[erinjane]

And again I'm with COCL. I don't think there's anyway I could be okay with something like that, for many of the same reasons COCL said. I run a children's counselling program for kids 2-12 who have experienced domestic violence, and I work in one of the worst neighbourhoods in my city in a public housing building, and I still can't possibly agree with it. I agree education is the answer...of course you can't reach everyone but regulating people's bodies and rights is just way too scary to me.

[crazyoldcatlady]

But I do think it is a good idea to outlaw, bad parents both male and female form having children. How they go about that is there business. But if they have a child, the state could impose a fine, jail time and or counseling on those who break the law.

once again, what makes a "bad" parent, and who decides?

maybe the welfare mom has kid 6, but she's working her ass off to make a good life. on the outside, it looks like she "failed". meanwhile, suburbia mom/dad/2.5 kids looks all shiny on the outside, but little jenny's getting molested.

Having children, raiding them to be anti social, effects me, my health, my finances, my well being. In short having children is really no different than smoking. yes you are destroying your lungs, but the second hand smoke effects all the non-consenting people around you.

you know what affects me? children raised to be psycho-christian republicans, homophobes, misogynists, and the general miasma of bigots and hypocrites.
shall we outlaw them as well? because i don't want their "cancer" affecting MY offspring or society.
/sarcasm.

on a fiscal level, putting bad parents in jail is going to crowd the prisons and tax the system even more. then they get out, saltier than what they went in. jail is not rehabilitation.

the point is, educate educate educate. give the tools to help those that need them. what they do with those tools is up to them. some will take it and fly, some won't. you can't police human nature, and this law is a scary slippery slope.

[freckleface7]

I agree the focus on mothers is bad.
But I do think it is a good idea to outlaw, bad parents both male and female form having children. How they go about that is there business. But if they have a child, the state could impose a fine, jail time and or counseling on those who break the law.
The idea we can do whatever we want to our bodies regardless of what it does to others, is in direct opposition to the idea of liberty.
Having children, raiding them to be anti social, effects me, my health, my finances, my well being. In short having children is really no different than smoking. yes you are destroying your lungs, but the second hand smoke effects all the non-consenting people around you.

We need a more social view of children than what we have, as an opportunity, a liability, and a responsibility.

that's more or less how I feel too. - look at the last posting about that young girl being stoned in Somilia.

we (in the international sense) need more advocates for the children. they don't ask to be born nor do they have any voice when they are "growing" in these really shitty dysfunctional family's.
when mother's (tho I totally agree that the biological fathers need to be included in this as well) abuse/neglect their children yet continue to propagate over & over again - where and when does it stop ? it's well documented that a high # of abused children go on to become abusers themselves so the cycle contines generating for generations.

[nohope]

I agree the focus on mothers is bad.

But I do think it is a good idea to outlaw, bad parents both male and female form having children. How they go about that is there business. But if they have a child, the state could impose a fine, jail time and or counseling on those who break the law.

The idea we can do whatever we want to our bodies regardless of what it does to others, is in direct opposition to the idea of liberty.

Having children, raiding them to be anti social, effects me, my health, my finances, my well being. In short having children is really no different than smoking. yes you are destroying your lungs, but the second hand smoke effects all the non-consenting people around you.

We need a more social view of children than what we have, as an opportunity, a liability, and a responsibility.

[Divala]

Dare I say it, but I'd be in favor of this, too. Where I work, women are constantly getting pregnant by men who's names they don't even know. At least half the cases that come past my desk end up going nowhere because they don't know anything about the man who's child they bore. And then they go on welfare with that child, and it costs the taxpayers a lot of money to financially raise their mistake. They keep doing this over and over, always having an infant in the home and never being able to go out and work because daycare assistance is so hard to come by (seriously, there's an 18-month waiting list where I work). It's a cycle that perpetuates itself. Maybe if these women were forced to not have any more children for a couple years (or ever) and get their shit straight, it'd help them get off welfare and would suck up a lot less taxpayer money.

I can also see the point of keeping laws off women's bodies, but at the same time, having a bunch of kids and not being able to raise them properly and provide for them is bordering on malicious to the system that tries to keep people afloat, who's resources are stretched enough.

I could go on about this for days, about 15-year-old girls who make pacts with their girlfriends to get pregnant over the summer, about women who get pregnant specifically for the welfare benefits of an extra body in their house, about women who do really stupid shit when they get drunk, and all the men who take advantage of them, but I won't.

[erinjane]

I read that in last Sunday's paper, then read it out loud to the mr and frecklette, and then gave her the hugest hug while semi lecturing her on the massive good fortune of living where she does. then I hugged her again.
what a tragedy.
what's your take on this ? http://www.parentdish.com/2008/11/06/dutch...0403x1200824951

frankly? I'm all in favor of it.
they are only looking at a 2 year perioud (less than what a typical iud's duration) and it's not as if they are wanting to Sterilize these women either; just give them a time to ideally get their shit together.

I'm with COCL. This sounds pretty scary to me. Sure, it's not permanent, but it's forcing a woman to do something to her body that she may not want to. I agree there are 'bad' mothers out there but I don't think this is a good answer. If anything, it sounds like a bandaid solution because they don't know how else to take care of the situation. I also don't like that this puts all the blame of 'bad' parenting on mothers - this just borders on way too many slippery slopes for me.

[kittenb]

I am not sure where to put this so here it goes: Nader asks if Obama is going to be an "Uncle Tom."

It's pretty suprising to watch. Even the Fox News guy is kind of like, "Dude?! What is wrong with you?"

[crazyoldcatlady]

I read that in last Sunday's paper, then read it out loud to the mr and frecklette, and then gave her the hugest hug while semi lecturing her on the massive good fortune of living where she does. then I hugged her again.
what a tragedy.
what's your take on this ? http://www.parentdish.com/2008/11/06/dutch...0403x1200824951

frankly? I'm all in favor of it.
they are only looking at a 2 year perioud (less than what a typical iud's duration) and it's not as if they are wanting to Sterilize these women either; just give them a time to ideally get their shit together.

i think anytime you start putting regulations on a woman's body, it undermines her as a whole. are there shitty mothers out there? yes. should we force "sterilization", even temporary? no. there are side effects to all birth control methods, too (even the pill can cause some nasty upleasant to lifethreatening ones). what if these mother's contraception fails? do they go to jail? get their kids taken away in that situation?

and what constitutes "unfit" mother? ("judicial intervention": did they beat them or just not hug them enough?) why does the onus fall on the mother, and not the father?

i know the article pertains to the dutch, but in the good ole' american spirit, keep your laws off my body

[freckleface7]

I read that in last Sunday's paper, then read it out loud to the mr and frecklette, and then gave her the hugest hug while semi lecturing her on the massive good fortune of living where she does. then I hugged her again.
what a tragedy.


what's your take on this ? http://www.parentdish.com/2008/11/06/dutch...0403x1200824951

frankly? I'm all in favor of it.
they are only looking at a 2 year perioud (less than what a typical iud's duration) and it's not as if they are wanting to Sterilize these women either; just give them a time to ideally get their shit together.

[pollystyrene]

God, that's sick. This is what happens when you mix poverty and religious extremism.

[lananans]

starship - I just cried

[starship]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27484976/

this made me feel sick

[tommynomad]

Some good news on the road toward the end of barbarism:
http://secondinnocence.blogspot.com/2008/1...-in-uganda.html

Thursday, October 16, 2008
FGM Ban in Uganda
It isn't a country-wide ban, but its a promising start:

A community in eastern Uganda has banned the deeply rooted practice of female genital mutilation (FGM), an official has said...

"The community decided that it was not useful, that women were not getting anything out of it, so the district council decided to establish an ordinance banning it,

[anarch]

More from Sepia Mutiny: The Council on American Islamic Relations is calling for the Federal Election Commission to launch a probe into the Clarion Fund, who, if found to be electioneering will be in clear violation of their tax-deductible status. The Military Religious Freedom Foundation is filing a lawsuit against the Department of Defense, for using the name and authority of an official U.S. military institution not only to validate an attack the religion of Islam, but to influence a political campaign.

So what can you do? If you are in one of the swing states and your newspaper sent you this DVD, let them know that you are unhappy about it. You can visit The American Muslim for more resources and information on the Obsession video. And finally, the next few days mark the end of Ramadan - you can tell a Muslim “Eid Mubarak”, today.

[crazyoldcatlady]

i was back home in the O-H not too long ago, and the 'rents had received that dvd in the mail, and they were all, "oh, we heard this is a scary documentary". i could tell from across the room that it was propaganda. my mother, god love her, is my feminist role model, but i still can't stop her from watching fox news.

[kittenb]

You know, everytime I go back to Dayton, where I am from, people in Chicago seem confused as to why I get so cranky. I know that no everyone in the Dayton area is like that, but that story, while horrible, represents a lot of anger and stupidity that permeates that freaking town.

[freckleface7]

Muslim Children Gassed at Dayton Mosque After “Obsession” DVD Hits Ohio but where's the outrage?

oh my gosh I got that dvd in the Sunday paper a few weeks ago!!
have not watched it however, as I was afraid just by the cover art on it.

in all honesty ( as I think everyone here knows I try to be & speak from the heart) I admit to some conflicting feelings due to the mr's career and the terrible terrible things therein, but yet my brother is a recent convert to muslim also and we are learning a very different side to things as well and I am at heart, a peace-believing woman.

harming those children (or any innocents for that matter, adults, children, animals, what have you) is beyond reprehnsible .

when we lived in both Panama & Germany, several times there were threats against the family's of soldiers and in the early days I was so scared and did not understand why anyone would want to hurt Us- the innocent family's who did not carry the guns.
now unfortunately I understand better.

[girltrouble]

you do know that only white people can be victims, don't you?
it's true. minorities only play the victim.

[anarch]

Doesn't sound like it. "No evidence of a hate crime"!

Racialicious observation: Only Muslims Can Be "Terrorists"

Comment #2 implies that Dayton police generally don't give a shit about investigating this kind of thing.

Echoes a conversation I had with a registered Republican the other day - one who actually thinks, and says that McCain has disappointed him, so he's voting for Obama. I'd said that I worried about the Bush Admin releasing an Osama Bin Laden video the week before the election, or releasing news of some terrorists captured or something similarly fearmongering. He said "Well they captured those guys who were planning to assassinate Obama recently..." "Yeah, but mainstream media hasn't published anything about that, and anyway that's not what a lot of Americans think of as terrorism," I said, "They think terrorism is only done by Muslims to white people."

[pollystyrene]

Cod that's awful. Are they doing anything to try to figure out who did it?