Military Recruiters must await "Opt-In"
- Thread starter Riprorin
- Start date
Wow, that is a GREAT point. I never thought it of it like that. It really does show the hipocracy.
F'ing right. Some moronic Army recruiter called here the other night. I enjoyed that. I really did. No, you cannot talk to my daughter. Sending my child off to be cannon fodder for GWB's reckless and pointless war is not a good thing. I hope you neocons don't like it.
Expecting somone's high school aged kid to risk their life in Iraq to cover the complete and utter incompetence of George W. Bush.
His family covered for him all of his life, now he expects OUR families to cover for him too?
No way. Tell the recruiter to call the White House and ask for Jenna and Barbara if he needs recruits.
How is it non-sense exactly? Parents should be notified if a child has some medical procedure done on them and the military does not need a childs personal information, espically that the age.
glenn1
Lifer
- Sep 6, 2000
- 25,383
- 1,013
- 126
What, have you so ill-prepared your daughter for adult life that she can't resist the charms of a man in uniform? Or are you worried that your child might be more patriotic than you are and sees it as service to the country rather than being "cannon fodder" ? When people like you are involved I actually trust the children to know what's better for themselves than you do, parents taking rash actions like yours often cause their children to act precisely opposite to what you would wish just because they know it would hack you off. I don't think anyone should join the military who doesn't wish to, but you acting in this fashion leads me to believe you're a sad, scared little man. It would be sweet irony indeed if your daughter joined the service and wound up winning the Medal of Honor or Distinguished Service Cross.
Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,268
- 126
Steeplerot
Lifer
- Mar 29, 2004
- 13,051
- 6
- 81
:roll: Young people have better things to do the die for oil. seen how crappy the recruiters are doing latley?
I dare them to call here, my girlfriend would have a few things to tell them where to stick their oil war too.
(But I am sure it would be nothing new to them.)
glenn1
Lifer
- Sep 6, 2000
- 25,383
- 1,013
- 126
I don't consider the prospect of having little Suzie Q to need to get on the phone with the recruiter and say "no, I'm not interested and please don't call again" (if that's not what she wishes to do) to be such a terrible imposition as to require legislation, no. Allowing parents the right to unilaterally declare their children off-limit to even answering such a phone call is a serious overreaction that IMHO is going to backfire. If nothing else you can't possibly stop the recruiter once the child turns 18, so you might as well let them deal with it themself early on. Sales pitches and cold calls are a part of life, if nothing else it's good practice for them to learn how to say "no" when being solicited.
Now if you want to pass a law saying that recruiters should have a mandatory "cooling-off" period after being told by THE CHILD that they aren't interested, which will prevent them from calling back repeatedly (say 6 months to a year) and harassing the child I have no problem with that. But being able to prevent them from contacting the child at all (especially the first contact to allow the child a chance to decline), that I do not support.
If you think this war will bring any financial(oil) gain to the USA, you have a few screws loose.
Iraq is not an imperial undertaking....
I hope your vacation gets extended, Rip. Even after a two-week warning, you still attach A SINGLE SENTENCE to a post even though you were BANNED for doing that exact same thing. I have nothing to say on this thread besides that.
Steeplerot
Lifer
- Mar 29, 2004
- 13,051
- 6
- 81
He failed at everything else in life that wasen't handed to him.
Free oil for our beloved liberators! -oops reality check, it was complete b.s..
I may be mistaken, but the main opposition to alllowing girls to have abortions without parental consent involved there being no clause for situations where girls were raped by family. That can be a traumatic experience, as you can imagine, and it makes sense that such a clause would be included.
This is similar to the partial birth abortion ban, which many opposed simply because there was no provision in case the mother's health was at risk.
These are not simple black and white situations, as each bill has many components. Just because democrats voted against that particular partial birth abortion ban, doesn't mean they're in favorite of that procedure. I don't know of any people who are "yay, abortions!"
My main point is if kids are under 18, then the recruiters should be required to contact parents first.
This is similar to the partial birth abortion ban, which many opposed simply because there was no provision in case the mother's health was at risk.
These are not simple black and white situations, as each bill has many components. Just because democrats voted against that particular partial birth abortion ban, doesn't mean they're in favorite of that procedure. I don't know of any people who are "yay, abortions!"
My main point is if kids are under 18, then the recruiters should be required to contact parents first.
Hehehehe.
Rip, if you think abortion is anything like going to war, something is wrong with you. People who go to war aren't pregnant, and people who have abortions are killing enemy troops and being killed themselves.
Recruiting was here before the Iraq war and will continue on, Arsbanned. Also not all military personal will go to Iraq.
shira
Diamond Member
- Jan 12, 2005
- 9,500
- 6
- 81
Well, I'm about as liberal as they come, and I think recruiters should be able to at least speak with high school kids without parents having to give approval.
So, I guess SOME liberals aren't hypocrites after all. And that means YOU agree with me that there are some circumstances of underage abortion in which it's perfectly fine that parents shouldn't be notified, right?
(If not, then I guess YOU'RE the hypocrite. hahahahaha)
Parents should always be informed when their child's information is released to anyone. I enlisted back in the day, and know how full of BS recruiters can be. My opinion is that recruiters should be required to have a parent or guardian present anytime they talk to a minor, with the possible exception of something like a school-wide assembly. While enlistment is a wise choice for some, it is not for everybody. It also seems that plain ol' common sense would show who might have the best interests of the child at heart, the parent or the recruiter.
umbrella39
Lifer
- Jun 11, 2004
- 13,816
- 1,126
- 126
Why should recruiters be held under a different light than any other telemarketer or soliciter that calls your house. This IS what we are talking about. We are not talking about recruiters having career fairs at high schools. We are talking about recruiters contacting children at home. The Federal do not call list should be extended to include calls from ALL soliciters, recruiters are no different when they are contacting you at home. I am pretty sure most kids know about the Armed Services by the time they are teenagers. If they want to serve they know where to find them.
oh my god i just fell out of my chair laughing at the level of ignornace
BBOND was right in his quote:
and recruiters lie, you can ask my dad's brother, oh wait, you can't he's dead cause some recruiter lied to him about what he'd be doing and who he'd be stationed with, ened up picking up bodies of us soldiers in vietnam and eventually was shot by the VC, performing his duties, i highly doubt they have changed since then
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter