Oregon Hikers

Sad.

This is a perfect example of why people that have no business having kids, keep having kids, then they get older, and we have to babysit them as a society. Fatherless households = no discipline, so then they behave like this. It's interesting that nobody discusses this, yet this is a very simple and clear example of the end result.

I'm with the above suggestions on a simple concrete "bench" or just legalize pushing these morons off the cliff so society would be better without them. I highly doubt they're providing any positive contributions other than costing everyone additional tax revenue.

markesc wrote:Sad.

This is a perfect example of why people that have no business having kids, keep having kids, then they get older, and we have to babysit them as a society. Fatherless households = no discipline, so then they behave like this. It's interesting that nobody discusses this, yet this is a very simple and clear example of the end result.

I'm with the above suggestions on a simple concrete "bench" or just legalize pushing these morons off the cliff so society would be better without them. I highly doubt they're providing any positive contributions other than costing everyone additional tax revenue.

Not to derail the thread but this seems like quite the leap in logic, Mark, in automatically assuming these folks come from fatherless-households and that people who do are not capable of proper behavior, etc. I thought that we were past that sort of nonsense victim-blaming but maybe not.

markesc wrote:Sad.

This is a perfect example of why people that have no business having kids, keep having kids, then they get older, and we have to babysit them as a society. Fatherless households = no discipline, so then they behave like this. It's interesting that nobody discusses this, yet this is a very simple and clear example of the end result.

I agree that this is sad, but I'm not sure how it indicates a fatherless child from a large family of fatherless children? Sometimes people from excellent families with both parents simply make bad decisions.

And sometimes children from broken families make excellent decisions. And sometimes kids have two moms - who provide excellent discipline without the guidance of a male.

Again, the vandalism isn't ok, I just don't think we can assume anything about the family life of who did it.

obera wrote:

markesc wrote:Sad.

This is a perfect example of why people that have no business having kids, keep having kids, then they get older, and we have to babysit them as a society. Fatherless households = no discipline, so then they behave like this. It's interesting that nobody discusses this, yet this is a very simple and clear example of the end result.

I agree that this is sad, but I'm not sure how it indicates a fatherless child from a large family of fatherless children? Sometimes people from excellent families with both parents simply make bad decisions.

And sometimes children from broken families make excellent decisions. And sometimes kids have two moms - who provide excellent discipline without the guidance of a male.

Again, the vandalism isn't ok, I just don't think we can assume anything about the family life of who did it.

Yes, here is the sad result of a child in a fatherless home. My wife and I have done our best with our sweet Maggie but she insists on going offtrail and climbing on things. It must be due to the lack of male discipline that makes her that way. Perhaps she is the one going to Sherrard to destroy the benches?

sprengers4jc wrote:

obera wrote:

markesc wrote:Sad.

This is a perfect example of why people that have no business having kids, keep having kids, then they get older, and we have to babysit them as a society. Fatherless households = no discipline, so then they behave like this. It's interesting that nobody discusses this, yet this is a very simple and clear example of the end result.

I agree that this is sad, but I'm not sure how it indicates a fatherless child from a large family of fatherless children? Sometimes people from excellent families with both parents simply make bad decisions.

And sometimes children from broken families make excellent decisions. And sometimes kids have two moms - who provide excellent discipline without the guidance of a male.

Again, the vandalism isn't ok, I just don't think we can assume anything about the family life of who did it.

Yes, here is the sad result of a child in a fatherless home. My wife and I have done our best with our sweet Maggie but she insists on going offtrail and climbing on things. It must be due to the lack of male discipline that makes her that way. Perhaps she is the one going to Sherrard to destroy the benches?

sprengers4jc wrote:

obera wrote:

markesc wrote:Sad.

This is a perfect example of why people that have no business having kids, keep having kids, then they get older, and we have to babysit them as a society. Fatherless households = no discipline, so then they behave like this. It's interesting that nobody discusses this, yet this is a very simple and clear example of the end result.

I agree that this is sad, but I'm not sure how it indicates a fatherless child from a large family of fatherless children? Sometimes people from excellent families with both parents simply make bad decisions.

And sometimes children from broken families make excellent decisions. And sometimes kids have two moms - who provide excellent discipline without the guidance of a male.

Again, the vandalism isn't ok, I just don't think we can assume anything about the family life of who did it.

Yes, here is the sad result of a child in a fatherless home. My wife and I have done our best with our sweet Maggie but she insists on going offtrail and climbing on things. It must be due to the lack of male discipline that makes her that way. Perhaps she is the one going to Sherrard to destroy the benches?

Wait, is that who's destroying the "sensitive habitat" on the Perdition Trail?!

Digging up this old thread b/c I was up at Sherrard Point today and someone was wondering what had happened to the benches. I remembered they took them out ~5 years earlier due to vandalism, but couldn't remember any details. Figured a search here would turn that up--always nice to have an online brain on hand to remember the things you can't.

Man, that is so much worse than I remember! Broken, chucked over cliff, broken, burned... Wonder what those benches ever did to make somebody hate them that much?

(By the way, my husband, who grew up in a "fatherless home" after his dad gave his life fighting for this country, says hi)

Ah, what an amusing trip down memory lane this thread is.

It's interesting the direction this thread took:

I suspect that the readers were okay with pushing destructive kids off the cliff since no one voiced any objections. I'm thinking how much I liked the "trunk monkey" commercials at this time. (let's all pause on reflect how much we'd pay to have this anti-theft device in our vehicles...ahhh)

For some reason, "fatherless home" gathered all of the attention. Interesting. I would suspect that kids came from a "parent-less home" meaning that they may have had a dad and/or mother, but neither one was willing to take on those golden rule lessons and taught the children the concept of "consequences." Oooh, that word "consequences." Gotta love it when you see acts of vandalism, theft of your unattended vehicle or home, infliction of assault on your body. Consequences are a good thing (at least from the victim's point-of-view).

So, summarizing. The vandals lacked parents, in that they were not taught right-from wrong, and
consequences were not enforced.

Sound good?

There seem to be a lot of big leaps and assumptions you're making there. I think we can all easily agree that vandalism is bad and wrong and there should be unpleasant consequences for those who commit vandalism. As for the rest of your guesswork, watching Perry Mason reruns on KPTV all those years ago taught me to jump up and say, "Your Honor, I object! Counsel is presuming facts not in evidence!"