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.
So..., what's next, dropping of grandma and grandpa; unwanted in-laws; overstayed visitors; the dead dog...! Just when I thought that our Marxist society couldn't sink any lower...!
Nebraska may be called a lot of things, but Marxist is not one of them, lol.
I am all for the safe haven laws that are put out throughout the states. They do what they are meant to...which is protect innocent children from possible harm. If a child is unwanted the likley hood that they will be abused raises dramatically. It is much better for a child to have to face the fact that their parents didn't want them (same as adoption by the way) then to have them possibly physically, verbally,mentally, and/or sexually abused. I applaud Nebraska for going out and expanding the law...too bad they made a fool of themselves by taking it back but I hope other states will soon follow.But I am really sick of the media saying that these cause too much stress on the child and that it is not fair for them but what about the kids who would have had a chance to live a better life if these laws were in place but instead were beaten and abused day after day which could turn to murder of the child or even worse the suicide of the child. Just a little while ago there was a story of a 10 year old boy who tried to kill himself because his mother verberally abused him by telling him that she didn't love him. She told him that everyday of his life so he tried to shoot himself with his father's gun...does that sound better then having a chance to live in a home with a LOVING family, even knowing that your parents gave you up.
Few would adopt teens and Nebraska cannot afford to house all of them.
If we had to take qualification tests before having children fewer would be abandoned. Like kittens, some dumb girls have them because they want love in their lives, not knowing the headaches that kids can cause, especially later on. If a person does not have their own life together, what nerve to bring another life into the world that will use your screwed up life as a role model?
I am thinking that before the stuff builds and builds and hits the fan there should be commonly used resource availability for family and couple counselling. Maybe group therapy after hours at the local school. Fun things so the community does not attach a stigma to them, where neighbors can help each other.
Your post describes a socialized country, particularly, any of the Scandinavian countries. This is known as "cradle to grave" government care. This may work well in a socialized country because of it's size and homogeneous population, but socialism will not work in a capitalistic society such as the US. Should Nobama-Biden be elected to the White House, Americans will get a bitter taste of just how socialism is dysfunctional in a capitalistic country.
Nebraska that well documented center of neo-Marxism...
So, Steveo,
I'm really confused as to how one makes the mental leap that providing a safe haven for children, regardless of age, is tantamount to socialism? Now I know that the S word is the last refuge of those with limited debating skills but I would rather have kids, especially teenagers who instead of living on the streets, earning money as prostitutes, thieves, and falling into drug abuse as a result would have someplace to go. You see Steve, child abuse and abandonment didn't begin with Hollywood stars becoming single parents.
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.