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.
If they can refuse it it is not force feeding now is it. be sensible . do they do forced drinking to them ?
1 in 3 people dies of heart disease , the most likely outcome of eating rubbish instead of a *natural* diet.
something we all guilty of > buying food at supermarkets. my mate had neglected his strawberry patch> i rammed the lot there and then and didnt need sugar or a bowl or washing them. not selling or packing or bleeping over a till or a speedhump or on an airoplaneo from japan . it felt absolutely great, true fulfillment
judges make up their own minds.
Originally posted by Griffo
reply to post by ZIPMATT
If they can refuse it it is not force feeding now is it. be sensible . do they do forced drinking to them ?
If they refuse to eat, they would starve (which would also call them into question by social services)
it still doesnt make it force feeding , and if they were starving you would still call it neglect, not abuse per se.
think about it : how nasty would it be to force a child to eat as it literally shove it in and make the child swallow ?
now that would be abuse under welsh women's aid psychological abuse definition *controlling what a person eats* as well being physical abuse, putting the child in danger
i wouldnt have a problem with the ss saying to someone found to do that , we are going to see a judge about it , straight away .
if you cant see how presuming/pretending you can predict future eating habits and hence future heart disease , is rather assuming a dangerously negative attitude unlikely to be agreed with , it is probably best to stop discussing it