All Your Kids Belong To Us

Hey, guess what! Those kids you're raising, they're not yours, either! They belong to the "collective." At least according to this MSNBC host.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=N3qtpdSQox0

Let's try to make this simpler for some of you. Choose the best quote that matches your opinion.

First, MSNBC host Melissa Perry:



Or a principled man of freedom, Ron Paul:



Go ahead, post your answers below.

Pervert

In a Devil's Advocate sort of way, you could say she is re-phrasing, albeit not well, the African proverb It takes a whole village to raise a child".

http://www.afriprov.org/index.php/af...8-proverb.html

I don't think that was her point, Chef. I think she would like it to go well beyond that.

I think you're most likely correct on that point. Many would like to see it go beyond that, unfortunately.

This is the goal of the commies, sounds just like them.

Maybe if the reeducation camps were run by Fox News the liberals wouldn't love the idea so much.
The more programs they can create, the more need for government, the more they can utilize their liberal arts PhD's that no one else is impressed with or is willing to pay them to use.
It takes a village to raise a child when the village is full of lazy idiots unwilling to work hard and sacrifice for their own children and want you to take care of their responsibilities.

Is it a good or a bad idea to try to influence the values and ethics instilled in children whose parents are unable or unwilling to do it themselves? Unfortunately, there are children out there who, through no fault of their own, are in that situation. Does the community bear some responsibility, or obligation, to take up the slack?

More to the point for the non-altruists: ultimately, wouldn't it be better for the community to do all we can to ensure that children are raised in an ethical, law-abiding loving environment, in order to maximize the likelihood that those children will become good, ethical, law-abiding adults?

Unlike the silly old man, I'm not real concerned that the state is going to come and take my children. More bizarre, unwarranted paranoia from Chicken Little.

Seriously, Timmy? You are what is wrong with America. Really? Children belong to the "collective" and not their parents? Wow.

Seriously, Timmy? You are what is wrong with America. Really? Children belong to the "collective" and not their parents? Wow. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Read my post again. Maybe you need to get some more lights in your doomsday prepper shelter so you can see better...and understand.

Is it a good or a bad idea to try to influence the values and ethics instilled in children whose parents are unable or unwilling to do it themselves? Unfortunately, there are children out there who, through no fault of their own, are in that situation. Does the community bear some responsibility, or obligation, to take up the slack?

More to the point for the non-altruists: ultimately, wouldn't it be better for the community to do all we can to ensure that children are raised in an ethical, law-abiding loving environment, in order to maximize the likelihood that those children will become good, ethical, law-abiding adults?

Unlike the silly old man, I'm not real concerned that the state is going to come and take my children. More bizarre, unwarranted paranoia from Chicken Little. Originally Posted by timpage

Boss and Captain both tried to influence Cool Hand Luke - how did that turn out? He just never did get his mind right (which represents buying into government sponsored thought). Captain represents the all knowing, benevolent liberal government that hates people that don't buy into their bullshit. Boss represents the government hacks putting the stupid ass policies in place. Cool Hand Luke represented principled conservative resistance to oppressive authority. (Naturally he ended up getting shot)
Loving and responsible parents are the greatest hope for kids, because when the government has to step in when no other alternative is feasible, exasperation and rebellion results. Sometimes, however, government positions are staffed by good people who do good work, God bless em, but it needs to be as limited as possible, not some liberal utopian dream.

Cool Hand Luke no more represents conservatives that he does liberals. You are starting to sound more gay than JD.

Cool Hand Luke no more represents conservatives that he does liberals. You are starting to sound more gay than JD. Originally Posted by WTF

Perhaps if you ever actually had sex with a real hooker, you could do a review. Are you to scared to go see one, afraid they might bite?
Oh, so you prefer fucking guys in the ass while the undocumented workers you cheat out of their pay and benefits do the real work at your shitty little company? (In England, I hear saying things like this is a friendly way of talking to another guy)