Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Selfish adults 'damage childhood'

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
T_i_B Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 07:48 AM
Original message
Selfish adults 'damage childhood'
Source: BBC

The aggressive pursuit of personal success by adults is now the greatest threat to British children, a major independent report on childhood says.

It calls for a sea-change in social attitudes and policies to counter the damage done to children by society.

Family break-up, unprincipled advertising, too much competition in education and income inequality are mentioned as big contributing factors.

According to the panel, "excessive individualism" is to blame for many of the problems children face and needs to be replaced by a value system where people seek satisfaction more from helping others rather than pursuing private advantage.



Read more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7861762.stm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
OhioChick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 07:52 AM
Response to Original message
1. Selfish CEO's damage everyone. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 08:55 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. They Sure Do
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 08:54 AM
Response to Original message
2. In the U.S., a rule of thumb is something like: The more you hear about X, the greater the
probability that things are really Y.

I think that all of our spiritual blather about Pro-Life is due to the fact that, on the average, the U.S. is Anti-Life and what people are willing to give of themselves for their children is pretty clear evidence of that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 09:01 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. I agree with you.
If Americans "loved their children" as much as has been touted in the media, we'd have palaces for schools, teachers would be paid more than any celebrity athlete, child care would be the highest paid field, parents would have unlimited time with their families, and, well, you get the idea.

Our catapulted themes do not match the reality.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 09:08 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. In the Middle Class, People take the easy way out and give their kids the wrong stuff.
Edited on Mon Feb-02-09 09:09 AM by patrice
Money/lifestyle, if they've got it, and think that's "love" - or - a complete pre-packaged and sanitized-in-the-holy-spirit "social" life, because all of us just know that those "with a calling" are right and the best thing for the needs of your kids, rather than giving of themselves, their own honest, open, vulnerable, REAL minds, hearts, hands, and TIME.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. And if those members of the middle class worked for employers
who actually practiced the "we love our children" theme running throughout our collective "consciousness," would they continue to act in such ways or would they schedule and make and have time to spend with their families? If those who create advertising also practiced the "we love our children" theme, would children be labeled as consumers to be marketed to using whatever images are necessary? Would parents be trying to make up for what they lack in time and energy with stuff?

What would happen if we questioned the idea that "anyone can be a parent" and made it more about parenting being a "calling" rather than a "natural progression" through one's life?

Sorry, I went off on a rather philosophical bent there. But I do wonder... We have so many pieces of "common knowledge" and "conventional wisdom" that just don't reflect our day-to-day reality.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. I taught highschool for 8 years. I KNOW what you're talking about.
Ask almost any teacher whether "we" are REALLY Pro-Life/Child!

And what you described adds up to this: Despite many many many protestations otherwise, despite how much "we" would fight REAL CHANGE:

WE ARE NOT A HAPPY NATION!

We ARE living ALL wrong!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 09:27 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Yes, we are.
On so many levels I wonder if we can de-tangle the mess we've created. The fact that so much of it depends on us first examining our own sets of values and standards and "beliefs," just makes it that much harder to do. There is nothing we resist more than looking inward.

Thank you for teaching. I so much wanted to teach. Then I saw what has happened to our school systems and what has happened to teaching; I wasn't sure I could work within such a toxic system. You have my greatest respect for what you did. And highschool?! Ouch.

:D

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 09:37 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. a ripple in the pond. for start with self and it ripples out
i become peace with self and it feeds the children, husband our unit. and that ripples out.

we ARE happy in this household.

i agree it is parenting and all that you two are talking about. i especially like putting out that parenting shouldn't be an assumption, but really think it thru and that would be thru constant education or reeducation of this nation.

but it doesn't stop there. it is pervasive thru out our society like this article states. it is not any one thing. and a parent that wants to do right by child is constantly bombarded by the outside world with the lower vibration of who we are.

a parent that has the time can easily counter that invasion in our lives with continual reinforcement of what is important, but it is god damn continual, all the time, in every facet our children walk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 09:48 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. Yes! We also need to be able to learn from the Young.
Edited on Mon Feb-02-09 09:50 AM by patrice
I always spent part of our time in the classroom finding out how their generation has essential differences with ours, e.g. When I/mygeneration found out that there are people in "our" country who abuse/kill children for pleasure, compared to when they found out same. The difference is over ten years: close to 20 years old for my generation, under 10, sometimes as low as 6 years old for their generation. There are other important hallmarks that are ignored most of the time and then even if people do notice this stuff, they are often clueless about how to figure out what to do about it, usually passing 100% of the buck to one or another type of person designated by something-or-other as having the appropriate understandings and "skills".

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #10
14. i have told my children, nieces and nephews, children in neighborhood, i learn
more from them than i give.

from the youngest of age, since babies i have learned from my kids and is such a kick and insight for me, such growth for me. i have always given this to my boys.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
coffeenap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 09:49 AM
Response to Reply #7
11. It is the strangest thing. We strive to live the way that is being
discussed and as a result, we are the "odd men out" in society. I don't really fit in anywhere, my kids are very different from everyone around them, and for three out of four of us it results in loneliness quite often. When I show up somewhere and show kindness and understanding toward young people, there is a chorus of, "OMG, you're so cool! I wish my mom could be like you." WHY is it that way? I should NOT stand out, we should all be engaged with the children and teens in our lives, not preaching from some far off fictional stage, but WITH them in THEIR world to help them navigate the almost impossible world we have created for them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 09:57 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. I know exactly what you're talking about, including the separateness and loneliness.
You see often how people punish one another for being different, not supporting their chosen myths.

And as an adult you risk being chastised for going to the younger generation in their world; you're "palling around". People don't get how much strength and self-possession it takes to really really reach out successfully to the Young. The Young do not respect you if you are not you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
coffeenap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 10:16 AM
Response to Reply #12
18. Oh, thank you for understanding! I so wish I could find people like
you in my little part of the world. I do have a few, but it doesn't make for a rich and supportive social life, if you know what I mean. Argh. :hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 11:06 PM
Response to Reply #11
28. Oh how I wish what you say were so, "I should not stand out, we should all be
engaged with the children and teens in our lives . . . WITH them in THEIR world to help them navigate the almost impossible world we have created for them." This is a beautifully courageous vision, something to live and strive for. I will meditate on this vision.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iwillnevergiveup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 10:00 AM
Response to Original message
13. Treating kids as friends/peers/confidants
is one of the greatest mistakes I've seen parents make. I taught elementary and middle school for lots of years and consistently saw the evidence of kids worrying about things they shouldn't even know about! Short attention spans, high distractability, withdrawal, sadness, no homework done, lack of curiosity, discipline issues...you name it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 10:02 AM
Response to Reply #13
15. i so dont do that. i refuse. i tell them, i am not your friend, i am your mama
dont want to be your friend, a mama is so much more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elizfeelinggreat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 10:14 AM
Response to Original message
16. greed is bad
Hopefully some good will come from this study, not just a big blame-the-parent fest (especially working mothers).

I wish the headline had emphasized this part of the report:



The inquiry has a long list of recommendations including:

• abolishing Sats tests and league tables in English schools

• a ban on all advertising aimed at the under 12s and no TV commercials for alcohol or unhealthy food before the 9pm watershed

• stopping building on any open space where children play

• a high-quality youth centre for every 5,000 young people

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #16
24. That sounds like a good start
it's amazing that you hardly ever see kids playing outside anymore. Part of that is the fear factor promoted by the MSM that there's a pedophile around every corner (there's no more now than ever before-just more reporting of them), but mostly children are all inside glued to their TV screens and video games. Often along with their parents. I can remember staying outside during summer months until the fireflies came out (especially when I was very young. By the time I was nine I had too many responsibilities). Now days I never hear children playing outside-and I live in sunny Florida where there are more good "outside days" than almost anywhere else!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Igel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. We always played outside when I was a kid.
Several things made it possible.

1. Adults weren't in so much of a hurry that they speeded while going through the neighborhood.

2. Adults weren't so worried about having a big house and lots of stuff that they survived on one salary; even if it meant scraping and living in a smaller house than they wanted or having a cheaper car, there was usually a parent home in every house. On average, every few minutes some parent would look out to see if the group of kids playing was ok.

3. There were a lot of kids. Between you, your siblings, your friends and their siblings, there'd be quite a few kids outside. If any one was in trouble, there'd almost always be older kids around to help. With a stay-at-home parent you don't usually put your kid in childcare, even if you did have just one.

4. In parallel with 2, kids had less and expected less.


So I look at where I've lived recently.

1. Adults are too worried about losing a few minutes in their day. They have too much respect for their own time to worry about kids.

2. Adults are too worried about having everything they want to have a parent stay home or work just part time. If they're home, they're likely doing something more important than checking on their kid's safety, like working or engaging in things that provide personal fulfillment. Or they're "helicopter moms" (or dads).

3. There aren't lots of kids around. They're economic burdens. You have a vanity kid and stop there, often telling yourself how much more morally superior you are to those that have more kids; to have more interferes with your lifestyle, your economic success in far too many ways to tolerate. Even if you have just one kid or many, it's off to childcare with them. The number of kids on the street playing is smaller than the number of kids living in the neighborhood.

4. Kids want more. This pushes parents to work to pay them off, esp. with spendy things like Xboxes.

We can add irrational fear of sexual predators from the hyping the rare abduction gets in the press. We could add the frantic desire to make sure your kid is literate in 3 languages and able to do calculus before he gets to pre-school so that there's a decent chance he'll get into the only colleges that matter--Ivy League, then the right professional school--not like *those* people living down the street or in Kansas. Kids have to be kept entertained, less they become bored and, horror of horrors, unhappy--an unhappy kid means that the parents are failures (that their kids aren't good or well-balanced doesn't show up on the radar screen).

Evolution is all about offspring. Too often those who consider themselves the most evolved have slated their genes for extinction, showing that they don't understand--or don't really believe in--evolution after all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #25
27. Hmmm. I know that evolution is a fact, but I don't have children
because: A). I never found a man to fall in love with, and B). I saw how hard being a single mom was for my own mother, and I don't want to go that route and, C). 7 billion miracles seem like enough to me, and D). even though I would love to have kids, there's the problem of giving a child ANY FUTURE AT ALL.Right now the possibility of that is slim to none:

Earth 'will expire by 2050'
Our planet is running out of room and resources. Modern man has plundered so much, a damning report claims this week, that outer space will have to be colonised

The end of earth as we know it? Talk about it here

Observer Worldview

* Mark Townsend and Jason Burke
* The Observer, Sunday 7 July 2002
* Article history

Earth's population will be forced to colonise two planets within 50 years if natural resources continue to be exploited at the current rate, according to a report out this week.

A study by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), to be released on Tuesday, warns that the human race is plundering the planet at a pace that outstrips its capacity to support life.

In a damning condemnation of Western society's high consumption levels, it adds that the extra planets (the equivalent size of Earth) will be required by the year 2050 as existing resources are exhausted.

The report, based on scientific data from across the world, reveals that more than a third of the natural world has been destroyed by humans over the past three decades.

Using the image of the need for mankind to colonise space as a stark illustration of the problems facing Earth, the report warns that either consumption rates are dramatically and rapidly lowered or the planet will no longer be able to sustain its growing population.

Experts say that seas will become emptied of fish while forests - which absorb carbon dioxide emissions - are completely destroyed and freshwater supplies become scarce and polluted.

The report offers a vivid warning that either people curb their extravagant lifestyles or risk leaving the onus on scientists to locate another planet that can sustain human life. Since this is unlikely to happen, the only option is to cut consumption now.

Systematic overexploitation of the planet's oceans has meant the North Atlantic's cod stocks have collapsed from an estimated spawning stock of 264,000 tonnes in 1970 to under 60,000 in 1995.

The study will also reveal a sharp fall in the planet's ecosystems between 1970 and 2002 with the Earth's forest cover shrinking by about 12 per cent, the ocean's biodiversity by a third and freshwater ecosystems in the region of 55 per cent.

The Living Planet report uses an index to illustrate the shocking level of deterioration in the world's forests as well as marine and freshwater ecosystems. Using 1970 as a baseline year and giving it a value of 100, the index has dropped to a new low of around 65 in the space of a single generation.

It is not just humans who are at risk. Scientists, who examined data for 350 kinds of mammals, birds, reptiles and fish, also found the numbers of many species have more than halved.

Martin Jenkins, senior adviser for the World Conservation Monitoring Centre in Cambridge, which helped compile the report, said: 'It seems things are getting worse faster than possibly ever before. Never has one single species had such an overwhelming influence. We are entering uncharted territory.'

Figures from the centre reveal that black rhino numbers have fallen from 65,000 in 1970 to around 3,100 now. Numbers of African elephants have fallen from around 1.2 million in 1980 to just over half a million while the population of tigers has fallen by 95 per cent during the past century.

The UK's birdsong population has also seen a drastic fall with the corn bunting population declining by 92 per cent between 1970 and 2000, the tree sparrow by 90 per cent and the spotted flycatcher by 70 per cent.

Experts, however, say it is difficult to ascertain how many species have vanished for ever because a species has to disappear for 50 years before it can be declared extinct.

Attention is now focused on next month's Earth Summit in Johannesburg, the most important environmental negotiations for a decade.

However, the talks remain bedevilled with claims that no agreements will be reached and that US President George W. Bush will fail to attend.

Matthew Spencer, a spokesman for Greenpeace, said: 'There will have to be concessions from the richer nations to the poorer ones or there will be fireworks.'

The preparatory conference for the summit, held in Bali last month, was marred by disputes between developed nations and poorer states and non-governmental organisations (NGOs), despite efforts by British politicians to broker compromises on key issues.

America, which sent 300 delegates to the conference, is accused of blocking many of the key initiatives on energy use, biodiversity and corporate responsibility.

The WWF report shames the US for placing the greatest pressure on the environment. It found the average US resident consumes almost double the resources as that of a UK citizen and more than 24 times that of some Africans.

Based on factors such as a nation's consumption of grain, fish, wood and fresh water along with its emissions of carbon dioxide from industry and cars, the report provides an ecological 'footprint' for each country by showing how much land is required to support each resident.

America's consumption 'footprint' is 12.2 hectares per head of population compared to the UK's 6.29ha while Western Europe as a whole stands at 6.28ha. In Ethiopia the figure is 2ha, falling to just half a hectare for Burundi, the country that consumes least resources.

The report, which will be unveiled in Geneva, warns that the wasteful lifestyles of the rich nations are mainly responsible for the exploitation and depletion of natural wealth. Human consumption has doubled over the last 30 years and continues to accelerate by 1.5 per cent a year.

Now WWF wants world leaders to use its findings to agree on specific actions to curb the population's impact on the planet.

A spokesman for WWF UK, said: 'If all the people consumed natural resources at the same rate as the average US and UK citizen we would require at least two extra planets like Earth.'

The world's ticking timebomb

Marine crisis:
North Atlantic cod stocks have collapsed from an estimated 264,000 tonnes in 1970 to under 60,000 in 1995.

Pollution:
The United States places the greatest pressure on the environment, with its carbon dioxide emissions and over-consumption. It takes 12.2 hectares of land to support each American citizen and 6.29 for each Briton, while the figure for Burundi is just half a hectare.

Shrinking Forests:
Between 1970 and 2002 forest cover has dwindled by 12 per cent.

Endangered wildlife:
African elephant numbers have fallen from 1.2 million in 1980 to half a million now. In the UK the songbird population has fallen dramatically, with the corn bunting declining by 92 per cent in the past 30 years.




So, while you may consider anyone who has multiple children to be morally superior to those of us who have none, please consider the possibility that WE are giving up our dreams of having children because the reality humankind has created for them is far to grim and terrifying to contemplate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MedleyMisty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 11:50 PM
Response to Reply #25
29. I don't want kids
And I don't know if you missed this in high school biology, but when a population becomes too large for its resources bad things happen. The planet can't really support so many billions of humans, especially not at our current rate of consumption. I don't know, maybe it could support nearly seven billion of us with billions more coming soon if resource distribution was fair and reasonable. But I don't see the members of our species with the power to distribute resources becoming fair and reasonable any time soon.

And of all the reasons I have for not wanting kids, not a one is materialistic. Unless you count the one where the expense of one kid would break us and put us out on the street (and yes, that's with both parents working) and I think that maybe homelessness isn't the best environment for a kid.

You have no clue about the reality of the lives of people outside of your rather high tax bracket, do you?

At the most basic level, beyond my financial situation, morals and values, and personality and preferred lifestyle (as in being free to do what I want to do, not any sort of material crap - do you really think that if I can't afford one kid that I'm really thinking "Oh noes, I won't be able to redo the kitchen three times a year if I have two kids!) and knowledge that I would be a terrible mother, I just don't feel a need to reproduce. I can't find any reproductive urge anywhere within me. I don't know, maybe my genes don't want to be passed on.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
old mark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 10:14 AM
Response to Original message
17. I found it ironic that the Publican Party - with their BS
about "family values" made it nearly impossible to raise a family on a simgle income. My mom was able to stay home till we were reasonably grown up, they went to college and began doing work she really wanted to do. (This had the added benefit of making us kids learn to do housework and cook.)

mark
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 11:31 AM
Response to Reply #17
23. And they make it incredibly difficult for single women to raise children
on their own. My father left my mom for another woman. Because of income disparity, she had to work twice as hard to earn half as much as her male counterparts. I was the oldest so I had to take over at home; cooking, shopping, cleaning, lawn work, looking after my sister. There wasn't much of a childhood there, but when your only parent works 8am to 11pm, what else would anyone expect?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
old mark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 03:44 AM
Response to Reply #23
30. The Publicans love to yell about the "rights of the unborn" but
once born, they have no more interest in the quality of your life.

They have been against any improvement in working people's lives and have done their best to keep us all as low as possible.

mark
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
haightpillsbury Donating Member (18 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 10:44 AM
Response to Original message
19. I can relate
We are living in the reign of the "F#$% the Grandkids Generation", methinks, and that explains the current climate. As a child of Boomers chewed up and spit out by the '80s I was programmed to believe that I was "in the way" and a waste of time and money because I was taking resources away from my divorced parents' material pursuits. The new motto is: Children are to be seen, not heard, and they should raise themselves and not interfere with our playtime. Or: "Nothing's going to get in my way, not even my kids." To be adversarial about it, the Boomers thought it would be clever and proper to "pursue happiness" by stealing everything they could, emotionally and financially, from their children and leaving them with the bill, but Wall Street and their employers beat them to it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #19
20. yes... be mad
and be better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 11:27 AM
Response to Original message
21. "...needs to be replaced by a value system where people seek
satisfaction more from helping others rather than pursuing private advantage." Egads! Are they advocating Socialism?? Do they mean to say that Republicanism doesn't work?? Sacrilege!


This goes far beyond parenting. This is at the heart of all society's ills-from government to (most of all) the boardroom. Consumerism pushes people to abandon others in their lives to focus solely on attaining MORE. More stuff, more prestige, and our society (along with that of the British) rewards the ruthlessness that goes along with it. If there's one upside to the Depression, it's that we may all be forced to recognize what's really important in life.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #21
22. altruism. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-09 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #21
26. It couldn't hurt for parents' to get Ed on how babies bond with you
or how that bond works over time, what it's for. Such a simple thing but I bet a lot of young moms don't have that information.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 01:39 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC