CompleteIdiot Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 LOSE WEIGHT OR WE'LL TAKE ALL SIX OF YOUR CHILDREN AWAY: OUTRAGE OVER SOCIAL WORKERS' 'DRACONIAN' ULTIMATUM TO PARENTS http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23462106-details/Lose+weight+or+we%27ll+take+all+six+of+your+children+away%3A+Outrage+over+social+workers%27+%27draconian%27+ultimatum+to+parents/article.do Another sign of the fascist state interfering in people's lives. Next they'll be coming for the kids of smokers and drinkers. Sadly, a lot of the Health Nazi sheeple on here will be happy about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambo121 Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Liked the comment underneath that said if the parents did drugs or beat them the Social would be doing everything they could to keep them with the family. Maybe some sort of assistance could be given in these circumstances as there is nothing to say they are bad parents or there kids are badly brought up. Society is going mad. Smoke, eat too much or even drive a car and your a leper. Take drugs, get pregnant while under the legal age or sit about and scrounge off society and your to be pitied and have all our tax spent on you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tazio Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Taking the kids away is a bit over the top. However a kid who is 16 stone at 12 years old will doubtless be on incapacity by the time he is 21. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djf Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 She admitted: "They keep making an issue about the kids' weight. I don't even own a deep-fat fryer. "All my food is home-cooked and the kids are not fed junk food at all. I think somebody's telling porkie pies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CompleteIdiot Posted March 24, 2008 Author Share Posted March 24, 2008 I think somebody's telling porkie pies. It might be genetic problem that predisposes them to gain weight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 It might be genetic problem that predisposes them to gain weight. You're an intelligent man. That argument is scraping the bottom of the barrel, and you know it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CompleteIdiot Posted March 24, 2008 Author Share Posted March 24, 2008 Oh well. It could be worse. Someone might be seriously suggesting that companies should be able to film you in your own living room. Oh wait... http://newteevee.com/2008/03/18/comcast-cameras-to-start-watching-you/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tazio Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Oh well. It could be worse. Someone might be seriously suggesting that companies should be able to film you in your own living room. Oh wait... http://newteevee.com/2008/03/18/comcast-cameras-to-start-watching-you/ That's going to decimate subscriptions to porn channels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davemclaren Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Oh well. It could be worse. Someone might be seriously suggesting that companies should be able to film you in your own living room. Oh wait... http://newteevee.com/2008/03/18/comcast-cameras-to-start-watching-you/ How often do you get out of your bunker? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CompleteIdiot Posted March 24, 2008 Author Share Posted March 24, 2008 You're an intelligent man. That argument is scraping the bottom of the barrel, and you know it. It is a component. People inherit metabolisms. Furthermore, what about that fat virus? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2000/07/29/wobes29.xml Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 It is a component. People inherit metabolisms. Furthermore, what about that fat virus? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2000/07/29/wobes29.xml Ach, you know the scientific principles at work here - not to mention the probabilities. Most people are overweight because they input more calories than they burn off. And most of the time that happens for the simple reason that people eat way too much. Parents have a significant responsibility in this regard. Put simply, if we teach our children to eat more than they burn off, they'll grow up to be overweight. The social workers are doing their job in an arse about face way, not to mention intervening about a dozen years too late, but the fundamental point is correct. The parents are teaching their children to be overweight and unhealthy. They should teach their children something better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CompleteIdiot Posted March 24, 2008 Author Share Posted March 24, 2008 Ach, you know the scientific principles at work here - not to mention the probabilities. Most people are overweight because they input more calories than they burn off. And most of the time that happens for the simple reason that people eat way too much. Parents have a significant responsibility in this regard. Put simply, if we teach our children to eat more than they burn off, they'll grow up to be overweight. The social workers are doing their job in an arse about face way, not to mention intervening about a dozen years too late, but the fundamental point is correct. The parents are teaching their children to be overweight and unhealthy. They should teach their children something better. Like ethics, morals and Christianity? God forbid parenting should be measured by anything so shallow! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Like ethics, morals and Christianity? Like when to stop eating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CompleteIdiot Posted March 24, 2008 Author Share Posted March 24, 2008 Like when to stop eating. Matt 7:1-5 Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye. No parents are perfect. If they are there for their children and they love their children, I'll take that over anything that can be measured by BMI alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Romanov Saviour of HMFC Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Matt 7:1-5 No parents are perfect. If they are there for their children and they love their children, I'll take that over anything that can be measured by BMI alone. But they are not giving the kids a fair shot at life. When they are old enough to go out and live they won't be able to because they will be to fat to get out of bed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 No parents are perfect. If they are there for their children and they love their children, I'll take that over anything that can be measured by BMI alone. Who's asking for perfection? All parents make mistakes. But it would help if they'd have a look and recognise their mistakes, instead of blaming the State for their woes or expecting the State to fix their problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legend Claws Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Not fair to take kids away but I do have a problem with fat parents in that I fear for their kids in terms of health, being bullied, never having sex etc. Sad fact is that the majority of obese people are only in that state due to gluttony and that must rub off on kids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CompleteIdiot Posted March 24, 2008 Author Share Posted March 24, 2008 But they are not giving the kids a fair shot at life. When they are old enough to go out and live they won't be able to because they will be to fat to get out of bed. You don't know that. This is a conditioning. Fat people are lazy and stupid. Right? Winston Churchill stood up against the Nazis. He was hardly a stick insect. He had already won a nobel prize for literature before steering Great Britain to victory. If Churchill was our leader today, he would be criticised for being a fat alcoholic smoker by the PC Health Nazis. Stereotyping doesn't help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boof Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 I think somebody's telling porkie pies. And eating 'em... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CompleteIdiot Posted March 24, 2008 Author Share Posted March 24, 2008 Who's asking for perfection? All parents make mistakes. But it would help if they'd have a look and recognise their mistakes, instead of blaming the State for their woes or expecting the State to fix their problems. No. They asked for help and now the state wants to take their children. That isn't help. It's state control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Romanov Saviour of HMFC Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 You don't know that. This is a conditioning. Fat people are lazy and stupid. Right? Winston Churchill stood up against the Nazis. He was hardly a stick insect. He had already won a nobel prize for literature before steering Great Britain to victory. If Churchill was our leader today, he would be criticised for being a fat alcoholic smoker by the PC Health Nazis. Stereotyping doesn't help. Yes. I don't know that but if they are already obese at such a young age then what chance do they stand? It's the parents responsibility to make sure children are in good health and they simply aren't doing that. Don't think they should be taken away but something has to be done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Winston Churchill stood up against the Nazis. He was hardly a stick insect. He had already won a nobel prize for literature before steering Great Britain to victory. Fair comment. And I will be the first to post on here in both celebration and apology just as soon as that 12-year-old-and-16-stone kid saves Britain from danger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CompleteIdiot Posted March 24, 2008 Author Share Posted March 24, 2008 Yes. I don't know that but if they are already obese at such a young age then what chance do they stand? It's the parents responsibility to make sure children are in good health and they simply aren't doing that. Don't think they should be taken away but something has to be done. Why? Where is the evidence that the parents are force feeding their children so they become fat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 Why? Where is the evidence that the parents are force feeding their children so they become fat? Where is the evidence that the parents asked for help and were handed a "diet or else" ultimatum? Perhaps the social services did all the stuff they were supposed to do when faced with a family of kids with obesity problems and behavioural issues. Perhaps their observations led them to the belief that the parents are to blame or are incapable of coping. Perhaps we're hearing one side of the story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Romanov Saviour of HMFC Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 Why? Where is the evidence that the parents are force feeding their children so they become fat? They are obviously doing something wrong as they are a family of 7 and everyone of them are on the 'large' side. The shocking development highlights Britain's childhood obesity crisis, which has already forced those as young as 13 to seek NHS weight-loss surgery. Only America has more overweight children than the UK, leading health experts to warn that our current generation of youngsters may not outlive their parents. This part is why parents should be doing more. They have been told to send them to football/dance lessons which is a very reasonable, sensible idea. If they don't do this then they will look at taking them into care. Kick up the arse that many families need maybe? Nothing worse than seeing some fat, lazy kid who wants to sit in front of their Playstation all day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 They are obviously doing something wrong as they are a family of 7 and everyone of them are on the 'large' side. Something's just dawned on me reading the article. I have an 11-year-old. The 11-year-old girl and 12-year-old boy combined weigh FOUR TIMES what he does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CompleteIdiot Posted March 25, 2008 Author Share Posted March 25, 2008 They are obviously doing something wrong as they are a family of 7 and everyone of them are on the 'large' side. The shocking development highlights Britain's childhood obesity crisis, which has already forced those as young as 13 to seek NHS weight-loss surgery. Only America has more overweight children than the UK, leading health experts to warn that our current generation of youngsters may not outlive their parents. This part is why parents should be doing more. They have been told to send them to football/dance lessons which is a very reasonable, sensible idea. If they don't do this then they will look at taking them into care. Kick up the arse that many families need maybe? Nothing worse than seeing some fat, lazy kid who wants to sit in front of their Playstation all day. You are conditioned to think it is okay for the state to come in and take people's children away. You are taking on the conditioning of the police state. Take a step back. Of course it is okay for parents to ask social workers for help and the social workers to suggest exercise as a good plan. It is not okay for the government to come in and take your children if you have not abused them. That is never okay. There is no reasonable basis for doing this. This is meant to be a free country. You might want to raise your kids as Christians, Muslims, Vegans or Environmentalists. Why should the state be able to tell you can't do that? That is the natural progression. You'll be sitting there going "something has to be done" after the fake news report says that being vegan makes you a terrorist comes out. That's how ridiculous this model of socialised government control of people's lives is. There is no end to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CompleteIdiot Posted March 25, 2008 Author Share Posted March 25, 2008 Something's just dawned on me reading the article. I have an 11-year-old. The 11-year-old girl and 12-year-old boy combined weigh FOUR TIMES what he does. That makes it okay then. Send in the secret police to take their children. Put the parents in camps. Gas them. Yeah! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CompleteIdiot Posted March 25, 2008 Author Share Posted March 25, 2008 Where is the evidence that the parents asked for help and were handed a "diet or else" ultimatum? Perhaps the social services did all the stuff they were supposed to do when faced with a family of kids with obesity problems and behavioural issues. Perhaps their observations led them to the belief that the parents are to blame or are incapable of coping. Perhaps we're hearing one side of the story. That's a loaded statement. What does it mean? You keep looking at this story as if the state needs to intervene in everything. If your kid was a schizophrenic and you had trouble dealing with their mental illness, should the state take your kid away from you? For all I know, you could have done everything to support you child. The state would always have an excuse though. That's what happens when you give the state the power to decide what happens to your children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 If your kid was a schizophrenic and you had trouble dealing with their mental illness, should the state take your kid away from you? Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 You keep looking at this story as if the state needs to intervene in everything. No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Payton Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 That's a loaded statement. What does it mean? You keep looking at this story as if the state needs to intervene in everything. If your kid was a schizophrenic and you had trouble dealing with their mental illness, should the state take your kid away from you? For all I know, you could have done everything to support you child. The state would always have an excuse though. That's what happens when you give the state the power to decide what happens to your children. Question for you CompleteIdiot, one I've not got a thought through answer to myself yet. I know what you're saying about a nanny state, but is there a point at which we can take the parents' right to look after their own children as they choose too far (I think there is) and should taking children away from their parents be at the far end of the spectrum of options available to those responsible for making the decision if it is considered neccesary? If yes, could you argue (and I'm not saying it is so in this case) that inflicting a poor diet on a child could be construed as serious abuse? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legend Claws Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 Question for you CompleteIdiot, one I've not got a thought through answer to myself yet. I know what you're saying about a nanny state, but is there a point at which we can take the parents' right to look after their own children as they choose too far (I think there is) and should taking children away from their parents be at the far end of the spectrum of options available to those responsible for making the decision if it is considered neccesary? If yes, could you argue (and I'm not saying it is so in this case) that inflicting a poor diet on a child could be construed as serious abuse?[/QUOTE] Yes I think you could term it as serious abuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neobis Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 I have said it before ..... Tax the Fat! Great program here from Giles Coren: http://www.channel4.com/more4/documentaries/doc-feature.jsp?id=55 I think CompleteIdiot maybe overweight, he always gets a bit touchy on the subject (as he does on smoking). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boaby Ewing Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 I don't think the state should be taking these kids away, but if they do, let's put them in cages outside Burger King so passers-by can rattle them with sticks. In for a penny and all that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rab Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 If they don't do this then they will look at taking them into care. The only responsibility the state has is education, and in the UK, healthcare. There is no fallback to the state if the parents are capabable of care, but fail to provide it. If you make the argument that there is, then there are a host of greater failures than a proper diet. Smoking, drinking (not just alcoholics), morality, ethics, respect - all of these are more important than teaching a kid to eat properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CompleteIdiot Posted March 25, 2008 Author Share Posted March 25, 2008 I have said it before ..... Tax the Fat! Great program here from Giles Coren: http://www.channel4.com/more4/documentaries/doc-feature.jsp?id=55 I think CompleteIdiot maybe overweight, he always gets a bit touchy on the subject (as he does on smoking). So you believe that fat people should be rounded up and put in concentration camps? Oh please! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CompleteIdiot Posted March 25, 2008 Author Share Posted March 25, 2008 Question for you CompleteIdiot, one I've not got a thought through answer to myself yet. I know what you're saying about a nanny state, but is there a point at which we can take the parents' right to look after their own children as they choose too far (I think there is) and should taking children away from their parents be at the far end of the spectrum of options available to those responsible for making the decision if it is considered neccesary? If yes, could you argue (and I'm not saying it is so in this case) that inflicting a poor diet on a child could be construed as serious abuse? Define a 'poor diet'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 So you believe that fat people should be rounded up and put in concentration camps? Arrr, bite Mac fries? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavsy Van Gaverson Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 I think it is a great idea . If your kids are fat they get taken of you What if you have no kids and are just a fat ******* yourself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neobis Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 So you believe that fat people should be rounded up and put in concentration camps? Where did I say that? Oh please! ..... Stay away from that cake tin now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavsy Van Gaverson Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 So you believe that fat people should be rounded up and put in concentration camps? Oh please! Yes, but let just call them what they are. 'Fat Camps' will do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacDonald Jardine Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 You are conditioned to think it is okay for the state to come in and take people's children away. You are taking on the conditioning of the police state. Take a step back. Of course it is okay for parents to ask social workers for help and the social workers to suggest exercise as a good plan. It is not okay for the government to come in and take your children if you have not abused them. That is never okay. There is no reasonable basis for doing this. This is meant to be a free country. You might want to raise your kids as Christians, Muslims, Vegans or Environmentalists. Why should the state be able to tell you can't do that? That is the natural progression. You'll be sitting there going "something has to be done" after the fake news report says that being vegan makes you a terrorist comes out. That's how ridiculous this model of socialised government control of people's lives is. There is no end to it. Really? Abuse is a very loaded term that implies wrongdoing. So if parents literally can't properly look after children, because of a learning disability or whatever, and no amount of help could change that, what do you do? Leave the children to whatever they have to suffer? That's not protecting families and certainly not children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doctor jambo Posted March 26, 2008 Share Posted March 26, 2008 You would have thought that Social Services would be too busy to bother with this kind of trivia . What with the hundreds of thousands of children being brought up by intra venous drug abusers, alcoholics and violent parents and all Clearly from their point of view it is OK to use hard drugs and raise children in abject poverty than let your kids over eat I'd rather the kids were fat than some of the poor starving, filthy waifs pushed around from pillar to post whilst thier parents are out whoring themselves or scoring smack Still, never mind eh, as long as cheap points are scored in the press over another trendy topic who cares? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.