On Jun 18, 2:07*pm, JimH wrote:
On Jun 18, 2:00*pm, "Jim" wrote:





wrote in message

....
On Jun 18, 1:26 pm, JimH wrote:

A *balanced* view on the subject.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...113DF934A15756...

Here's some more balance:

We can't feed them meat:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/6896309.stm

Can't let them sleep in a car seat:

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=148...&comments=true

Can't let them play football:

http://www.shortnews.com/start.cfm?id=71071

Can't take them to the emergency room for anything:

http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0...ued-when-child...

Can't let them play with toys:

http://www.uspirg.org/newsroom/toy-s...ws/consumer-gr...

Only thing we can do is lock them in a hermetically sealed room with
soft walls.

OK Who was the bean bag that got you started on this topic? Although, I
think I know. What was the name of the thread?

That's it Jim..........blame someone else for Loogie being unable to
control himself.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Me control myself? Who was the idiot that suggested that because some
parents decide to let their kids be kids, albeit in a safe and
controlled way, that somehow those parents are inferior and should be
subjected to child endangerment laws? Who is it that suggested that a
parent that allows their children to safely and responsibly
participate in sports is somehow a bad parent?