Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-15-2012, 10:36 AM
 
47,525 posts, read 69,536,408 times
Reputation: 22473

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by claudhopper View Post
True, but if the brats are locked out all night, we can call and have them taken away. Doesn't work that way with dogs, unfortunately.
Good one -- and yes that's true.

But undisciplined kids will become a much bigger problem than dogs ever can be. They'll spray paint your walls, rob convenience stores, become public burdens for their entire lives.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-15-2012, 11:05 AM
 
23 posts, read 57,657 times
Reputation: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
He wasn't really leaving her alone with those kids. She pretended at times to love those kids -- she was only supposed to be alone with them for about 30 minutes until his mother would come to take care of them.

She knew she had 30 minutes to kill them all and so she did. There is no way her husband could have seen that coming -- that 30 minutes alone with her own kids would induce her to chase them all down to drown them.

And why isn't the same thing when men kill their kids? Why aren't they given all this sympathy when they murder their children in cold blood?
A child (or person or animal) can be killed in under 30 seconds. 30 minutes qualifies as leaving her alone with kids. He was advised not to do that, so yes, he was pre-warned well before this event ever happened that she was not safe to be around the children alone. He was advised not to have anymore children with her and yet he did, twice. Andrea was mentally ill and it was confirmed well before she had her last few children. He apparently would have rather not been inconvenienced by that fact then to take precautions for his children that he made the choice to continue to have. His choice.

It's a decision process normal parents agonize over everyday with their kids on a number of different topics. 'Should I let them or not?' 'What are the consequences if something goes bad?' Is it worth the risk?' Fill in the blank for 'it' with any number of activities. Parents make decisions based on those factors EVERY DAY.

What's the number one thing that people say to women who stay in abusive relationships? You knew what he was, why did you stay? You have to take blame because you put up with?, etc., etc. It applies here also.

Stating that Andrea Yates was mentally ill is not giving her sympathy. It's stating a fact and pointing out that he wasn't mentally ill so it was his responsibility to keep his kids safe around her. The two things should not be confused. I haven't heard a single person say that Andrea Yates does not deserve to be in jail.

If a man had a history of mental illness, his family was told not to encourage/have more children with him and too not let him be alone with them and they ignored that fact, & he ended up killing the children, my stance would be the same. When an example comes up that you think does not reflect that, by all means point it out, but I don't see that happening here.

What about all the people that demand justice when mothers know about sexual abuse of their children & do nothing to stop it. The mother is publicly vilified and is often thrown in jail, same as the offender, so no, it's not a double standard (thank goodness). Ignoring facts to support a position is called denial and for some reason has happened a lot with the Andrea Yates case.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-15-2012, 11:30 AM
 
12,867 posts, read 14,876,786 times
Reputation: 4459
Quote:
Originally Posted by PearlShark View Post
A child (or person or animal) can be killed in under 30 seconds. 30 minutes qualifies as leaving her alone with kids. He was advised not to do that, so yes, he was pre-warned well before this event ever happened that she was not safe to be around the children alone. He was advised not to have anymore children with her and yet he did, twice. Andrea was mentally ill and it was confirmed well before she had her last few children. He apparently would have rather not been inconvenienced by that fact then to take precautions for his children that he made the choice to continue to have. His choice.

It's a decision process normal parents agonize over everyday with their kids on a number of different topics. 'Should I let them or not?' 'What are the consequences if something goes bad?' Is it worth the risk?' Fill in the blank for 'it' with any number of activities. Parents make decisions based on those factors EVERY DAY.

What's the number one thing that people say to women who stay in abusive relationships? You knew what he was, why did you stay? You have to take blame because you put up with?, etc., etc. It applies here also.

Stating that Andrea Yates was mentally ill is not giving her sympathy. It's stating a fact and pointing out that he wasn't mentally ill so it was his responsibility to keep his kids safe around her. The two things should not be confused. I haven't heard a single person say that Andrea Yates does not deserve to be in jail.

If a man had a history of mental illness, his family was told not to encourage/have more children with him and too not let him be alone with them and they ignored that fact, & he ended up killing the children, my stance would be the same. When an example comes up that you think does not reflect that, by all means point it out, but I don't see that happening here.

What about all the people that demand justice when mothers know about sexual abuse of their children & do nothing to stop it. The mother is publicly vilified and is often thrown in jail, same as the offender, so no, it's not a double standard (thank goodness). Ignoring facts to support a position is called denial and for some reason has happened a lot with the Andrea Yates case.
i agree with your post. the question is really what did HE do to protect his kids, and the answer is nothing. the children only had 2 parents to protect them, and they both failed.

the parents are both still alive and all the children are dead.

she gets deserved punishment, and he gets to go on and have a new family:

Rusty Yates Has a New Child - ABC News

he wanted more children and, by golly, he had them. society better hope that this wife is not deranged like the other one, or we would be seeing another sad ending.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-15-2012, 11:33 AM
 
Location: Ohio
15,701 posts, read 16,989,924 times
Reputation: 22090
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
He wasn't really leaving her alone with those kids. She pretended at times to love those kids -- she was only supposed to be alone with them for about 30 minutes until his mother would come to take care of them.

What do you mean he didn't leave her alone with the kids......he most certainly did. He should have stayed there until his mother showed up. Would you leave children that age alone in a house for an hour? A half hour? Really? Let alone leaving them alone with someone as mentally unstable as she was known to be? So unstable that her doctors told him she was not to be left unsupervised?

Pretended to love her kids? I am quite sure she did love her kids.....when she was in her right mind.....which she wasn't at that time. Do you think the mentally ill can turn their disease on and off at will?

She knew she had 30 minutes to kill them all and so she did. There is no way her husband could have seen that coming -- that 30 minutes alone with her own kids would induce her to chase them all down to drown them.

Again, knowing what he knew....would you leave your kids alone with her? She was known to go into catatonic states for god's sake. She was known to totally ignore the kids when she was psychotic. What if one of the children ran into the street or set a fire in that 30 minutes? Would you depend on her to save them.....knowing full well how unstable and undepedable she was? You would leave your kids alone with someone like that? Really?

And why isn't the same thing when men kill their kids? Why aren't they given all this sympathy when they murder their children in cold blood?
Don't try to pull the man vs women card in this case. Women are also looked down upon in similar circumstances.....like when they stay with abusive men who hurt their children.

If the tables were turned, and a mother left her children alone with a mentally ill father....after doctors told her not to......it would be her fault too.

BTW......mentally ill men are treated just as Andrea has been.....one example: Mark David Chapman.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-15-2012, 11:37 AM
 
Location: The #1 sunshine state, Arizona.
12,169 posts, read 17,610,744 times
Reputation: 64102
WesternPilgram, what about all the IVF children you were dissing in another thread, don't they count?

Gee I guess when people say, "It's gone to the dogs" it's really true.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-15-2012, 11:42 AM
 
1,604 posts, read 1,562,204 times
Reputation: 941
Quote:
Originally Posted by WesternPilgrim View Post
I don't mean to be anti-pet or anti-animal. I've raised cattle, goats, and chickens; have owned several dogs; and have lived with up to 20 cats at a time. Animals are great.

Having said that, there are disturbing trends in America today. A growing segment of the population is vegetarian or vegan, generally because they don't want to participate in what they consider to be animal cruelty. And yet these same people are often militantly pro-"choice" when it comes to choosing to kill an unborn human child. One lady, a supporter of PETA, even told me that she hoped the human race would become extinct.

Pet funerals are a growing industry. There are more than 750 pet funeral homes, crematories, and cemeteries in America today. I kid you not.

While U.S. birthrates are plummeting, for the first time there are now more households with dogs than there are households with children.

What's going on here? It seems that Americans are actively, consciously, deliberately choosing pets over children. Make all the jokes you like, but it's no laughing matter when it comes to culture and demographics. The phenomenon is undoubtedly related to America's war against children - against their lives in the form of abortion; against their families in the form of promiscuity, co-habitation, divorce and homosexuality; and against their innocence in the form of our decadent popular culture. We want the companionship of dependent and sentient beings without the responsibility that comes with their being human.


Are Dogs Replacing Kids - YouTube
I share your concern. Republicans don't believe in providing insurance for children. I also find that outrageous. This war against children must stop.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-15-2012, 12:22 PM
 
Location: Northern CA
12,770 posts, read 11,536,452 times
Reputation: 4262
Quote:
Originally Posted by Who?Me?! View Post
Wrong! He KNEW she was suffering from depression...ALL he cared about was stickin' it in her and leaving her alone with the outcome. A DECENT loving partner couldn't help but see her mental condition AND get her help...he didn't.
Oh for cryin out loud, this whole nation is suffering from depression, it's the number one reason for prescriptions. Yeah, he wanted her to kill the children, so he set her up. Ludicrous
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-15-2012, 12:24 PM
 
Location: Ohio
15,701 posts, read 16,989,924 times
Reputation: 22090
Quote:
Originally Posted by claudhopper View Post
Oh for cryin out loud, this whole nation is suffering from depression, it's the number one reason for prescriptions. Yeah, he wanted her to kill the children, so he set her up. Ludicrous
She was suffering from much worse than run of the mill depression.

And who ever said he set her up?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-15-2012, 12:33 PM
 
Location: Northern CA
12,770 posts, read 11,536,452 times
Reputation: 4262
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annie53 View Post
Don't try to pull the man vs women card in this case. Women are also looked down upon in similar circumstances.....like when they stay with abusive men who hurt their children.

If the tables were turned, and a mother left her children alone with a mentally ill father....after doctors told her not to......it would be her fault too.

BTW......mentally ill men are treated just as Andrea has been.....one example: Mark David Chapman.
You are the one painting a picture that isn't true. Andrea killed his children, he and they are the victims of this story.
Now back to the topic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-15-2012, 12:53 PM
 
Location: Ohio
15,701 posts, read 16,989,924 times
Reputation: 22090
Quote:
Originally Posted by claudhopper View Post
You are the one painting a picture that isn't true. Andrea killed his children, he and they are the victims of this story.
Now back to the topic.
Everything I said was true and factual.

You can't change the facts.....he left his children alone with a severely, mentally ill woman.....after doctors TOLD him not to leave her alone......he was negligent......and if he hadn't been.....she wouldn't have had the opportunity to kill the children.

Andrea is also a victim in this story.....a victim of her husband's negligence.

And I guess you would leave your children alone with a mentally ill woman....no problem.

Now, back to the topic. Not everyone should have children......oh wait.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top