• Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    143
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Jesus.

    “Children in the US can be legally married in 41 states, physically punished by school administrators in 47 states, sentenced to life without parole in 22 states, and work in hazardous agriculture conditions in all 50 states.” Over and over again, the worst states for children are clustered around the “pro-life” Bible Belt, and the map of the states that are the worst for children looks a lot like a map of red-state America. (Liberal states, too, have a long ways to go when it comes to protecting kids, but they generally do a bit better.)

    And Republicans just want to make it worse.

    • Ragdoll X@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Also Republican states have consistently reported higher CSA rates over the past two decades, and a survey of tens of thousands people showed that conservatives are also just more likely to say they are pedophiles.

    • krayj@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is projection and hypocrisy at its finest.

      The more the state proclaims to ‘protect children’ and promote ‘family values’, generally the worse it scored on the analysis.

    • zib@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      Physical punishment in schools is still a thing??? I had to endure that back in the 90s, but I thought for sure people would have figured out better ways to discipline kids by now.

      • BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        I got paddled in 4th grade (late 80s) for saying “bastard”. Wasn’t screaming it, wasn’t calling someone else a bastard, I just said it and I got two whacks for it. Yeah, that was fucking draconian.

    • tsonfeir
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s for the children though, think about the children!! /s

      The one thing I’ll disagree with is, if a kid murders their entire family, they should never be allowed to roam free. It’s perfectly acceptable to say “this person is broken and cannot ever exist in society” with a crime like murder.

      • Prompt
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        My take is that if a kid does something that extreme it has probably been forced to work from a very young age, beaten up at home and at school and raped from a very young age.Then been forcefully married and having the rapists child. Just taking some excerpts from the article. Where I live the scenario of a kid killing its own family who’s under the age of 18-20 is unthinkable. Kids must be protected at all costs. Both a good and a bad upbringing will stay with you all your life and shape you for better or worse. I’ve worked with addicts and kids in institutions for many years. There are almost no happy childhoods there.

        • tsonfeir
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I imagine that information would be considered during the trail and the charges would be decreased, given a history of abuse. But, in the case that it isn’t that…

              • FfaerieOxide@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Why are you so hung up on their being “a punishment”.

                You’re coming up with these outlandish hypotheticals to justify your seeming desire to see …children… retributively harmed.

                Do we not at least agree in theory the at least ostensibe purpose of corrections is …correction?

                Do we agree that is the goal and should be worked toward in all cases?

                Starting from the position a person CAN be rehabilitated, do you agree from the point a person is rehabilitated there is no reason to lock them up?

                Do you reject that notion and believe a person who no longer thinks nor acts the way that lead them to commit harmful acts—just presume momentarily that’s possible—should still remain locked up?

                If the second, would you mind explaining what utility you feel that serves.? Leaving reformed people locked up.

      • PersnickityPenguin
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That kind of extreme example is so rare that it’s not really worth basing policy off of.

  • jadejitsu@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m glad I left the US to have my son born in the Czech Republic (his mother is Czech). Education is better. Health care is better. My employer at the time provided paid paternal leave!

  • SinningStromgald@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    1 year ago

    Well that’s an article that makes you want to just curl up in a ball and cry after reading.

    It’s hard to understand what exactly Republicans are trying to protect kids from if not the things listed in that article/study?

  • 3rihskerb
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    Anyone that votes anywhere should be reading this report.