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.
The children weren't alone, else the parents wouldn't have witnessed it and reported it to the authorities.
I couldn't care less if this guy hands out tracts, pamphlets or papers. He can hand out anything he wants. He can decorate his car to look like Jesus, he can shout his faith through a megaphone. I couldn't care less.
I just don't want strangers approaching my children to discuss personal matters (and I do consider religion to be a very personal matter) without my permission. I think most parents share my perspective, as it's a reasonable position to take.
As a general statement that is fine but it has nothing to do with what went on here.
Parents complained about a man approaching their children, giving them religious tracts, and talking to them about his faith.
If a stranger approached your child, gave them religious tracts, and started telling them about his faith, without your permission, how would you react?
Then over protect your child and remove them from what you don't want them to see or hear.
Don't infringe on his right to be there. Because you feel uncomfortable, does not mean the man has to leave or be thrown in jail. The world does not revolve around you and your fears.
Then over protect your child and remove them from what you don't want them to see or hear.
Don't infringe on his right to be there. Because you feel uncomfortable, does not mean the man has to leave or be thrown in jail. The world does not revolve around you and your fears.
I have no problem with his right to be there. I have a problem with his approaching children to discuss religion without the children's permission. It doesn't make me uncomfortable in the least for him to publicly proclaim his beliefs. I don't expect the world to revolve around me. I do expect strangers to understand that if they want to have a personal conversation with my children, and as I said before, religion is a personal subject, then strangers need to go through me. If he wasn't approaching children, then no one would have complained that he was doing so, and he wouldn't have been asked to stop doing so.
I have no problem with his right to be there. I have a problem with his approaching children to discuss religion without the children's permission.
Nowhere does it state that he was discussing anything with them. Why does this need pointed out over and over?
You already noted to me that the kids were not alone that the parents were with them but yet despite acknowledging that you can't simply state that what he was doing as presented is something he is constitutionally allowed to do.
Quote:
It doesn't make me uncomfortable in the least for him to publicly proclaim his beliefs. I don't expect the world to revolve around me. I do expect strangers to understand that if they want to have a personal conversation with my children, and as I said before, religion is a personal subject, then strangers need to go through me. If he wasn't approaching children, then no one would have complained that he was doing so, and he wouldn't have been asked to stop doing so.
As you note, approaching children with their parents present.
Quote:
The children weren't alone, else the parents wouldn't have witnessed it and reported it to the authorities.
Who is the adult here?
The mom that called the cops or the guy that, instructed the guy not to approach his kids as he saw him coming.
One ran to mommy and the other handled it on the spot.
Who taught you how to handle a bully? Your parents that raised a victim?
You do realize that rather than attacking my argument, you are attacking me.
Calling the authorities to complain is not "being a victim". It's a rational choice when a person doesn't have a lot of information about the other person's actions, but thinks there is something wrong. Confrontations don't always end well.
Nowhere does it state that he was discussing anything with them. Why does this need pointed out over and over?
You already noted to me that the kids were not alone that the parents were with them but yet despite acknowledging that you can't simply state that what he was doing as presented is something he is constitutionally allowed to do.
As you note, approaching children with their parents present.
The complaints state that he was discussing religion with them. Why do you completely discount the parents and their perspective in this matter, in order to argue that this guy did nothing wrong? The parents complained because he was approaching children. And this man doesn't deny approaching children, he simply characterizes his actions as an exercise of free speech.
You do realize that rather than attacking my argument, you are attacking me.
Calling the authorities to complain is not "being a victim". It's a rational choice when a person doesn't have a lot of information about the other person's actions, but thinks there is something wrong. Confrontations don't always end well.
As you acknowledged, the parents were right there with the kids.
I'm with you all the way, if it were a guy on the playground approaching kids.
You are blowing it way out of proportion to try and make a point.
You have been taught to be "the victim"
As you acknowledged, the parents were right there with the kids.
I'm with you all the way, if it were a guy on the playground approaching kids.
You are blowing it way out of proportion to try and make a point.
You have been taught to be "the victim"
How is a guy in a parking lot approaching kids all that different from a guy on a playground approaching kids?
It's still a stranger approaching children to discuss personal matters with those children.
I haven't been taught to be "the victim". I've been taught to rationally assess a situation and to respond reasonably to that assessment. Personally, I tend to be more confrontational (as if you couldn't tell from our debates), but I certainly don't judge people who aren't comfortable confronting others and who let the police or other authorities handle questionable situations.
The complaints state that he was discussing religion with them. Why do you completely discount the parents and their perspective in this matter, in order to argue that this guy did nothing wrong? The parents complained because he was approaching children. And this man doesn't deny approaching children, he simply characterizes his actions as an exercise of free speech.
I never claimed that he wasn't approaching children but we both agree that the parents were likely there at least in most cases.
The article notes that he was handing out papers. That is in a way telling people about his beliefs but it's not a discussion. Did he try and discuss it with people? Perhaps, but that is not what is being presented.
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.
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.
