Children Investigated For Laughing Too Loudly

Officials from a noise pollution team are investigating claims that the children at Osmund and Andrew's Primary School laugh "unbearably" loudly. In addition to the excessive laughter, neighbors complain that the children kick footballs against the school's chain link fence, the sports teacher shouts during lessons, and the kitchen routinely runs out of cinnamon rolls on chili day. Headmaster John Thorpe said, "Children have to be educated somewhere and there are obvious good reasons why it should take place in residential areas. Bearing that in mind, it is inevitable that there will be a range of different responses to that from residents. We have always adopted a good neighbor policy and done whatever we can to mitigate disturbances. Some people will say that the sound of children laughing and playing together can be quite uplifting. As a teacher, I think it's good to hear children running around and thoroughly enjoying their lives."

Comments

everything is "for the children"

[Anonymous Coward]

we tolerate so much BS for the sake of "children". They erode our rights - it's for the sake of the children. They keep me up after working the late shift and yet that's supposed to be "uplifting".

No matter what you do, your kids are going to hate you anyway, parents. I know. I'm a parent. Thankfully, my children are grown and gone (thank god).

So I say - to hell with the children. They aren't worth all the sacrifices.

Re:everything is "for the children"

[TerranFury]

Funny, this sentiment. It sounds bitter to the extreme, but lots of people must think something like it here in the developed world, because our birthrates aren't enough to even replace people as they die. If we thought having children was worth it, we'd have more kids.

And it's strange, because you'd think we of all people would want to bring new people into the world: We have all the money and power and rights and privileges; you'd think we'd be the ones who enjoy life and think the world is a happy enough place to warrant bringing another generation into. Yet it's the developing world where people have the most children -- places where you'd think life must on the whole look less appealing (and perhaps cruel to bring a child into). Now, part of it is to do with the availability of contraceptives here, and the increased unofficial social rights of women to ensure that the contraceptives are actually used. But in the end I think it all comes down to money. Children are expensive -- and we'd rather spend the money on ourselves.

If preserving the environment is one of your core values, this might be seen as a good thing: It reduces the rate at which the population grows and takes a little bit of the pressure off the environment (except we individually do consume more resources in the developed world, and perhaps this makes up for it). It might also be a good thing if your core value is human happiness: With more resources to go around, the average happiness on a planet with fewer people might be greater.

But it also raises the obvious question: If the existence of too many people is a bad thing, then what gives you the right to conclude that you are not one of the "too many?" And if bringing children into the world is not worth it, then were your parents fools for having you? Would it be better if you simply did not exist?

Re:everything is "for the children"

[Abreu]

I know several people that fully (and vocally) agree with the "why the heck should I saddle myself with an infant" attitude you describe.

Even more sadly, some of them are my friends.

Too band I am not elocuent enough to describe the joy that being a father of two can bring.

Yes, I know that my kids eat up half my income (and probably will continue to do so for the next 20 years)

Yes, I know that my kids are the reason why I have less free time than most of my colleages

Yes, I have to get up at 4am to whack night terrors in the head with a bat, or to get a glass of water

Yes, it is all worth it

Re:everything is "for the children"

[RockDoctor]

Yes, it is all worth it

Your evidence for this assertion is ... ?

Re:everything is "for the children"

[RockDoctor]

If the existence of too many people is a bad thing, then what gives you the right to conclude that you are not one of the "too many?"

You're making the false conflation between "it's not worthwhile making an X" and "it's worthwhile destroying an X that has already been made".

I've long since come to the same conclusion as the original poster - however unlike the poster I realised the way the world is going before I had created any children. So, prior to establishing a serious relationship with another person, I established a very solid and serious relationship between myself and my descendants - that of their non-existence.

It almost makes "parallel universe" stories interesting. Perhaps the non-existent ones would have been interesting ; perhaps they'd have been WOMBATs ; but that was my choice to make.

It might also be interesting to re-examine the decision when (not "if") we get to have full genetic control of the descendants.

Re:everything is "for the children"

[Halo1]

we tolerate so much BS for the sake of "children". They erode our rights - it's for the sake of the children.

No, lunatic and hardline control freaks erode our rights, along with people who don't think and just blindly follow the nonsense-machine as soon as they've heard some trigger keywords. When those control freaks can't use the "children" straw man argument, they will use terrorists, "values", democracy, tradition, your income, your freedom, or anything else that is largely irrelevant to the issue at hand but which will somehow make you naturally support their side.

Of course, maybe you are also in favour of getting rid of democracy, your income and your freedom so those arguments no longer can be used either to enlist anyone in contemporary crusades against the evil of the day.

Re:everything is "for the children"

[ta bu shi da yu]

Uh, he has two kids. What more evidence do you need?

Re:everything is "for the children"

[Tukz]

Two negatives doesn't make a positive.

Re:everything is "for the children"

[lagomorpha2]

Yes, it is all worth it

Citation Needed

Re:everything is "for the children"

[feandil]

it's not an assertion, it's a personal feeling. and if you can't see the difference, well, go back to your lab and your wrist games

Re:everything is "for the children"

[Anonymous Coward]

It's worth it to him. Why do you need evidence for that? It's worth it to me too, and you know where you can shove your need for evidence.

Re:everything is "for the children"

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd like to kick every idiot running around saying that, thinking it somehow makes them seem smarter.

Re:everything is "for the children"

[ta bu shi da yu]

Oh how droll. /golfclap

Re:everything is "for the children"

[RockDoctor]

Uh, he has two kids. What more evidence do you need?

That's evidence that he (assuming it's a he, and that he is the father) has had unprotected sex with someone who was fertile and who chose to carry the foetuses to term. It's not evidence that the exercise was or will be worthwhile, nor is it evidence about his (assumptions as above) intentions prior to indulging in sex. The large majority of people simply grow up with an assumption of "I'll have children" without basing it on any evidence. Some people even think that they have a right to have children!

The presence of footprints and artefacts on the Moon is evidence of men travelling to the Moon and something about the engineering involved, but it isn't evidence of Kennedy's 196x speech as a motivation, of his assassination and subsequent canonisation, nor of the Cold War tensions leading to it. Since these artefacts are likely the longest-lasting evidence of the existence of H.sapiens, one wonders what putative aliens discovering them in a billion years from now would see.

Don't live next to a school

[gubers33]

Enough said.

Bah!

[thisnamestoolong]

Humbug!

Chili Day!

[Tekfactory]

What the heck is the correlation between Cinnamon Rolls and Chili.

Note the Author did not say they ran out of Cinnamon rolls on a Chilly day when something warm might hit the spot. The author stated they routinely ran out of Cinnamon rolls on chili day.

The obvious question then becomes why does the noise pollution team care about Cinnamon rolls, I can hazard a guess about the Chili.

Re:Chili Day!

[clone53421]

I can think of 2 possibilities.

1) They only serve cinnamon rolls on chili day. This one would be obvious.

2) The kids don't like chili.

As far as why the noise pollution team cares, it probably doesn't. This was just a list of complaints. Running out of cinnamon rolls was a complaint. Noise was a complaint. The neighbours cared about running out of cinnamon rolls because their kids went to the school, and their kids complained.

In other news...

[Anonymous Coward]

Residents of the Midwest complained about fireflys waking them up with light pollution. A Kansas Lawyer has filed a class-action lawsuit, claiming over $10 million in damages.