Never mind that so many cases of child abuse occur by an adult who is wasted. Morons
2006-11-29 06:52:26 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
LOL. Liberals, you brainless twits. Have you ever heard of after 10-beers-death? I have, where a drunk adult, after going on a tirade, beats the living **** out of a child.
2006-11-29 06:56:36 · update #1
I can drink in front of my child without abusing him... However, I cannot in any way smoke in front of my child without having the toxins enter into his lungs...
Sure, some people get wild on alcohol, but a lot don't. The fact of the matter is that ALL people who smoke in front of children will be sharing their terrible smoke.
Good Question!!!
2006-11-29 06:55:37 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
the ban on smoking has nothing to do with the modeling of a bad behavior (as it is) it has to do with the fact that the smoke hurts the child directly... whereas you drinking doesn't hurt the child directly (other than the poor modeling).. you still have to make the choice to abuse the child... not saying i completely agree with it.. just that it makes perfect logical since in it's limited scope... you can't fix the whole world in one day.. so just do what you can when you can.
and as for your little add in about the 10 beers.. how many people DON'T abuse their children after drinking a lot? plenty.. actually, more people DON'T abuse their children than DO after drinking and those that DO obviously need some mental help.
2006-11-29 06:55:59 · answer #2 · answered by pip 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
you're good, you have a factor. i did no longer understand all of us replaced into attempting to prohibit cigarettes. i understand they are banning smoking in public places with the intention to no longer provide harmless human beings 2d hand smoke. i think of the factor is that smoking is undesirable no be counted what, yet whilst somebody beverages gently and responsibly there is not any injury accomplished. there are various extra deaths via smoking than eating. inebriated using regulations are no longer continually useful, however the regulation makers do what they are able to. We cant ban each thing, next we can opt to prohibit knives because of the fact human beings get stabbed with them, then how can you slice you sandwich ?
2016-10-13 09:10:08 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hey I believe you should be able to smoke around your kids I dont give a rats behind what you do. I am tired of not being able to do things like speak like an adult because children are around. All you conservatives talking about this remember that next time you talk about your idiotic obscenities around children b.s. that infringes on freedom of speach. Get rid of the FCC. Its unconstitutional.
2006-11-29 07:57:35 · answer #4 · answered by mrlebowski99 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why are ditto heads so stupid that they can't tell the difference between an act that infringes upon the rights of others i.e. second hand smoke, and something that someone is doing soully to them selves. Now most liberals and Conservatives that I know think that people that abuse substances in front of children are abhor-able, for their lack of good judgment. But cigarette smoking alone has an immediate impact on the health and well being of a child in its vicinity. I have every legal right to swing my hand in the air but that right stops (unfortunately) right when it smacks you upside your fool head.
2006-11-29 07:11:10 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Please, please, please don't make blanket statements - you look like a lot of the "liberals" on here! Some liberals aren't stupid, some are. Just like conservatives.
I DO think it's ironic that many liberals think very young girls (12, 13) have the maturity to deal with an abortion, but they can't be trusted to make choices on what to eat. Some people in NY and LA are trying to make it illegal for schools to sell fatty or sweet foods. Not sure what party they belong to, but come on! If abortion is a "personal choice" (and I agree that it is, and should be) then certainly, what you eat is a personal choice. Weird, isn't it?
2006-11-29 07:00:26 · answer #6 · answered by Jadis 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Because Ted Kennedy is still a strong influence in the Democratic party.
2006-11-29 10:49:13 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Liberals cant help they that they are born with niticeable mental disabilities. Help me combat the liberal menace. They steal babies and use them for burnt offerings! Prepare for Armageddon if the Democratic war machine is not CRUSHED! The Apocalypse is nigh!
2006-12-01 17:23:41 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not to mention the lawsuits they threatened to Nabisco and Kraft if they didnt take fat out of their foods..,taking snack foods and sodas out of schools..,they are getting more and more involved in private lives and yet claim conservatives are more govt.In Omaha you will get arrested for smoking while walking down the street within the city limits.
2006-11-29 06:57:20 · answer #9 · answered by halfbright 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
stupid???? that's nice.. when you have a ridiculous question.. why don't you look in a mirror... smoking around children kills children.. it is second hand smoke, and is more dangerous to the people around than to the smoker... drinking is someone's own choice.. if someone can't handle their drinking, or makes poor choices when drinking than they need to seek help.. drinking does not pose a risk to children unless someone does it that can't handle it.. and child abuse is against the law regardless if someone is drunk or not.. you are comparing apples to oranges and you are calling me stupid
2006-11-29 06:59:15 · answer #10 · answered by katjha2005 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋