It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Jeb Bush In 1995: Unwed Mothers Should Be Publicly Shamed

page: 8
20
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 10:08 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

You can complain about shaming a certain segment of any population.

But everyone shames.

Kinda like, "Everyone Poops".




posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 10:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: beezzer


Basic training didn't scar me.

Not even close.

Then you must have been insensitive to begin with. Or raised in an authoritarian household where you were shamed and ridiculed and became inured to it.

That makes sense.
Carry on, then......


Assumption much?



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 10:11 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer


Assumption much?

Nope.
Inference.

a conclusion reached on the basis of evidence and reasoning.

edit on 6/10/2015 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 10:12 PM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

You shamed me.




posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 10:16 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer


You shamed me.

Good. Now, shape up and get with the program.




posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 10:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: beezzer


You shamed me.

Good. Now, shape up and get with the program.



I can't. I'm a programmed kill-bot.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 10:18 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer
that might be true but I believe everything should be in balance.
if the poor should be shamed for being poor then the business sector and gov't should also be shamed for coming up with insane policies that seem to propagate the poor.
in other words, for every person working a 40 hour job who has to depend on the gov't for assistance there's a business out there that isn't fullfilling their responsibility. if one deserves to be shamed so doesn't the other.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 10:21 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer


I can't. I'm a programmed kill-bot.


sigh.

I know.
And taken so young, too. Such a travesty - such a waste of a talented, promising, vibrant human being's youth.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 10:26 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

To shame Bush or anyone else for shaming is confusing, to be honest.

No-one is ever excluded from shaming. It just doesn't work like that. People aren't nice. The world isn't nice.

Shaming is done every day, practically on every thread on ATS.

It's part of human nature. You can't exclude it, you can't "shame" people into not shaming people by saying shaming is bad by shaming.

(great, now I have a nosebleed from that!)



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 10:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: beezzer


I can't. I'm a programmed kill-bot.


sigh.

I know.
And taken so young, too. Such a travesty - such a waste of a talented, promising, vibrant human being's youth.


Oh lord, there has to be some rule about making members nauseated.




posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 10:30 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer


Oh lord, there has to be some rule about making members nauseated.

ermmmmm......
nope!
No, there's not!!!

Fancy that!!!


People aren't nice. The world isn't nice.

But, it could be!! And ..... I'm nice.
edit on 6/10/2015 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 10:38 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer
really, you got a nosebleed?? Gee I've got a headache from reading all this stuff by page 5!
it's one thing for a bunch of people on an internet forum to go wild with words, it's quite another when the gov't either federal or state or local makes it official policy!
I don't really care much what "shaming" means, or who is doing to to whom, or if you think we all do it or not!
not when the justifications for it are, in my opinion off the wall, and well it seems to be for the purpose of pointing out one groups to blame all the problems on.
ya know, I think I've made some good points in this discussion but well you seem to avoid them when you do run across them and come back with some off the wall comment like the one I am responding to.
the best way to get rid of the welfare state is to enable the citizens to earn a decent living! put the danged responsibility of keeping the employees alive back in the laps of the companies that are enjoying their labor and out of the laps of the taxpayers! don't want to do that, or think that is so unfair to the business sector, well, okay, then enjoy your welfare state. because you can't complain about the lazy, single moms and uneducated fools and use them as a justification to get rid of or reduce the system while there's so many hard working people tapping into it because of necessity.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 10:40 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar


ya know, I think I've made some good points in this discussion

You certainly have.

Thanks for being here.

put the danged responsibility of keeping the employees alive back in the laps of the companies that are enjoying their labor and out of the laps of the taxpayers!

EGGS-ACT-LEE.

Exactly.
Thanks again for being here.

edit on 6/10/2015 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2015 @ 12:59 AM
link   
changed my mind.I do know what it is like to be pregnant and not
married and having to marry someone I didn't want to.
edit on 11-6-2015 by mamabeth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2015 @ 06:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: dawnstar
it's also laughable to assume that you will continue to enjoy your freedom in a country where the population is increasingly becoming more and more dependent on gov't benefits or charity instead of the earnings from their labor!


That is strikingly true.

The Bill of Rights, Constitution will become meaningless with a tidal wave of entitlement-thought.


This is true.

"The beginning of the end of the democracy is when the people discover themselves funds from the public pot."
edit on 11-6-2015 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2015 @ 07:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
Think he's fundamentally changed these opinions in 20 years? If not, maybe he needs to start the trend a little closer to home. Like with his dopey brother.


As governor of Florida in 2001, Bush had the opportunity to test his theory on public shaming. He declined to veto a very controversial bill that required single mothers who did not know the identity of the father to publish their sexual histories in a newspaper before they could legally put their babies up for adoption. He later signed a repeal of the so-called "Scarlet Letter" law in 2003 after it was successfully challenged in court.


Seriously? Tell me this didn't happen, please.


But that was only 6 years after he made that statement, not 20...



posted on Jun, 11 2015 @ 07:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: NavyDoc


in our current warfare state,

Dear Doc,
hey -- did you mean to type 'welfare'?

Because if not.... well, yeah - I don't want our 'current warfare state'. Not the aggression, or the shaming, or the violence, or any of it. Please take your 'curent warfare state' and tuck it away somewhere out of sight in the archives room where it can gather dust and mold.


Thanks.
Love, Buzzy


I don't want the current warerfare state either. We should not be the world's policeman either.

But I disagree, negative societal pressure is negative reinforcement and is effective. Kids, for example, are restricted more by embarrassment in front of their peers than negative repercussions from authority figures. That's a simple fact.

What we see here is more an ideological and emotional rejection of perceived "meaness" for a protected class than any logical thought.

There are lots of problems, people who rely on the system and don't care about self responsibility and accountability are only part of the problems we face. Pointing out this very real and salient fact does not suggest that one ignores all of the other problems. This is a logical fallacy.



posted on Jun, 11 2015 @ 07:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: ~Lucidity

There is public shaming now.

If you disagree with gay marriage, you are publically shamed.




If you disagree with EQUALITY, you are publically shamed.

There, fixed that for you. And you bet your ass you should be shamed.



posted on Jun, 11 2015 @ 07:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: 3danimator2014

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: ~Lucidity

There is public shaming now.

If you disagree with gay marriage, you are publically shamed.




If you disagree with EQUALITY, you are publically shamed.

There, fixed that for you. And you bet your ass you should be shamed.


Thank you for validating my point.



posted on Jun, 11 2015 @ 08:09 AM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

No worries.

I have NO problem with shaming racists/xenophobes/homophobes etc... none whatsoever. Its 2015, 1950s mentality has no place in our society anymore.



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join