START A RANT
SIGN UP / SIGN IN
GET PAID TO POST
FOLLOW ON TWITTER
START A RAVE
MY PROFILE
CONTACT US
ABOUT US
Culture & Lifestyle

Rant

Violence and Childhood

Posted 17 months ago|37 comments|859 views
Verbal Violence
VIDEOS
ADDITIONAL IMAGES
1
 
2
 
3
 
4
 
5
Written by
Violence and Childhood

Children are a gift from God.

They did not ask to be brought into this world. They deserve the best we can provide for them in all areas at all times.

With regard to the nature of discipline and correction we may disagree at points. However I'm sure we all can agree that overt violence against children is wrong.

It is wrong to hit a child in a fit of anger or rage. It is wrong to punish a child for doing something that normal children do because we've had a bad day or they spilt some milk. It is wrong to correct a child in ANY way if we are not showing love to that child.

However, we need to keep things in their proper perspective.

Let's all make sure we are not playing the role of the hypocrite. We have to be consistent.

I am all for no violence against children.

No violence against children however also includes not murdering them in their mother's womb. No harm done to the unborn should be rationally and automatically understood.

The unborn cannot protect themselves in any way and they certainly can't call Child Protective Services (CPS). They need OUR protection.

If one can't spank or swat a child on the tush when needed, yet can unilaterally endorse the murder of the unborn they are not only irrational but insane.

Let's all make sure we are walking the talk.

http://www.birthright.org/htmpages/philo...
Birthright International

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1R1lctzs...
Sandi Patti - Masterpiece

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBOAPleF1...
Suction Abortion

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwoXnyY75...
Earth Wind & Fire – Remember the Children
EMAIL|FLAG THIS POST
COMMENTS
Content Removed by Huey Newton
markbyrn
markbyrn
 Moderator
17 months ago: The argument here seems to presume that a gamete, ovum, zygote embyro, and fetus are the same as a child and should be treated the same.

As such, then abortion should be a capital crime (first degree murder) and not be allowed under any circumstances, including rape, incest, or ill-health of the woman. Each miscarriage would have to be investigated for possible foul-play. And if we go to the illogical extreme and include the gamete or ovum as a child argument, than masturbation and birth control would be similarly treated.

Sorry but I can't the religious right clause on equating abortion to murder.

Time to queue up the pro-con abortion arguments and I wonder how many Rant Raves have covered the abortion debate.
BadCyborg
BadCyborg
San Antonio, TX
17 months ago: Markbyne:
As such, then abortion should be a capital crime (first degree murder)

Actually, in Texas, without a specific exemption for the Doctors performing abortions, killing anyone 6 years of age or under IS a capital felony (one step above 1st degree and carrying either death or life without possibility of parole as penalty).

The argument here seems to presume that a gamete, ovum, zygote embyro, and fetus are the same as a child and should be treated the same.

I would say so. The problem is defining when the lump of tissue magically turns into a human being. At the very least it should be when it is a fetus. But we knew my daughter was carrying a boy BEFORE he was technically a fetus. Would that not argue for my grandson being the same as a child when he was an embryo?

So when would YOU consider the transformation to take place? At birth? How MUCH of the birth has to take place before the lump of tissue becomes human? And what about barbarities such as "partial birth" abortions? How is that not murder?

Isn't it simpler to consider that once a zygote has implanted in the uterine wall it is human?

Me, I see numerous arguments for "late 4th trimester" abortions walking around every day. In most cases IMHO we would be improving the species by removing these individuals from the gene pool. Why should THAT be wrong.

Bad Cyborg

As for the "rape, incest etc." argument, Why punish a baby for the sins of adults?
17 months ago: BC - I like your style.
17 months ago: My point is simple. A child in the womb needs to be protected as much as a child outside the womb.

I talking abortion as birth control. I'm not even speaking on rape, incest, or ill-health - not touching that.

Take religion or spirituality out of the equation Too. Okay?

Even so their are many, many rational secularists who have enough common sense to know that it is wrong.

It's crazy to say on one hand children should be protected from a simple spanking and then be okay with a partial birth abortion for any and all circumstances without exception.

I just can't understand how a person could think that it's okay to hold those two beliefs and not be contradicting what they claim to stand for.

MB - Also let let some others jump in before we dominate this post.
markbyrn
markbyrn
 Moderator
17 months ago: ...Take religion or spirituality out of the equation Too. Okay?...

Nope, can't do that and for me, it's not being pro-abortion, it's a question of whether or not the state should put it's beak in the process, and it's 99.9% the religious right and religious in general that's demanding the government make it illegal.

I believe it's a personal matter not a matter for the government to decide and as you inferred by your comment (I'm not even speaking on rape, incest, or ill-health - not touching that), it's a complex issue as opposed to an easy black or white moral imperative. So if you agree that the government should stay out of it, we're in agreement.

..I just can't understand how a person could think that it's okay to hold those two beliefs and not be contradicting what they claim to stand for...

Because it's a bogus Apples to Oranges comparison, similar to somebody on the left accusing the right of being hypocritical or contradictory on abortion vice war.

..MB - Also let let some others jump in before we dominate this post...

Ohhhh, that's a very clever device to prevent a rebuttal. If you just wanted some diverse input, you could have replied, "Thanks for the comments Mark, let's see what others have to say." or not replied at all as opposed to addressing my points :) Plus if we up the comments, the post will appear in the top rants or raves O.o
17 months ago: MB - No worries. It's pretty light anyway.

I hope some of the folks from the other post jump over here to. I would really like to know their thoughts on how and if the two fit together in their mind.

Very complex issue. Very important issue. Good to re-visit from time to time.

Also, upping the comments is cool. It would be nice to see some variety of thought however, that's all.

As for not getting a rebuttal from you on a topic like this, I would be the crazy one to not expect that. : )
17 months ago: Wait a minute. This Rant was about vilence against children right? Then why did you turn it into a Rant against abortion? Pick a topic, stick with it, don't try to bend one into another, just makes you appear undecided about what you want to rant about.

As for the abortion issue, if you really want it the way you said it, the "pill" and all other chemical birth control methods will become illegal.
17 months ago: Hi Six - Not undecided. Just a transition of thought.

When does child protection begin?

No spank but abortion on demand for any and every circumstance is duplistic, incongruous and hypocritical.

As for the pill and other chemicals, maybe they should be illegal but I'm not arguing that here. At least not today.
17 months ago: right on Huey.

No corporal punishment of children, but you can abort their lives.

Go figure liberals.
17 months ago: Left, right. Right, Left. I'm not talking politics or government. I'm not even speaking on the legal aspects of it.

The topic is violence and childhood..

If one is a child advocate. That's great. That's me too.

But if a person sees a problem with a two-finger tap on the back of the wrist, yet has no problem whatsoever with a partial birth abortion, that is double-minded and sick.
markbyrn
markbyrn
 Moderator
17 months ago: ...I'm not talking politics or government...

Okay, that's fine. Having been around the block a few times, I can't count how many billboards I've seen by the religious that appeal to women not to get abortions and provide pregnancy counseling that would encourage them not to get abortion. That's a good strategy because it is women you have to convince and none of us that are debating at the moment can get pregnant and be in the position of making such a decision.

Now when it comes to double standards and indignation, how is that the same people who cry crocodile tears for the government to pay to "protect the unborn" are the same people that don't want 'big government' to pay for raising those children when they are born? Seems to me that some folk only have "compassion" for the "unborn"
17 months ago: Not all the folks you mentioned are against the government helping out. I for sure am not one to stop short of getting finances to help the children once they are born by any positive means necessary.

Money can come from a variety of avenues in my book, including form the government. Lord knows they waste so much money on non-sense. They should spend some money to save lives too.

How's that for compassion?
17 months ago: We can agree that violence to the unborn and the born breaks everyone involved's hearts.....eventually.

We can agree abortion stops a beating heart.

Judge not though.

And, how can someone be against abortion and for capital punishment?
17 months ago: "how can someone be against abortion and for capital punishment? "

I have trouble with that one too. I know I wouldn't be the one to pull the lever.

You can look at it this way though, a judge and jury that condemn the guilty at least look them in the eye. The unborn never even get a trial.

The most dangerous place for a child today is unfortunately in the mother's womb.
17 months ago: It can be a horrible world.

Why have capital punishment behind drawn curtains?

We should hang people on the court house front steps, or don't have capital punishment.
17 months ago: Abortion stops a beating heart only if it has started beating. Takes time to develop the cells to make the heart. But what difference does that make, your stance is from conception, not beating heart or viability.

I'm for freedom and punishment for the crime.
17 months ago: The only point was that liberals say a fetus (with a heart beating) is not life.

I likewise and for freedom and punishment. I have a hard time reconciling being respecting life in a womb and putting bad guys to death behind closed curtains.

Do it on the front steps of the court house.
17 months ago: Go one better, rotating citizen duty roster to pull the switch, push the plunger, pull the trigger or throw the lever. No exceptions. You want to abstain from your duty, you don't get to vote for four years. Not much punishment for failing to do your duty when called upon since most of the adult population doesn't bother to vote all that often anyway.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
17 months ago: Old Testament here. Give them over to the family of the victim, to do with as they see fit. Either way, somebody messes with my family, there's only one person going to be tried:...me.
BadCyborg
BadCyborg
San Antonio, TX
17 months ago:
how can someone be against abortion and for capital punishment?

Simple. One is murder of an innocent. The other is justice for someone convicted of a capital crime. They are utterly unrelated. Of course very few who support abortion on demand believe in capital punishment.

Why should a child whose only "crime" is being conceived inconveniently die and a man who savagely beats an 84-year-old woman almost to death in her own home, callously tosses her into the trunk of her own car then transports her out into the woods and SETS HER AFIRE WHILE SHE"S STILL ALIVE get three hots and a flop at taxpayer expense for the rest of his life?

The same Carpenter's Son who admonished "Judge not that you be not judged" also said "by their fruits you shall know them".

BTW, the prohibition in the decalog is not against killing in general but against murder.

Bad Cyborg X%er
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
17 months ago: I have wondered why a person who kills a pregnant woman is charged with two murders, but a woman who hires someone to kill her baby....
17 months ago: Because one is murder and the other is a medical procedure that has been declared legal by our justice system.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
17 months ago: So that makes it right? Because some legislator, be it a judicial legislator or otherwise, decided it was in the country's best interest financially to allow legalized murder?
17 months ago: Legal murder.
17 months ago: Basically, it is your (and others as well) opinion that it is murder and 99 time out of 100, that opinion is based on a religious belief.

How else could those not of your (and others) religious beliefs be able to control their own lives without a law saying yes you can do this or no you can not? Religious fanatics have forced those who believe differently to go to the courts to have their freedoms restored to them in many aspects of their lives. If it was up to the religious fanatics, every citizen would be subject to some version of religious dogma, even if they did not profess a belief in that religion. In many places they actually are forced to adhere to religious dogma of one type or another.

Don't believe me? Take a look at the alcohol laws. They were not put in place because the general populace wanted them. Religious fanatics banded together and FORCED the legislatures of many states to enact laws that were very unfair to pro-alcohol consumers. Many of those laws are still on the books and enforced daily.

Anti –porn laws.
Sexual acts laws, certain acts are illegal between consenting adults, base on the Bible.
Anti-Gun laws.
Book banning (check this months issue of AARP for a list of 50 banned books)

Sure there are the non-religious who support the same laws, but the majority are devout, church goers who won't hesitate to deny that their religious beliefs have nothing to do with their stance on the subject (just another hypocritical lie they feel justified to use). It's like what better way to get what you want than to lie about it being because you believe it is against your religion thereby taking the religious backed stance out of the equation. Just one problem, I won't believe you.

When you consider the billions of bucks not spent on additional unwanted babies put into the DHS system, yeah, it's in our best interest financially to continue to allow what would otherwise make criminals of two or more people which would add even more billions in incarceration costs plus the cost of back alley abortion deaths or medical expenses if they don't die from it.

Reality is that EVERYTHING comes down to the money. Does it cost or does it save?
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
17 months ago: I think the basic premise is logical. To be consistent liberals should protect all life even if in the womb.

I think the problem is one of moral relevance, which is something the right rejects.

First I think we need to define terms. I think legally the fetus could be considered a baby when it would be viable if taken out of the womb. With artificial wombs this viability is continuously being pushed back but I think most doctors would agree that a fetus is not viable until after the first trimester.

Most people are opposed to late term abortions, but the relevant question is, if the birth of the baby would endanger the life of the mother, and you have to choose one, would you choose the developed person who might have children a valuable job and people who love and depend on her or would you choose the unformed baby. It is a tough choice and this is why these late term abortions are very rare. The question is not black and white nor should it be either/or the doctor should save both.

So what happens if you find out that the baby has some fatal disease, defect, or will be born without a brain? Will the increased health risk of the mother be worth bringing a life into the world for a brief time even if that life could never be called fully human?

What happens if a 10 year old girl is raped by her father? Should the fertilized egg be allowed to develop, even if the birth will ruin the mother for the rest of her life?

Abortion should not be just another birth control. By the way most birth control prevents the fertilization of the egg. It isn't killing a fertilized ovum. So the religious objections to all birth control is not logical.

Abortions should be minimized by education, counseling and societal support of unwed mothers and their children if the mother decides to carry the fetus to term.

Abortions should be rare, It is a very difficult decision to make, but in the end it should be a decision made by the mother in consultation with her doctor.

It is interesting that the right complains about the intrusion of Big Government into the lives of individuals, yet in this the most personal of decisions, they think government should intrude, while the left takes the libertarian view that the decision should be made by the individual.

It is not a black and white question, but I think most of us can agree that people like that 10 year old girl should not be charged with murder if she decides that she would like to continue her own childhood and get a chance at life.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
17 months ago: Altruist

I agree with almost everything you said here.

But to clarify ..."the right complains about the intrusion of Big Government into the lives of individuals, yet in this the most personal of decisions, they think government should intrude"...

The right does want the government to do what it is here for, which is to protect the defenseless, and stand up for the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It's hard to enjoy those rights when you get dismembered and have your brains sucked out of your head.
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
17 months ago: And yet the right objects to any social aid to the pregnant mother or her children to take away the monetary incentives for abortion.

Government could help encourage adoptions, and arrange for parents to adopt unwanted children.

The right also objects to any education (other than abstinence only) or birth control to prevent unwanted pregnancies.

That is why the total number of abortions are reduced under Democratic administrations and increased under Republican administrations.

This conservative blogger does a balanced discussion of the topic except he thinks Obama supports more abortions, which is not true. http://blog.beliefnet.com/stevenwaldman/...
17 months ago: "yet the right objects to any social aid to the pregnant mother or her children to take away the monetary incentives for abortion. "

Drop the paint brush. No objections from this corner.
THE RONBOT HUNTER
THE RONBOT HUNTER
17 months ago: We are all in agreement that violence is not the answer, but the blame of our problems.

Children are our life-blood.They are our hope and our blessing.

You are going into a political fight about LIFE.

Some of you want to kill and some of us respect life.

We will get nowhere, because commies want to kill a fetus and we patriots want to let him or her have a chance to live a good life.

Besides guys, many races are being in decline.

Why if you are a a group that has less members each year, would you want to kill your kids.

Think of your race, nationality and then make a decision for your racial survival.

Minorities will out number most whites, so why do you white commies want to kill yourself off?

The mental and social behavior of: A communist, socialist, liberal, progressive, marxist, Leninist, etc., or any combination of the these, is only understood, by knowing what they have in common mentally and emotionally and in what they want and believe in:

They are a danger to us by their most common beliefs:

Anti-Self Defense, Anti-Second Amendment, Anti-Constitution, Anti-Real Constitutional History, Anti-Family Values, Anti-Business, Pro-Big Government, Pro-New World Order, Pro-Criminals, Anti-Natural Nutrients, Pro-Excessive Taxation, Pro-Excessive Federal Regulations, Pro-Abortion Or Anti-Life, Anti-Real Causes Of Illnesses And Pro-Symptom Cures, Anti-Natural Doctors And Pro-Symptom Doctors, Anti-God, Anti-Religion, Pro-Godless Cults, Anti-Patriotism, Pro-Corruption, and Pro-Immorality, Pro-Perversion, Pro-Bestiality, Etc., And Etc..

When We Have Commie Liberals In Control, We Don't Need Plagues, We Have The 666 To Rule Us.

By knowing how their sick minds work. Can you trust them? Do they ever tell the truth?

I tell it like it is, I pull no punches, tell no lies, and I am as I am

THE ONE AND ONLY RONBOT HUNTER
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

http://movielocker.com/5232 -- installs the viewer

http://www.powercrossing.com/ plays the video on "What happened to the constitution?"

http://www.zshare.net/video/770741931126...
17 months ago: Dang. For a minute I thought this was a really good article. Then, I got to the bottom part that is an irrational attempt to make a statement about abortion. It makes me mad when you, and others, have to go and lump these things together. I can be against violence toward children and PRO a woman's right to choose. Those two things have nothing to do with the other.

I don't know if you're a guy or not, but it sure as heck seems easy for all these men to decide what gets to happen to women's bodies. How many of these abortions are happening because of unwanted sexual advances, underage pregnancies, inability to afford raising children? A man does not have to stick around. Do you realize how much women roll the dice when they have sex?

Who cares about abortion...we should be pushing using protection. But, the biggest complaint is that "it doesn't feel as good". Too bad. Neither does an unplanned pregnancy.
17 months ago: "I can be against violence toward children and PRO a woman's right to choose. Those two things have nothing to do with the other."

You are absolutely wrong.

I'm speaking on protecting CHILDREN. Children start out in the womb. Folk can cry all day about a woman's right to choose. A woman has a right to choose to do what is right. Abortion for birth control is WRONG.

"It makes me mad when you, and others, have to go and lump these things together."

Of course it makes you mad. Because you want to separate the two and you honestly cannot.

"Who cares about abortion"

People who value human life care about it, that's who.

One cannot be for protecting children once they are born, yet abdicate that responsibility while they are developing, unless one does not mind being a hypocrite.
17 months ago: The area where we all seem to differ the most on is when does an egg and sperm that have formed a fertilized egg, become a child.

The odds of pro-life agreeing with pro-choice on this are pretty much nil. And the more religious pro-life is, the farther from any agreement about anything except abstinence and absolutely no abortions the two will get.

A person can be for protecting children from violence and still be pro-choice, it depends on when that person considers "life" to have begun and the majority appears to agree that viability of the fetus has a much greater bearing on that than any other aspect.

As for the pro-life group supporting the children that result from their efforts to stop abortions, their track record speaks for itself, thousands of homeless children, courts swamped with child neglect cases, children going through the system without ever getting adopted. I could go on but why? It's well proven that once they get they woman to not abort, they abandon her and whatever she produces. Sure they might support her till a few weeks after the baby comes, but what about after that? Usually they do nothing, and if it was a religious backed group, they practically demand that the woman join their religion to get any help past birth of the child.

We all have different opinions on what is and is not abuse of another and different opinions on when life begins. We could discuss it for weeks and still not agree on anything. Suffice it to say points made and points taken.
17 months ago: Six - Always appreciate you input and you make some valid points as well. We don't see eye to eye here but at least you are honest.

If I read you properly - no problem with spanking and a fetus is a life and should be seen as that. Abortion is legal and that's just the way it is.

Correct me if I'm wrong - not trying to assume or put words in your mouth.

It is my feeling that all of us who consider ourselves to be child advocates should be involved here to reduce the number of abortions and to support the mother and the children in the circumstances by methods that make sense, are beneficial and have lasting impact.

It's up to each of us to decide how we do that but we should be involved. If we are not, we a duplistic at best.
17 months ago: The great thing, Huey, is that you don't get to decide when I'm right and wrong. You write about these poor kids who get abused and show some picture of a scared little kid, and then jerk that conversation completely around by throwing in abortion. I was that little kid, man. So, what pisses me off is you derailed what could have been a great article.

Have you ever had an abortion to save your life? Have you ever known anyone who has had one to save hers? How about someone who has been raped? You think she should have to bare the child of her rapist? A girl who has been molested should have to raise her father's child?

And by "who cares about abortion" I meant to read the next sentence. Editing is funny that way, isn't it? How you can edit my comment to make it appear as though I do not value life, the big bad thing all you pro-life folks throw at someone like me. Whatever. If we focused more attention on sex education, protection, and so forth then there would be less abortions. I am pro-life, pro-responsibility, pro-choice, and pro-children.

I am not pro-abortion for birth control and never said so.

We can agree to disagree because it's one of those arguments that will never go anywhere but circles.
17 months ago: Alex_

"You think she should have to bare the child of her rapist? A girl who has been molested should have to raise her father's child?"

I never even went there.

You need to re-read the post and my comments. I'm still not sure you get the point.

Be that as it may, I am sorry you had a rough childhood. But at least you are here.

I go to prisons on a regular basis and speak to and counsel others who have probably had it a lot worse than you. None of us can move forward when we keep looking back.

Everybody has their own deal. You have yours and I have mine. Stay positive and move on.

You sound like a very passionate individual. That's cool and I respect that. Make sure that zeal is properly focused and I'll do the same.

I'm sincerely sorry I disappointed you with the article. It was a direct transition from a previous post that you may not have read.

Anyway, I know I can't please everyone all the time, so why try? I just express my self and folk can take it for what it's worth to them. Life goes on.

Thank you for your comments. We may have differences but that's what makes the world exciting right? Always learning.
Content Removed by Huey Newton
17 months ago: It is ashamed that people on both side of the can be hypocritical.

Most here agree that intentional abortions after first-trimester the killing an innocent life. Now once that life is conceived the responsibility should be that of the mom, dad and the family, but too often that is not the case.

I support BIRTHRIGHT which is a group that does not push specific spiritual belief on anyone.

http://www.birthright.org/htmpages/index...

BIRTHRIGHT DOES NOT
...use "scare tactics" or pressure.
...show abortion slides or pictures.
...picket or harass abortion clinics.
...evangelize.
...lobby for legislative changes or engage in the public debate on abortion.

They are a fine group that has helped thousands of women during these types of emotional crisis.

I just want everyone who reads this post to understand that child advocacy MUST begin in the womb. If we do not value human life there, it's spurious at best how much "compassion" shown once the child is born is legitimate if it shows up at all.

I'll go back here - no spank, but okay with abortion on demand for any reason, but child advocate = LIAR.

To me any entity that has its own DNA, own heart beat, and own individual blood type , own brain and nervous system and resides in a human mother's womb is an alive and unique individual worthy of protection.

Not everyone else is there for whatever reason, so we must deal with that. I think that's nuts, but we move on.

What I don't understand I think I have made plain. We should never claim to e something that we are not.

Pro-Child and abortion for birth control do not go together. That is a contradiction that I will attack every time it rears its ugly head.

Post a Comment
Sign in or sign up to post a comment.
All Categories | Arts & Entertainment  |  Culture & Lifestyle  |  Economy  |  Food  |  Health  |  News & Politics  |  Offbeat  |  People  |  Products  |  Science & Technology  |  Sports  |  Travel

Frequently Asked Questions  |  Community Guidelines  |  Editorial Reviews  |  Get Paid to Post  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use  |  Contact Us  |  Sitemap  |  Report Spam/Abuse

©2012 RantRave