What's baffling you today....?

21 to 40 of 44 messages
19/12/2012 at 10:58
Corinthian wrote (see)

Just why do Americans need household arsenals of assault weaponry? - I mean the 'well regulated militia' just isn't needed anymore, as us redcoats went home in 1815.

 

 

 

+1

I have never seen so much defending of the utterly, utterly indefensible.

You can point out that the Founding Fathers had flintlock pistols and not assault weapons in mind, when they drew up the 2nd amendment; remind them that the constitution can be amended (and that the above is a clue); provide gun death statistics from other countries; try to explain that arming the teachers would not have been the answer; try to persuade them that even if they think they have a "tyrannical goverment" that needs to be deterred it has tanks, planes and a big f*cking army. Not one single argument holds up in the light of reasoning and they still demand the right to bear arms.

Basically Americans are just in love with guns. It's sickening.

Edited: 19/12/2012 at 10:59
19/12/2012 at 17:31
Why that woman who's son is dying of a brain tumor refused to let him have an operation because of the possible side effects
LIVERBIRD    pirate
19/12/2012 at 19:16
I don't know the answer to that one either Tom. But she DID call him Neon and believes in herbal crap so she's quite barmy.....
19/12/2012 at 19:56
Liverbird...that's exactly what my wife said.
19/12/2012 at 21:25

I think she wants him to live and die now as the boy she knows and recognises rather than take the risk that he could live for some considerable time incapacitated by the "possible side effects".

Some might think that selfish of her others' might think she should give the boy the chance of there possibly being little or no side effects.

At the end of the day society tends to leave the child in the care and responsibility of the mother whatever the outcome. Should the mother therefore not have the say how SHE wants matters to proceed?

 

19/12/2012 at 21:29

Probably yes she should but what are the possible side effects?  I've heard impaired intellect and infertility.  As a mother I'd like to have a live child with these "possible" side effects than a deceased one!

20/12/2012 at 08:03
Martenkay wrote (see)

I think she wants him to live and die now as the boy she knows and recognises rather than take the risk that he could live for some considerable time incapacitated by the "possible side effects".

Some might think that selfish of her others' might think she should give the boy the chance of there possibly being little or no side effects.

At the end of the day society tends to leave the child in the care and responsibility of the mother whatever the outcome. Should the mother therefore not have the say how SHE wants matters to proceed?

 

She got to put her case in front of a judge, which is fair, it means she had her say,  but ultimately the doctors know best. 

The father is also in favour of the op.

 

Edited: 20/12/2012 at 08:11
20/12/2012 at 11:13

It's baffling me how it can rain so much, so often in this country like it is now, yet we still have problems with supplying water to our homes at times.

20/12/2012 at 13:01

When the cloud base is at treetop height and it's pissing down, my Garmin finds the satellites in a trice. When it's sunshine and a clear blue sky it can take five minutes.

That is what is baffling me today.

20/12/2012 at 13:23
Strangely Brown wrote (see)

It's baffling me how it can rain so much, so often in this country like it is now, yet we still have problems with supplying water to our homes at times.

It is baffling until you realise that the water supply and urban planning in this country is mismanaged. There would more than enough water to go around and no need for drought orders if we stopped paving over the southeast of England and then built a big pipe to it from the Welsh hills.

20/12/2012 at 13:27

Rate it's falling over here you won't need a bliddy pipe
What's baffling me today is the fuss over Sunday Trading Laws and M&S deciding to open at midnight on Sunday to make up for the lost hours on Sunday. Don't retailers think shoppers will adjust and we son't all try and cram everything into six hours on Sunday?

20/12/2012 at 22:07
What baffles me is how I survived my early years when, on Sunday, the only shops that were open were the newsagents and the garden centre. Even in December!!
20/12/2012 at 22:51
Why people are stripping supermarket shelves of food? These days they are only shut for a day, you won't starve!
Oh and ps if it is the end of the world tomorrow, duh it's the end you won't need food!
21/12/2012 at 09:24

How can my class of 17/18 yr olds ask me: 'Is Greece in Europe?' - It later emerged that they knew Greece used the Euro as they had been there on holiday.

seren nos    pirate
21/12/2012 at 09:27

Oh dear Keir......thats a bad one

seren nos    pirate
21/12/2012 at 09:29
Screamapillar wrote (see)
Strangely Brown wrote (see)

It's baffling me how it can rain so much, so often in this country like it is now, yet we still have problems with supplying water to our homes at times.

It is baffling until you realise that the water supply and urban planning in this country is mismanaged. There would more than enough water to go around and no need for drought orders if we stopped paving over the southeast of England and then built a big pipe to it from the Welsh hills.

didn't they do that for birmingham centuries ago....

I think they should do it and charge the south east a fortune..............At the moment Wales has the second highest water charges in the country..........and we get all the sodding rain

21/12/2012 at 10:27

I blame all the leeks.

 

*b-doom-tsh*

21/12/2012 at 11:00
We three Keir's of orient are... wrote (see)

How can my class of 17/18 yr olds ask me: 'Is Greece in Europe?' - It later emerged that they knew Greece used the Euro as they had been there on holiday.

Did they mean physically in Europe, or in the EU?

Andorra is not in the EU, but does use Euros.

21/12/2012 at 12:04

Both. 

JvR
21/12/2012 at 13:10

 

Screamapillar wrote (see)
Martenkay wrote (see)

I think she wants him to live and die now as the boy she knows and recognises rather than take the risk that he could live for some considerable time incapacitated by the "possible side effects".

Some might think that selfish of her others' might think she should give the boy the chance of there possibly being little or no side effects.

At the end of the day society tends to leave the child in the care and responsibility of the mother whatever the outcome. Should the mother therefore not have the say how SHE wants matters to proceed?

 

She got to put her case in front of a judge, which is fair, it means she had her say,  but ultimately the doctors know best. 

The father is also in favour of the op.

 


I can understand the mother being worried about side effects of the treatment but that's where the doctors should be explaining what the risks are, what the side effects are and what they can do in order counteract them.
Ok, infertility would be the biggest problem but how does she know that her young child is going to grow up to want children, besides there's always adoption.
The effects on his growth and problems with puberty can be addressed by giving growth hormones and testosterone injections.
If the father and her had weighed everything up and decided that the chances of a successful outcome to the treatment was so low and that the young child's quality of life would be poor then I can understand the decision.
If the chances of the treatment being successful were high then not giving the child the chance would be mad.

 

21 to 40 of 44 messages
Previously bookmarked threads are now visible in "Followed Threads". You can also manage notifications on these threads from the "Forum Settings" section of your profile settings page to prevent being sent an email when a reply is made.
Forum Jump  

RW Forums