Muslim and Arab Killings in the US

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, that's quite a low standard for bigotry. Do you support driver license testing for all new drivers versus non testing of existing drivers that moved in from another state? That's a policy that's applied to an entire group, regardless of the specific characteristics of individual members of those groups. Is driver license testing the essence of bigotry? If driver license testing is not bigotry, which I suspect you'll agree that it's not, how is scrutiny of immigrants bigotry?

All drivers are given the same test. If Muslims were given a different test, your metaphor make make more sense. Trump, and I suspect you, propose a separate test for Muslims based on nothing more than the fact that they are Muslims. If you don't understand that as bigoted, I'm afraid that we don't have a lot to discuss.

PP (but not the one from immediately above)....the one you keep labeling as Islamophobe due to my concerns about the Syrian refugee population.....I'm not saying a test (or ban) for ALL Muslims. Just the ones who are coming from countries known to harbor terrorists. Muslims from Canada or wherever, no problem.

...also, continuing my post from above, to be abundantly clear, my concern is not only with Muslim Syrian refugees. My concern extends to the Christian refugees, as well. (Did I ever say let the Christians in, and not the Muslims? I think not. That's because the same risk - call it "small" if you wish - exists there.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Yes. I am married to an Arab Muslim, and our young children - trilingual, US-born - have unmistakably Arab last names. For the first time in twenty years in this country, I am afraid for what future has in stock for my American, yes, American children. I worry about how this country will treat them. And a little bit of me is glad that we thought ahead to take out citizenships for them in our respective countries of birth. If things turn ugly, they will have options.

OP, what are your respective countries of birth?

Why?


Because I doubt that you would take your children back to countries both of you left.
We don't really want to, we are just putting some options in place. I don't want my son bullied at school or excluded from jobs in the past because of his last name. He is starting kinder this fall and I'm dreading the day he comes back crying that someone called him a terrorist at the playground. Maybe children of people who post here. I'm contemplating teaching him to respond with "asshole", just for the hell of it.

You are not going to leave this country because your child was bullied because of his last name. If you go back to either your country or your husband's country, you know your life will be much worse and your children will be subject to much worse.

That really depends, doesn't it. The educated global class doesn't really have countries of their own any longer. The home is wherever the job is.

But I love how you respond with "this is as good as it gets for ya" instead of "sorry it's possible your child will be bullied because of his last name." Great job belittling what kids go through.

Well, in all fairness, the OP brought up the threat to leave this country, implying that it's can be so bad here that they'll go somewhere else better - why else would you leave if not to go somewhere better. The PP merely pointed out how laughable this notion is, because even though the US is not perfect, it's the best available. Immigration vs emigration for the US is 10 to 1, I'd call that a solid vote for our way of life being superior.

And yes, "as good as it gets" is a valid consideration. We all strive to do better, but expecting perfection is irrational and will only drive you into madness after repeatedly failing to attain something that's just beyond your reach.
I don't need lecturing on what to expect, or your concern about mental health, thanks so much. Whether the US is best available or not is up for debate and depends on your life situation. Deciding it's the best for everyone is like taking an averaged temperature reading for the entire hospital from ICU to the morgue.

We are not immigrants and feel no commitment to any particular country; we move based on jobs and pick up citizenships where we can do give our children options. We are both from well to do countries so we don't attach any particular emotion to moving to the US. Certainly, if life in the US becomes unfriendly to children with our last names, we can easily get a good life somewhere else.

But I understand that US-bound immigrants from poor countries feel different.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, that's quite a low standard for bigotry. Do you support driver license testing for all new drivers versus non testing of existing drivers that moved in from another state? That's a policy that's applied to an entire group, regardless of the specific characteristics of individual members of those groups. Is driver license testing the essence of bigotry? If driver license testing is not bigotry, which I suspect you'll agree that it's not, how is scrutiny of immigrants bigotry?

All drivers are given the same test. If Muslims were given a different test, your metaphor make make more sense. Trump, and I suspect you, propose a separate test for Muslims based on nothing more than the fact that they are Muslims. If you don't understand that as bigoted, I'm afraid that we don't have a lot to discuss.

Very clearly not all drivers are given the same test in my example. Drivers moving in from a different state are not tested at all. If you continue to only read what you want to read and ignore things that don't conform to your existing views, then you are right, we don't have a lot to discuss.

Of course we should give different tests based on the situation. Just as you would screen new drivers more carefully, you would screen people from communist countries more carefully, and you would also screen more carefully people from countries where a significant minority of the population hold believes incompatible with our core American values. I can't believe I am having this discussion - do you not focus your limited resources in the areas where there is more occurrence of problems? I did software testing for a living in a previous career you and you bet your ass we more vigorously tested software delivered by a company that had more defects in the past, regardless of who the actual coder was that wrote a module. But based on your view, our increased scrutiny of that software vendor amounted to bigotry.

Unbelievable.

If your point is that prejudice and discrimination are just hunky dory, I'm not going to argue with you. Just don't get mad when I say that you support prejudice and discrimination.

As I keep saying, you can't simultaneously argue that Trump (and you by extension) don't support discrimination and that discrimination is justified. You really need to pick your argument and run with it.

We keep talking in circles because you keep conflating the two different definitions of "discrimination":

dis·crim·i·nate
1. recognize a distinction; differentiate.
2. make an unjust or prejudicial distinction in the treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, sex, or age.

The first definition is what we all practice on a daily basis. It's again part of what makes us human. When you test new drivers but do not test state-to-state transfer drivers, that's also the first type of discrimination - recognizing that there is a valid difference and treating the two groups differently as a result.

You somehow think practicing discrimination of the first kind somehow makes someone guilty of discrimination in the second kind. Note that not even all discrimination based on race, sex, or age is discrimination of the second kind: only those that are unjust or prejudicial. For example, people under a certain age cannot watch certain movies, this is a discrimination based on age, but it is a just distinction. Men as a group have higher life insurance costs for similar age and health, which is a discrimination based on sex, but this distinction again has just reasons. Similarly, there are valid and just reasons to apply more scrutiny to people applying for immigration or refugee status from Muslim or Arab countries. My reasons for believing the reasons are just have been outlined in previous posts so I won't repeat them here. Again you are conflating two different things. As long as you continue to do this, no one can have a productive conversation with you. I've tried my best. I'll leave this branch of the discussion here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Daughter of two extremely unreligious Muslims here who immigrated to the US. While we are not religious, we have a very clear religious last name. As September 11th was happening, one of my dad's coworkers walked up to him in front of everyone and slapped him blaming him for the attacks. Someone else defaced and vandalized his car. My dad is the sweetest man in the world with zero hate in his heart. He's a proud American who loves this country and his worked tirelessly his entire life here in support of it. My youngest sister was 5 when 9/11 happened and I can't even begin to tell you how badly she was bullied at school after the attacks—physically, mentally, and emotionally. My parents had to pull her out of school for a bit until things settled down. And this was in the first grade, with a lot of the hate towards her being taught by parents to their kids at home.

Fast forward to this year and Trump's candidacy. I'm legitimately (and extremely) worried that what happened after 9/11 will happen to our family again any day now. These two latest attacks on Muslim Americans terrify me to my core and as an American citizen, as a human being, I should not be made to feel this way in my own home country.

Jeff, thank you for doing your part and for deleting the hate filled threads. It makes this little corner of the Internet feel a lot more safe and I for one am grateful of all you do to keep it that way.

Yes. I am married to an Arab Muslim, and our young children - trilingual, US-born - have unmistakably Arab last names. For the first time in twenty years in this country, I am afraid for what future has in stock for my American, yes, American children. I worry about how this country will treat them. And a little bit of me is glad that we thought ahead to take out citizenships for them in our respective countries of birth. If things turn ugly, they will have options.

OP, what are your respective countries of birth?

Why?

Because I doubt that you would take your children back to countries both of you left.

We don't really want to, we are just putting some options in place. I don't want my son bullied at school or excluded from jobs in the past because of his last name. He is starting kinder this fall and I'm dreading the day he comes back crying that someone called him a terrorist at the playground. Maybe children of people who post here. I'm contemplating teaching him to respond with "asshole", just for the hell of it.

You are not going to leave this country because your child was bullied because of his last name. If you go back to either your country or your husband's country, you know your life will be much worse and your children will be subject to much worse.

That really depends, doesn't it. The educated global class doesn't really have countries of their own any longer. The home is wherever the job is.

But I love how you respond with "this is as good as it gets for ya" instead of "sorry it's possible your child will be bullied because of his last name." Great job belittling what kids go through.

As I said, you would not return to one of your countries but be like others in the education global class that don't really have countries any more. It sounds like you are determined that you child will be bullied in kindergarten because of his surname. Be this is a subliminal wish on your part to have your child bullied so that you can join the educated global class and roam the globe. No chance of bullying there for your child, no chance at all.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:We keep talking in circles because you keep conflating the two different definitions of "discrimination":

dis·crim·i·nate
1. recognize a distinction; differentiate.
2. make an unjust or prejudicial distinction in the treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, sex, or age.

The first definition is what we all practice on a daily basis. It's again part of what makes us human. When you test new drivers but do not test state-to-state transfer drivers, that's also the first type of discrimination - recognizing that there is a valid difference and treating the two groups differently as a result.

You somehow think practicing discrimination of the first kind somehow makes someone guilty of discrimination in the second kind. Note that not even all discrimination based on race, sex, or age is discrimination of the second kind: only those that are unjust or prejudicial. For example, people under a certain age cannot watch certain movies, this is a discrimination based on age, but it is a just distinction. Men as a group have higher life insurance costs for similar age and health, which is a discrimination based on sex, but this distinction again has just reasons. Similarly, there are valid and just reasons to apply more scrutiny to people applying for immigration or refugee status from Muslim or Arab countries. My reasons for believing the reasons are just have been outlined in previous posts so I won't repeat them here. Again you are conflating two different things. As long as you continue to do this, no one can have a productive conversation with you. I've tried my best. I'll leave this branch of the discussion here.

People are being killed because of anti-Muslim prejudice and you are taking about drivers licenses? This is not a semantic game. You are clearly stating that you support discrimination based on religion and/or national origin. You believe your position is justified. However, you somehow how want to suggest that is "good" discrimination as opposed to "bad" discrimination. If you are comfortable with this discrimination, why are you arguing about it? I get it. You think subjecting Arabs and Muslims to a different standard is just like Illinois and Iowa having different drivers license tests. Never mind that nobody walks up to someone and says, "your license is from Illinois" and shoots them in the head.

Anti-Arab and anti-Muslim prejudice is tolerated much to readily in this country. Yes, you will argue that your type of discrimination is not so bad as some other person's type of discrimination because you don't consider all Muslims terrorists, you just presume they might be one until they prove otherwise. All immigrants to this country should be vetted. All refugees should be vetted. But, the standard should not change based on religion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, that's quite a low standard for bigotry. Do you support driver license testing for all new drivers versus non testing of existing drivers that moved in from another state? That's a policy that's applied to an entire group, regardless of the specific characteristics of individual members of those groups. Is driver license testing the essence of bigotry? If driver license testing is not bigotry, which I suspect you'll agree that it's not, how is scrutiny of immigrants bigotry?

All drivers are given the same test. If Muslims were given a different test, your metaphor make make more sense. Trump, and I suspect you, propose a separate test for Muslims based on nothing more than the fact that they are Muslims. If you don't understand that as bigoted, I'm afraid that we don't have a lot to discuss.

Very clearly not all drivers are given the same test in my example. Drivers moving in from a different state are not tested at all. If you continue to only read what you want to read and ignore things that don't conform to your existing views, then you are right, we don't have a lot to discuss.

Of course we should give different tests based on the situation. Just as you would screen new drivers more carefully, you would screen people from communist countries more carefully, and you would also screen more carefully people from countries where a significant minority of the population hold believes incompatible with our core American values. I can't believe I am having this discussion - do you not focus your limited resources in the areas where there is more occurrence of problems? I did software testing for a living in a previous career you and you bet your ass we more vigorously tested software delivered by a company that had more defects in the past, regardless of who the actual coder was that wrote a module. But based on your view, our increased scrutiny of that software vendor amounted to bigotry.

Unbelievable.

If your point is that prejudice and discrimination are just hunky dory, I'm not going to argue with you. Just don't get mad when I say that you support prejudice and discrimination.

As I keep saying, you can't simultaneously argue that Trump (and you by extension) don't support discrimination and that discrimination is justified. You really need to pick your argument and run with it.

We keep talking in circles because you keep conflating the two different definitions of "discrimination":

dis·crim·i·nate
1. recognize a distinction; differentiate.
2. make an unjust or prejudicial distinction in the treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, sex, or age.

The first definition is what we all practice on a daily basis. It's again part of what makes us human. When you test new drivers but do not test state-to-state transfer drivers, that's also the first type of discrimination - recognizing that there is a valid difference and treating the two groups differently as a result.

You somehow think practicing discrimination of the first kind somehow makes someone guilty of discrimination in the second kind. Note that not even all discrimination based on race, sex, or age is discrimination of the second kind: only those that are unjust or prejudicial. For example, people under a certain age cannot watch certain movies, this is a discrimination based on age, but it is a just distinction. Men as a group have higher life insurance costs for similar age and health, which is a discrimination based on sex, but this distinction again has just reasons. Similarly, there are valid and just reasons to apply more scrutiny to people applying for immigration or refugee status from Muslim or Arab countries. My reasons for believing the reasons are just have been outlined in previous posts so I won't repeat them here. Again you are conflating two different things. As long as you continue to do this, no one can have a productive conversation with you. I've tried my best. I'll leave this branch of the discussion here.

Not sure if you're planning to revisit this thread, but you've done an excellent job of describing the two uses of the word "discriminate" and the reason for the impasse with the discussion we've apparently both been having. (Not sure it's going to move the needle though, unfortunately.)

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:As I said, you would not return to one of your countries but be like others in the education global class that don't really have countries any more. It sounds like you are determined that you child will be bullied in kindergarten because of his surname. Be this is a subliminal wish on your part to have your child bullied so that you can join the educated global class and roam the globe. No chance of bullying there for your child, no chance at all.

Quit being a dick. Nobody wants their child to be bullied. You aren't even making any discernible point anymore. People are being bullied because of their surnames. Some are being killed. You may not share their fears, but don't belittle them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
As I said, you would not return to one of your countries but be like others in the education global class that don't really have countries any more. It sounds like you are determined that you child will be bullied in kindergarten because of his surname. Be this is a subliminal wish on your part to have your child bullied so that you can join the educated global class and roam the globe. No chance of bullying there for your child, no chance at all.

A subliminal wish that my child is bullied? Are you really such a complete, unadulterated moron?

We already are a part of the educated global class, thank you. And they don't take you into this group just because your child has been bullied.

Idiot.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As I said, you would not return to one of your countries but be like others in the education global class that don't really have countries any more. It sounds like you are determined that you child will be bullied in kindergarten because of his surname. Be this is a subliminal wish on your part to have your child bullied so that you can join the educated global class and roam the globe. No chance of bullying there for your child, no chance at all.

Quit being a dick. Nobody wants their child to be bullied. You aren't even making any discernible point anymore. People are being bullied because of their surnames. Some are being killed. You may not share their fears, but don't belittle them.

People are bullied because of their surnames all the time when they are kids. Me being one of them. However the pp was talking about a child not an adult. Is there a news story you saw of a kid being killed because he had a muslim surname? All i see are bullies being bullies to every kid. I see few news stories about muslims being target but i see a ton of attacks by muslims on non muslims in the news

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As I said, you would not return to one of your countries but be like others in the education global class that don't really have countries any more. It sounds like you are determined that you child will be bullied in kindergarten because of his surname. Be this is a subliminal wish on your part to have your child bullied so that you can join the educated global class and roam the globe. No chance of bullying there for your child, no chance at all.

Quit being a dick. Nobody wants their child to be bullied. You aren't even making any discernible point anymore. People are being bullied because of their surnames. Some are being killed. You may not share their fears, but don't belittle them.

People are bullied because of their surnames all the time when they are kids. Me being one of them. However the pp was talking about a child not an adult. Is there a news story you saw of a kid being killed because he had a muslim surname? All i see are bullies being bullies to every kid. I see few news stories about muslims being target but i see a ton of attacks by muslims on non muslims in the news

Yes, it is sad that the media gives less coverage to crimes against Muslims than it gives to crimes by Muslims. It is even more sad that you consider murder to be the point that you show concern about bullying. I'm sorry that you were bullied as a child. As you demonstrate, such bullying can have life-long impact. We should all hope that kids wouldn't have to experience such behavior. In particular, we should hope that such bullying is not provoked by our political leaders.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As I said, you would not return to one of your countries but be like others in the education global class that don't really have countries any more. It sounds like you are determined that you child will be bullied in kindergarten because of his surname. Be this is a subliminal wish on your part to have your child bullied so that you can join the educated global class and roam the globe. No chance of bullying there for your child, no chance at all.

Quit being a dick. Nobody wants their child to be bullied. You aren't even making any discernible point anymore. People are being bullied because of their surnames. Some are being killed. You may not share their fears, but don't belittle them.

People are bullied because of their surnames all the time when they are kids. Me being one of them. However the pp was talking about a child not an adult. Is there a news story you saw of a kid being killed because he had a muslim surname? All i see are bullies being bullies to every kid. I see few news stories about muslims being target but i see a ton of attacks by muslims on non muslims in the news

Yes, it is sad that the media gives less coverage to crimes against Muslims than it gives to crimes by Muslims. It is even more sad that you consider murder to be the point that you show concern about bullying. I'm sorry that you were bullied as a child. As you demonstrate, such bullying can have life-long impact. We should all hope that kids wouldn't have to experience such behavior. In particular, we should hope that such bullying is not provoked by our political leaders.

Where are these news stories about kids with muslim surnames being bullied? Links? THe liberal media would certainly NOT hesitate to put these at the frontpage if it were true.

You certainly sound like a bully right now being sarcastic about bullying and it's life long impact. I doubt highly that kids are provoked by trump or hillary for that matter then again by their liberal parents....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-uRiExRJ5AI

Yes i'd blame the parents not other people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Yes. I am married to an Arab Muslim, and our young children - trilingual, US-born - have unmistakably Arab last names. For the first time in twenty years in this country, I am afraid for what future has in stock for my American, yes, American children. I worry about how this country will treat them. And a little bit of me is glad that we thought ahead to take out citizenships for them in our respective countries of birth. If things turn ugly, they will have options.

OP, what are your respective countries of birth?

Why?

Because I doubt that you would take your children back to countries both of you left.
We don't really want to, we are just putting some options in place. I don't want my son bullied at school or excluded from jobs in the past because of his last name. He is starting kinder this fall and I'm dreading the day he comes back crying that someone called him a terrorist at the playground. Maybe children of people who post here. I'm contemplating teaching him to respond with "asshole", just for the hell of it.

You are not going to leave this country because your child was bullied because of his last name. If you go back to either your country or your husband's country, you know your life will be much worse and your children will be subject to much worse.

That really depends, doesn't it. The educated global class doesn't really have countries of their own any longer. The home is wherever the job is.

But I love how you respond with "this is as good as it gets for ya" instead of "sorry it's possible your child will be bullied because of his last name." Great job belittling what kids go through.

Well, in all fairness, the OP brought up the threat to leave this country, implying that it's can be so bad here that they'll go somewhere else better - why else would you leave if not to go somewhere better. The PP merely pointed out how laughable this notion is, because even though the US is not perfect, it's the best available. Immigration vs emigration for the US is 10 to 1, I'd call that a solid vote for our way of life being superior.

And yes, "as good as it gets" is a valid consideration. We all strive to do better, but expecting perfection is irrational and will only drive you into madness after repeatedly failing to attain something that's just beyond your reach.
I don't need lecturing on what to expect, or your concern about mental health, thanks so much. Whether the US is best available or not is up for debate and depends on your life situation. Deciding it's the best for everyone is like taking an averaged temperature reading for the entire hospital from ICU to the morgue.

We are not immigrants and feel no commitment to any particular country; we move based on jobs and pick up citizenships where we can do give our children options. We are both from well to do countries so we don't attach any particular emotion to moving to the US. Certainly, if life in the US becomes unfriendly to children with our last names, we can easily get a good life somewhere else.

But I understand that US-bound immigrants from poor countries feel different.


I encourage you to leave now and pay for citizenships as you move around the globe. But that will not stop your child from being bullied where his surname is as common as mud or where he will be the only one with that type of surname. To think you will make life decisions based on your child possibly being bullied may mean that your are not as smart as the global job market requires.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As I said, you would not return to one of your countries but be like others in the education global class that don't really have countries any more. It sounds like you are determined that you child will be bullied in kindergarten because of his surname. Be this is a subliminal wish on your part to have your child bullied so that you can join the educated global class and roam the globe. No chance of bullying there for your child, no chance at all.

Quit being a dick. Nobody wants their child to be bullied. You aren't even making any discernible point anymore. People are being bullied because of their surnames. Some are being killed. You may not share their fears, but don't belittle them.

Please read the original post in which the poster said she feared her child would be bullied in kindergarten because he had a Muslim surname. She and her family have dual citizenship so that they could leave the country if this happened. It was the poster who talked about her membership in the educated global class and that she could live any place she wished. My point was that fear of having a child bullied seems an odd reason to leave a country. Would you leave a country if your child were bullied or would you deal with it as many of us have done.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As I said, you would not return to one of your countries but be like others in the education global class that don't really have countries any more. It sounds like you are determined that you child will be bullied in kindergarten because of his surname. Be this is a subliminal wish on your part to have your child bullied so that you can join the educated global class and roam the globe. No chance of bullying there for your child, no chance at all.

Quit being a dick. Nobody wants their child to be bullied. You aren't even making any discernible point anymore. People are being bullied because of their surnames. Some are being killed. You may not share their fears, but don't belittle them.

Please read the original post in which the poster said she feared her child would be bullied in kindergarten because he had a Muslim surname. She and her family have dual citizenship so that they could leave the country if this happened. It was the poster who talked about her membership in the educated global class and that she could live any place she wished. My point was that fear of having a child bullied seems an odd reason to leave a country. Would you leave a country if your child were bullied or would you deal with it as many of us have done.

She is not saying that she will leave the country due to fear that her child will be bullied, but might leave if the situation in this country became untenable for people with surnames like theirs. Again, the tolerance so many of you are showing for anti-Muslim and anti-Arab prejudice is dismaying. Posters have brushed off such prejudice, provided justifications for it, and tried to turn this into a discussion of anti-Semitism. You people are part of the problem.

If someone tells you that they fear their child will be bullied, I would hope that all of us would respond with words of reassurance and support -- regardless of the cause of the bullying. Telling someone that they have a subliminal wish for their child to be bullied is psychotic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I encourage you to leave now and pay for citizenships as you move around the globe. But that will not stop your child from being bullied where his surname is as common as mud or where he will be the only one with that type of surname. To think you will make life decisions based on your child possibly being bullied may mean that your are not as smart as the global job market requires.

We'll leave when we're good and ready, you won't have a vote on that committee, nor will you ever have any idea how smart or dumb we are.

I'm going to practice my patience instead of sarcasm now and explain this to you like you were five:

It's not just about the possibility of bullying; clearly, no one leaves over that. First, it's bullying at school, then, it's harassment at airports, then, it's being passed over for jobs and security clearances. And on top of that, there's indifference of the general public - people like you - who says, oh well, you people had it coming, bend over and take it, small price to pay to live in such an awesome country, and my grandpa used to be called bad names too, you'll survive. And maybe your son NEEDS to be scrutinized more than my son because hey, he comes from a population that I think is responsible for the world's ills.

So, for now, I'm sticking with teaching my child to say "asshole" a lot earlier than I thought I'd have to.