-30 votes

.

.



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Hope you find your cookies...

Now, who is going to do all this policing for you, a further empowered government? What can possibly be your reasoning in calling for it if you believe in freedom and liberty???

The only thing I can agree on is establishing a consistent age of majority. 16 for sex, 18 for war, 21 for drink, and now 26 for healthcare is more of the type of ridiculousness in directive and prohibitions geared around government control we are getting everyday!!!! Enough already.
P.S. I left out mentioning voting as I suspect it doesn't count anymore anyway...

“Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the government take care of him better take a closer look at the American Indian.” ― Henry Ford.

Yikes

Wow. That is very harsh, I think.
Our government has been artificially raising the period of adolescence and dependence in our society in a systematic way over the last 100 years, and you would see it raised even further?
A human biologically matures around 13, give or take. If not for the overprotectiveness, and shielding of children from "harsh" things, they are easily capable of psychologically maturing nearly that fast, at least as to taking responsibility for their own actions.
Feeding them to the government education machine exacerbates this extension and overdependence on authority.
A child with special needs can only be determined and dealt with on an individual basis; there is no overarching rule that can be made.

I'm sure that holding parents criminally responsible for their children long after they should be adults will decrease the birth rate, at least. ;)

Just open the box and see

Well, I would END the Dept. of Education for starters.

And just about every other federal agency.

So this is not about growing the government.

It's about holding people responsible when they take the vows, have offspring and then PROFIT off of taxpayers with write-offs for procreating.

Believe me - I think the federal income tax should be abolished because then at least the government could not try to influence behavior with tax code.

The government has no business rewarding procreation. They do it so people will produce more income tax-payers.

So what if it decreases birth rate...It's not the government's role to be anyone's moral compass.

Government's only job is to protect our liberties.

"We have allowed our nation to be over-taxed, over-regulated, and overrun by bureaucrats. The founders would be ashamed of us for what we are putting up with."
-Ron Paul

This one situation

You want to hold the father responsible in this situation because he's a rich banker.

It's about holding people responsible when they take the vows, have offspring and then PROFIT off of taxpayers with write-offs for procreating.

What about the father whose kid kills, and he doesn’t make profit off the taxpayers? There should be no "justice" done upon him? There are a lot of murderers in jail. I suppose we should line up all their parents beside them too, or just if they were rich?

You are right that the government should get out of the education business, but they also need to get out of the marriage business too. That is just another aspect of the "moral compass" that the government has no business being involved in.

This particular situation is hardly a "lone gunman" thing, and to call for the fathers head is simply to play into the propaganda they are creating. There is no evidence to suggest that a person with Asperger’s should have special needs when it comes to legal responsibility. The mother was hardly destitute from the divorce, and was receiving plenty of money to care for the "child" in any medically relevant way. While an Asperger's patient certainly has plenty of "character", they are hardly dangerous, normally. This particular situation should be judged on its own merits, the marital status of the parents is only peripherally relevant, if at all, in what happened.

This was a terrible tragedy, and the urge to call for someone’s blood is strong, but don't bleed the wrong people in this situation.

Looking for targets in an emotionally compromised state is worse than doing nothing, which is exactly what the media is encouraging. They would rather you seek revenge on the gun itself though. ;)

Please observe how the media is frothing up this situation. Congress and the President are all foaming at the mouth against guns now. Your own call for the fathers head is the same thing, with a different target. It's human nature to cry out for someone to pay after a tragedy, but don't let the media guide your grief, they are more ill equipped to guide morality than the government (if that's even possible).
You are aware that gun laws don't stop gun violence, but the same will hold true for any morality law, even against the parents. Divorce may or may not be an immoral act, but I don’t think we want the government deciding that, do we?

Just open the box and see