Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

And regarding children's rights, which the topic of circumscription is about and hopefully President Warrem can help streangthen - for the sake of the american youth:

Ian Swanson was 5 when his family moved from the United States to Umeå, a small university town in northern Sweden. It was the place where he made his first friends, where he learned to read and where, like any kid, he was "into absolutely everything."

He occasionally got a spanking from mom, or a swat on the rear and a stern look from his dad. But he remembers one day when his kindergarten teacher, school principal and a social worker came to their home. They worried Ian wasn't fitting in; they wanted to talk about the "abuse."

Swanson remembers translating for his parents, who were still learning the language, too: "'You have to understand, things are different here.'"

In 1979, a few years before the Swanson family arrived, Sweden became the first country to ban physical punishment of children.

Since then, 30 more countries have passed bans on corporal punishment at home, and even more have banned it in schools, according to the Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children. Just last month, Togo confirmed to the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child that parts of its children's code are meant to ban physical punishment.

No countries in North America ban physical punishment by parents

/.../

"[Parents] couldn't understand how someone had the gall -- 'Who in the world can come in and tell me how I'm supposed to raise my child?'" he said. "That's a very American idea. In Sweden, that would not be asked. It's everybody's responsibility."

When Pia Johnson was a teen studying in Sweden, she didn't realize a ban was in place at first. Her peers seemed happier and more independent, she said, but there wasn't an obvious link to children's rights.

Now that she's 45 and a public school teacher in Las Vegas, her view has shifted: Nobody she met in Sweden experienced neglect, and few experienced physical trauma at the hands of their parents. Nobody in Sweden has to wrestle with the questions of what was abuse, what wasn't and what to do next.

"We have a lot of messed-up parents raising kids, teaching their kids to be messed up, as well," said Johnson, who teaches third-graders. "When we call [Child Protective Services], they're like, 'Well, no, that's not exactly it. It's a small bruise.' When we try to advocate, nothing gets done. In Sweden, even if there isn't a bruise, all you have to do is say something."

https://edition.cnn.com/2011/11/09/world/sweden-punishment-ban/index.html


So I can understand if Pearl Jam fans across the pond have problems taken in the perspective of a child's own rights because they don't seem to be in focus over there - but internet exists, and you are able to start to think about things. Things that are wrong, aren't right just because it is the only thing you know of from your upbringing.

Hopefully President Warren is more open minded. And has a plan.

Can you capsulize this into whether or not you are supporting Yang and is anti-cutting agenda?  This is important to me because what happens in the US affects the world, so whether or not we outlaw circumcision should be super important to our friends across the pond.  Plus I have no interest in reading any of what you posted. 

Stop being condescending then and quoting me, if you are not gonna read what I post or be able stay away from your hostility-problem.

Thank you.

I highly suggest you stay away from my hostility.  It would be healthier for you.  

I do believe you were the one quoting me. For the sole reason to be condescending, so you force your hostility on me actually. Which you of course are aware of.

I was unaware of the "no quoting if you're going to be condescending" rule.  My bad.  

Wait, did I just do it again?

You highly suggest me to stay away from your hostility, while forcing it on me by quoting to tell me you don't care about reading what I have posted. Maybe logic isn't your strong suit - but that does not add up.

And no need to get hostile if you do not believe in children's rights. take a look in the mirror instead.

mrussel1 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

And regarding children's rights, which the topic of circumscription is about and hopefully President Warrem can help streangthen - for the sake of the american youth:

Ian Swanson was 5 when his family moved from the United States to Umeå, a small university town in northern Sweden. It was the place where he made his first friends, where he learned to read and where, like any kid, he was "into absolutely everything."

He occasionally got a spanking from mom, or a swat on the rear and a stern look from his dad. But he remembers one day when his kindergarten teacher, school principal and a social worker came to their home. They worried Ian wasn't fitting in; they wanted to talk about the "abuse."

Swanson remembers translating for his parents, who were still learning the language, too: "'You have to understand, things are different here.'"

In 1979, a few years before the Swanson family arrived, Sweden became the first country to ban physical punishment of children.

Since then, 30 more countries have passed bans on corporal punishment at home, and even more have banned it in schools, according to the Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children. Just last month, Togo confirmed to the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child that parts of its children's code are meant to ban physical punishment.

No countries in North America ban physical punishment by parents

/.../

"[Parents] couldn't understand how someone had the gall -- 'Who in the world can come in and tell me how I'm supposed to raise my child?'" he said. "That's a very American idea. In Sweden, that would not be asked. It's everybody's responsibility."

When Pia Johnson was a teen studying in Sweden, she didn't realize a ban was in place at first. Her peers seemed happier and more independent, she said, but there wasn't an obvious link to children's rights.

Now that she's 45 and a public school teacher in Las Vegas, her view has shifted: Nobody she met in Sweden experienced neglect, and few experienced physical trauma at the hands of their parents. Nobody in Sweden has to wrestle with the questions of what was abuse, what wasn't and what to do next.

"We have a lot of messed-up parents raising kids, teaching their kids to be messed up, as well," said Johnson, who teaches third-graders. "When we call [Child Protective Services], they're like, 'Well, no, that's not exactly it. It's a small bruise.' When we try to advocate, nothing gets done. In Sweden, even if there isn't a bruise, all you have to do is say something."

https://edition.cnn.com/2011/11/09/world/sweden-punishment-ban/index.html


So I can understand if Pearl Jam fans across the pond have problems taken in the perspective of a child's own rights because they don't seem to be in focus over there - but internet exists, and you are able to start to think about things. Things that are wrong, aren't right just because it is the only thing you know of from your upbringing.

Hopefully President Warren is more open minded. And has a plan.

Can you capsulize this into whether or not you are supporting Yang and is anti-cutting agenda?  This is important to me because what happens in the US affects the world, so whether or not we outlaw circumcision should be super important to our friends across the pond.  Plus I have no interest in reading any of what you posted. 

Stop being condescending then and quoting me, if you are not gonna read what I post or be able stay away from your hostility-problem.

Thank you.

I highly suggest you stay away from my hostility.  It would be healthier for you.  

mcgruff10 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

And regarding children's rights, which the topic of circumscription is about and hopefully President Warrem can help streangthen - for the sake of the american youth:

Ian Swanson was 5 when his family moved from the United States to Umeå, a small university town in northern Sweden. It was the place where he made his first friends, where he learned to read and where, like any kid, he was "into absolutely everything."

He occasionally got a spanking from mom, or a swat on the rear and a stern look from his dad. But he remembers one day when his kindergarten teacher, school principal and a social worker came to their home. They worried Ian wasn't fitting in; they wanted to talk about the "abuse."

Swanson remembers translating for his parents, who were still learning the language, too: "'You have to understand, things are different here.'"

In 1979, a few years before the Swanson family arrived, Sweden became the first country to ban physical punishment of children.

Since then, 30 more countries have passed bans on corporal punishment at home, and even more have banned it in schools, according to the Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children. Just last month, Togo confirmed to the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child that parts of its children's code are meant to ban physical punishment.

No countries in North America ban physical punishment by parents

/.../

"[Parents] couldn't understand how someone had the gall -- 'Who in the world can come in and tell me how I'm supposed to raise my child?'" he said. "That's a very American idea. In Sweden, that would not be asked. It's everybody's responsibility."

When Pia Johnson was a teen studying in Sweden, she didn't realize a ban was in place at first. Her peers seemed happier and more independent, she said, but there wasn't an obvious link to children's rights.

Now that she's 45 and a public school teacher in Las Vegas, her view has shifted: Nobody she met in Sweden experienced neglect, and few experienced physical trauma at the hands of their parents. Nobody in Sweden has to wrestle with the questions of what was abuse, what wasn't and what to do next.

"We have a lot of messed-up parents raising kids, teaching their kids to be messed up, as well," said Johnson, who teaches third-graders. "When we call [Child Protective Services], they're like, 'Well, no, that's not exactly it. It's a small bruise.' When we try to advocate, nothing gets done. In Sweden, even if there isn't a bruise, all you have to do is say something."

https://edition.cnn.com/2011/11/09/world/sweden-punishment-ban/index.html


So I can understand if Pearl Jam fans across the pond have problems taken in the perspective of a child's own rights because they don't seem to be in focus over there - but internet exists, and you are able to start to think about things. Things that are wrong, aren't right just because it is the only thing you know of from your upbringing.

Hopefully President Warren is more open minded. And has a plan.

Can you capsulize this into whether or not you are supporting Yang and is anti-cutting agenda?  This is important to me because what happens in the US affects the world, so whether or not we outlaw circumcision should be super important to our friends across the pond.  Plus I have no interest in reading any of what you posted. 

Stop being condescending then and quoting me, if you are not gonna read what I post or be able stay away from your hostility-problem.

Thank you.

I highly suggest you stay away from my hostility.  It would be healthier for you.  

I do believe you were the one quoting me. For the sole reason to be condescending, so you force your hostility on me actually. Which you of course are aware of.

I was unaware of the "no quoting if you're going to be condescending" rule.  My bad.  

Wait, did I just do it again?

You highly suggest me to stay away from your hostility, while forcing it on me by quoting to tell me you don't care about reading what I have posted. Maybe logic isn't your strong suit - but that does not add up.

And no need to get hostile if you do not believe in children's rights. take a look in the mirror instead.

Are you drunk already?  We don't believe in children's rights because some of us had our kids circumcised?

Elizabeth Warren Slowly Wins Over Voters

https://youtu.be/BlC-SB8UvnM

Candidates for the June 26 debate: New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker, former HUD Secretary Julián Castro, former Maryland Rep. John Delaney, Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar, former Texas Rep. Beto O'Rourke, Ohio Rep. Tim Ryan and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

Candidates for the June 27 debate: Colorado Sen. Michael Bennet; former Vice President Joe Biden; South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg; New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand; California Sen. Kamala Harris; former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper; Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders; California Rep. Eric Swalwell; writer and spiritual guru Marianne Williamson and entrepreneur Andrew Yang.

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

Really don't like the setup. I'd prefer all the top-polling candidates (Biden, Sanders, Harris, Warren, Buttigieg) be on stage together. I think that's how the Republicans did it in 2016. Trump and all the high-polling candidates in one debate, Santorum and all the wannabes in another. 

There will be more than one debate though..?

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

Really don't like the setup. I'd prefer all the top-polling candidates (Biden, Sanders, Harris, Warren, Buttigieg) be on stage together. I think that's how the Republicans did it in 2016. Trump and all the high-polling candidates in one debate, Santorum and all the wannabes in another. 

There will be more than one debate though..?

The question mark suggests that you don't know the answer to this. So I'll tell you. Yes, there will be more than one debate. 

No it suggests that - candidates will be picked off and the higher ones will stay through the debates and what you wish for will happen down the line. Correct?

mrussel1 said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

Here's the lineups for the first debates...

Candidates for the June 26 debate: New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker, former HUD Secretary Julián Castro, former Maryland Rep. John Delaney, Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar, former Texas Rep. Beto O'Rourke, Ohio Rep. Tim Ryan and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

Candidates for the June 27 debate: Colorado Sen. Michael Bennet; former Vice President Joe Biden; South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg; New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand; California Sen. Kamala Harris; former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper; Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders; California Rep. Eric Swalwell; writer and spiritual guru Marianne Williamson and entrepreneur Andrew Yang.

Really don't like the setup. I'd prefer all the top-polling candidates (Biden, Sanders, Harris, Warren, Buttigieg) be on stage together. I think that's how the Republicans did it in 2016. Trump and all the high-polling candidates in one debate, Santorum and all the wannabes in another. 

Did you know Andrew Yang is against circumcision?  Not really a worthy topic, but I wanted to throw it out there.  

Meltdown99 said:

we need @brianlux, once again falling behind in his duties...boys!  BOYS or as in @mrussel1, he prefers...girls!  GIRLS!