I am getting a very strange response to saying that British children whose parents took them to ISIS need to be brought home to safety & their parents locked up. The response is "No, because their parents meant to do that to them. The parents just have to live with it."
-
-
Argh. It only posted part of my thread and still won't let me post the rest for some reason. I found it in drafts tho. Here it is: Bloody hell, I do go on.pic.twitter.com/sXn0HhnQr8
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Lol how is this a difficult concept to anyone?!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
"Society has the responsibility to try to stop them from doing any of that" Yes, but 'for the children' quickly goes from a retroactive justification, where the state steps in after harm occurs, to one that presumes to intervene before it happens.
-
I think there's good case to hold someone responsible when measurable harm occurs: but that the punishment should be of the perpetrators, not some 2nd-hand 'enablers', even if they're parents. Perhaps 'especially'. But i'm not dogmatic about the point, just concerned...
-
If i could be convinced that a CPS type org would ONLY ever intervene in cases of real harm, i'd probably be 100% on board. Its just that, in my experience, that's impossible; once the system exists, you inevitably get stuff like this:https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2014/07/arrested-for-letting-a-9-year-old-play-at-the-park-alone/374436/ …
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.