this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2023
328 points (98.0% liked)

InsanePeopleFacebook

2624 readers
109 users here now

Screenshots of people being insane on Facebook. Please censor names/pics of end users in screenshots. Please follow the rules of lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 186 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

More and more I'm starting to think we need such a thing as a children's Bill of Rights. We always talk about rights of the parents but children's rights seems to get just ignored completely in today's society. I mean why does this child have to have their life potentially ruined and at the very least damaged markedly by the attitude of the parent. This kid didn't choose to be born to the psycho parent, yet it's going to have to feel the the effects of it.

[–] [email protected] 62 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It seems like "parental rights" is the new strategy that far right radicals are using to erode personal rights and freedoms. Up here in Canada they're using it to force gender non-conforming children to be outted to their parents by their schools, and even acknowledge the violation to the rights of children through the use of the notwithstanding clause: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/sask-bill-137-notwithstanding-clause-1.6993335

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's because it was never about rights. It is about property.

Women used to be men's property.

Children used to be parents' property.

Minorities used to be white people's property.

The right doesn't want people's rights, they want property rights.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Time to start owning republicans.

[–] [email protected] 56 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There is the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which is an international treaty signed by all but 1 country in the UN. The only holdout is the US.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

A common enough thing for the US oddly enough.

The UN: "Hey, how about we made this basic, common sense, decent thing, part of what everyone could expect?"

The US: "Yeah, nah"

[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In Norway we tried. We got overuled by the European Courts. A bunch of foster parents threw in the towel as a result, and hundreds of children were deprived of a stable home environment.

Big win for the rights of abusive parents though!

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah I remember reading that. In Queensland, Australia it for some fucking insane reason is still legal to WHIP KIDS in private schools.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I thought there is no way that's true... get your shit together Queensland.

With the exception of Queensland, all Australian states and jurisdictions have prohibited the use of physical punishment in all schools.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

So, to be clear I think this is a fantasic idea and needed, but I don't actually see it happening. Children aren't a voting group who can advocate for their own rights, while conversely psychos like that in the image above will be quite vocal about "goverment interference".

While something like this should be bipartisan and common sense to enforce basic facilities for children. I am certain that R's would insist on "not 'trans'ing' children" or the rights of unborn children and the whole thing dies as part of culture war BS.

Maybe I'm jaded, but I don't see how this could progress.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 year ago

You've identified a key problem with top down "representative" democracy.

History hasn't ended. We can evolve.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I would like it if we could also somehow make over feeding your child count as child abuse.

There are a lot of parents who will just throw pizza and McDonald's at the child they have brought into the world rather than put the energy in to feed them nutritious healthy food.

Then you end up having third graders that weigh 175 lb becoming the norm.

And when you step back for just a moment and think, it is clear that that is child abuse. They are inflicting damage on that child that will last for the rest of their lives.

But making your child fat out of sheer laziness isn't treated the same as starving your child out of sheer laziness, and I don't know why.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

You're better off arguing that we should be offering nutritional food for free to children (or everybody) if that's the case. This bypasses a lot of issues that might stem from poverty and location, and seems to show positive trends in physical, behavioral and educational health, plus, as a long-term investment, generates huge returns in the money spent.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

"Put in the energy" what a judgemental prick. You have no idea what someone's personal situation is, nor would you care if you did. Just another cake life dickhead looking down on others.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

I want to know what these people think about the foster care system. When I see crap like that it raises so many questions. Do they know what actual child abuse looks like? Do they think that foster care is a better alternative to eating chicken nuggets? Have they thought about the implications of classifying certain foods as "child abuse" or how you would even enforce that? Do they really think all the people in that situationare lazy? Have they considered that many of those kids end up being latch key kids because their parents are underpaid and working constantly just to feed/cloth/house their kids? Have they ever touched grass?

Just so many questions...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

And the fix for that is name calling? I agree, there is a lot more needed than "energy" but let's have a discussion.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Makes sense. Too much legislation gets passed to “protect the children” but maybe it would help to codify what that actually means and get some committee to find out what issues kids are currently facing (inappropriate homeschooling, lack of independent mobility...) as opposed to the fearmongering against E2E encryption etc.