Post by Radrook Admin on Apr 11, 2020 12:01:41 GMT -5
Parents Must be Committed to their kids: by Evevadandylion
If one does not preconsider the consequences of reckless/neglectful parenting as being a LIFETIME INVESTMENT, that person is too immature to be having sex.
Those who choose to put themselves in position as solely responsible for the teaching of a helpless naive child -- and take it lightly -- are a Cancer spot on society that engender festering feelings of inadequacy and confusion, and play the ultimate role in the downfall of Nations.
Post by Radrook Admin on Apr 26, 2020 18:04:06 GMT -5
That's why I believe that a license should be required in order to be allowed to be a parent. Had a license been required, many of the children that have been psychologically mangled by unqualified parents would have been spared the agony.
Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
Post by Radrook Admin on Apr 27, 2020 20:50:33 GMT -5
Those are very good questions! The solution would need to be left up to the experts in the field such as psychologists and Sociologists who can professionally assess the best ways to make the licensing feasible.
About child reporting. That is the exact situation that licensing would strive to avoid. The child should have no need to feel threatened and have to report a parent and a parent who needs reporting should not be parenting in the first place.
Regarding the training, parenting skills should begin as soon as a child can understand instructions. If a child understands that a met should not be mistreated then surely they can understand that neither should a baby or child placed in his or her future care be mistreated.
Tests would be to make sure that a citizen knows parenting responsibilities. Application for a license would mean that the person has the knowledge necessary. However, the person's behavioral record, psychological and emotional stability must also be evaluated. A psycho might be able to pass a parenting license knowledge exam. Once the child is in his clutches, then it is too late. These devils will threaten the child in order to prevent any reporting. So emotional and psychological stability is a must in qualifying for such a license. IMHO.
Yes when dealing with psychos that might charismatically trick the test where can a child go to and report? The administrators of test MUST inform every child WHAT AND WHO to find and tell if they feel threatened.
No system would be perfect.
True, passing a knowledge test doesn't prove a person trustworthy to raise a child. It just means that the person knows what is right and what is wrong in child rearing. In short, if indeed mistakes are made-then ignorance can be ruled out. Same with driving a car, if the person knows the rules, then a traffic violation is not due to ignorance. The point is that since a great percentage of child abuse is generated by parental ignorance, providing such knowledge can be expected to reduce child abuse which stems from it.
Another stipulation for the license is a thorough background check which would tend to rule out psychological or emotional instability. Also to assure that the parents are financially able to raise a child in a healthful environment and not in a ghetto.
These two together as prerequisites for a parenting license can be expected to have a positive effect.
The right to procreate is a right which most governments concede unless there is mental retardation or some other genetic reason to prohibit a couple from it.
Reproductive rights are legal rights and freedoms relating to reproduction and reproductive health that vary among countries around the world. The World Health Organization defines reproductive rights as follows:
Reproductive rights rest on the recognition of the basic right of all couples and individuals to decide freely and responsibly the number, spacing and timing of their children and to have the information and means to do so, and the right to attain the highest standard of sexual and reproductive health. They also include the right of all to make decisions concerning reproduction free of discrimination, coercion and violence.
The Court has long recognized that the right to procreate is a fundamental right protected by the Constitution. In Skinner v. Oklahoma (1942), the Court invalidated a state statute that provided for the mandatory sterilization of certain habitual criminals. Noting that the right to procreate was a “basic right of man,” the Court strictly limited the power of a state to impose involuntary sterilization. civilrights.uslegal.com/due-process-violation/substantive-due-process/right-to-procreate/
In the case of procreation rights... The WHO is a bogus cover for governmental entity. Its FAR Too large and impersonal because it is global. Even a national institution alone can be too strong. It ought to be based on regional demographic concerns or at least run unfunded by politician hands
Every region experiencing similar pars and status quo should have a voted for and appointed headship organization exclusively for supervision of decent parenting standards and criteria unique to that region. And if a family moves they will register and be held accountable to the new standards or else be sanctioned for not notifying the Board
I agree. Negative sanctions should be part of the plan in order to discourage any deviation from good parenting.
The World Health Organization does the following:
WHO works worldwide to promote health, keep the world safe, and serve the vulnerable.
Our goal is to ensure that a billion more people have universal health coverage, to protect a billion more people from health emergencies, and provide a further billion people with better health and well-being.
For universal health coverage, we:
focus on primary health care to improve access to quality essential services
work towards sustainable financing and financial protection
improve access to essential medicines and health products
train the health workforce and advise on labour policies
support people's participation in national health policies
improve monitoring, data and information.
For health emergencies, we:
prepare for emergencies by identifying, mitigating and managing risks
prevent emergencies and support development of tools necessary during outbreaks
detect and respond to acute health emergencies
support delivery of essential health services in fragile settings.
For health and well-being we:
address social determinants
promote intersectoral approaches for health
prioritize health in all policies and healthy settings.
Through our work, we address:
human capital across the life-course
noncommunicable diseases prevention
mental health promotion
climate change in small island developing states
elimination and eradication of high-impact communicable diseases.
About procreation rights, that is how those rights are defined.
In countries which guarantee such rights, citizen opposition would present a very formidable obstacle. Negating such rights would be a complete about-face and would be challenged by citizens who feel that their rights are being violated. It would finally be taken to the supreme court in the USA and whatever the Supreme Court decides would have to be heeded in the USA. In countries where human rights are not protected constitutionally, then the opposition to that kind of legislation would be via "illegal" means.
Well truly it wasn't fair for the world to impose such sanctions on the country and blame them for the whole of the first world war. That is in part what feuled sentiment for Hitler's civilians.
However those who followed him were ignoring the blatant fact of massacre on every side of the judgmental sphere. Where their conscience was at is really hard to say
True, the severe sanctions placed on Germany after WWI laid the foundation which created the profound social discontent leading to WWII. But the question is whether war was the only solution to the problems that the nation faced. The USA faced very similar problems of unemployment during the presidency of Theodore Roosevelt. Yet President Roosevelt chose to solve those problems via peaceful means. In stark contrast, Hitler chose militarization and a systematic persecution of a very important segment of its population. But the price that the nation paid for that temporary respite from underemployment was not worth it.
That whole scenario constituted nationally-approved bad parenting. Fascist German parents were teaching prejudice and cruelty and disregard for human life. But as the Bible tells us, whatever we sow we reap.
Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
Post by Radrook Admin on May 22, 2020 16:28:33 GMT -5
I agree totally. The USA and Germany were not in the same psychological situation of being scapegoats or saddled with the same national financial burden of having to pay for war damages considered unfairly severe. However, had Hitler not arisen at that psychologically vulnerable time, the nation would have found a better way to deal with the problems. So in my opinion, it wasn't primarily the deep resentment that led to the violent demonic solutions but the man and his fanatical ideology which fanned the flames of human irrationality for his own ambitious purpose.
Please note that the Allies bent over backward to avoid another World War by allowing Hitler to stop payments, to re-militarize the nation, and to steamroll through several countries in order to pacify him. Yet Hitler interpreted it as a weakness.
Honestly why the Russians or British weren't sanctioned after the war for their heinous acts all thru the 19th century which led to the ugliness in the start of the 20th century, is truly beyond me.
Their leaders have war mongered and pillaged as much as anyone in recent memory. The reason wars happen is bc leaders want to annex land and slave power.
I wonder why God does not call people to stop those leaders individually. The reasons for his waiting and citizens suffering harshly is truly beyond me. I guess because life in flesh does not matter at all in the long run for anyone, but only acknowledging Gods supreme law as Good!
Because one of the universal sovereignty issues still needs to be settled.
The Issue was raised by Satan's accusation that God was selfishly withholding something good from his creatures because he feared that they would succeed without him.
Gen 3: 5 “Is it really so that God said you must not eat from every tree of the garden?”
"For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."
God disagrees with this:
Jeremiah 10:23, 24 NWT
23 I well know, O Jehovah, that man’s way does not belong to him.
It does not belong to man who is walking even to direct his step.+ -------------------------------------------------------
Only when this issue is conclusively settled can God justifiably step in.
Once that fact is conclusively demonstrated, then it will be time to intervene.
Daniel 2:44 ►NIV "In the time of those kings, the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed, nor will it be left to another people. It will crush all those kingdoms and bring them to an end, but it will itself endure forever.
Stepping in too soon would leave questions unanswered.
Directing our steps meaning.... As far as purity and fairness and goodwill?
For i think that's what succeeding is - for a Kingdom will endure by generosity and goodwill, but topple under the leeching of greeds
That was the original idea. A world paradise under the guidance of God inhabited by his obedient Earthly children. Mankind was not created to be independent of God. It was created to depend on his guidance.
NWT “Fear the true God and keep his commandments. For this is the whole obligation of man.”—ECCLESIASTES 12:13.
Psalm 119: 105 Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path.
JEREMIAH 10:23 KJ21 O Lord, I know that the way of man is not in himself; it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps.
Satan challenged that arrangement by telling man that God was selfish and that man had a right to decide right from wrong. He insinuated that man could succeed without God if only God would step aside. God allowed the challenge in order to prove otherwise.
That was approx 6000 years ago. Had God intervened it could be argued that he did not allow mankind to reach its full creative potential for fear that mankind would succeed. So God must allow mankind to reach a stage where there are absolutely no doubts concerning this issue raised at Eden.
Interesting. You do raise a point. But then God DID intervene at BABEL.
I am not raising a point. I am simply repeating the point that Satan raised in his challenge at Eden.
True. He God has intervened numerous times. But Earth in general has been allowed to continue under Satanic rule.
Luke 4: 6 5 Then the devil led Him up to a high place and showed Him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. 6 I will give You authority over all these kingdoms and all their glory,” he said. “For it has been relinquishedto me, and I can give it to anyone I wish. 7 So if You worship me, it will all be Yours.”…
Jesus did not dispute that claim. In fact, the Apostle Paul and John acknowledge that this world is generally under satanic control. Paul refers to him as the god and the prince of this world. Tells us that he has the whole world under his power.
2 Corinthians 4:4 (NLT)
4 Satan, who is the god of this world, has blinded the minds of those who don’t believe. They are unable to see the glorious light of the Good News. They don’t understand this message about the glory of Christ, who is the exact likeness of God.
Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.
1 John 5:19
We know that we are of God, and that the whole world is under the power of the evil one.
Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
So all these interventions left the situation more or less intact because the issue raised at Eden still needed to be resolved before God felt justified in regaining full control.
However, you do raise a very good point. God did say at Babel that left to their own devices there would be nothing they could not accomplish. However, that statement has to be considered within the context of the rest of the scriptures which describe God's will as irresistible. His present will is that mankind age sicken and die here on earth, and since that is God's will, there is NOTHING mankind can do via technology in order to nullify that judicial decision. Being in one geographical location under one language would never nullify that decision.
All the peoples of the earth are counted as nothing, and He does as He pleases with the army of heaven and the peoples of the earth. There is no one who can restrain His hand or say to Him, 'What have You done?'
So it definitely wasn't fear of mankind succeeding against him that caused him to intervene. In view of the above, God's statement can only be understood as either verbal irony or hyperbole.
Post by Radrook Admin on May 25, 2020 19:38:37 GMT -5
One thing that has to be always kept in mind and which the Bible constantly reminds us of is that earth's governments are ALL scheduled to be forcefully removed and replaced by the Kingdom of God.
They are not prophesied to be the means by which mankind finds peace. If indeed they did succeed, then Satan would have been proven true and God a liar, and Satan's rebellion and all other rebellions will have been proven justified. But that is not what we are told will happen:
Daniel 2:44 NIV "In the time of those kings, the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed, nor will it be left to another people. It will crush all those kingdoms and bring them to an end, but it will itself endure forever.
11 I saw heaven opened, and look! a white horse.a And the one seated on it is called Faithful and True, and he judges and carries on war in righteousness. 12 His eyes are a fiery flame,e and on his head are many diadems. He has a name written that no one knows but he himself, 13 and he is clothed with an outer garment stained with blood, and he is called by the name The Word of God. 14 Also, the armies in heaven were following him on white horses, and they were clothed in white, clean, fine linen. 15 And out of his mouth protrudes a sharp, long sword with which to strike the nations...
Christians are supposed to pray for that to happen and waiting hopefully for it to happen and not placing their faith on Earth's kingdoms as the solution to mankind's problems.
Matthew 6:9, 10
9 “You must pray, then, this way: “‘Our Father in the heavens, let your name be sanctified. 10 Let your Kingdom come. Let your will take place, as in heaven, also on earth.
Pet 3:13 13 But there are new heavens and new earth that we are awaiting according to his promise, and in these righteousness is to dwell.
Not everyone will be allowed to live on that new Earth. Only those who are willing to live as God wants us to live.
“The righteous will possess the earth, and they will live forever on it.”—Psalm 37:29.
Radrook Admin: Welcome to all the new members and thank you all for joining the forum. For some strange reason, it is only now that I was informed that others had joined. My apologies.
Aug 13, 2023 4:37:21 GMT -5
Radrook Admin: Welcome to the Forum Sanya!
Jun 21, 2023 15:04:34 GMT -5
Radrook Admin: Welcome to the forum Abdul! Thanks for joining!
May 29, 2023 22:40:18 GMT -5
Radrook Admin: Yes, sooner or later this entire website will disappear with everything posted on it for lack of finding someone to take over when I croak. But it won't be because you folks are refusing to respond. That I can guarantee.
Feb 26, 2023 7:10:41 GMT -5
Radrook Admin: That's one reason why I stopped providing long insights into the chess games I play. It's like speaking to the wall.
Feb 26, 2023 7:06:45 GMT -5
Radrook Admin: Funny how I can have approx. 400 people at one point browsing, and not one of them wants to give feedback nor participate in any way manner or form. Not even a simple click with a like.
Feb 26, 2023 7:03:49 GMT -5
Radrook Admin: Funny how these discussion forums were all the rage once until Twitter and YouTube and other such discussion venues came along.
Feb 13, 2023 8:40:52 GMT -5
Radrook Admin: I wish visitors would say something instead of just reading and leaving in silence. Or at the least, at least have the courtesy to rate the material.
Feb 4, 2023 21:26:37 GMT -5
Radrook Admin: Thinking that doctors are beyond criticism no matter what is a cultural trait I do not share.
Feb 3, 2023 12:48:59 GMT -5
Radrook Admin: Reporting physician malpractice might save someone else from getting murdered.
Jan 31, 2023 9:10:52 GMT -5
Radrook Admin: Funny how nobody believes you when you describe physician malpractice until it happens to them-isn't it.
Jan 30, 2023 21:13:57 GMT -5
Radrook Admin: Just restored the History section. Hopefully this one won't disappear like the last one did.
Jan 25, 2023 16:37:13 GMT -5