It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Believer101
Mother or not, it is against the law to let ANYONE under the age of 18 get a tattoo, whether or not they have parental consent.
She broke the law, she got arrested.
Following that logic... it would be ok to beat your children, sexually abuse your children, starve your children....etc. I think you see where i'm going with this! The government and the laws in place are there to protect people, including inocent children who definitely didn't choose their parents. complete freedom would be anarchy!
Originally posted by greeneyedleo
Originally posted by Submarines
Not only was I shocked, but I was speechless!
What shocked me even more was your post! I can't believe that you have a problem with the arrest of a mother who allowed a TEN YEAR OLD CHILD to be permanently tattooed.
Please tell me, someone, that I'm not the only one here that has a problem with this!
I have no problem with it. It is for a very good purpose. His brother DIED. That is not something he will ever regret.
While im inked up and my 7yr old cant waits until she is old enough for tattoos and I would not let her get one so young....we need LESS government in our lives. LESS. not more!!
every situation is different and I do not see this situation as one that deserves legal action. now if a mother was taking her kid to get ink all over his body for the fun of it....with stupid crap....then I would judge her negatively.
but this was a memorial of a dead sibling!!edit on January 20th 2012 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by AK907ICECOLD
reply to post by relocator
All the tribes in villages in small countries should be invaded by the US, take their resources, and protect their children from 100's to 1,000's years of traditions of painting and tattooing their bodies and faces, so inhumane, such destruction to one's body, I can't beleive this happens, We as a SUPERPOWER need to save them now!
That's to nay sayers in the up most respect of having a open mind to this issue, How the hell you know the decent of the heritage??? Hurry, hurry, the minds are closing, get it in quick, LOL.
Just a thought, have a nice day!
Originally posted by AK907ICECOLD
reply to post by Char-Lee
You say that like it's a bad thing, their family values and morals ARE stronger as a whole then 95% of america's.
to say otherwise is ingorance is it not??
Please indulge me.............ohh wait, I'm sorry and sarcastic when I say you are too dependant on tech and not on nature, could you survive in a loving family in a small village with nothing but dependance on a person and nothing else, I could, what say you.
Still I love and pray for your short sightedness.edit on 20-1-2012 by AK907ICECOLD because: Added a lil love
Originally posted by AwakeinNM
This is ridiculous. I'm not saying this stupid mom did the right thing - she did not. But if the government is going to go after her, they need to go after all of those fat cows who live vicariously through their three-year-olds by putting makeup on them and forcing them to perform in beauty pageants - AND the sick bastards who organize those pageants.
Which do you think is doing more damage to the kid? A tattoo, or being objectified before the age of reason? Seriously.
Originally posted by LadySkadi
I wonder if Mom had allowed the son to brand or scar himself rather than get the ink would the law have come for her? WA set precedence by acquitting the Dad who branded his underage kids, but of course state to state laws would differ... Just musing, really a bit off topic, I guess.
edit on 20-1-2012 by LadySkadi because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by hellzdoms
First of all when I read the title,I thought it was a rant about getting a child a tattoo..
Now reading it,I understand why she allowed him to. Because a brother has great love to his relative does not mean that he cant express it.
I heard worse things than that like tanning in those booths or whatever they are..I mean thats not right but a tattoo for that reason.I think there should be exceptions.