Anonymous wrote:
I was the poster she was correcting and I said she was right on the historical fact -- but it is an overblown comparison and only someone who's forefathers and mothers were not lynched, denied basic liberties would make this dumb ass comparison.

Fight for an equitable education system, fight for the elimination of childhood hunger and poverty, fight to end police brutality
Pure entitlement, tantrum crap.

Anonymous wrote:Here's an updated story from the Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2015/04/15/listen-to-the-911-call-that-led-cops-to-take-the-free-range-kids-into-custody/?hpid=z2

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Yea for you for understanding that intergration and civil rights is just as important as the age that kids can walk to the park alone. BRAVO FOR YOU!

No, that is a different argument. Here is the argument the poster was addressing:

PP#1: The people who fought for civil rights didn't put their children in harm's way.
PP#2. That is factually incorrect.

And if sending Ruby Bridges to this school instead of that school is about integration and civil rights, then letting your children walk home from the park alone is about parental vs. state rights (aka freedom). It's incredibly reductive to say that the whole case is about the age that kids can walk home from the park alone.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You just don't get it. And yes, we do need some regulations as to what can and cannot with their kids -- we do. People do not mind that their are car seat laws or leaving kids alone in a car, etc. . I let my kids do stuff that technically may be against the regs and if I got called out on it -- I'd get over it and comply. Why? Because I know that I am responsible, but their are a lot of other people that are not and it is not going to kill me or my kids to not walk to Starbucks by themselves. Folks get pissed because things are no longer old-school and neighbors are not friendly and looking out, but as soon as someone does -- there is hell to pay. These parents are loud mouth grand standers who are more interested in a cause then the possibility of losing their kids. Horrible execution on their part, so much else they could have done to change the regs if they disagree. Just another example of the privileged, all about me, entitlement epidemic in this area.

Bravo, very well stated!!! I totally agree that these parents have a huge sense of entitlement because they feel they are above the law. Sorry folks, no one is above the law. As others have said, work to change laws you don't agree with. These parents just continue to flaunt their disagreement with the law, thereby putting their own kids at risk in the meantime.

Sometimes going against a law you feel is unjust requires people willing to do the right thing. Personally, that is not the way I am wired to operate. But look at recent history -- whether you agree with the causes or not: gay marriage and pot laws (though still against federal law). In the 1930s people harboring Jews were breaking the law. Do you think that lawmakers would seriously take up the cause of children walking to the neighborhood playground unless there was public fervor about a case or several across the country??

Monkey Bars does not equal the Holocaust
Monkey Bars does not equal civil rights
Monkey Bars does not equal gay marriage
Monkey Bars does not equal Jim Crow

Know what all those things have in common?
ALL OF THEM WERE THINGS PEOPLE PUT THEMSELVES IN HARM'S WAY TO CHANGE, NOT THEIR DAMN KIDS!
If I do not have enough common sense and discretion to know that walking to the park is something I can lobby to change WITHOUT GETTING MY KIDS PICKED UP BY CPS -- then I choose THAT!
These parents are more interested in doing the hell what they want then making real change. They are pissed because they did not get their way.
Honest to GOD, if the cops told me 'hey your kids cannot go to 7-11 unsupervised' -- I would think "OK", now I know and go on about my life. Not even a blip on my freaking radar. My life will go on, my kids' lives will go on and my kids will still have plenty to do and NUMEROUS ways to practice and develop independence even if they cannot buy a damn slurpie by themselves.
I have no problem with "free-range", I have a problem with STUPID.

You know what really helps, if you're trying to make a real change? Publicity.

Also, you're wrong about people not putting their kids in harm's way to fight the Holocaust, civil rights, gay marriage, or Jim Crow. (By the way, what is gay marriage, specifically, doing on that list? As opposed to gay rights?) Let's start with the Birmingham Children's Crusade and the Little Rock Nine, for civil rights. And you left apartheid off the list, but I will add it, and refer you to the Soweto uprising.

Shame on the parents of 6 year old Ruby Bridges Hall for sending her to school in a political spotlight. She had a right to go to school there, but it was a very dangerous environment. Thank God for her brave parents. These parents have the right to decide whether their children can handle going to a neighborhood park ... and clearly there are different opinions on whether the law is or isn't clear on whether the Metievs were within their legal rights.