Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

...the atrocities of the UN's goal to destroy the entire family structure with they "right of a child" act or whatever it's called. Essentially, parents would not be able to home school their own child in the way the family feels they should be, even with the kid's consent, parents could not discipline their kids and also the child could take the parents to court for anything they didn't agree with.

Of course, ultra libs like Hillary Clinton and Barbara Boxer love this and I'm sure Obama will sign on it. Just another Constitutional right being destroyed all in the name of "progress". So a child can sue the parents for not buying them a car, etc, etc? Wow....all in the agenda to destroy the God given rights that the Creator has bestowed upon parents. Will be a sad for America and natural moral law if this gets passed.

It sickens me as to the arrogance of the United States Government and their ilk that they think they have a say so in how a parent raises their own flesh and blood. What has happened to our freedoms in this nation??!!!

May this atrocity be shot down in the biggest way possible.

catamount man wrote:...the atrocities of the UN's goal to destroy the entire family structure with they "right of a child" act or whatever it's called. Essentially, parents would not be able to home school their own child in the way the family feels they should be, even with the kid's consent, parents could not discipline their kids and also the child could take the parents to court for anything they didn't agree with.

Of course, ultra libs like Hillary Clinton and Barbara Boxer love this and I'm sure Obama will sign on it. Just another Constitutional right being destroyed all in the name of "progress". So a child can sue the parents for not buying them a car, etc, etc? Wow....all in the agenda to destroy the God given rights that the Creator has bestowed upon parents. Will be a sad for America and natural moral law if this gets passed.

It sickens me as to the arrogance of the United States Government and their ilk that they think they have a say so in how a parent raises their own flesh and blood. What has happened to our freedoms in this nation??!!!

May this atrocity be shot down in the biggest way possible.

Yes...I'm sure that is exactly how this is written...

Appaholic wrote:

catamount man wrote:...the atrocities of the UN's goal to destroy the entire family structure with they "right of a child" act or whatever it's called. Essentially, parents would not be able to home school their own child in the way the family feels they should be, even with the kid's consent, parents could not discipline their kids and also the child could take the parents to court for anything they didn't agree with.

Of course, ultra libs like Hillary Clinton and Barbara Boxer love this and I'm sure Obama will sign on it. Just another Constitutional right being destroyed all in the name of "progress". So a child can sue the parents for not buying them a car, etc, etc? Wow....all in the agenda to destroy the God given rights that the Creator has bestowed upon parents. Will be a sad for America and natural moral law if this gets passed.

It sickens me as to the arrogance of the United States Government and their ilk that they think they have a say so in how a parent raises their own flesh and blood. What has happened to our freedoms in this nation??!!!

May this atrocity be shot down in the biggest way possible.

Yes...I'm sure that is exactly how this is written...

Not verbatim, but something to the effect of a child bringing suit for something he or she doesn't agree with. You don't have to make a mountain out of a mole hill with every single post of mine you do realize that but what else is new.

catamount man wrote:

Appaholic wrote:
Yes...I'm sure that is exactly how this is written...

Not verbatim, but something to the effect of a child bringing suit for something he or she doesn't agree with. You don't have to make a mountain out of a mole hill with every single post of mine you do realize that but what else is new.

Re: mountain out of mole hill -> see CM's initial post...

catamount man wrote:...the atrocities of the UN's goal to destroy the entire family structure with they "right of a child" act or whatever it's called. Essentially, parents would not be able to home school their own child in the way the family feels they should be, even with the kid's consent, parents could not discipline their kids and also the child could take the parents to court for anything they didn't agree with.

Of course, ultra libs like Hillary Clinton and Barbara Boxer love this and I'm sure Obama will sign on it. Just another Constitutional right being destroyed all in the name of "progress". So a child can sue the parents for not buying them a car, etc, etc?

Ummm. Where in your copy of the constitution does it say that a parent has a right to home school a kid? When has a child ever been entitled to a car? Did you even think about your post before posting it? You may turn in your Libertarian card to Mr. Crantz at the door as you exit. Thanks.

All of you can kindly go jump. I'm sick of cowtowing to you people anyway. Don't call me, don't email me, just forget that I exist!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I will be a better person away from here anyway.

catamount man wrote:All of you can kindly go jump. I'm sick of cowtowing to you people anyway. Don't call me, don't email me, just forget that I exist!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I will be a better person away from here anyway.

PWI again?

What is this docunent called catamountman?

catamount man wrote:...the atrocities of the UN's goal to destroy the entire family structure with they "right of a child" act or whatever it's called. Essentially, parents would not be able to home school their own child in the way the family feels they should be, even with the kid's consent, parents could not discipline their kids and also the child could take the parents to court for anything they didn't agree with.

Of course, ultra libs like Hillary Clinton and Barbara Boxer love this and I'm sure Obama will sign on it. Just another Constitutional right being destroyed all in the name of "progress". So a child can sue the parents for not buying them a car, etc, etc? Wow....all in the agenda to destroy the God given rights that the Creator has bestowed upon parents. Will be a sad for America and natural moral law if this gets passed.

It sickens me as to the arrogance of the United States Government and their ilk that they think they have a say so in how a parent raises their own flesh and blood. What has happened to our freedoms in this nation??!!!

May this atrocity be shot down in the biggest way possible.

The reason this doesn't bother me or make me think it has teeth (if true) is because it is being put forth by the UN.

Somehow I don't think a peacekeeping force of Bangldeshis and Fijians are going to knock down my doors if I swat my son on the butt.

As for suing me, I would just cut off his fvcking allowance and send him to his room. We'll see what kind of lawyer he can afford then.

dbackjon wrote:What is this docunent called catamountman?

http://untreaty.un.org/English/TreatyEv ... df/03e.pdf

catamount man wrote:All of you can kindly go jump. I'm sick of cowtowing to you people anyway. Don't call me, don't email me, just forget that I exist!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I will be a better person away from here anyway.

What do you mean by here? Reality?

catamount man wrote:All of you can kindly go jump. I'm sick of cowtowing to you people anyway. Don't call me, don't email me, just forget that I exist!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I will be a better person away from here anyway.

As CS.com turns
The weekly drama - the saga of Catamount man - takes an all too familiar turn again this afternoon...
Sure, we're running out of plot twists - in fact this weeks episode is just like last weeks...

But stay tuned for tomorrow (or the day after when he returns) and either apologizes or calls us all profanity laden adjectives...

Catman - did you actually READ this?

Every section that "gives" children rights is followed by a section LIMITING those rights when it comes to parents or guardians.

This is from 2001. The target is those countries that still allow child slavery, sex explotation, drafting in war, etc.

Children are still horribly exploited world wide, mostly in Africa and Asia.

Much ado about nothing - the goals of this document are very admirable - and very CHRIST-LIKE, actually.

There is NOTHING that would give rise to what you said in your OP.

dbackjon wrote:Catman - did you actually READ this?

Every section that "gives" children rights is followed by a section LIMITING those rights when it comes to parents or guardians.

This is from 2001. The target is those countries that still allow child slavery, sex explotation, drafting in war, etc.

Children are still horribly exploited world wide, mostly in Africa and Asia.

Much ado about nothing - the goals of this document are very admirable - and very CHRIST-LIKE, actually.

There is NOTHING that would give rise to what you said in your OP.

Jon, Jon, Jon....of course not....why read it when it's obviously just a cover for the UN and their King from Indonesia, Obama the Muslim, and an attempt to subvert and brainwash our children through indoctrination.....unlike US churches....

Appaholic wrote:

dbackjon wrote:Catman - did you actually READ this?

Every section that "gives" children rights is followed by a section LIMITING those rights when it comes to parents or guardians.

This is from 2001. The target is those countries that still allow child slavery, sex explotation, drafting in war, etc.

Children are still horribly exploited world wide, mostly in Africa and Asia.

Much ado about nothing - the goals of this document are very admirable - and very CHRIST-LIKE, actually.

There is NOTHING that would give rise to what you said in your OP.

Jon, Jon, Jon....of course not....why read it when it's obviously just a cover for the UN and their King from Indonesia, Obama the Muslim, and an attempt to subvert and brainwash our children through indoctrination.....unlike US churches....

And..
[youtube][/youtube]

dbackjon wrote:Catman - did you actually READ this?
Every section that "gives" children rights is followed by a section LIMITING those rights when it comes to parents or guardians.
This is from 2001. The target is those countries that still allow child slavery, sex explotation, drafting in war, etc.
Children are still horribly exploited world wide, mostly in Africa and Asia.
Much ado about nothing - the goals of this document are very admirable - and very CHRIST-LIKE, actually.
There is NOTHING that would give rise to what you said in your OP.

Jon,
What are you..?
A godless communist..!!!
We're going to have to submit you to some "re-education" if you keep this up...

The Constitution is a flexible document that can, and should, be altered to address modern conundra.

Fvck you if you don't agree.

Cap'n Cat wrote:This country needs to quit coddling the lazy mofo's who keep suckling from the government teet....like my borther and I...

Fvck you if you don't agree.

Agree