That I wish for myself, and YOU! Happy Easter, my friend.
On Apr 10, 9:13 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
> That is exactly it. They are us, which reverts back to the simple
> golden rule "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you".
>
> On Apr 10, 5:48 pm, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > "They are us. What do we wish for ourselves?" is what I see as the
> > core moral dilemma. They hear you saying this and they see you acting
> > accordingly.
>
> > On 10 Apr., 17:02, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > I heartily agree that our current systems make intervention
> > > difficult. We can do better. But the systems are better than they
> > > were two or three generations ago. It shouldn't stop us from making
> > > the call and giving the child all the support we can. If we each
> > > continue to act with integrity according to our moral compass, the
> > > rest will follow. Often, I think, the change we are looking for is
> > > not the change we see. That call might make things seem worse in the
> > > short term. But if a child can see an adult advocating, that child
> > > understands that it can be done, and may be on the way to advocating
> > > for themselves. They are us. What do we wish for ourselves?
>
> > > On Apr 10, 8:48 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > I couldn't agree more Molly. Yet anyone trying to intervene faces
> > > > chronic problems with bureaucracy that has moved from 'jobsworth' to
> > > > nasty behaviour towards complainants as a matter of routine. We still
> > > > have the routine use of secrecy preventing problems reaching public
> > > > scrutiny. The 'Baby P' scandal rolls on in the UK - today it has been
> > > > revealed that police failed the kid because the detective handling the
> > > > case moved on and thus there was no prosecution which would have saved
> > > > his life 8 months before he died. Cops have been presenting
> > > > themselves as 'heroes' until now. The relevant reports remain
> > > > unpublished, but are being leaked. We simply cannot trust the people
> > > > with authority to investigate. Your recommendations are, of course,
> > > > sound. They hit up against a system that is already corrupt. I
> > > > believe the debate and action needed is in respect of this problem.
>
> > > > On 10 Apr, 13:38, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > Yet even curiosity gets the better of some Vam, as perhaps in
> > > > > curiosity killing the cat. One hesitates to use the tool metaphor in
> > > > > speaking of sex - yet alas even curiosity may line the pathway to
> > > > > depravity. I can't reveal full details of what has been happening
> > > > > close to me over the last few years - but this includes the use of
> > > > > daughters to attract young males to criminal activity through sex with
> > > > > them by Fagin-like parents.
>
> > > > > On 10 Apr, 05:35, Vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > " But I can conceive of a much healthier environment where it would
> > > > > > possibly be permissible to respond in kind."
>
> > > > > > You mean : You need it. I too. Let's do it.
>
> > > > > > Instead, I see in the child's need an opportunity to create a
> > > > > > healthy
> > > > > > perspective of the matter in him, his thought - world, his life,
> > > > > > beyond his need of sex and definitely without the least need in me
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > benefit / satisfy myself from his need of sex.
>
> > > > > > Just an alternate view !
>
> > > > > > On Apr 9, 11:49 pm, gruff <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Perhaps it does matter. Boys and men tend to be more sexually
> > > > > > > aggressive than girls and women, though in the adult range of that
> > > > > > > aspect, more women are beginning to come out of the timidity
> > > > > > > closet,
> > > > > > > which pleases me to no end. Or it did back when I was still able.
>
> > > > > > > Nor does a child acting out sexually necessarily indicate a sexual
> > > > > > > violation or abuse has taken place. It may simply be a lack of
> > > > > > > love
> > > > > > > in the home that causes that acting out -- though a lack of love
> > > > > > > can
> > > > > > > certainly be considered abuse. Or it could also be a vivid
> > > > > > > imagination. There are probably a host of reasons a child would
> > > > > > > act
> > > > > > > out sexually, just as there are a host of reasons children act
> > > > > > > out in
> > > > > > > many other ways.
>
> > > > > > > As to whether that acting out would justify a response, well, in
> > > > > > > today's emotional and irrational mindset many have regarding the
> > > > > > > issue, I'd have to say there would be no justified response
> > > > > > > because it
> > > > > > > would do no more than to place the child in the emotional chains
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > shame, guilt and despair. But I can conceive of a much healthier
> > > > > > > environment where it would possibly be permissible to respond in
> > > > > > > kind. It just doesn't exist at this time.
>
> > > > > > > On Apr 9, 11:03 am, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > boy or girl, does it matter? children who act out sexually do
> > > > > > > > so
> > > > > > > > because they have been violated in this way. But as a question
> > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > morality, would their approach justify any response to it?-
> > > > > > > > Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
