anonemouse

As much as I would like to see a law passed - and enforced - that required all parents to take their children to the doctor, I doubt it will happen. But I do think that there should be some sort of punishment in place if something happens to a child as a result of his or her parent's refusal to seek medical care. The best analogy that comes to my mind at the moment is car insurance laws. Many states have laws that state that all car owners must have insurance. Now, most policemen don't just pull people over randomly to check to see if they have insurance, but if something happens and they get pulled over anyway - or if they're in an accident - the insurance gets checked and the driver is punished if he doesn't have it. So, I don't think police should be randomly checking to see if you're taking your children to the doctor. But if a child dies of an illness or some other treatable problem, I do think that parents should face consequences if they refused to have medical intervention.

Definitely will!

I'm short, so I have a hard time pulling off tunics. They make me look like a midget. I did get my first ever pair of capris the other day, though, which I'm absolutely thrilled with. In plus sizes, they were all still too long to look right, even in petite lengths (those stupid manufacturers think that women get taller as they get fatter). I pretty much stick with t-shirts and the occasional button-down (as long as it doesn't have 3/4-length sleeves, which my arms are too short to pull off).

YES! That's exactly what I was thinking in the dressing room, "#@*% GIANT CAMELTOE!" I tried on a body suit thingy (the ones with the built-in bra) a few weeks ago, but didn't get it because I didn't want to spend $50 at the time. It did hold me in (or at least, smoothed me out) quite a bit. *sigh* I think I'm going to have to go back. I have to wear the ones with the bra, though, 'cause the panty girdles just roll down on me. They never hit at the right spot, either, and I get a very obvious indentation.

No one cares?

As much as I think people should be educated on the good, the bad, and the ugly of the band, I also think it's pretty obvious why her band failed. Or rather, why she failed her band. After all, we go on and on and on about how the band is only a tool and only works as well as the banded person works it. If you don't get filled to the right restriction, if you don't eat the right foods, if you don't exercise, you aren't going to be very successful in the long run. The band isn't for people looking for the easy way out. You gotta put some effort into it. And to me, that's the best thing about it, because it FORCES you to make those lifestyle changes that we all found a bit too hard to make when we were unbanded, because you go into this (or at least, you SHOULD) knowing that this is on YOU. And to me, being bitter and angry about still being fat after getting the band is completely stupid, 'cause the band can't do 100% of the work for you. That's YOUR failing, not the band, in most cases. So be pissed at yourself, not at your band, and certainly not at people who ARE successful at losing weight with the band. Being pissed and bitter at a completely inanimate object - one that has done it's one and only job of restricting the amount you can eat - makes no sense whatsoever.

Seriously, I feel so sorry for the folks that have to live close to it, because that HAS to ruin their property values. Not to mention having to live with the stink. It's bad enough just passing it on the interstate.

There's a Purdue chicken plant in a nearby town. It's right next to the interstate, unfortunately. Some days, it's enough to make you gag. I guess there's a drainage pond or whatever there, but it just smells like rotten fried chicken.

There's a Flower's Bakery in my hometown. They make a lot of breads and pre-packaged goodies that you see in grocery stores. I LOVE it when they're making cinnamon rolls. You can smell it for MILES.

True, there is a big difference. One's outright abuse and the other's just neglect. But if religious freedom trumps all, where do you stop? Where do you draw the line? It can be argued that once a parent/guardian refuses to seek care for their child, whatever the child is suffering from becomes their fault, and therefore IS damage that is being inflicted upon one person by another. That could especially be said in situations where the illness is completely and easily curable. I just think it's horrible that someone can be exempt from being punished for another person dying just by claiming that their religious beliefs forbade them from doing something. I just think there has to be a limit, and for me that limit is when it concerns someone that is completely under the control of a guardian or parent and has no option but to do what the parent/guardian decides, regardless of what they might believe or want.

Oh no, it's here. It's the DS thread. (At least, I think that's what everyone else is talking about.)

And I realize that. I know that it will probably never be illegal. I wish it was, though. LIke I've said before, I think people should be able to do whatever they want to with THEIR bodies, but I don't think they should be able to do whatever they want with their children's bodies. There is a limit, like with the example that Gadgetlady posted, where the state SHOULD step in and say, "We won't allow you to do this." I think there is a point where the physical well-being of the child comes before the parent's or guardian's religious rights.

When it comes to their kids? You bet. They can do whatever they want to with their own lives, but they shouldn't have the right to sentence their child to death because they'd prefer to pray instead of have their child take antibiotics. And honestly? I think a Jehovah's Witness refusing to allow their child to have a blood transfusion that would save the child's life IS neglect. Lack of needed medical attention is neglect, IMO. Again, I think people should be allowed to do whatever the heck they want to with their OWN lives, but I don't think they should be allowed to make those decisions for their children. To use a non-medical example, if a woman prefers to live in an abusive relationship, bully for her. I don't like it, but I don't think she should be forced to leave if she doesn't want to. But she shouldn't be allowed to raise her children in that atmosphere. IMO, I think she has to make a decision based on what's best for her children, not what she personally prefers. To refine my earlier statement, I believe that people should be allowed to seek the medical treatment that they believe in FIRST. If that treatment doesn't work, though, I think they should have to see a medical doctor, if necessary, at least when it comes to their children. So have your child see an herbalist or an accupuncturist first, if you wish. But if they don't improve, you SHOULD see a medical doctor.

Who am I? No one. But I fully believe the government has the right to tell citizens what they can and cannot do. And that includes not allowing people to neglect the health of their children. Now, does that mean that someone HAS to go to a modern doctor? I don't think so, necessarily. They could try herbal remedies, holistic healing, accupuncture, etc., first. But I do think it means that they CANNOT ignore a problem, such as their child's illness, and hope or pray it goes away. I think they should go to SOMEONE, whether it's a holistic doctor or something, and if that doesn't work, go to someone that does, even if it's someone that they don't like or wouldn't choose to go to themselves. They shouldn't be allowed to sit there and allow their child to die in the hope that a miracle will take place, when in all likelihood it could have been easily taken care of if they'd just done it. I do think there comes a point where a parent has to think about what's best for their child and not what they would prefer. People don't HAVE to believe in something. But that doesn't mean they shouldn't have to do it. Many people in this country don't think they should have to pay taxes, but that doesn't mean they're exempt from paying them.

I think so!

What I was referring to with "hunting them down" was going to the DS board, finding a vulnerable DSer and attacking them there. Yes, people went to the DS board and read their posts. There's nothing wrong with that. The fact is, though, they weren't attacked on THEIR board. Now, I can see how some DSers might be offended by what is said here. But it's being said in RnR, which is where it should be said, if it's going to be said. Now, of course we get childish and catty here. We always have. And come on, making fun of our fellow fat folks (Ha! Alliteration!) isn't anything new in this forum, either. There are lots and lots of threads that make fun of posts that people make here at LBT, too. It's all in (mostly) good spirits, and like I said, a form of venting. Everyone deserves a few catty, childish moments in their life. And honestly? Most of it was in good spirits, until the fighting started.

I went to Gap on my lunch break today. First time I've been in one in years. Hell, since I've been old enough to shop there, in fact! I was, like, 10 the last time I was in their sizes. I think I've found a new addiction, just wish I had more money to pay for it! Anyway, I fit in their 12s. And they'd look GOOD, too, if it wasn't for this damn pannus! I'm gonna have to break down and get some Spanx or some other type of shapewear, 'cause that was just icky. They fit EVERYWHERE except right at my stomach, below my waistband. I could button them, zip, and sit down in them with no wrinkles or bulges (other than what I'm bitching about). I've just got so much lose skin on my tummy that it compresses it and make it look like a 2nd rear end, and a lumpy one at that. Now, I'm sure it didn't look as bad as I thought it did ('cause you know our eyes go straight to what we KNOW is wrong), but it was still depressing. I'm gonna go get a body suit thingy sometime this week and go back and see if they look better. I did get a pair of shorts that didn't do the 2nd ass thing, though, and a couple of t-shirts. Found a really pretty dress, too, but I need a petite size in it and the store doesn't carry them. Not sure if I'll get it online, though, since it was a guazy white one and I get paranoid in gauzy crap. :smile:

Now y'all know why I stay away from OH! Every so often, I let it draw me back in and I'll lurk just long enough to get really pissed off and come back here.

I completely agree with this. Don't get me wrong, I believe in religious freedom. I have to. As an Atheist, I would be a complete hypocrite if I didn't. But I think it should be limited to competent adults. In other words, I don't think that a child or adult that is under a guardianship should be subjected to whatever their guardian believes in, willy-nilly, if there is a good possibility of harm coming to the child, either directly or through neglect. I think the physical/mental welfare of the child should come before the guardian's right to religious freedom.

Know what's worse than donuts? Pizza. I had my one and only PB on pizza, and it wasn't even the good shit, either! It was freakin' Tombstone! Took two bites and was in absolute hell for 3 1/2 hours. Krispy Cremes are AWESOME, though. Or at least, they were when I could eat them. And like someone said, you've gotta eat them while they're hot or warm, 'cause they're gross otherwise.

I have to agree. No one's hunting down "DS Talk Forum" and bashing DSers. Here, it's been a combination of A) laughing at something that is, quite honestly, slightly amusing in a sad way (charcoal suppositories and inflating undies), and :cursing: venting. Everyone deserves to be able to vent in a safe place, and this is our safe place. If we were going and invading a DS forum and posting shit for everyone to see and attacking people left and right, then I could definitely see where the outrage would be coming from, and I'd probably be just as outraged. But the fact is, that isn't happening.

It's whose. Who's stands for "who is.":cool:

I think it's the folks that you've friended.

No kidding. She gives all of us younger members a bad name.

The sentiment is definitely returned!