You're emotionally defending programs and relying on argumentative ploys instead of facts to back up your assertions.
Who is the programmed one here? Why not prove what you say instead of give nonsensical generalities and say we're saying kids should be allowed to hurt people?
Hey , you keep asking others, why dont you show some proof?
I've reposted enough, and the burden of proof is on them to prove programs work anyway!
They've had 30 years... what gives? If they're so good, show something!
That also is irrelevant to the issue of ethics, morals, and their rights as children, or the nonsensical model of treating problems by ignoring them and forcing completion of a B.M. Curriculum supplemented with LGATs.
Quite frankly, programs are absurd, and the only thing CCMgirl can pull out of her ass is "they're not ALL bad!" (with no proof, or anything more than a false middle fallacy as a crutch) or "WELL YOU DON'T OFFER ALTERNATIVES WTF YOURE SAYING LET THEM HURT PEOPLE?
Honestly... most people with troubled kids do fine without programs. Statistics don't LIE. There are tons of alternatives, and I don't feel like copying and pasting everything deb has posted for years just for CCM.
Put up, or shut up, and see the sig.