Separated Parenting Access & Resource Center
crazy gamesriddles and jokesfunny picturesdeath psychic!mad triviafunny & odd!pregnancy testshape testwin custodyrecipes

Author Topic: George, what the hell were you thinking?  (Read 10338 times)

Indigo Mom

  • Guest
RE: Whoa!
« Reply #20 on: Jan 17, 2004, 05:47:42 AM »
Back up that brightly painted VW bus with the orange peace sign and furry seats right up!!!!!!!

-----Statisitcally crack/crank/meth users go back to using time and again. -----

I believe that's what he said in the other thread.  In fact, those are his exact words.  He works in an ER, treating trauma patients, so I do believe dude knows what he's talking about here.  He didn't say "once a drug addict, always a drug addict".

-----If your previous postings here are in reference to drug use ( I'm a little too young to know what Columbian gold and strawberry paper is, but I think they are euphemisms for cocaine and acid?) -----

I was born in the 70's so I don't know what those are...but I'm assuming Columbian gold is pot and strawberry papers are the rolling papers dipped in strawberry oil...or something like that.  

-----If I'm right aren't you a little hypocrytical? -----

Yes, peanutsdad WOULD be a lot hypocritical if he did indeed say "once a drug addict, always a drug addict"...but he didn't.  


  • Guest
RE: Unemployment statistics!
« Reply #21 on: Jan 17, 2004, 09:41:53 AM »

Tell ya what john, you take in the addicts, I'll keep my tax dollars. Here are my posts from the thread to which you refer:

Who said anything about pointing fingers?

Statisitcally crack/crank/meth users go back to using time and again. Dont think I know what Im talking about? 'fraid I do,, I see more addicts come thru my ER than I care to count. Personally, I get tired of seeing MY tax dollars spent to treat addicts. Now you want folks to advocate this mother getting the kids. Right,, sure thing,, lets take the kids from one addict, and give em to another,, sounds great to me.

If either of these two parents truly cared about these children, they would turn them over to the state and start the long process of getting well for themselves, and give those children a chance of salvaging their childhood.

>My mother was an alcoholic and a drug abuser, so I do know
>what their life style will be like with a drug addict. I
>would have chosen my mother any day over being molested.

Bully for you. I would prefer children be safe any day, and whether its a child molester, or a drug addict, they aint safe.

>you ever talked to people who have been through the foster
>care system? Many foster families have just as many, if not
>worse problems than the bio-parents.

I've spoken to many foster parents, in fact, I KNOW many. Where are you getting your information concerning foster families? The local fiction bookstore? As a matter of fact, I testified for a foster couple to obtain custody of 2 children they adopted from crack addict families. Were these contested? yup,, the state removed the children for their own safety.
>This mother is in a viscious cycle. If she could get into a
>program and get some help she may be able to get her children
>back and that in and of itself might help her stay sober
>rather than resort to drugs due to hopelessness.

This is the kind of simpering pandering BS that has placed children back into unsafe homes time and again. Tell you what, why dont YOU take this mother into YOUR home and help rehab her. After you've had everything of value stolen and pawned, come back and tell us how humanitarian you feel.

Any further questions?


  • Guest
RE: Whoa!
« Reply #22 on: Jan 17, 2004, 09:55:10 AM »
Actually Indi,

That is true, once an addict, always an addict. Drug or alcohol, its always one hit, toke, drink or injection away from goin from recovering addict to active addict.

The difference that John doesnt get, is the casual user from the 70's or the casual drinker of the current day,, is not the problem. Its the addict that wrecks lives, drives drunk, neglects or abuses children.


  • Guest
RE: Unemployment statistics! Slightly off-topic to thread - sorry.
« Reply #23 on: Jan 17, 2004, 10:57:49 AM »
I just think it's hypocritical to have ever done illegal drugs, of which marijuana is one, and then state that another person who did or does drugs is a hopeless case.  The post was making light of the attitudes of the 1970's and I understand that, but because you did what was "acceptable" at the time doesn't make it right or legal.  I don't know if the person who posted ever truly did drugs, but the post sure read like he had, or at least didn't think it was wrong.  To me, it doesn't matter how "hard" the drug is; using is using.

I stated that I was unsure of what strawberry paper and Columbian gold were.
Since you remember the '70,s, maybe you could answer my question about Columbian gold?  What is it?

I never said anyone was a hard core user.  What I thought was hypocritical about the post was that in a previous post it was said that a drug user will not change, but you proved that not to be true since, as you pointed out, many of the drug users of the 1970's are now responsible, law abiding people.

Just because at one point in your life your doing something wrong does not mean you will never overcome and change.  That was the point of my message.  I'm sorry I took you all away from your reminiscing.  I just hate to see someone discouraged from getting help.


  • Guest
RE: Unemployment statistics! Slightly off-topic to thread - sorry.
« Reply #24 on: Jan 17, 2004, 11:11:36 AM »
No one said for them not to get help John. Both the father and the mother need to get help. Why dont you go help them?

What WAS said, is BOTH are ADMITTED addicts. So, with that being the case, you advocate keeping the children with either parent? These two parents arent just " doing something wrong once".. they are repeat offenders, and show currently a track record of using, getting clean, then going back to using. The quitessential definition of an addict. Thes two people are not high school kids with no responsibilities and partying. They are parents that are neglectful and abusive.

Just for your "historical trivia knowledge", Columbian gold was a popular strain of pot in the 70's. Strwberry papers where a flavored paper used to roll a joint.

Am I a user? No. Did I drink as an underage teen? yes. Am I an alcoholic or a drug addict? No.  Now, any other questions John?


  • Guest
RE: Whoa!
« Reply #25 on: Jan 17, 2004, 11:14:54 AM »
Your right, I don't believe in the casual use of any illegal substance.  If you've done illegal substances you do not have a right to pass judgement on someone else who has.  I don't think you can justify people's use of drugs in the '70's by saying that it was casual and therefore okay just because it makes those who did it feel better about it.

Just for the record, I don't know that you ever did use an illegal substance and I'm sorry for implying that.  It was your overall message as I wrote above that seemed hypocritical to me.  

There have been recoveries even from hard-core drug use and that is all I'm saying.  It can't be said on one side, "These people did drugs, but they only did a little of the right kind and at a different time, so they're alright, and then on the other side "these people do the bad drugs at a bad time so they're hopeless."


  • Guest
RE: Whoa!
« Reply #26 on: Jan 17, 2004, 11:28:24 AM »
I dont recall saying anything of the sort John. What I DID say, is these PARENTS who are SUPPOSED to be responsible for their children,, are addicts,,, admittedly.

Yes there are recoveries from hard core drugs. Care to know the statistics of STAYING clean if you are a cocaine or crack user, or meth? The patient that is able to stay clean is the EXCEPTION to the rule, not the standard.

 So, go right ahead, YOU pay for all the nice rehab programs. I would choose not to. I can think of better things to spend my tax dollars on.

You are absolutely correct on one thing, we arent going to agree on this issue. My personal feeling is if you want to help the addicts,, go do so. Mtself, I prefer to help the kids.


  • Guest
RE: The issues on this are FAR deeper ...
« Reply #27 on: Jan 17, 2004, 11:31:19 AM »
Well the early part of the 70's I was more interested in dirting my diaper then caring about anything! LOL
Later part of the 70's I was more worried about my barbie doll fashions then my own :)


  • Guest
RE: Whoa!
« Reply #28 on: Jan 17, 2004, 11:35:05 AM »
John,, do you have a family member that has done hard core drugs????


  • Guest
RE: Whoa!
« Reply #29 on: Jan 17, 2004, 12:04:16 PM »
Since when has it not been helping kids to help their parents?  I can tell you first hand how much I would have benefitted by some tax dollars used to help my mother.  Believe me, none of your tax dollars were used to help her.

By the way I think I might have mistaken something in your post on the other board for something demeaning when it wasn't.  Does BTW mean "by the way" or is it derogatory?  I am a novice to online acronyms.  You would laugh at what I thought it meant.  I'm sorry for getting angry.  I shouldn't have gotten so personal.


Copyright © SPARC - A Parenting Advocacy Group
Use of this website does not constitute a client/attorney relationship and this site does not provide legal advice.
If you need legal assistance for divorce, child custody, or child support issues, seek advice from a divorce lawyer.