No tats for 10-year-olds
-
@Catseye3 said in No tats for 10-year-olds:
But is it the state's responsibility to step in on something I happen to disapprove of?
It arrested the mother who allowed the 10-year-old to get a tat.
That answer your question?
-
I don't understand how anybody can promote this stuff for 10 years olds.
Either the trans-stuff or the tattoo.
Children have a right to be protected from bloody stupid parents who harm them or allow them to harm themselves.
@Doctor-Phibes said in No tats for 10-year-olds:
bloody stupid parents
Just as you have the right to pronounce parents -- or anybody -- "bloody stupid". Much as I'd like to deprive stupid people of the right to vote, I have yet to figure out a way to exclude them from the privilege of being American.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in No tats for 10-year-olds:
bloody stupid parents
Just as you have the right to pronounce parents -- or anybody -- "bloody stupid". Much as I'd like to deprive stupid people of the right to vote, I have yet to figure out a way to exclude them from the privilege of being American.
@Catseye3 said in No tats for 10-year-olds:
@Doctor-Phibes said in No tats for 10-year-olds:
bloody stupid parents
Just as you have the right to pronounce parents -- or anybody -- "bloody stupid". Much as I'd like to deprive stupid people of the right to vote, I have yet to figure out a way to exclude them from the privilege of being American.
I'm happy for them to vote. I'm not happy for them to damage children. Somebody needs to step in if they're going to cause harm to somebody who isn't old enough to make mature decisions for themselves.
-
That’s why the question is a very simple one. Do you or do you not consider it neglect or abuse? From there, government intervention is not a difficult question.
I suspect most people on the fence, are really on the fence about not wanting to own an opinion that it is not neglect or abuse. Understandably so. That is a difficult opinion to say out loud, for sane people.
Education is extremely important.
-
That’s why the question is a very simple one. Do you or do you not consider it neglect or abuse? From there, government intervention is not a difficult question.
I suspect most people on the fence, are really on the fence about not wanting to own an opinion that it is not neglect or abuse. Understandably so. That is a difficult opinion to say out loud, for sane people.
-
That’s why the question is a very simple one. Do you or do you not consider it neglect or abuse? From there, government intervention is not a difficult question.
I suspect most people on the fence, are really on the fence about not wanting to own an opinion that it is not neglect or abuse. Understandably so. That is a difficult opinion to say out loud, for sane people.
@Horace said in No tats for 10-year-olds:
That’s why the question is a very simple one. Do you or do you not consider it neglect or abuse? From there, government intervention is not a difficult question.
I suspect most people on the fence, are really on the fence about not wanting to own an opinion that it is not neglect or abuse. Understandably so. That is a difficult opinion to say out loud, for sane people.
I find the question easy to answer for 10 year olds. It might become more difficult to answer for, say, 16-18 year olds.
-
Prior to 18 the answer was a form No to any such question. After, Our policy was this. We cannot, once you are 18, stop you from getting tattoos or piercings beyond the ears. But understand that if you do so against our wishes it will be seen as your statement of independence, that you are ready to make your own decisions and pay your own way.
There’s no free lunch.
-
Bears repeating:
"At work I see naked people every day. I've seen good tattoos, and I've seen bad tattoos. I've seen new tattoos and I've seen old tattoos. I've never seen a good, old tattoo."
-
Bears repeating:
"At work I see naked people every day. I've seen good tattoos, and I've seen bad tattoos. I've seen new tattoos and I've seen old tattoos. I've never seen a good, old tattoo."
@George-K said in No tats for 10-year-olds:
Bears repeating:
"At work I see naked people every day. I've seen good tattoos, and I've seen bad tattoos. I've seen new tattoos and I've seen old tattoos. I've never seen a good, old tattoo."
In other words, "no Maori hires. Like, ever."
-
@Catseye3 said in No tats for 10-year-olds:
But is it the state's responsibility to step in on something I happen to disapprove of?
It arrested the mother who allowed the 10-year-old to get a tat.
That answer your question?
@George-K said in No tats for 10-year-olds:
@Catseye3 said in No tats for 10-year-olds:
But is it the state's responsibility to step in on something I happen to disapprove of?
It arrested the mother who allowed the 10-year-old to get a tat.
That answer your question?
Did the mother allow the tattoo or actively promote the tattoo? Want to know my guess?
