MSNBC: Your Kids Don't Belong To You, They Belong To The Community

[theDoctorisIn]

Marxist=someone that wants all of humanity to live within a system that is communal and shares everything with everyone. This system would have us all sharing and getting equal amounts of things.

Sadly, human nature always leads to a dictatorship and the government forcing this down our throats.

I can agree with this for the most part.

Now, how does my lack of outrage at Melissa Perry's comments make me a "Marxist"?

 

[ScienceRocks]

Marxist=someone that wants all of humanity to live within a system that is communal and shares everything with everyone. This system would have us all sharing and getting equal amounts of things.

Sadly, human nature always leads to a dictatorship and the government forcing this down our throats.

I can agree with this for the most part.

Now, how does my lack of outrage at Melissa Perry's comments make me a "Marxist"?

She wants the community to control our children. Isn't the community(society) having control of things=Marxist in nature?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Do you routinely provide answers for other people to questions that were not asked? Are you on drugs?

Perhaps I jumped to conclusions.

I'm sure you can define "Marxist", and explain why not being outraged at this makes me one, right?

That seems to be a common thread for those like you. A Marxist believes in the supremacy of the state and the subornation of the individual to the state in all things, property, wealth, and even children. The idea that the state, or the "community" has primacy over children before parents is a very Marxist ideal and one that "any other Marxist" would also not be outraged over.

There are two major problems with this post.

1. "Marxism" doesn't mean what you think it does. Marxism calls for a stateless society, not a society in which the State is supreme. "Marxism" has more in common with anarchy than anything else - and the state "having primacy over children" would NOT be considered a "Marxist" ideal in any way.

2. Neither Melissa Perry or I have put forth the idea that "the state" or "the community" has "primacy" over children before parents.


I'm most certainly NOT a Marxist. But I do know what it means.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Marxist=someone that wants all of humanity to live within a system that is communal and shares everything with everyone. This system would have us all sharing and getting equal amounts of things.

Sadly, human nature always leads to a dictatorship and the government forcing this down our throats.

I can agree with this for the most part.

Now, how does my lack of outrage at Melissa Perry's comments make me a "Marxist"?

She wants the community to control our children. Isn't the community(society) having control of things=Marxist in nature?

1. No one has suggested that "the community control our children". Neither myself, nor Melissa Perry.

2. No, that wouldn't be "Marxist" in nature either.

 

[rightwinger]

Explain to me how its free kid.

You stupid ****, what is "free" about their education?

God Liberals are idiots.

All American children are entitled to a free public school education. Where ya been?

All Americans are entitled to a free public school education. Parents are not charged extra for having children in the public school system nor are they charged extra for having multiple children using public schools
You do pay taxes regardless of whether you use the schools or not

 

[ScienceRocks]

Would Stalinist be more accurate for what I'm saying?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Would Stalinist be more accurate for what I'm saying?

Yes.

Marx was the sociologist and theoretician.

Stalin was the Dictator.

 

[SinJinsg]

Perhaps I jumped to conclusions.

I'm sure you can define "Marxist", and explain why not being outraged at this makes me one, right?

That seems to be a common thread for those like you. A Marxist believes in the supremacy of the state and the subornation of the individual to the state in all things, property, wealth, and even children. The idea that the state, or the "community" has primacy over children before parents is a very Marxist ideal and one that "any other Marxist" would also not be outraged over.

There are two major problems with this post.

1. "Marxism" doesn't mean what you think it does. Marxism calls for a stateless society, not a society in which the State is supreme. "Marxism" has more in common with anarchy than anything else - and the state "having primacy over children" would NOT be considered a "Marxist" ideal in any way.

2. Neither Melissa Perry or I have put forth the idea that "the state" or "the community" has "primacy" over children before parents.


I'm most certainly NOT a Marxist. But I do know what it means.

Thank you for proving you have utterly no Earthly idea what you are talking about. No, Marxism does not call for a "stateless" society. It calls for a society where the state IS the society. That you do not know this indicates that you have an extremely superficial understanding of what Marx wrote. I am little surprised.

And yes, that is exactly what she said. She said directly that we need to get over the notion that children belong to their parents and once we embrace the collective idea that children belong to the community then we will be better enlightened.

 

[thereisnospoon]

I can't figure out why I should be outraged at that video...

You aren't outraged that someone else is telling you that your kids shouldn't belong to you, or you at least shouldn't think like that?

I don't have any kids, but if I did, I wouldn't consider them to "belong" to anyone.

Children aren't property.

Oh, so we're going to play semantics, huh?
Look, you said you don't have kids. Therefore you have no right to an opinion on this matter.
You are just being contrary because that is what left wing loons do.
Oh, if my kids are not mine, then why don't you come on over and try to take one of them or harm one of them...See what happens to you. The plastic sheeting covering my living room floor should give you a hint.

 

[thereisnospoon]

I can't figure out why I should be outraged at that video...

I typed up the 30 second transcript of what she said:

We have never invested as much in public education as we should have, because we have always had a private notion of our children. [Sarcastic] 'Your kid is yours and totally your responsibility.'

We never had a collective notion that these are OUR children. So part of it is that we have to break through our private idea that kids belong to their parents, or that kids belong to their families.

We must recognize that kids belong to the WHOLE COMMUNITY; once it is everyone's responsibilty, and not just the household, we start making better investments.

Unfuckingbelieveable.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Your community has taken responsibility for your kids. We provide a free education, a safe environment, health services, sports, recreation

Every community values it's children, they are our future

Why are conservatives outraged?

"Free" education?
What the **** are you yammering about...
All of the above items are funded by property taxes. Taxes which the bearers of children ALSO pay. NOTHING is free.
BTW most of the shit you do-gooder libs think of on which to spend OUR money, we dd not ask for.

 

[thereisnospoon]

I don't have any kids, but if I did, I wouldn't consider them to "belong" to anyone.

Children aren't property.

Then by what right do you have to opine on the subject? They belong to those who brought them into this world, unless the parents do something that warrants their seizure.

But the fact that you aren't disturbed by this is... disturbing.

I have "the right" to opine on whatever the **** I want, thank you very much.

And from my view, the compulsive need to be outraged all the time is "disturbing".

No. You don't..You stated you have no kids. Therefore you are unqualified to opine on this matter. Period
The more you protest, the more you'll get hammered on it.
Hang it up. EVERYONE is against you on this.

 

[thereisnospoon]

I don't have any kids, but if I did, I wouldn't consider them to "belong" to anyone.

Children aren't property.

Then by what right do you have to opine on the subject? They belong to those who brought them into this world, unless the parents do something that warrants their seizure.

But the fact that you aren't disturbed by this is... disturbing.

I have "the right" to opine on whatever the **** I want, thank you very much.

And from my view, the compulsive need to be outraged all the time is "disturbing".

You should turn to your lib friends and ask them why they are perpetually offended.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

That seems to be a common thread for those like you. A Marxist believes in the supremacy of the state and the subornation of the individual to the state in all things, property, wealth, and even children. The idea that the state, or the "community" has primacy over children before parents is a very Marxist ideal and one that "any other Marxist" would also not be outraged over.

There are two major problems with this post.

1. "Marxism" doesn't mean what you think it does. Marxism calls for a stateless society, not a society in which the State is supreme. "Marxism" has more in common with anarchy than anything else - and the state "having primacy over children" would NOT be considered a "Marxist" ideal in any way.

2. Neither Melissa Perry or I have put forth the idea that "the state" or "the community" has "primacy" over children before parents.


I'm most certainly NOT a Marxist. But I do know what it means.

Thank you for proving you have utterly no Earthly idea what you are talking about. No, Marxism does not call for a "stateless" society. It calls for a society where the state IS the society. That you do not know this indicates that you have an extremely superficial understanding of what Marx wrote. I am little surprised.

Incorrect.

The post-capitalist era of "Communism" that Marx suggested was an inevitable end result (otherwise known as "Stateless Communism" or "Pure Communism") is a stateless society where the entire world works together in harmony, not a society with an all-powerful centralized state.

And yes, that is exactly what she said. She said directly that we need to get over the notion that children belong to their parents and once we embrace the collective idea that children belong to the community then we will be better enlightened.

Nothing in that statement implies that "the community" should or would have "primacy" over the parents.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Then by what right do you have to opine on the subject? They belong to those who brought them into this world, unless the parents do something that warrants their seizure.

But the fact that you aren't disturbed by this is... disturbing.

I have "the right" to opine on whatever the **** I want, thank you very much.

And from my view, the compulsive need to be outraged all the time is "disturbing".

No. You don't..You stated you have no kids. Therefore you are unqualified to opine on this matter. Period
The more you protest, the more you'll get hammered on it.
Hang it up. EVERYONE is against you on this.

1. My lack of kids does NOT stop be from having opinions, or make them any less valid than yours.

2. I could care less if you guys "hammer" me.

3. You don't speak for "EVERYONE", you speak for yourself.

 

[rightwinger]

Your community has taken responsibility for your kids. We provide a free education, a safe environment, health services, sports, recreation

Every community values it's children, they are our future

Why are conservatives outraged?

"Free" education?
What the **** are you yammering about...
All of the above items are funded by property taxes. Taxes which the bearers of children ALSO pay. NOTHING is free.
BTW most of the shit you do-gooder libs think of on which to spend OUR money, we dd not ask for.

If you have children in school, your property taxes do not come close to paying for your Childs education costs. If you have multiple kids in school, your property taxes pay a pittance of the costs

Your COMMUNITY picks up the bulk of those costs

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Then by what right do you have to opine on the subject? They belong to those who brought them into this world, unless the parents do something that warrants their seizure.

But the fact that you aren't disturbed by this is... disturbing.

I have "the right" to opine on whatever the **** I want, thank you very much.

And from my view, the compulsive need to be outraged all the time is "disturbing".

You should turn to your lib friends and ask them why they are perpetually offended.

None of my "lib friends" are big on the whole "outrage" thing.

We leave that to you guys.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

You aren't outraged that someone else is telling you that your kids shouldn't belong to you, or you at least shouldn't think like that?

I don't have any kids, but if I did, I wouldn't consider them to "belong" to anyone.

Children aren't property.

Oh, so we're going to play semantics, huh?
Look, you said you don't have kids. Therefore you have no right to an opinion on this matter.
You are just being contrary because that is what left wing loons do.
Oh, if my kids are not mine, then why don't you come on over and try to take one of them or harm one of them...See what happens to you. The plastic sheeting covering my living room floor should give you a hint.

What the **** are you talking about?

I'm not sure why you think that any one is trying to "take" your kids.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Your community has taken responsibility for your kids. We provide a free education, a safe environment, health services, sports, recreation

Every community values it's children, they are our future

Why are conservatives outraged?

We have volunteered to have them take part in those services; however, with this mindset they are talking about, it would be compulsory, not voluntary. That is the outrage.

Also, here's the flame thread for Right Winger and Doctor:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-f...r-exposes-his-communist-side.html#post7058927

I don't know what kind of shit hole community you live in but my community takes care of its children and is proud of them. We invest in our schools, recreational facilities, libraries, police protection. When our sports teams do well, the whole community celibrates. When a child is successful, the whole community is proud

God, it must suck to be a conservative

What sucks is when you libs refer to forced expense through taxation as 'investment'..
AN investment is a voluntary transfer of cash or other financial vehicle for the purpose of return on investment.
Taxation is not voluntary nor does it realize a return.
Most of the parks, landscaping, all the frills in the schools, the decorative lighting for the streets, etc is just politicians finding stupid shit on which to spend other people's money.

 

[Yurt]

fine, if they belong to the community then i can tell your kids to stfu, stop playing in the street and you can pay for my kids food and clothing etc...