I understand the paranoia of parents that their children will go missing and never be found or if there's a body it won't be able to be identified but this is going too far surely! If this was offered to me I would politely (or not so politely!) decline, thank you very much!

I don't consider myself a violent person.
But if I saw any parent dragging their kid into that place I would have to lay the pimp hand.

Hit and Run of course

Originally posted by 11Bravo
My problem is two-fold here.
First off, we are instilling a sense of fear in our kids by telling them that they need to undergo this cataloging process in order to protect them.

You are instilling that fear into your kids if that is the way you present this to them. Personally, I wouldn't tell my kids they "needed to undergo a cataloging process in order to protect them". But that's just me.

Secondly, we are conditioning our kids to be submisive.

Kids are supposed to be submissive to their parents. But this program does nothing to encourage submissiveness.



Look at what the article says:

Best of all, it only takes 10-minutes and supplies parents with a complete child identification package that can be taken home or carried with the family on vacation. The information -- most of which is contained on a CD -- is compact and totally private. The IL CHIP program keeps only the parental permission form!

A charitable organization is providing an ID package, free of charge, to parents.

Not everything is a conspiracy.

No, not everything is a conspiracy, I concur.

Not everything needs cataloged either.

Submission to parents is a totally different animal then submission to the state.
By encouraging kids to undergo the cataloging process it says to the children that 'mommy and daddy cant always protect you, but with the help of the state you will be safe'. It presents the state as the omnipotent savior that does things mommy and daddy cant do.
What do I suggest?
Hmmmm, I dont know, keep an eye on your kids?
Im not slamming parents that want to do this, as I understand that motivation, but I am saying that programs such as this set dangerous precedent.

So tell me JSO, what would you tell your kids when they ask why they are being fingerprinted?
You wouldnt tell them it was for their protection?

i think the more appropriate association being conditioned is

chip= safety insurance

and after this positive association with the word chip is strengthened it will have more leverage to be used in more intrusive ways because the ol' positive association w/ safety and insurance (i.e in case this happens) will make it more acceptable



[edit on 20-3-2007 by cpdaman]

Originally posted by cpdaman
i think the more appropriate association being conditioned is

chip= safety insurance

Nice observation.
No actual 'chip' involved, but the relationship is established.

My wife was just telling me about a letter she got from the insurance company advocating a "Child I.D." program they offer for free.
Im not sure if it was affiliated with the IL-CHIP program, but the point she brought up was that the insurance company wants you to reply with a YES or NO if you will be attending.
Why would they want you to reply if you werent attending?
So they know who is a potential free thinker, thats why, and as a mark for people who 'arent concerned for the safety of their kids'.
Dont be surprised when before long you see discounts on your insurance if you submit to the 'family catalogue' and even steeper discounts if you have 'guide-star' tracking your vehicle and 'Acme Alarms' watching your household.

Originally posted by 11Bravo
No, not everything is a conspiracy, I concur.

Not everything needs cataloged either.

Submission to parents is a totally different animal then submission to the state.

Huh? How does the state enter into this?

By encouraging kids to undergo the cataloging process it says to the children that 'mommy and daddy cant always protect you, but with the help of the state you will be safe'. It presents the state as the omnipotent savior that does things mommy and daddy cant do.

See, I have a problem with the tone of your discourse with children.

Kids look at things the way we present it to them.

They have no concept of "state", except for which one they live in.

And they certainly don't envision the state as an "omnipotent savior". They don't even know what that means.

What do I suggest?
Hmmmm, I dont know, keep an eye on your kids?
Im not slamming parents that want to do this, as I understand that motivation, but I am saying that programs such as this set dangerous precedent.

So tell me JSO, what would you tell your kids when they ask why they are being fingerprinted?
You wouldnt tell them it was for their protection?

My kids are now in their twenties. When they were young, the local PD set up a similar Kid ID program, where they were fingerprinted.

Most parents just said, "We're making a scrapbook of Jason", or something similar. The kids loved it, and played with their inkstained fingers.

You don't overburden children with adult facts. If you do, you raise a generation of neurotic paranoids.

If all the information gathered is given to the parents only for safekeeping until such time as the data is needed, then I don't see a problem with it.

Parents who have the resources could do this on their own, however, not all parents do.

Therefore, the Masons are to be commended for providing this service free of charge to parents who choose to take advantage of it.

[edit on 2007/3/20 by GradyPhilpott]

Your exactly right gradyphilpot and when our children grow up resenting the fact their parents actually had them electronicaly tagd like an animal we can have them shot for not coming home before curfew. I envision a bright future with this system, i personaly cant wait to destroy my childrens free will.

Originally posted by jsobecky
Huh? How does the state enter into this?

Well, you dont think the Masons are going to be using the fingerprints do you?

See, I have a problem with the tone of your discourse with children.

What you would call the "tone of your discourse" I would call honesty.
Some parents prefer not to lie to their kids, it kinda sets a bad example if you know what I mean.

Kids look at things the way we present it to them.

I concur again. Look at all the things we agree on!
You are absolutly right that kids look at things the way we present it to them. That is why I try to present 'it' to them as honestly and in depth as I can, whatever 'it' happens to be at the time.

They have no concept of "state", except for which one they live in.

Well I can only speak for myself and what I remember as a child.
I understood by six or seven years old that I lived in a great nation(state). You only have to witness a few 4th of July celebrations before you identify with the state. And to be honest I use the term 'state' as a vague reference to anyone that claims authority or dominion over a person or people.
I probably just opened a can of worms with that statement, but oh well.

And they certainly don't envision the state as an "omnipotent savior". They don't even know what that means.

I beg to differ, but its semantic anyway.
I think kids are alot smarter then you give them credit for.
Maybe I have just been around some really smart kids, I dont know.

My kids are now in their twenties. When they were young, the local PD set up a similar Kid ID program, where they were fingerprinted.

Congratulations. I hope it kept them safe and kept you worry free.
How did you broach the subject with your kids, and how old were they?

Most parents just said, "We're making a scrapbook of Jason", or something similar. The kids loved it, and played with their inkstained fingers.

Oh....you...you....you lied to the little children?
Why? You didnt want to 'scare' them?
You would rather lie to them then warn them of a danger that exists in the world?
You are joking right?

You don't overburden children with adult facts. If you do, you raise a generation of neurotic paranoids.

So let me get this straight.
You would lie to you children while taking steps to protect them because you dont want to raise a "generation of neurotic paranoids"?
Like I said earlier, I dont believe in lieing to children at all, its a matter of 'do as I do', but beyond that, by denying facts and information to your children simply because you are afraid of how it might scar them, you raise a generation of pathological liars who are ignorant of the ways of the world.
Your kids wont care about the truth because they have been fed lies from childhood.
My kids will understand that most of the world lies about their true intentions, kinda like you lied to your kids about your true intentions.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
I see nothing here that says any child will be tagged.

Not this year Grady, you are right. But eventually.
Its the conditioning that I am against.
Conditioning kids on a number of levels until eventually it will be a chip.
I mean, we have all seen the clip of Andy Rooney pushing the chip, and the family in Fla, and half a dozen others.

If the Masons were stockpiling a huge database of information, I would be worried.

I really don't see this as conditioning, as kids get plenty of poking and prodding in the course of childhood to keep them healthy and safe.

Is this much different than the photographer who shows up at the school to take those wretched school photos each year?

You want conditioning? When they had kids in New York lining up to turn in their toy guns a couple of decades ago, that was conditioning.

This is just another way for parents to keep their kids safe and I think it's a good idea.

If the Masons make people queasy, they can just save the Masons the money and pay for the same kind of kit out of their own pockets...or not.

It's their kid.

[edit on 2007/3/20 by GradyPhilpott]

GradyPhilpott can you think of any logical explination for having the word CHIP in this paticular scheme?

CHIP
CHild
Identification
Program

No, this one is no conspiracy...
rather, it looks to me to be one hell of a way to assist in locating missing children should an amber alert be issued.

Plus, if the kid ever attempts to go into a life of crime, they know who the kid is by the fingerprints etc.

I can't see any problems with this.

Originally posted by 11Bravo

Originally posted by jsobecky
Huh? How does the state enter into this?

Well, you dont think the Masons are going to be using the fingerprints do you?

What do the Masons have to do with the state? Did you read the article? They keep none of the data.

See, I have a problem with the tone of your discourse with children.

What you would call the "tone of your discourse" I would call honesty.
Some parents prefer not to lie to their kids, it kinda sets a bad example if you know what I mean.

It's not lying. It's protecting them from some cruel facts of the world, and allowing them to remain innocent and remain children during their childhood.

I could, for example, choose to explain the case of Adam Walsh to a 6 year old. Remember him? They found his head, but never found his torso.

Or I could tell him about what happened to Jessica Lunsford.

Now what would that do to a 6 year old's mind?

You, on the other hand, would probably describe the gruesome details to your 6 year old.

And I'd hate to know your 6 year old 15 years from now. I know that I wouldn't let your kid play with mine, given your ideas as a parent.

I understood by six or seven years old that I lived in a great nation(state). You only have to witness a few 4th of July celebrations before you identify with the state.

Well, all kids like parades. That doesn't make them priescent little political scientists. It just gives them a "happy" feeling.

And they certainly don't envision the state as an "omnipotent savior". They don't even know what that means.

I beg to differ, but its semantic anyway.
I think kids are alot smarter then you give them credit for.

I doubt it. I raised two TAG kids. There is intellectual development, and there is emotional development. Your methods threaten kid's emotional well-being, imo.

Most parents just said, "We're making a scrapbook of Jason", or something similar. The kids loved it, and played with their inkstained fingers.

Oh....you...you....you lied to the little children?
Why? You didnt want to 'scare' them?
You would rather lie to them then warn them of a danger that exists in the world?
You are joking right?

Refer to the Adam Walsh paragraph above.

You don't overburden children with adult facts. If you do, you raise a generation of neurotic paranoids.

So let me get this straight.
You would lie to you children while taking steps to protect them because you dont want to raise a "generation of neurotic paranoids"?
Like I said earlier, I dont believe in lieing to children at all, its a matter of 'do as I do', but beyond that, by denying facts and information to your children simply because you are afraid of how it might scar them, you raise a generation of pathological liars who are ignorant of the ways of the world.
Your kids wont care about the truth because they have been fed lies from childhood.
My kids will understand that most of the world lies about their true intentions, kinda like you lied to your kids about your true intentions.

I didn't "lie" to my kids. I talked to them in age-appropriate language. They don't need to know all the dirty secrets of the world when they are children.

And as I said, from what I hear you saying, your children are probably afraid of their own shadows. Or worse, you may have warped their little psyches because of what you've told them. Kids should be playing with soccer balls and Barbies, not listening to sicko details of the world.

Originally posted by Long Lance
terrorize people into submission... the cure is worse than the disease.

it's true, you might actually identify the corpse faster than usual, the rest is a bunch of empty promises and a slew of intrusive or deadly programs utilizing all the biometric and genetic data, which follows inevitably.

It's a CD with the child's information on it. The parent's have the only copy.

They can loan it to law enforcement if their child goes missing. Or, they can use it as a frisbee.

It's all voluntary.

you don't think you could catalogue people for a) hereditary 'issues' (...did you know they found genetic clues for lifetime income... ) b) psychological issues like AD/HD, sociopathic tendencies from your speech pattern (new scientifcally validated method with 99+% guarantee to identify future terrorists, powered by DARPA® ) and c) might just use it to track you or worse, simply look up a compatible organ donor on their databse established to protect the poor kids.

I'm sure that a paranoiac could talk himself into any number of nefarious scenarios.

i have a question for you: is the staggering amount of missing people not proof or organized forces commiting these crimes? in this case, centralized databases are probably the worst single option there is.

Not in and of itself. Many people voluntarily go missing every day.