this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2023
301 points (98.1% liked)

InsanePeopleFacebook

3927 readers
1 users here now

Screenshots of people being insane on Facebook. Please censor names/pics of end users in screenshots. Please follow the rules of lemmy.world

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 174 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (6 children)

More and more I'm starting to think we need such a thing as a children's Bill of Rights. We always talk about rights of the parents but children's rights seems to get just ignored completely in today's society. I mean why does this child have to have their life potentially ruined and at the very least damaged markedly by the attitude of the parent. This kid didn't choose to be born to the psycho parent, yet it's going to have to feel the the effects of it.

[–] homura1650@lemmy.world 54 points 2 years ago (1 children)

There is the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which is an international treaty signed by all but 1 country in the UN. The only holdout is the US.

[–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 15 points 2 years ago

A common enough thing for the US oddly enough.

The UN: "Hey, how about we made this basic, common sense, decent thing, part of what everyone could expect?"

The US: "Yeah, nah"

[–] hanekam@lemmy.world 33 points 2 years ago (1 children)

In Norway we tried. We got overuled by the European Courts. A bunch of foster parents threw in the towel as a result, and hundreds of children were deprived of a stable home environment.

Big win for the rights of abusive parents though!

[–] Zealousideal_Fox900@lemmy.world 13 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yeah I remember reading that. In Queensland, Australia it for some fucking insane reason is still legal to WHIP KIDS in private schools.

[–] mranachi@aussie.zone 7 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I thought there is no way that's true... get your shit together Queensland.

With the exception of Queensland, all Australian states and jurisdictions have prohibited the use of physical punishment in all schools.

[–] FoundTheVegan@kbin.social 21 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

So, to be clear I think this is a fantasic idea and needed, but I don't actually see it happening. Children aren't a voting group who can advocate for their own rights, while conversely psychos like that in the image above will be quite vocal about "goverment interference".

While something like this should be bipartisan and common sense to enforce basic facilities for children. I am certain that R's would insist on "not 'trans'ing' children" or the rights of unborn children and the whole thing dies as part of culture war BS.

Maybe I'm jaded, but I don't see how this could progress.

[–] SlikPikker@lemmy.ca 25 points 2 years ago

You've identified a key problem with top down "representative" democracy.

History hasn't ended. We can evolve.

[–] Bizarroland@kbin.social 12 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I would like it if we could also somehow make over feeding your child count as child abuse.

There are a lot of parents who will just throw pizza and McDonald's at the child they have brought into the world rather than put the energy in to feed them nutritious healthy food.

Then you end up having third graders that weigh 175 lb becoming the norm.

And when you step back for just a moment and think, it is clear that that is child abuse. They are inflicting damage on that child that will last for the rest of their lives.

But making your child fat out of sheer laziness isn't treated the same as starving your child out of sheer laziness, and I don't know why.

[–] webadict@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago

You're better off arguing that we should be offering nutritional food for free to children (or everybody) if that's the case. This bypasses a lot of issues that might stem from poverty and location, and seems to show positive trends in physical, behavioral and educational health, plus, as a long-term investment, generates huge returns in the money spent.

[–] MrModule@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

"Put in the energy" what a judgemental prick. You have no idea what someone's personal situation is, nor would you care if you did. Just another cake life dickhead looking down on others.

[–] Hobo@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

I want to know what these people think about the foster care system. When I see crap like that it raises so many questions. Do they know what actual child abuse looks like? Do they think that foster care is a better alternative to eating chicken nuggets? Have they thought about the implications of classifying certain foods as "child abuse" or how you would even enforce that? Do they really think all the people in that situationare lazy? Have they considered that many of those kids end up being latch key kids because their parents are underpaid and working constantly just to feed/cloth/house their kids? Have they ever touched grass?

Just so many questions...

[–] GortexGary@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

And the fix for that is name calling? I agree, there is a lot more needed than "energy" but let's have a discussion.

[–] ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.de 11 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Makes sense. Too much legislation gets passed to “protect the children” but maybe it would help to codify what that actually means and get some committee to find out what issues kids are currently facing (inappropriate homeschooling, lack of independent mobility...) as opposed to the fearmongering against E2E encryption etc.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.ml 82 points 2 years ago (3 children)

I dated a girl in highschool who didn't have a social security number. Her parents thought it was the mark of the beast and never registered one for her. All that did was cause her a problem when she became an adult. She had to go down and register one for herself so that she could do normal things like rent an apartment, buy a car, have a credit card, or get a job.

[–] frickineh@lemmy.world 41 points 2 years ago (1 children)

At least if she had a birth certificate, it's not so bad. Still a huge, unnecessary pain in the ass, but kids without birth certificates are going to have a complete nightmare as adults (assuming they don't grow up to be as crazy as their parents). It's so, so hard. I wish sovcits would limit their bullshit to themselves and not subject their poor kids to it.

[–] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 29 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Confirm. Had to help a friend of mine rebuild her documentation from scratch because her mom, who is nuts, destroyed her birth certificate, social security paperwork, driver's license, and all other documentation apparently out of spite.

It turns out, it's very difficult to get a replacement birth certificate without the involvement of your sole remaining parent when said parent is dead set on being uncooperative. If you don't have a government photo ID, getting the other documents is impossible. And if you don't have the other documents, getting the photo ID is impossible. Chicken and the egg!

[–] frickineh@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I know we have a non-profit where I live that specifically helps people with that. Usually, it's homeless people who just don't have any of their documentation anymore, but I recommended them to someone whose parent was similarly awful. I don't even know where you'd start.

[–] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 13 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It varies a bit by state. We wound up asking an attorney, and they were able to direct us towards where to get the correct forms and paperwork. We had to get signed and notarized affidavits from other surviving family members to attest that she was who she said she was, etc. It took ages, and tons of running around all over the place to this office, that office, this government building, that government building, all over the damn state.

[–] JesusLikesYourButt@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

You are an amazing person and friend for helping and supporting them through that. I hope your friend is doing well!

[–] tslnox@reddthat.com 1 points 2 years ago

That reminds me of one awesome movie with Bud Spencer.

(Banana Joe)

[–] punkwalrus@lemmy.world 15 points 2 years ago

I didn't have one until in was 15. My dad was forced to because he couldn't claim me on his taxes anymore when the IRS made it mandatory. "That was the year seven million children vanished," according to the IRS at the time.

The frustrating thing is that he was so vehemently against it, my mother had to do it (she controlled the finances), and this led to a huge issue because I was born overseas for my dad's work. They had to drag out state department records and proof I was a US citizen, because of being born on foreign soil. It was a mess.

[–] geekworking@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Depends upon how long ago. Back in the 70s and 80s it was not common to apply for Social Security at birth or as a young child. It was also a bigger hassle before the internet. Some combination of phone calls, mail, and visiting the Social Security office in some cases.

You really didn't need it until you hit your teens and started to work or got your own bank account.

I think I was like 10 or 12 when I got my SSN. It wasn't any sort of protest or parental BS. Just didn't need it before then.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

I think she was born in 1980, but literally everyone else I knew had a SSN their whole life. I think you're an outlier, but I'm just speaking from my own limited experience. Have you met other people your age who didn't have SSN as kids? When my son was born we just filled out a form at the hospital. I'm pretty sure they filed it for us, although I can't remember for sure, since it has been a couple of decades now.

[–] calypsopub@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

I was born in the 60s and didn't get my social security number until I got my first job. That's the way it used to be.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

I’m a little older and it was normal to not get SSN until you needed it as a teen. Meanwhile, for my kids, it was part of their newborn paperwork. I don’t know if it was actually required but they made it easy and there were benefits that did require it

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 65 points 2 years ago (1 children)

You just know those poor kids aren't vaccinated against anything too.

[–] BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago

Not one blessed thing.

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 48 points 2 years ago

"Sovereign citizen", my ass. They just don't want to participate in society, at least not in the part where the concept of society involves a "give". This is not only about giving taxes, but also topics like "give your kid a chance for a normal life".

[–] ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world 37 points 2 years ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

deleted by creator

[–] qyron@sopuli.xyz 31 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

This makes absolutely no sense in my country.

Any child born in this country, if born in an hospital, leaves there already a citizen, with all connections to the state the child is in right to have, by force of law. This means from the moment the child is born, the child gains legal status and protection under the law, including from the parents and family.

Children that by some reason could not be registered at the hospital facilities are required to be registered in under 10 days from the date of birth, under penalty of heavy fines for the parents.

Less than a year back, there was a new cover about a gates community where a child was born and died for unknow causes in less than a year. Somehow, this transpired to the authorities and trigered a massive investigation. More children were found, unregistered, which means unvaccinated, never seen by a pediatrician, etc.

The so called "leader" of that community accused the state of overbearing, arguing the children were his, by right of father, and thus he was entitled to raise the children as he saw fit.

The subject quickly faded off the main news lines, as it was deemed a sensible subject, prone to cause suffering to more children, but that ass got the full weight of the law on him, from child endangerment, to destruction of remains (the deceased baby was alledgly cremated on the compound grounds).

The other children were removed from the compound, along with any members of the community that such chose to.

The religious freedom and parents rights arguments were carefully laid down on the ground, run over with a steam roller, folded, pressed again, soaked in kerosene and lit on fire.

We are a mostly liberal country but children have special protection under the law. We are born citizens and as thus the state has the responsibilty to defend us.

Are there flaws? Yes. Some, grotesque. But for the majority of cases, the system works.

[–] ttmrichter@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This makes absolutely no sense in my country.

This makes absolutely no sense in any country. The whole "Sovereign Citizens" movement (and its offshoots and influences) is a steaming hot pile of garbage that's being cooked by an underlying tire fire. It's what happens when sociopaths interact with each other in ways that feed and fan the flames of their disorder.

[–] qyron@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 years ago

In enjoyed the hard fire images. Very nice. The pyromaniac in my smiled.

[–] Neato@kbin.social 25 points 2 years ago (2 children)

This is just child abuse. Denying your child the basics that are required by the government for them to use their entitlements like school, healthcare, government services, etc is obscene. Your personal beliefs stop when they hurt other people, including your children.

This is just shit that's going to be a headache for their kid later on and would have been 1000% easier to handle as the parent near their birth.

[–] ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.de 13 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

school

YoU cAn'T pUt YoUr cHiLd iN tHe iNdOcTRiNaTiOn MaCHiNe! DeFeNd YoUr RiGhT tO hOmEsChOoL WiThOuT OvErSiGhT!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] JJROKCZ@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Bold of you to think these kids are going to ever see a school or hospital. They’ll be kept at home being fed the most asinine homeschooling regimen possible and their “medical care” will be essential oils and potatoes in the socks. Then they’ll die before age 8 and the parents will blame it on chemtrails

[–] ttmrichter@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Are chemtrails still a thing? I thought it was 5G now?

[–] Donjuanme@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago (2 children)

That sounds like some major ppd if she thinks she somehow doesn't have her 2 year old

[–] NewNewAccount@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago

She doesn’t have them because the government owns them now. The government owns everyone with a SSN, apparently.

[–] Orbituary@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago

26 months, not 2 years, you birth certificate holder!

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Redhotkurt@kbin.social 8 points 2 years ago

The use of prepositions ("on him," "on her") makes this kind of an awkward read. It fits, though, because they seem dumb as fuck anyway.

[–] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 years ago

Broad vocabulary.