When youths have too much time on their hands...

Dec 2018
860
12
U.S
#1
When youths have too much time on their hands, they become volatile, increase(s) in laziness, increase(s) in uncontrolled sexual risings/urges, erratic, less mentally sound, and their actions show it.

A British teenager who sent hoax bomb threats to schools across Britain and the United States and caused a security scare at an American airport was jailed for three years on Friday, prosecutors said.
George Duke-Cohan, 19, emailed thousands of schools in the UK with a bomb threat in March, Luton Crown Court had heard.
He was arrested just days later but while still under investigation, he sent more email threats to British and US schools, claiming a pipe bomb had been planted on their premises.
His calls led to the evacuation of more than 400 British schools.

Teenager jailed for bomb threats to British and US schools - Independent.ie



The Holy Bible says that 'laziness' and other forms of 'laziness' will bring a person to be lacking in monetary 'things' and 'material things', such as what many in the world would consider 'profitable'.

Proverbs 10:4 "He becometh poor that dealeth with a slack hand: but the hand of the diligent maketh rich."


But today, it seems that even though a person might be 'lazy' in terms of 'regular/acceptable' work, being active in other activities, such as sexual encounters, internet socializing, 'bomb threatening', etc... may not end them up with/to those 'lacking' to those profitable 'things'. They can still eat, they can still live in a home/dwelling/apartment, they can still 'travel', they can still make phone calls, they can still go out and about their society alot more 'freely' and in 'freedom', to self and to the social 'norms and standards', as far as daily 'work' is concerned, than many who do work daily for their sustenance.

So if they are not 'lazy' as in the sense of not getting out of bed or the home, shouldn't their abled bodies be working somewhere or being trained to work somewhere?

Of course they should be. At 19 years of age, their future has already started.

10 years ago, they were 9. 10 years ahead, they will be 29.

From the age of 9 to 19, ten years, the training and the support and the reasonings brought into their lives has shaped who they are at the age of 19. At the age of 19 to 29, ten years, those trainings and support(s) and reasonings, if not corrected and properly put into order and priority, will be with them and maybe the same, at the age of 30.


Getting angry at your children while they are still under your care and under your guardianship, which is prime time to have those trainings and supports and reasonings, which could prevent them from becoming 'wrongful' in their future being brought into their lives, is not wrong nor unloving. Rather it is the more 'loving' thing to do.


Proverbs 13:24 "He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes."


the rod is not a stick, per se.
and chastening is not always with a stick, per se.

the rod of correction, the chastening to correct ways. A verbal rebuke or scolding or firm verbal discipline are as 'rods' and instruments of 'chastening'.

Is your child making many 'errors' to your wisdom and knowledge as a parent? Both to mother and father? Then your child should receive those 'many' corrections which keeps the child on the 'level' balance. Balancing out 'each' error is not wrong nor excessive. it is only 'wrong and excessive' to the ways the World might allude to saying those ways are wrong. But it is only an illusion. Those worldly 'allusions' are only 'illusions'.

When parents begin subscribing to those 'allusive illusions', their children are the ones who receive(s) the 'wrongs'.

No discipline from parents, to the child, means discipline is not necessary, to their reasonings and thoughts towards their life.


Proverbs 10:4 "He becometh poor that dealeth with a slack hand: but the hand of the diligent maketh rich."


This also could include any 'boss' or 'employer' who deals with a peson with a 'slack' hand, or 'laziness', for a lack of a better term. Their 'wealth' levels will become 'unbalanced'.


1544462291245.jpeg



The 'scales' of Just and Right. In society, in the home, in Family structures, in lives.



These are the ways of the Gentile Way(s) in uprightness in The Way. The entire World is not Gentile, however.


Before the Separatists separated themselves from Britain pre the new 'land' discoveries, Britain was under certain rules and ways of The Monarch and of the Church. And it was for these reasons why they 'separated' themselves from Britain.

And as they set sail to the 'Americas Land', the U.S and to Canada, they took with them their ideas of self governance and self rights and self rule. And these new 'settlers' has helped shaped the world to what it is today. To these settlers and their proponents and subscribers, these 'Scales of Just and Right' are much more needed than in other places where 'Rule and Right' are as 'Laws' of that land(s).

It is 'silly' to try to compare Saudi Arabian life to U.S or Canadian life, for example. Saudi Arabia, even with the 'Scales of Just and Right' have their Law on one end of the scale and to keep the 'Scale' balanced, the citizens must keep to that 'weight' on the other/opposite side.

For the U.S and Canada, for example, there is law on one side but there are also many other individuals on the same side to which the other citizens need to try to keep 'balanced'.
 
Last edited:
Sep 2018
6,621
1,089
cleveland ohio
#3
When youths have too much time on their hands, they become volatile, increase(s) in laziness, increase in uncontrolled sexual risings/urges, erratic, less mentally sound, and their actions show it.

A British teenager who sent hoax bomb threats to schools across Britain and the United States and caused a security scare at an American airport was jailed for three years on Friday, prosecutors said.
George Duke-Cohan, 19, emailed thousands of schools in the UK with a bomb threat in March, Luton Crown Court had heard.
He was arrested just days later but while still under investigation, he sent more email threats to British and US schools, claiming a pipe bomb had been planted on their premises.
His calls led to the evacuation of more than 400 British schools.

Teenager jailed for bomb threats to British and US schools - Independent.ie



The Holy Bible says that 'laziness' and other forms of 'laziness' will bring a person to be lacking in monetary 'things' and 'material things', such as what many in the world would consider 'profitable'. But today, it seems that even though a person might be 'lazy' in terms of 'regular/acceptable' work, being active in other activities, such as sexual encounters, internet socializing, 'bomb threatening', etc... may not end them up with/to those 'lacking' to those profitable 'things'. They can still eat, they can still live in a home/dwelling/apartment, they can still 'travel', they can still make phone calls, they can still go out and about their society alot more 'freely' and in 'freedom', to self and to the social 'norms and standards', as far as daily 'work' is concerned, than many who do work daily for their sustenance.

So if they are not 'lazy' as in the sense of not getting out of bed or the home, shouldn't their abled bodies be working somewhere or being trained to work somewhere?

Of course they should be. At 19 years of age, their future has already started.

10 years ago, they were 9. 10 years ahead, they will be 29.

From the age of 9 to 19, ten years, the training and the support and the reasonings brought into their lives has shaped who they are at the age of 19. At the age of 19 to 29, ten years, those trainings and support(s) and reasonings, if not corrected and properly put into order and priority, will be with them and maybe the same, at the age of 30.


Getting angry at your children while they are still under your care and under your guardianship, which is prime time to have those trainings and supports and reasonings, which could prevent them from becoming 'wrongful' in their future being brought into their lives, is not wrong nor unloving. Rather it is the more 'loving' thing to do.


Proverbs 13:24 "He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes."


the rod is not a stick, per se.
and chastening is not always with a stick, per se.

the rod of correction, the chastening to correct ways. A verbal rebuke or scolding or firm verbal discipline are as 'rods' and instruments of 'chastening'.

Is your child making many 'errors' to your wisdom and knowledge as a parent? Both to mother and father? Then your child should receive those 'many' corrections. Correcting 'each' error is not wrong nor excessive. it is only 'wrong and excessive' to they ways the World might allude to saying those ways are wrong. But it is only an illusion. Those worldly 'allusions' are only 'illusions'.

When parents begin subscribing to those 'allusive illusions', their children are the ones who receive(s) the 'wrongs'.

No discipline from parents, to the child, means discipline is not necessary, to their reasonings and thoughts towards their life.
you do realize crime it at a 40 year low dont you?
 
Dec 2018
860
12
U.S
#4
you do realize crime it at a 40 year low dont you?
in where? Europe?

From Table 1 it can be seen that 10 EU Member States saw their number of crimes increase between 2007 and 2012 (time series not available for Ireland or France). By contrast, total recorded crime decreased in the remaining 16 EU Member States, the most noticeable changes being recorded in Greece (-54 %), parts of the United Kingdom (-25 % in England and Wales and -29 % in Scotland), Estonia (-19 %) and Slovakia (-18 %); note that there is a break in series for Greece which may in part explain the particularly large reduction.

England and Wales had the greatest influence on the downward trend in the EU-28 during this period, with the largest decrease of crimes in terms of registered cases, more than 1.2 million less in 2012 than in 2007. Among the non-member countries shown in Table 1, the total number of crimes recorded by the police in Turkey increased by 96 % between 2007 and 2012.


total recorded
in terms of registered cases

greatest influence on the downward trend
[while] 10 EU Member States saw their number of crimes increase between 2007 and 2012


Who are committing these crimes?


Who is making [an] effort to manage borders [pertaining] to 'anyone' regardless of inner conflict non resolutions?

Trying to 'aid' in conflict resolution(s) but not aiding in the correcting of 'leadership(s)' of those conflict filled places? Isn't the 'head' greater than the body, even in those places of conflict? Don't those 'leaders' to those conflict filled places enjoy their rights to 'lead and correct' and Govern properly?


Do Countries such as Syria and Somalia 'want/desire' to become a Republic? Is that what they are 'demanding' in a way? Then why wouldn't their Leaders keep those Countries from becoming such?


You do know what occurs when a 'bordered People(s)' become a Republic, right?

It's called the intermingling of the many people(s), marriages included. And I don't know how 'savvy' those citizens might be as far as casual relationships are concerned, but it will occur to the 'traditionally' inclined persons regarding 'sex' and 'purity'.

Male to male intercourse in places where 'poop' is stored might become 'common', perhaps. And their 'Leaders' are not seeing this as a possible 'problem' for their Country or their Country's 'future'?

Romans 9:29 "And as Esaias said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha."


Can you see the future of the World as no child bearing persons.

is it for physical pleasure or for 'lack of knowledge'? I mean, is those sorts of 'sexual' intercourse that much more 'better/more pleasurable' than the traditional ways? So it's a personal choice. Then why can't leaders stay within the Traditions they were placed in/voted in to maintain?

Even if they did 'sway' opposite of their Country's tradition, as leader, they shouldn't seek to change the Traditions of the Country around for their own sake and/or reasoning or preferences. What they do in their private time and life is theirs privately. And their private joys should not be placed into the lives of those that they are ruling over to have accepted in the Country of their, the citizens', fathers and forefathers.


'Sex' is only 1 factor. Then there is language and culture and history and lands and Established landmarks, etc...
Foods, clothing, lifestyles, division and separation of wealth classes, etc....

If not a 'contest' of sorts, why put man against man to see who can make it to the 'top', in ways of World's 'goods', upon the lives of those that are content and fine without needing to be a part of those races?

Why force a man or woman to need to receive things which they never had in their lives prior to this 'race to the top', per se.

India has had a history of 'smoking' within it. It has been a part of their culture before India had a current Government system. And the elders of India learned of India's culture and history and lifestyle. Currently though, Indian Government is forcing those 'native' Indians with their history and culture and life, to abandon their own lives for the sakes' of Government protocol by rejecting their life and their life's ways to accept the Government of India's ways and how the Native Indians should live their lives while living in India, the home and land of their lineage even to the times when India was under a non current Government system.


If current things occurred during the older Rules, many would not be too pleased with the 'punishment' of those 'crimes'. And so Republic was formed. To give individuals their 'privacy'.

Doing 'illicit' drugs? In private is much safer than out in the open.

So what might the agenda be as to why this is occurring? What 'point' or 'need' is there for these things to be happening from top levels downward?

That parents ought to care for their children regardless of 'private' matters? So that the children could be 'open' and 'unafraid' to share their 'private' joys with their parents? But to some, certain 'private joys' of youths is not appreciated by the parents. It brings them reproach and revulsion. For individual children to 'guage' their relationship with their own parents is the relationship between child(ren) and parent(s) to have in their own 'private', 'non mandated' ways of how they, in their own relationship can live without needing 'fear' to be able to do so... This relationship of 'less fear' between parents and children is communication.


In other words: is my private joy important enough to share with my parents? Is this private joy something I feel that my parents should know about? Yes. But I'm afraid of telling them of these 'private joys' because they will get upset, probably. What should I do if I want to honor my parents but not dishonor them because of my 'private joys'?

I will have to communicate if I want to have those 'private joys' known of by my parents. And how a person communicates to their own parents is in that family.
 
Last edited:
Dec 2018
860
12
U.S
#5
Okay, so I communicated to them of these private joys and they were unappreciative. And I got the boot because of it.
Was any further communication sought? Is being 'booted' something that you would want to have your parents 'know' about? But what if i tell them about being booted and they get upset? How can I honor my parents but not dishonor them about this 'booting' thing? I will have to communicate if I want the issue of 'booting' agreed with by both parents and child(ren).

So when this occurs, what if I'm allowed to live under their roof just as long as I don't participate or engage in any of those 'private joys' which caused them to be not appreciative? (it must be a big deal to them if they got so upset, right?)... Then I will have to think to myself, within myself of which is more important to myself. My parents and not being booted or my 'private joys' I was being 'booted' for in the first place.


Perhaps in The LORD God (J)esus Christ's Eyes, separating self from parents, such as in any 'marriage', is that to which you will be bound together as one with.

If a person separates self from parents because of 'work', then to 'work' will that person be bound together as one, with.
If for 'illicit drug usage' a person separates self from parents, then to that 'illicit drug usage' will that person be bound together as one, with.

etc etc..


And just as in any 'marriage' between husband and wife, needing separation from parents, the communication(s) which occur after is up to them on their terms and in their ways.


What is 'separation'? The 'important reason' for needing to be 'separated'.


Is my wife or husband going to be important enough for myself to separate myself from my parents?
Is my job going to be important enough for myself to separate myself from my parents?
Is my 'illicit drug usage' going to be important enough for myself to separate myself from my parents?


And of course, this separation between parents and child(ren) could be with a blessing or with a 'non blessing'. And/or the family relationship can be left 'open'. But this of course usually is dependent upon the 'heads'' decision, being the parents.


So the 'heads' of my family booted myself out. I should honor that, right?
It would depend on what your family is worth to you. Would it be possible to 'divorce' that '''marriage of sorts''' and be reunited with the former???


-----


Romans 7:1-4 "Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth? 2For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of herhusband. 3So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man."


For the 'woman' is bound to her husband as long as he lives, regardless of divorce.


-----


Is it possible to 'reunite' with parents even though you may have gotten 'married' to something other than a husband or wife? The person is 'bound' in honor, to certain things. Husband to wife, wife to husband, person to 'lifestyle', etc....

The communication/relationship between the parents and their children which 'separated' is up to them and to them primarily, to discuss and keep or 'modify' to their preference(s) and/or agreements. But also keep in mind the 'other's' 'parents/family' also from which they separated from.


Mamma, I'm in love with a criminal. Or rather, Mamma, I'm in love with a person that chose to separate him/herself from his/her parents for 'crime'.





But could that 'criminal' separate self to reunite with the former 'love(s)'?



The LORD God (J)esus Christ has made it easier for today's culture by having the 'marriage certificate' be needed to be considered a 'marriage' which is bound by The LORD God (J)esus Christ. In days past, 'marriage', that was binding, might not have been with 'certificate of marriage'. Which allows for reunion to the 'real marriages'. The love between parents and children included.
 
Last edited:
Sep 2018
6,621
1,089
cleveland ohio
#6
in where? Europe?

From Table 1 it can be seen that 10 EU Member States saw their number of crimes increase between 2007 and 2012 (time series not available for Ireland or France). By contrast, total recorded crime decreased in the remaining 16 EU Member States, the most noticeable changes being recorded in Greece (-54 %), parts of the United Kingdom (-25 % in England and Wales and -29 % in Scotland), Estonia (-19 %) and Slovakia (-18 %); note that there is a break in series for Greece which may in part explain the particularly large reduction.

England and Wales had the greatest influence on the downward trend in the EU-28 during this period, with the largest decrease of crimes in terms of registered cases, more than 1.2 million less in 2012 than in 2007. Among the non-member countries shown in Table 1, the total number of crimes recorded by the police in Turkey increased by 96 % between 2007 and 2012.


total recorded
in terms of registered cases

greatest influence on the downward trend
[while] 10 EU Member States saw their number of crimes increase between 2007 and 2012


Who are committing these crimes?


Who is making [an] effort to manage borders [pertaining] to 'anyone' regardless of inner conflict non resolutions?

Trying to 'aid' in conflict resolution(s) but not aiding in the correcting of 'leadership(s)' of those conflict filled places? Isn't the 'head' greater than the body, even in those places of conflict? Don't those 'leaders' to those conflict filled places enjoy their rights to 'lead and correct' and Govern properly?


Do Countries such as Syria and Somalia 'want/desire' to become a Republic? Is that what they are 'demanding' in a way? Then why wouldn't their Leaders keep those Countries from becoming such?


You do know what occurs when a 'bordered People(s)' become a Republic, right?

It's called the intermingling of the many people(s), marriages included. And I don't know how 'savvy' those citizens might be as far as casual relationships are concerned, but it will occur to the 'traditionally' inclined persons regarding 'sex' and 'purity'.

Male to male intercourse in places where 'poop' is stored might become 'common', perhaps. And their 'Leaders' are not seeing this as a possible 'problem' for their Country or their Country's 'future'?

Romans 9:29 "And as Esaias said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha."


Can you see the future of the World as no child bearing persons.

is it for physical pleasure or for 'lack of knowledge'? I mean, is those sorts of 'sexual' intercourse that much more 'better/more pleasurable' than the traditional ways? So it's a personal choice. Then why can't leaders stay within the Traditions they were placed in/voted in to maintain?

Even if they did 'sway' opposite of their Country's tradition, as leader, they shouldn't seek to change the Traditions of the Country around for their own sake and/or reasoning or preferences. What they do in their private time and life is theirs privately. And their private joys should not be placed into the lives of those that they are ruling over to have accepted in the Country of their, the citizens', fathers and forefathers.


'Sex' is only 1 factor. Then there is language and culture and history and lands and Established landmarks, etc...
Foods, clothing, lifestyles, division and separation of wealth classes, etc....

If not a 'contest' of sorts, why put man against man to see who can make it to the 'top', in ways of World's 'goods', upon the lives of those that are content and fine without needing to be a part of those races?

Why force a man or woman to need to receive things which they never had in their lives prior to this 'race to the top', per se.

India has had a history of 'smoking' within it. It has been a part of their culture before India had a current Government system. And the elders of India learned of India's culture and history and lifestyle. Currently though, Indian Government is forcing those 'native' Indians with their history and culture and life, to abandon their own lives for the sakes' of Government protocol by rejecting their life and their life's ways to accept the Government of India's ways and how the Native Indians should live their lives while living in India, the home and land of their lineage even to the times when India was under a non current Government system.


If current things occurred during the older Rules, many would not be too pleased with the 'punishment' of those 'crimes'. And so Republic was formed. To give individuals their 'privacy'.

Doing 'illicit' drugs? In private is much safer than out in the open.

So what might the agenda be as to why this is occurring? What 'point' or 'need' is there for these things to be happening from top levels downward?

That parents ought to care for their children regardless of 'private' matters? So that the children could be 'open' and 'unafraid' to share their 'private' joys with their parents? But to some, certain 'private joys' of youths is not appreciated by the parents. It brings them reproach and revulsion. For individual children to 'guage' their relationship with their own parents is the relationship between child(ren) and parent(s) to have in their own 'private', 'non mandated' ways of how they, in their own relationship can live without needing 'fear' to be able to do so... This relationship of 'less fear' between parents and children is communication.


In other words: is my private joy important enough to share with my parents? Is this private joy something I feel that my parents should know about? Yes. But I'm afraid of telling them of these 'private joys' because they will get upset, probably. What should I do if I want to honor my parents but not dishonor them because of my 'private joys'?

I will have to communicate if I want to have those 'private joys' known of by my parents. And how a person communicates to their own parents is in that family.
Falling crimeWhere have all the burglars gone?
The rich world is seeing less and less crime, even in the face of high unemployment and economic stagnation

Both police records (which underestimate some types of crime) and surveys of victims (which should not, but are not as regularly available a source of data) show crime against the person and against property falling over the past ten years in most rich countries. In America the fall began around 1991; in Britain it began around 1995, though the murder rate followed only in the mid-2000s. In France, property crime rose until 2001—but it has fallen by a third since. Some crimes are all but disappearing. In 1997, some 400,000 cars were reported stolen in England and Wales: in 2012, just 86,000. Where have all the burglars gone?
 
Sep 2018
6,621
1,089
cleveland ohio
#7
Okay, so I communicated to them of these private joys and they were unappreciative. And I got the boot because of it.
Was any further communication sought? Is being 'booted' something that you would want to have your parents 'know' about? But what if i tell them about being booted and they get upset? How can I honor my parents but not dishonor them about this 'booting' thing? I will have to communicate if I want the issue of 'booting' agreed with by both parents and child(ren).

So when this occurs, what if I'm allowed to live under their roof just as long as I don't participate or engage in any of those 'private joys' which caused them to be not appreciative? (it must be a big deal to them if they got so upset, right?)... Then I will have to think to myself, within myself of which is more important to myself. My parents and not being booted or my 'private joys' I was being 'booted' for in the first place.


Perhaps in The LORD God (J)esus Christ's Eyes, separating self from parents, such as in any 'marriage', is that to which you will be bound together as one with.

If a person separates self from parents because of 'work', then to 'work' will that person be bound together as one, with.
FBI: US Homicide Rate at 51-Year Low | Ryan McMaken
 

Similar Discussions