Another couple found guilty of murder for parenting by "To Train Up a Child"

page: 7
46
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 1 2013 @ 10:30 PM
link   
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
 


Of note here is thAt the "post birth Abortion" I wAs referencing is ActuAlly:

www.slate.com...


. . . Giubilini and Minerva push beyond that limit. They note that neural development continues after birth and that the newborn doesn’t yet meet their definition of a “person”—“an individual who is capable of attributing to her own existence some (at least) basic value such that being deprived of this existence represents a loss to her.” Accordingly, they reason, “The moral status of an infant is equivalent to that of a fetus, that is, neither can be considered a ‘person’ in a morally relevant sense.”


They Are AdvocAting "Aborting" children ANY AGE until they Are considered A "Person." It wAs 100% within the reAlm of child Abuse resulting in the deAth of thAt child.



[I]n order for a harm to occur, it is necessary that someone is in the condition of experiencing that harm. If a potential person, like a fetus and a newborn, does not become an actual person, like you and us, then there is neither an actual nor a future person who can be harmed, which means that there is no harm at all. … In these cases, since non-persons have no moral rights to life, there are no reasons for banning after-birth abortions. … Indeed, however weak the interests of actual people can be, they will always trump the alleged interest of potential people to become actual ones, because this latter interest amounts to zero.


-FBB




posted on Dec, 1 2013 @ 10:44 PM
link   

OccamsRazor04

Grimpachi
reply to post by FriedBabelBroccoli
 


Then remain consistent. You remind me of groups that preach one thing then turn around and advocate another not realizing they are the same thing.

Opps..I may have hit a nerve with that but it remains true.


Quite hilarious that you bash him, and you don't say a word to the person who STARTED the off-topic comments. Unless your post is a thinly disguised Christian Bash thread, OrphanApology is the one who should be yelling at. I guess you don't care if someone goes off-topic as long as it supports your views.


You should know by now when I want to call out Christianity for how I see it I do there is no need to disguise it. Abortion shouldn't be an issue in this thread if it becomes one I will not hold back but I hope it can stay on topic.

The motivation for the book is on topic. You disagree that the bibles teachings influenced the authors that's fine it is worth talking about. The abortion issue can be fit in to this but it wouldn't be to the advantage to those of faith which I tried to explain nicely.




Then why can't the Christian haters in this thread point to ANY verses that support this book? They keep going off-topic, and the OP couldn't care less as long as it supports Christian hate it's fine. It's only when you attack the off-topic posts the OP gets mad. Hilarious.


It’s only hilarious because you thing that abortion is on topic. If you really want to go there.
edit on 1-12-2013 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2013 @ 10:47 PM
link   
reply to post by FriedBabelBroccoli
 


Here I thought you were going to talk about this guy.




Candidate Who Advocates Parents Killing Rebellious Kids Was State Child Abuse Lawyer

October 11, 2012 in Religion, Violence, Youth


In the last little while a truly stunning number of Republican officials and candidates have gotten press for making stunningly horrible statements, from the Wisconsin state representative who said “some girls rape easy” to the Georgia congressman who called the big bang a lie “from the pit of hell” to the Arkansas legislator who called slavery “a blessing” to the other Arkansas legislator who pointedly noted that Jesus was okay with slavery before calling President Lincoln a marxist.

It’s been an interesting month. But I think this one takes the cake.

A few days ago it was revealed that Charlie Fuqua, a candidate for the Arkansas state House of Representatives, wrote in a recent e-book that the state should have the legal right to execute “rebellious” children, so long as the kids’ parents agree.
First article I found

Can we return to the topic now?
edit on 1-12-2013 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2013 @ 11:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


I have read the book, If I could remember the link I would post it. I also watched the videos of the family sitting there and looking all wonderful......

The book talks of punishments that are plainly cruel painted in a benign way. A misguided fool could easily take it into extremes saying to themselves "If ONLY THEY WOULD OBEY" , not saying my adoptive mother was ever read this book, but I was abused by a stubborn, power tripping woman who could be this guys doppelganger.......maybe worse This was an ADOPTED child with clearly emotional needs that depended on a sense of security, safety, and love that this ":mule treatment" probably only exceeded in traumatizing this child all over again. These adoptive parents were clearly unfit and uneducated in any sense of the word!!!! And for the abortionist freaks derailing the thread ....think about how truly good abuse targets adoptive children make !!

The book discusses pushing your toddler into a river to "pseudo" experience drowning so they know better not to go in ..but than turn around and show them love .....and do it all in a loving manner. I wish I could find that link because they clearly have not only no knowledge, but a misguided knowledge on the stages of development in children. This is an abuse book bathed in love ...because after all ...you love your mules and such the same way you love your kids......



posted on Dec, 1 2013 @ 11:08 PM
link   
reply to post by paleorchid13
 


Thank you for posting and you bring up a real good question.

How in the hell did those people qualify to adopt? I thought people had to jump through hoops and be squeaky clean to adopt. It is just insane. I though SS visited once a year as well to check up maybe I am wrong about that.



posted on Dec, 1 2013 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Grimpachi
reply to post by paleorchid13
 


Thank you for posting and you bring up a real good question.

How in the hell did those people qualify to adopt? I thought people had to jump through hoops and be squeaky clean to adopt. It is just insane. I though SS visited once a year as well to check up maybe I am wrong about that.


Do you meAn CPS?

It is Also possible they Adopted foreign, there ApArently Are people who Are seeking to get rid of children they hAve Adopted through crAigslist Among other sites.

-FBB



posted on Dec, 1 2013 @ 11:22 PM
link   
reply to post by FriedBabelBroccoli
 


Yeah CPS and she was adopted from Ethiopia according to this.

slate
So CPS doesn't check on kids brought in from other countries? That is so wrong.



posted on Dec, 1 2013 @ 11:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


A good question. They probably are squeaky clean until an adoptive child starts acting differently, or displays behavioral problems...not so sure the adoption agencies talk so much about that to adoptive parents. I do know that I read a book called "Damaged Angels". It was about many kids adopted overseas and here at home that had fetal alcohol syndrome but didn't show the physical features . The adopted parents didn't know what the heck was going on.

Many well suited parents who adopt a child have the expectations that a child is just going to mold with the family. When they adopt an older child, their expectations may be unrealistic. These parents just turned to their religion and found a stupid, misguided book that blinded their sense of reason.



posted on Dec, 1 2013 @ 11:43 PM
link   

OccamsRazor04
reply to post by amazing
 


Then why can't the Christian haters in this thread point to ANY verses that support this book? They keep going off-topic, and the OP couldn't care less as long as it supports Christian hate it's fine. It's only when you attack the off-topic posts the OP gets mad. Hilarious.


Well that's not really the point. The point is that Michael Pearls book is based on biblical teachings and principles and widely accepted and popular with conservative Christians. His books are based on biblical teachings. That's the link.



posted on Dec, 2 2013 @ 12:00 AM
link   
reply to post by amazing
 



And they wonder why there seems to be a war on Christianity. Do they really not know?

the author is not a christian, not even human. it is a twisted, sadistic monster.

you don't "train" children with pain, you teach them with love.

this is torture, plain and simple. the torture of children.



posted on Dec, 2 2013 @ 12:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


the link you posted www.slate.com...

I didn't even know all these details , but I am truly disheartened by this and even more convinced that this child was traumatized all over again. PTSD, probably from abuse she suffered before...or the culture shock, separation ....

The indifference that is taught in "TO Train Up A Child" ..probably triggered this girl....even if she was never abused before ...this would have been a shock ......

......

I think I am too dumbfounded right now to say anymore
edit on 2-12-2013 by paleorchid13 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2013 @ 01:24 AM
link   

Grimpachi

OccamsRazor04

Grimpachi
reply to post by FriedBabelBroccoli
 


Then remain consistent. You remind me of groups that preach one thing then turn around and advocate another not realizing they are the same thing.

Opps..I may have hit a nerve with that but it remains true.


Quite hilarious that you bash him, and you don't say a word to the person who STARTED the off-topic comments. Unless your post is a thinly disguised Christian Bash thread, OrphanApology is the one who should be yelling at. I guess you don't care if someone goes off-topic as long as it supports your views.


You should know by now when I want to call out Christianity for how I see it I do there is no need to disguise it. Abortion shouldn't be an issue in this thread if it becomes one I will not hold back but I hope it can stay on topic.

The motivation for the book is on topic. You disagree that the bibles teachings influenced the authors that's fine it is worth talking about. The abortion issue can be fit in to this but it wouldn't be to the advantage to those of faith which I tried to explain nicely.




Then why can't the Christian haters in this thread point to ANY verses that support this book? They keep going off-topic, and the OP couldn't care less as long as it supports Christian hate it's fine. It's only when you attack the off-topic posts the OP gets mad. Hilarious.


It’s only hilarious because you thing that abortion is on topic. If you really want to go there.
edit on 1-12-2013 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)


No, it's hilarious because abortion is off-topic, and so was the post he replied to starting the abortion comment. Yet the only one you lambaste for being off-topic is him. His abortion comments were as on-topic as the person he replied to. Be consistent and tell them BOTH to get back on topic, but you won't, because one of them hates Christianity so you don't mind the off-topic posts they make.



posted on Dec, 2 2013 @ 01:26 AM
link   

amazing

OccamsRazor04
reply to post by amazing
 


Then why can't the Christian haters in this thread point to ANY verses that support this book? They keep going off-topic, and the OP couldn't care less as long as it supports Christian hate it's fine. It's only when you attack the off-topic posts the OP gets mad. Hilarious.


Well that's not really the point. The point is that Michael Pearls book is based on biblical teachings and principles and widely accepted and popular with conservative Christians. His books are based on biblical teachings. That's the link.


So there are NO verses in the Bible that support this, but it's based on biblical teachings? Do you understand the sheer level of stupidity it requires to say that and not see anything wrong with that statement? If there are NO VERSES in the Bible that support this it is NOT based on Biblical teachings. Period. End of story.



posted on Dec, 2 2013 @ 03:02 AM
link   
edit on 2-12-2013 by paleorchid13 because: talking to a brick wall we call religion



posted on Dec, 2 2013 @ 03:02 AM
link   
edit on 2-12-2013 by paleorchid13 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2013 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


This is just disturbing. And horribly sad.
What parent in their right heart and mind could do any of these things to their child?
I almost wish I had Facebook and twitter just to support this boycott. There have been other " gurus" found guilty for their unorthodox methods. These folks should be in jail for even suggesting them, but more than likely for performing these acts themselves.

It makes me sick that this exists, yet parents are being incarcerated for picking up their own children from school. I'm afraid this was my last straw for faith in humanity. This breaks my heart, but thanks for bringing some awareness to this book. Maybe it can save other children.



posted on Dec, 3 2013 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


Thank you for speaking up on this topic, and for supporting those of us raised under those types, and worse, of draconian measures. The answer lies in between, coupled with some common sense.



posted on Dec, 5 2013 @ 10:05 AM
link   
I came across a website last week by a former trainer of illuminati bloodline children. The purpose of the abuse is stated as instilling loyalty to the family at an early age.

svali



posted on Dec, 5 2013 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by searcher109
 


Yes this is a form of mind control similar to Stockholm syndrome or trauma bonding. This is why people who are abused don't often report their aggressors.




new topics
top topics
 
46
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join