Tuesday, February 15, 2011
The NSPCC Trying To Raise Cash By Frightening People?
The NSPCC claims that every school class has abused children in it.
Story here
There is no doubt that many children in Britain have lives that are far from ideal. But you have to remember that the NSPCC acts like a corporate business and many of its press releases are simply an effort to attract funding.
What is abuse? Well there are those who claim raising your voice to a child is abuse. Or that saying no to a child's demands for a new X Box is abuse. By lumping in such trivial examples with genuine violence you can ramp up the figures to any level you wish, and that's what this latest claim is about, in my opinion.
The destruction of the traditional family is the main cause of problems in childhood, but this is never endorsed by the NSPCC. Instead they encourage the single-mother culture and demonize men. I see many women in public who are totally incapable of parenting children with any hope of raising them to become balanced adults. These women live in the world of TV soaps and Jeremy Kyle and have chaotic lives that they blame on everyone else. They have "families" consisting of themselves and the progeny of many failed, and often brief, relationships with the dregs of the male gender. These women lurch from one bad-boy to the next, producing feckless, feral children for the state to look after. These children reach adulthood and burden to the state still further by becoming prisoners, permanently unemployed, or in the case of females, single-mothers. And the whole process starts again.
In Britain today, many working people can't afford to have children. Conversely, women on benefits are financially encouraged to have more. The result of this absurd situation is that more babies are born to the worst parents and many children have only a benefit-dependant single-mother to raise them. Meanwhile, working and middle-class families have fewer children because they are so heavily burdened by large mortgages and the costs of being financially self-reliant. The result is that more children are born into the worst family backgrounds and in my opinion this is a deliberate policy to dumb-down the population. Why else have successive governments permitted this?
Story here
There is no doubt that many children in Britain have lives that are far from ideal. But you have to remember that the NSPCC acts like a corporate business and many of its press releases are simply an effort to attract funding.
What is abuse? Well there are those who claim raising your voice to a child is abuse. Or that saying no to a child's demands for a new X Box is abuse. By lumping in such trivial examples with genuine violence you can ramp up the figures to any level you wish, and that's what this latest claim is about, in my opinion.
The destruction of the traditional family is the main cause of problems in childhood, but this is never endorsed by the NSPCC. Instead they encourage the single-mother culture and demonize men. I see many women in public who are totally incapable of parenting children with any hope of raising them to become balanced adults. These women live in the world of TV soaps and Jeremy Kyle and have chaotic lives that they blame on everyone else. They have "families" consisting of themselves and the progeny of many failed, and often brief, relationships with the dregs of the male gender. These women lurch from one bad-boy to the next, producing feckless, feral children for the state to look after. These children reach adulthood and burden to the state still further by becoming prisoners, permanently unemployed, or in the case of females, single-mothers. And the whole process starts again.
In Britain today, many working people can't afford to have children. Conversely, women on benefits are financially encouraged to have more. The result of this absurd situation is that more babies are born to the worst parents and many children have only a benefit-dependant single-mother to raise them. Meanwhile, working and middle-class families have fewer children because they are so heavily burdened by large mortgages and the costs of being financially self-reliant. The result is that more children are born into the worst family backgrounds and in my opinion this is a deliberate policy to dumb-down the population. Why else have successive governments permitted this?
Comments:
<< Home
This threat is common for all regions of the world. In Sri Lanka most of western countries supported to the LTTE which is most terrible group of terrorists.
Post a Comment
<< Home
