |
In article .com, (Curtis CCR) writes:
| Dan Lanciani wrote: | | | In article . com, | (Curtis CCR) writes: | | | Dan Lanciani wrote: | | In article | .com, | | (Curtis CCR) writes: | | [...] | | | In California, any phone call going over the public network | | | cannot be monitored or recorded without consent of BOTH | parties. | | | | [...] | | | The restrictions extend to the call center operations here too. | | | Customers hear "your call may be monitored or recorded..." The | | | montoring system records all calls on the customer service reps | | phone, | | | as well as what they are doing on their computer during the | call. | | In | | | addition to the line for call queues, there is also a line for | the | | CSR | | | to use for direct incoming calls or to make outgoing calls. | The | | | monitoring system records all calls on the CSR's phone | regardless | | of | | | what line is used. | | | | | | When recordings are reviewed by management, they are always | | reviewed by | | | two people. The privacy policy requires that as soon as they | | identify | | | anything they hear as personal or otherwise not related to | customer | | | service, they stop listening and move on. The direct line on | the | | CSR | | | phone does not have a monitoring notice so the privacy has to | be | | | extended to third party. | | | | Are you saying that they do record the direct line even though | there | | is | | no notice to the person on the other end? If that is the case, | | hasn't the | | law already been violated even if the people reviewing the tapes | try | | to | | avoid listening to "personal" content? | | | | Nope. It works out because of the way the law is written. The | | recording connection to the phone is authorized, and they don't | listen | | to personal communications. | | I'm still a little confused about this. First, just to clarify, they | do | record the direct line without notice to or consent of the person on | the | other end, right? | | Yes. It's a physical wiretap. Though multiple lines appear on the | phone, there is only one pair of wires going to it. The system | phyically taps those wires and records everything. | | The primary purpose of the tap is to record incoming call center calls | to the customer service rep. The other calls are recorded are, I guess | you could say, a by-product of the legitimate wire tap. Is the fact that the other recordings are made as a by-product of the legitimate tap dispositive of their legality? That is, if you made the exact same recordings by deliberate choice would the situation change? | No, unless the agent advises whoever he is taking to on the "direct" | line that the call may be recorded, the second party does not know. If this is acceptable, it appears to contradict your prior statement that: ``In California, any phone call going over the public network cannot be monitored or recorded without consent of BOTH parties.'' since there is an ''or'' between ''monitored'' and ''recorded''. (assuming the calls are going out over the public network) At least I think that was your statement if I'm not confusing the attributions. | So are you saying that the two-party-consent requirement | applies only to personal communications and that it is ok to record | everything | as long as you don't listen to the personal parts? | | No, I said no such thing. I didn't mean to imply that you said it; I was merely proposing the only possible way I could see reconcile your seemingly contradictory statements. I apologize for using the ``So are you saying'' structure. | The calls coming into the the customer | service agent on the call center lines have an announcement that the | call may be recorded. Yes, I understand. I am not talking about those calls. I am talking about the calls on the direct line that have no announcement and are recorded without the consent of the party on the other end. | The elements of the California wiretap law say that it's a crime to | make an unauthorized tap, or, in an unauthorized manner and without | consent of all parties, attempt to learn the contents of a confidential | communication. First, the wiretap is authorized and the employees | knows his phone is tapped. Does the fact that one party knows his phone is tapped have any bearing on the requirement that the other party consent? | Second, no attempt is made to learn the | contents of any confidential (personal) calls. I don't believe that it is plausible to equate personal and confidential in this way. Clearly it is possible to have confidential business calls. Of course, without the definition of ``confidential'' it is impossible to know what the law as you state it means. On the other hand, any definition of ``confidential'' that allows one party to the call (or even a third party) to make the determination that something is not ``confidential'' would pretty much defeat the all-party requirement. | If they come up during | a review, as soon as it is known they are no-notice calls, the playback | is stopped and the review moves to the next call. This seems a bit different from what you said before, but I'm still not completely clear on the procedure. Do they stop playing *all* calls that were made on the no-notice line or only no-notice calls where something personal/confidential came up? | Who exactly is authorized | to make the personal/non-personal distinction? | | The persons that are authorized to review calls. They don't work for | me, nor do I operate the call monitoring system. I cannot say what | position these people hold. I didn't mean the specific people at your company. I meant who in general is authorized by the law to make such determinations? | In California, am I as an | individual allowed to record all of my phone conversations without | notice to | the other party as long as I review only the non-personal parts? | | If you want to record your phone calls without giving notice, you | should consult an attorney about the legalities of it. I don't want to record my calls and I don't live in California. It was a hypothetical question intended to explore any possible distinction in the law that might give more latitude to businesses than to individuals. | As non-attorney | I would say no. I suppose you could record all of your calls without | notice, but then you couldn't allow anyone else to listen to those | recordings. Interesting. I don't think this is the case in some other all-party-consent states. | Go back to what I originally described. I have, several times. But I'm still unable to reconcile all of your statements. | The only recordings here that | are reviewed are those that come in on the CSR's call center line. | Those calls have notice to all parties that they may be recorded. Ok, I think that answers the question I raised above about whether they stop listening to all no-notice calls or only to no-notice calls where something personal/confidential comes up. However, I still believe that making the recording of the no-notice call in the first place is inconsistent with the statement: ``In California, any phone call going over the public network cannot be monitored or recorded without consent of BOTH parties.'' Dan Lanciani ddl@danlan.*com |
``In California, any phone call going over the public network cannot be monitored or recorded without consent of BOTH parties.'' That law is against Federal Wiretapping Laws. Person may be recorded if one party is aware. Federal Laws always override state laws. The California law is invaild. The prosecutor could appeal that decision and claim the Federal law overwrite state law. What about the other law? You are support to report a crime if you overhear it or see it? There is a conflict of laws here Greg R |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:25 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com