Search Results for 'Yg'

[hopey]

I will probably get slammed for saying this, but… MYOB? If the mom is comfortable with it, that is her business. Also, the girl could have been older than you think. I have a niece who is 8 years old and looks more like six.

I am a stepmom all summer to an 8 year old boy, and that may soon change to all year. If someone came up to tell me that my stepson had “wandered away” after I had given him permission to go play on the playground within my line of sight, I would politely say thank you but internally I would be wondering why you were butting into my business.

Children need to be taught how to take care of themselves and then given opportunities to practice those lessons, not be hovered over by adults who never allow them any independence or to develop their own competence. My stepson’s first solo commercial airplane flight (2 hr flight) just before turning 7 years old is something he now considers to be a major growing-up milestone, and he is very proud to have taken care of himself without mom or dad beside him. Giving him that freedom has helped to build his self-confidence and maturity.

The world is actually safer for kids now than it was in the 70s, despite popular concerns. Here is a blog by a woman who has been castigated by publicly talking about letting her 9 year old son ride the subway by himself. She provides information and links to debunk a lot of the current myths about how “unsafe” the world is for kids.

http://freerangekids.wordpress.com/about-2/

[changingtimes]

especially after the camp long incident, people should be on the look out and watching there kids a little more closely. There is park down on delridge near my sister in laws house that the kids like to play at since it is a stone throw from there house, my sister in law said kids as young as 4 walk with there brothers and sisters to play in the park, she said last week she was there with her kids and she was the only adult and a grey cadi stopped across the street and a guy was stareing at the kids, she said she felt an immediate red flag so actually (and i yelled at her for doing so) walked up to the creepy guy and asked him what he wanted. the guy said nothing he was just “taking a break” and was like leering at her, anyways she told all the kids in the playground to go home right now and she called the police when she got home and reported the man….not sure what the follow up was. you never know what these weird peoples intentions are but its better to be save then sorry :)and its good of you rainy day to be watching out for others….

[RainyDay1235]

So, I’m curious how others feel on this topic….

The other day I was walking my dog heading home through High Point. A baseball game was going on in the back playfield. A little girl walked past me – she couldn’t have been more than 5 or 6 – on her way to the playground at the other end of the park. She stopped to pet my dog – and I asked he where her Mom was. She said she was at the game watching her brothers play.

Now, tehcnically the Mom could ‘see’ her once she was at the playground (definitely not the entire walk there), and this was several hundred yards away (guesstimate). I asked if she had permission to be by herself and she said yes. Now, I passed a woman walking slowly that direction and figured it was ‘Mom’. Once I met up with her I asked if it was her little girl, and she said no.

I felt very uneasy leaving her alone. It seems odd since *I* grew up in the 70s going off doing whatever I wanted, on bike or foot. Maybe I was “told” to hang around my brothers at 5 or 6, but the rules were pretty loose. But it does feel like a different time now….

Also, I have seen some questionable cars & vans ‘park’ on 34th right there. Granted, it’s people eating their lunch, taking work breaks etc but….line-of-sigh or no, it would only take a minute to grab that little girl and be gone.

What should I have done in that situation? Keep walking? Go to the ballfield and make sure her Mom knew where she was?

[charlabob]

Thanks for the clarification, JimmyG!

[Ken]

You may want to print this out if you meet a cop who does not want to do the paperwork. They may not be required but you can ask that they forward the info/call to an animal control officer.

There are only 4 enforcement officers for the entire city.

http://www.cityofseattle.net/animalshelter/strategy.htm

The following are some general guidelines to be used by both the Neighborhood Team and the Park Patrol Team to ensure that enforcement activities are conducted in a manner that is fair and equitable to all citizens.

A Citation shall be issued for violations including leash law, scoop law and pet licensing. A citation shall also be issued for other related animal-related violations when a pet owner:

Has previously been issued a warning, citation or parks exclusion notice for an animal-related violation.

Gives false information to the officer.

Allows the animal to

Bite or behave dangerously, aggressively or in a menacing fashion.

Behave unruly; jump up on people.

Chase fish/wildlife; enter or destroy fish/wildlife habitat.

Destroy public and/or private property.

Be off-leash in or near a playground, wading pool, beach, athletic field or any park area where there is a concentration of children, or on or near a trail or any park area where people are walking, running, picnicking or engaging in other recreational activities where an off-leash dog would be considered by a reasonable person to be disruptive.

A Park Exclusion Notice shall be issued in addition to a citation when the violator:

Has received 3 or more animal-related citations in the parks within a twelve (12) month period.

Has previously received a citation for dangerous animal behavior surrounding an incident that occurred in a City park.

Is uncooperative or belligerent and the Seattle Police Department must be summoned to assist the officer.

Except for violations of leash law, scoop law, licensing laws or other circumstances outlined above, a Warning may be issued, at the discretion of the officer, if the following conditions are met and the violator:

Tried earnestly not to violate the law.

Has not previously received animal code violation warnings, citations or parks exclusion notices for animal-related violations.

Has not allowed the animal to bite or behave dangerously, aggressively or in a menacing fashion.

Is otherwise in compliance of the leash law, scoop law and pet licensing law.

Note: When the police advise you not to confront people, they may have your best interest at heart. But those of us who are not afraid of confrontation or it’s results, should continue to at in a civic minded fashion. Otherwise everyone gets run over since we cannot possible afford enough police to protect a compliant citizenry.

[ellenater]

Wow! Thanks for the welcomes!! It’s funny how the people on the blog are as nice as the people we meet in person. Not surprising, I guess…

The suggestions are great. We are all over Craigslist. I hadn’t seen some of those postings, though so thanks, thriftwaygirl. We’re on it!

Sue thanks for the tip on Allied. That’s the stuff, right there. Nothing beats WOM.

NR, what is your neighborhood? We are just getting acquainted with all the different neighborhoods. We’re not picky about which ones but it’s nice to walk to stuff. We have been driving around a bunch but I’m not seeing many signs.

Thanks again. I’m so excited to move over!!!

[Ken]

Just so people can target their remarks , I am male, 53 and buy my clothes and shoes from a big and tall catalog. I used to favor “direct action” to resolve conflicts but now that I am older, I prefer political solutions.

Back to the subject at hand…

Dog owners throughout Highpoint neighborhoods vary in their observation of the law. Some are scrupulous, some are repeat offenders and some switch back and forth depending on the circumstances. And some actually look around to see if anyone is watching before deciding whether to pick up the poo.

The guy with 3 labs will get a confrontation next time I see him walking up from the snake hill area with them off leash.

The older guy who only takes his mutt off leash to play fetch in the pocket park will probably be ignored for now since the dog is on leash 95% of the time.

I will contact the director of the Highpoint community center and the after school care based at highpoint/westseattle elem school as well as animal control if I see the guy using the elementary school playground as his private dog park again. The after school program uses that playground and the dog poo is as annoying to me as it is to other parents/caregivers who have to pick up kids after stepping or falling in it.

I have better things to do but it seems nothing happens without somebody pushing the civic cart along a bit from time to time.

JT, if your shy about confronting the free range dog owners at West Seattle Elementary playground, drop me an email and I will give you my cell number. I am not shy. :)

Final note. This is a rant forum. While there are rules and I am sure WSB has posted them, replies and even strong disagreements should be expected in a rant thread.

If you want to see it done with style and imagination, visit the rude pundit.

http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/

[JenV]

again my apologies, JimmyG- you actually said they were “being TARTED up”. I can see my mistake now. ;)

[PSPS]

About the same time, I noticed one cop car at the corner of 41st and Dakota just sitting at the corner with his rooftop lights going. Occasionally, he’d drive into the school’s playground and sit there for a while shining his spotlight around. Then he’d go back to the corner for a while.

I presumed it was part of a “containment.”

[Anonymous]

Walfredo, this is kind of a long article, but pretty convincing that Webb would be a bad choice for VP. What do you think of it?

http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/05/ixnay_on_the_ebbway.php

[MrJT]

Hi funnygirl,

On recommendation of our architect, we just used Continental Surveying. They did a complete survey, including topography, for what I thought was a reasonable rate. Their offices are in Greenwood not West Seattle.

206.783.7177

[Ken]

To phrase the issue as a Fox commentator would, Are right wingers fools? or just dumb. We will examine that question in depth right after this message from Lockheed- Martin…

Hint: you must click on the links to get the real facts on the netherlands polygamy story and see the wingnut “journalist” who purposely mistranslated the contract name and associated it with same sex marriage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_the_Netherlands

http://www.anonymousliberal.com/2005/10/is-polygamy-really-legal-in.html

http://www.amptoons.com/blog/archives/2005/10/05/lies-hypocripsy-and-same-sex-marraige/

[rs261]

Sexual orientation doesnt have anything to do with polygamy.

Sexual orientation has to do with the gender of your same species you find attractive. You are either Homosexual, Hetrosexual, or Bisexual.

Incest also has nothing to do with sexual orientation, and I dont believe is against the law everywhere…its more of a taboo then illegal in most places. (Genetic disorders anyone?)

So again, it is completely about discrimination about sexual orientation, and not about redefining anything. Unless you are trying to redefine sexual orientation, but thats not what the court is saying.

As for your questions.

1) I dont know, it has nothing to do with discrimination based on sexual orientation. It does have to do with discrimination of religious beliefs, but most places have laws that handle that specifically. As was said the other day in texas, “religious freedom only goes as far as you are not breaking the law”.

2) See incest statement above. If 2 brothers or 2 sisters or a brother and sister want to get married, and it is not illegal in their state due to incest laws, go for it, just be prepared if they have offspring to pass along genetically undesirable traits at a greater rate.

So, again let me state…

SEXUAL ORIENTATION = one’s natural preference in sexual partners; predilection for homosexuality, heterosexuality, or bisexuality.

Not number of partners…or age…but strictly the sex of the person you find attractive. And that is what the ruling was based on. Discrimination based on sexual orientation.

[Anonymous]

House, the article you link to has the author joking about wishing he could claim his pet as a dependent. I wish that too. So. The case being written about is whether a disabled person can claim their service dog as a medical *deduction*. Seems reasonable if we can deduct our eyeglasses under medical.

I fail to see the *slippery slope* between gay marriage equality and income tax deductions. Of course now that we’ve muddied the original issue with pets,dependents, children, deductions, and polygamy, Wes has to steer us toward pedophilia.

Why can’t someone just explain to me how two committed, consensual, adult, same sex partners affects their straight marriage. And please refrain from quoting leviticus. That is a belief system, not a legal argument.

[Wes]

I believe that Holland since legalizing same sex marriage, has also legalized polygamy there after and now a pedophile political group has just started up there to lower the age for consent to 12 instead of 16. Most of those in this group seem to be same sex orientated as well.

I think House brings up a good point which we should all be aware of and that is the possibility of a slippery slope of what defines marriage.

This is the only point I have brought up, so please do not read into this more than what I have stated.

[Kayleigh]

I think polygamy is illegal because some believe significant psychological harm comes from it. Marrying relatives is illegal I think because of the increased risk of creating children with significant genetic defects.

It would be interesting to read the science on polygamy itself; I couldn’t find anything that was divorced from the nutty religion and forced marriages. And how come it’s usually multiple wives and not multiple husbands?

I have days where I wonder why anybody would want one spouse, let alone several, though.

[Trick]

House,

I believe the way the Supreme court spelled it out (Texas vs Lawrence) is about “consent”.

So Rick Santorum immediately talked about Incest,Polygamy,Adultery as being accepted as long as there is consent.

It’s a good argument for the right, no doubt.

However, the Polygamists (who oppose same sex marriage) can’t necessarily argue too well that a 15 yr old girl is consensual with a 55 or 65 yr old man who HE chooses to be as his wife. Their argument is based on religious beliefs rather than two consenting adults.

[TheHouse]

Wrong, JT. It wasn’t meant to fire anyone up. It was meant to provoke thought. If you think the debate over dependents is radical, just read the link below. It’s already being tested by disabled people. Give it 15-20 years and it will be a topic of debate.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9A05EED61339F93BA15750C0A967948260

RS261, defining marriage is at the core of the debate so it is very relevant. If you believe that this is discriminatory based on sexual orientation, then I’d like to ask you a few questions:

1) Why is polygamy illegal? It is marriage between consenting adults, albeit more than two. Why should someone be discriminated against if they choose to have multiple spouses as long as they are consenting adults?

2) Why shouldn’t relatives be allowed to marry if over the age of 18? As long as they are consenting adults, why should we discriminate against them?

The above are examples of discrimination based on “sexual orientation”.

[Jo]

JimmyG is right.

I’m suspecting instead of a customer complaint, the health inspector came around, saw a dog in a shop, and then issued warnings to all businesses in the vicinity. It’s simply against the law to bring an animal (of any kind) into an establishment that sells food. It’s a health issue, not a canine prejudice issue.

Charlabob said: “it also doesn’t serve food (you order out) so that also makes a difference.” If you serve any food at all, whether on premises or ‘to go’ the health department says, ‘no animals.’ The only exception is a service dog.

So, I guess find a place with an outdoor patio and keep your dog close, or tie it up outside while you’re inside.

[Ken]

In much of this country, and the world, you’re married the moment you sign the marriage license. The religious part of it is optional. As is the justice of the peace ceremony.

In WA, the mixture of church and state is complete in this area. Anyone claiming to be a religious “leader” can perform incantations that the state then deems satisfactory to turn the license into a legal document. There are no requirements as to the sanity or even the species of the officiating “leader”. So, in theory, Fido of the Church of Dog, or a representative (Dwarf, Pirate or Tree) of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM) could perform your marriage ceremony and the state would have to consider it legal as long as the officiant and two witnesses also sign the license. (the legality of a paw print as well as the method of determining the “age” of majority of the pooch, Dwarf or Tree might present legal hurdles which have not yet been addressed by the legal system)

RCW 26.04.060

Marriage before unauthorized cleric — Effect.

A marriage solemnized before any person professing to be a minister or a priest of any religious denomination in this state or professing to be an authorized officer thereof, is not void, nor shall the validity thereof be in any way affected on account of any want of power or authority in such person, if such marriage be consummated with a belief on the part of the persons so married, or either of them, that they have been lawfully joined in marriage.

For those who would like a bit more legal clarity on both real and hypothetical questions regarding what constitutes a religion capable of officiating at a wedding, read this WA state Attorney General circa 1971, from the Universal Life Church:

http://www.ulcseminary.org/forum/uploads/WashOAG1971No117.pdf

And then sign up for your ordination papers.

http://www.themonastery.org/?destination=ordination

On the secular side, only a limited set of judges from a list can officiate at a marriage.

http://www.metrokc.gov/kcdc/WeddingJudges.pdf

http://www.kingcounty.gov/courts/SuperiorCourt/civil/weddings.aspx

It should be noted that if we are going to define tradition as the arbiter of marriage, we must define strict limits on what is tradition and what is history lest we then legalize as the fundies seem to want, concubines, polygamy, marriage within close family groups (the Tudors?)

as well as the illegality of divorce.

This is unlikely to happen since the current Republican nominee and most current republican office holders seem to be serial adulterers and trade in their wives for newer or richer models with more regularity than they trade in their cars.

Those who have had their marriage “ruined” by the legality of same sex marriages in MA or CA, please tell your story in this thread that we might all be forewarned.

I personally feel the decoupling of religion from the purely civil contract of marriage should be a legislative goal more important than the civil rights issue of gay marriage but most liberals are content to throw this bone to the fundy right to keep them quiet.

[Anonymous]

That’s interesting, flowerpetal. I’ve never seen people have to go through BOTH. I’ve certainly seen the “puffer”, but usually you go through one or the other.

Maybe they do things different in Vegas. Even though I am based there, I haven’t gone through their security in about 3 years.

I do know a good tip for if you set off the metal detector. Usually they want to do a full “pat down” when that happens. If you happen to notice that they have one of the xray machines, request to do that instead of the “pat down”. Sooooo much faster!

Thanks, JimmyG for the insight. Supposedly it is supposed to be one of the busiest summers for travel (aaahhhh….. recession? Sorry, couldn’t help myself), but it seems that most airports (TSA) are taking the initiative to prepare. It’s good to see.

[Gina]

I keep reading the thread title as “my billygoat” neighbors.

[Anonymous]

JimmyG, Shibaguyz and House – Congratulations on becoming homeowners. I want to thank you for sharing your stories of hard work, determination and sacrifice in order to get to where you are today.

I congratulate you, too, on not taking the much-to-easy “victim” mentality (well, Shibaguyz, it sounded like maybe you did, and then you pulled yourself out of it).

Yes, rents have gone up. Gas has gone up. Everything has gone up, it’s inflation and it happens. I guess you can either choose to keep up or not.

[Gina]

Inspired by Charlabob, the sale will be a bit different.

The artisan Jewelry will not be part of the Jan’s Hip Sale fundraiser. Prices will be as marked.

The baked goods and white elephant items–all proceeds will go to the Jan’s Hip Fund.

Jan and I were thinking of free will donation as being what people pay for those items. Saves putting on those price tags that never seem to come off.

I will have a donation jar for those that just want to drop off money.

Look for the red, white and blue balloons on 45th SW across the street from the Lafayette School playground. Between Admiral Way and Lander. Look for the white swoopy picket fence.

9 until 2, or until it rains steadily.

[Anonymous]

NR, I can’t find any information to support the claim that the FLDS are abusing welfare. On a news site, that is. Lots of blogs are saying they do. It is my understanding that the Texas location has a cement factory among other businesses. I also found this story on CNN interesting. Apparently the pentagon has contracts with FLDS companies to buy machined parts.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/04/17/polygamy.pentagon/index.html