Brittany Patterson's heart sank when she got a call from police about her 10-year-old son, Soren. As any parent would, she had to be in a complete panic. Was he OK? Did something terrible happen?A deputy explained that, yes, Soren was OK, but that he'd been found alone "downtown" — in a rural Georgia town with a population of only a few hundred people. He'd apparently gotten bored at home and walked into town on his house, a distance of less than a mile.A concerned citizen had called the police, who then brought Soren home.And then Brittany Patterson was arrested.This wild story has caught fire on social media and reignited a decades-old parenting debate. — (@) Patterson is a self-described Free Range Parent.Her son hadn't told her that he'd left the house to go downtown, which she chastised him for, but overall she wasn't that concerned. She was used to giving her kids lots of freedom to explore nature around their home, visit nearby friends, and come and go more or less as they pleased. Free Range Parenting is a controversial parenting style in stark contrast to Helicopter Parenting, which involves near constant supervision and intervention. Free Range Parents let their kids roam freely, often supervising very little — usually with a lot of communication about what is and isn't OK, and a lot of trust that their child has the tools to navigate situations properly on their own.It's controversial because the line between fostering independence and pure neglect is extremely gray.According to Parents Magazine, the term Free Range Parent gained initial popularity in response to a New York columnist who let her 9-year-old ride the subway alone. Some people thought the idea sounded ridiculously dangerous and neglectful. Others figured, if the kid has money and knows how to read the map, why not?Anecdotally, it feels like we supervise children way more than previous generations did. Photo by Gilberto Peralta Bocio on Unsplash It was common for Boomers and even Gen X kids to quite literally get kicked out of the house on Saturday morning and told not to come back until dinner!Most parents I know, including me, hover a great deal more than our parents ever did.Why is that? Has the world gotten more dangerous?"Crime rates and many risks have actually decreased over the past few decades," says psychologist Caitlin Slavens, but "we’re more aware of them than ever, thanks to 24/7 news and social media. So [while] it might feel more dangerous now, the stats don't actually show that is the case. "Proponents of Free Range Parenting say it works wonders in fostering confident, independent children."We’ve taught our children to trust themselves, fostering calm and thoughtful individuals rather than chaotic and anxious ones," says Michelle Shahbazyan, a marriage and family therapist who practices free range in her own home. "This approach not only benefits them but also sets a positive precedent for how they interact with the world and for future generations they will be a part of shaping."But there are legitimate drawbacks to a more hands-off approach too."There are new risks, like the online world," says Slavens, "that make free range parenting not always a safe option, especially when dangers aren't necessarily apparent."Your kid walking a half mile alone to meet a friend shouldn't be a huge deal (even if our own anxieties say otherwise), but what if they're really going to meet someone they met online? It's cool if kids want to be alone or hang by themselves in their room — you don't need to constantly check on them — but what if they're trying their hand at the latest deadly TikTok challenge?It sounds absurd, but these are things parents legitimately have to fear in 2024.These hard-to-see dangers are what complicate matters and make it difficult for many parents to let go of control.Brittany Patterson's story isn't over yet.It's shocking to know that she was arrested in front of her children for "reckless conduct" and booked at the county jail, just because her almost 11-year-old decided to go for a walk less than a mile from home.She was charged a fine and, far worse, assigned a case manager from the Division of Family and Children Services.They're currently trying to get her to sign a Safety Plan and agree to download a location-tracking app on her son's phone. She says she won't sign and is disputing the charges.Parents everywhere are outraged, and in Patterson's case, it seems clear that law enforcement has way overstepped.But the debate between the need for independence and safety remains, and we probably won't know exactly where the line between free range vs neglect really is any time soon.

The unoriginal classic. The post “Actually a nick”: The Beatles song George Harrison thought they stole first appeared on Far Out Magazine.

A forgotten moment. The post The one Neil Young song he “really didn’t like” first appeared on Far Out Magazine.

“Sometimes an album just develops a life of its own." The post “Nothing out of place”: The song Glenn Frey claimed had perfect chords first appeared on Far Out Magazine.

A formless track The post ‘Bad’: The U2 song about heroin that Bono has never been satisfied with first appeared on Far Out Magazine.

America’s Catholic bishops don’t usually enjoy being political commentators. It’s not in their job description. When they do choose to comment on some policy, some less-than-religious political analyst at the New York Times usually writes an op-ed fretting about the fraying separation of church and state. Even if that doesn’t happen, the intersection of ecclesial and political authority quickly becomes a touchy business. Just ask the Middle Ages. So, while America’s Catholic bishops are probably enjoying discussing the election around morning conference coffees and evening socials during their second annual plenary meeting in Baltimore this week, public comments to the press have been somewhat limited. There are already several rather important issues on the agenda. There’s a new Bible translation they need to approve for use during the celebration of the mass; the conference is planning on having a discussion on opening causes for beatification in Rome for two holy women; and there are a couple of appointments that also need to be made; not to mention a Eucharistic revival to expand. That all said, whether it’s on the official agenda or not, a response to the election is going to be a consideration — especially after what happened on Inauguration Day four years ago.  The day Joe Biden, who is a Catholic (at least nominally), took the oath of office, the conference’s president at the time, Archbishop José Gomez of Los Angeles, issued a statement that warned of the “moral evils” contained in the incoming administration’s agenda. While he was certainly right to say something about it, the statement received pushback from the Holy See’s Secretariat of State (which tried to bottle it up) and from a number of Gomez’s fellow bishops.  This time around, the bishops aren’t dealing with a potentially hostile administration. Donald Trump and his incoming administration seem to share a lot of the same cultural goals and priorities. The trouble is that there are a few rather important issues about which they do not agree. Archbishop Timothy Broglio took a first stab at those issues during a press conference on Tuesday. Flanked by Bishop Mark Seitz (who leads the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ migration committee) and by Bishop Michael Burbidge (chairman of the USCCB’s pro-life committee), the three men attempted to lay out their concerns on immigration and pro-life issues. On the one hand, the bishops informed the press that they are planning on watching what happens with Trump’s campaign promise to carry out a mass deportation of illegal immigrants — if his approach undermines human dignity, they’ll say something.  In terms of pro-life issues, bishops at the press conference seem to have dropped the ball a bit. Burbidge said he was optimistic about working with an administration that may be more friendly to the pro-life cause — as he should be — but he neglected to mention the Trump administration’s problematic stance on the abortifacient drug mifepristone. At the same time, he also emphasized that the Catholic Church is opposed to in vitro fertilization (IVF) while suggesting that bishops will wait to see whether Trump’s campaign promises materialize into reality. If we’re being honest, Trump’s win puts Catholic bishops in a rather difficult position: It’s far easier to criticize your enemies than it is to correct your friends.  Despite being the president who got Roe v. Wade overturned, Trump’s 2024 campaign platform could only be considered the pro-life option when you compare it to the platform of his far more radical opponent. While he kept repeating that abortion legislation ought to be left to the states, both Trump and JD Vance have said the new administration won’t block access to mifepristone — even though it both kills children and is incredibly dangerous for women. Then there’s the IVF issue. Back in August, Trump informed NBC News that he was planning to force insurance companies to pay for in vitro fertilization (IVF) procedures. Just days later, JD Vance (who is a Catholic convert) defended that position to the media, saying that the point was to help Americans “afford to have families” even if they are struggling with infertility.  That, unfortunately, is not the Catholic moral position. IVF involves creating living human embryos, and then freezing or discarding those not implanted in the womb of their mother. For that reason, the USCCB has condemned it. Catholic bishops, like other faith leaders in the United States, now have a choice. They can bide their time and wait to react to an adverse event with a strongly worded statement. Or, they can preempt the issue by gently reminding the incoming administration that every human life, even if created in a lab, is a precious gift from God with an eternal soul and should not be subject to death by mifepristone or years in a freezer. READ MORE: Trump Victory Is the American Counter-Reformation 46 Years Ago, the Soviet Empire’s End Was Set in Motion The Synod on Synodality: Petering Out Into Irrelevance? The post Now That Trump Won, Catholic Bishops Have a Choice appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

The correct federal tax rate for individuals is 0%. In fact, the IRS should REFUND the last five years of income taxes to all those who paid. In GOLD. — HealthRanger (@HealthRanger) November 14, 2024

by Ethan Huff, Natural News: In a recent interview with Fox & Friends, incoming Trump administration “border czar” Tom Homan revealed the plot for how President-elect Donald Trump plans to hit the ground running with mass deportations of illegal aliens. According to Homan, worksites, of all places, are the number-one spot where the government finds the most victims of […]

by Paul Craig Roberts, Paul Craig Roberts: It is dangerous for Trump supporters to think that the battle is over with the election victory. The battle has not begun, and it never will if Trump cannot put together a fighting administration. There are about 4,000 political appointees in the Executive branch, 1,200 of which have […]

from Bannons War Room: TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/