Tell an opinion you have that is in the strong minority

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some animal rescue organizations are in cahoots with puppy mills. Puppies that used to be sold in pet stores are just funneled through shady "rescue" organizations now. The puppy mills haven't disappeared even though you mostly can't buy puppies at stores any more.

I don't like it when I hear people brag about "rescuing" yet have no idea where this convenient supply of dogs comes from, unless they're rescuing pit bulls or chihuahuas.

OMG. This hadn't occurred to me. You could be right!

That is where they send the extras they cant sell. or the oops pregnancies that are not purebred. I know several breeders with strong ties to the rescue world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. Don't care about infertility struggles.
2. Don't care about doormats who won't DO something to
address their problems.
3. Tired of the SN Trump Card.

NP here. I am enraged by all the free stuff SN parents get that have nothing to do withy their child's SN. I can kinda see the free PT/OT/Speech maybe, but my very wealthy friend also gets FOR FREE from the county: preschool withh bus service, 42 hours/week nanny, Medicaid and food stamps. FOR FREE. And the nanny does her laundry and watches her NT kids too!!

Uh, wha? Food stamps is a means-based program, as is Medicaid -- if they are indeed "very wealthy" then they wouldn't be eligible for those programs. And I've never heard of a free nanny, no way. Maybe an aid in the classroom? If her child is eligible for a free special needs preschool and full-time aid, you shouldn't be enraged or envious...it means her child is quite disabled.

It's all true. The means test for Medicaid/food stamps is done ON THE KID, who has no assets. All his copays and RX's are paid by Medicaid, and his food is bought with food stamps. In addition to preschool five days a week, his mom is allowed 42 hours of nanny care paid. She does not work, has two NT kids, lives in a 6000sf house and drives a large luxury SUV. Her SN child walks, talks, eats, and is potty trained, he is just delayed pretty significantly. I don't see why she needs a tax payer paid nanny because of that.

I'm somewhat skeptical about all this. For a disabled child to get on Medicaid, they generally have to qualify for SSI (needs based benefits based on family income). A wealthy family will not qualify. I am under the impression most social programs use household income/assets, not just the child. If her child is qualifying for a full time nanny/aide, it sounds like the child must be pretty severely disabled, which is sad. And I say this as someone who can't stand people who try to abuse the system.

All I know is what she told me directly herself. So I guess she is lying? She buys his food with food stamps. When he gets an ear infection (unrelated to his SN), her insurance pays first and Medicaid pays the doctor and Rx copays. She pays nothing. Same for all of the therapy copays. She pays nothing. She just put a huge addition on to her already huge house (not for the child.) I am not a troll and I am not lying. You don't want to believe it because its so outrageous, but it's true. She has a network of other SN mom friends and they all tell each other how to "max out" the system.

Sweetie, she's yanking your chain.

[Anonymous]

I think if a parent spends less than two hours a weekday with their child under 5, the child is harmed - regardless of gender.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think if a parent spends less than two waking hours a weekday with their child under 5, the child is harmed - regardless of gender.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I secretly judge people who buy breeder dogs.

I think Michael Brown deserved to be shot. While I do believe there are real problems between police officers and minority communities, I don't think that means every time a black person gets shot it is automatically police brutality. Seriously -- there had to have been a better case of police violence to protest over than a kid who black witnesses said charged at a police officer.

I don't think Johnny Depp is attractive at all.

I agree with this. The video of him in the store prior to the shooting kind of said it all to me. Not to mention the evidence supports the cop. Now Eric Garner is a completely different story. That cop should have been brought up on manslaughter.

I'm sure you also think that the two Bonnie and Clyde white teens should have been shot and killed. Armed robbery, auto theft times three, gun theft... Those thugs do not belong in normal society. Do you also believe those armed white teenagers deserved to be shot and killed? Or just the unarmed big black teenager?

Yes. I'm general, I care way more about the lives of the law enforcement protecting us than dangerous criminals, regardless of color. Is there some merit that we should have an independent body to investigate these types of shootings than the police departments themselves? I would say yes because there needs to be checks in balances. But if you are an armed and dangerous criminal acting in a threatening manner toward police instead of cooperating, then you know the risk you run. I'd rather ensure the police officers are the ones going home safe to their families.

[Anonymous]

*checks and balances

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. Don't care about infertility struggles.
2. Don't care about doormats who won't DO something to
address their problems.
3. Tired of the SN Trump Card.

NP here. I am enraged by all the free stuff SN parents get that have nothing to do withy their child's SN. I can kinda see the free PT/OT/Speech maybe, but my very wealthy friend also gets FOR FREE from the county: preschool withh bus service, 42 hours/week nanny, Medicaid and food stamps. FOR FREE. And the nanny does her laundry and watches her NT kids too!!

Uh, wha? Food stamps is a means-based program, as is Medicaid -- if they are indeed "very wealthy" then they wouldn't be eligible for those programs. And I've never heard of a free nanny, no way. Maybe an aid in the classroom? If her child is eligible for a free special needs preschool and full-time aid, you shouldn't be enraged or envious...it means her child is quite disabled.

It's all true. The means test for Medicaid/food stamps is done ON THE KID, who has no assets. All his copays and RX's are paid by Medicaid, and his food is bought with food stamps. In addition to preschool five days a week, his mom is allowed 42 hours of nanny care paid. She does not work, has two NT kids, lives in a 6000sf house and drives a large luxury SUV. Her SN child walks, talks, eats, and is potty trained, he is just delayed pretty significantly. I don't see why she needs a tax payer paid nanny because of that.

I'm somewhat skeptical about all this. For a disabled child to get on Medicaid, they generally have to qualify for SSI (needs based benefits based on family income). A wealthy family will not qualify. I am under the impression most social programs use household income/assets, not just the child. If her child is qualifying for a full time nanny/aide, it sounds like the child must be pretty severely disabled, which is sad. And I say this as someone who can't stand people who try to abuse the system.

All I know is what she told me directly herself. So I guess she is lying? She buys his food with food stamps. When he gets an ear infection (unrelated to his SN), her insurance pays first and Medicaid pays the doctor and Rx copays. She pays nothing. Same for all of the therapy copays. She pays nothing. She just put a huge addition on to her already huge house (not for the child.) I am not a troll and I am not lying. You don't want to believe it because its so outrageous, but it's true. She has a network of other SN mom friends and they all tell each other how to "max out" the system.

Sweetie, she's yanking your chain.

+1
I would do just about anything to get some appropriate services for our son. I'm very glad that he's intelligent and doesn't battle those delays, but he needs more speech than we can pay for (we get 52 sessions a year @ $25 copay through insurance; for what he has it's supposed to be daily.), he doesn't qualify for physical or occupational therapy anymore (even though they admit, yeah, he still needs it) and according to them he needs to be in preschool, but, oops, the only preschool available is "too restrictive" for him so he doesn't get anything. So he's in private preschool we can't really afford. No way in hell is your friend getting all that. She's yanking you because she finds your outrage hysterical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My minority opinion: I like pencil dicks.

Seriously. I'm small and it's more comfortable. I see big, I think "ow" not "yum".

Well, then it's not really a pencil dick, it's just right sized for you. (And how lovely for some pencil dick guy out there! Or guys, if that's what you prefer.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. Don't care about infertility struggles.
2. Don't care about doormats who won't DO something to
address their problems.
3. Tired of the SN Trump Card.

NP here. I am enraged by all the free stuff SN parents get that have nothing to do withy their child's SN. I can kinda see the free PT/OT/Speech maybe, but my very wealthy friend also gets FOR FREE from the county: preschool withh bus service, 42 hours/week nanny, Medicaid and food stamps. FOR FREE. And the nanny does her laundry and watches her NT kids too!!

Uh, wha? Food stamps is a means-based program, as is Medicaid -- if they are indeed "very wealthy" then they wouldn't be eligible for those programs. And I've never heard of a free nanny, no way. Maybe an aid in the classroom? If her child is eligible for a free special needs preschool and full-time aid, you shouldn't be enraged or envious...it means her child is quite disabled.

It's all true. The means test for Medicaid/food stamps is done ON THE KID, who has no assets. All his copays and RX's are paid by Medicaid, and his food is bought with food stamps. In addition to preschool five days a week, his mom is allowed 42 hours of nanny care paid. She does not work, has two NT kids, lives in a 6000sf house and drives a large luxury SUV. Her SN child walks, talks, eats, and is potty trained, he is just delayed pretty significantly. I don't see why she needs a tax payer paid nanny because of that.

I'm somewhat skeptical about all this. For a disabled child to get on Medicaid, they generally have to qualify for SSI (needs based benefits based on family income). A wealthy family will not qualify. I am under the impression most social programs use household income/assets, not just the child. If her child is qualifying for a full time nanny/aide, it sounds like the child must be pretty severely disabled, which is sad. And I say this as someone who can't stand people who try to abuse the system.

All I know is what she told me directly herself. So I guess she is lying? She buys his food with food stamps. When he gets an ear infection (unrelated to his SN), her insurance pays first and Medicaid pays the doctor and Rx copays. She pays nothing. Same for all of the therapy copays. She pays nothing. She just put a huge addition on to her already huge house (not for the child.) I am not a troll and I am not lying. You don't want to believe it because its so outrageous, but it's true. She has a network of other SN mom friends and they all tell each other how to "max out" the system.

Sweetie, she's yanking your chain.

+1
I would do just about anything to get some appropriate services for our son. I'm very glad that he's intelligent and doesn't battle those delays, but he needs more speech than we can pay for (we get 52 sessions a year @ $25 copay through insurance; for what he has it's supposed to be daily.), he doesn't qualify for physical or occupational therapy anymore (even though they admit, yeah, he still needs it) and according to them he needs to be in preschool, but, oops, the only preschool available is "too restrictive" for him so he doesn't get anything. So he's in private preschool we can't really afford. No way in hell is your friend getting all that. She's yanking you because she finds your outrage hysterical.

She has no idea it bothers me. Maybe you should make friends with her so she can teach you her tricks. She showed me his Medicaid card with his name on it. Like "haha look he has a Medicaid card."

[Anonymous]

I hate riding boots.

[Anonymous]

I hate bicyclists,with all their affected mannerisms, dress, etc., and attitude that they own the road. Find a trail, you angry losers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I believe correct grammar and spelling is important. And this includes usage on social media. In 100 years we will be reduced to emoji and acronyms. Face to face communication will be reduced to grunts and pointing. God help us.

"Face-to-face" should be hyphenated. Just thought you'd like to know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why some educated and smart people participate in any form of organized religion.

+2

Or why women voluntarily participate in organized religion. The rules are to keep men in line and women subservient.

[Anonymous]

Agree with: "I don't understand why some educated and smart people participate in any form of organized religion."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think women who talk about how much they love sex and love sucking DH's dick are just afraid of being left and dumped.

And generally fairly unattractive.

Some women love sex. It's amazing being married to one.

Loving sex isn't the issue. Talking about it is.

Having sex is the best part of sex.