Fornits

Fornits Home for Wayward Web Fora
An open discussion about the troubled parent industry

Imagine if we used this same rationale at our own highschool if a classmate died?

Jim Remnal died last Thursday from an overdose in his home.  He attended Ridgemont high school later attended Yale University and completed his post graduate doctorate work at Harvard.  He started up and ran his own research firm.

Conclusion: Ridgemont high school must have been too tough on him, wasnt very effective and let him down!!  Ha,Ha,Ha

You know, if John D. Rueben doesn't read Fornits someone is doing it for him, otherwise there wouldn't be this strenuous and desperate effort to disconnect thewho from John Reuben.

It doesn't matter if Reuben is thewho or not - Reuben is evil on his own merit.  He remains on this Ahab-like quest pushing the Great White Whale of Aspen even though his son died despite being shoved through the program system.  Reuben should realize how ASR would rationalize his son's death if they were asked why he died after their treatment:  He didn't make use of the program's "tools", or his parents didn't follow through on maintenance.  In other words, John Reuben and his son are failures in the eyes of ASR.

Nothing changes the fact that John D. Reuben cannot say "without ASR, my son would be dead or in jail".  Michael died, despite the programs.  It sounds cruel to put that so bluntly, but John Reuben is backing people like Lon Woodbury who use the dead or in jail cliche as a selling tool.  Reuben knows firsthand that a program is no guarantee that a child won't end up dead or in jail, yet he persists in program mongering.  For that he should be held accountable.

I have been reading thru the posts here and I dont see the connection between this program he attended and his sons death.  How were they connected?  Wasnt his son like 30 years old when he died?

Exactly correct.  So now we're waiting to see proof that any programs work and to see proof TheWho is not John Reuben.  Until someone shows some real hard evidence to the contrary, this is where we are.

Exactly and since we dont have any proof we just dont know who TheWho is or how effective programs are.

Quote from: "Guest"

Yes, so unless somebody can prove otherwise we all agree John Reuben is TheWho.

Thanks for agreeing with me guest!

Exactly!!  I think you see what I am saying.  Anyone can make a statement and believe it all they want like your statement says.  But until they provide some proof very few other people will be onboard with your beliefs...

See this:

John Rueben "is not" thewho.  So unless someone can prove otherwise we all agree with this!!

So we are back to the point where we need to provide proof from either perspective (or vantage point) if you may.  The burden of proof lays heavily on both perspectives.  

This is a good discussion.  I hope Ajax13 and Bruce are reading.

My vote is for each person to provide proof of what they state.  whether that be positive or negative.  That seems to be more fair then having one side being the one with the burden of proof.

Yes, so unless somebody can prove otherwise we all agree John Reuben is TheWho.

Thanks for agreeing with me guest!

Exactly!!  I think you see what I am saying.  Anyone can make a statement and believe it all they want like your statement says.  But until they provide some proof very few other people will be onboard with your beliefs...

See this:

John Rueben "is not" thewho.  So unless someone can prove otherwise we all agree with this!!

So we are back to the point where we need to provide proof from either perspective (or vantage point) if you may.  The burden of proof lays heavily on both perspectives.  

This is a good discussion.  I hope Ajax13 and Bruce are reading.

Wait...I'm confused.  For several years you have been saying we have to provide evidence that programs don't work.  You were fine with having us prove a negative.  

Now you do it.  John Reuben is TheWho unless you prove he isn't.  We're just playing by your own rules, Who.  Now show us some proof.

Exactly,  just provide proof of what you say, whether it be a positive or a negative.  Simple.  Otherwise anyone could just reword everything to be positive or negative to avoid the rules.  So if you feel Reuben is thewho then provide your proof.  If you feel strongly he is not thewho then provide proof also.
Until then we really dont know.

Drowning is a really nice way to go, I heard.  It’s the struggle people put up before they take in their first inhale of water that really sucks.  After that the lungs just breath in and out like they always did only its water instead of air.  Water doesn’t have enough oxygen in it so you eventually just pass out.  But it is very euphoric and calming to breath the water in and out of your lungs.  Your eyes are open you float around and then it goes dark.

Much better than being impaled on a fence post for 3 days where no one can hear you screaming as the post moves thru your body at about an inch an hour.  That has to be one of the worst ways to go.  But all in all I am not afraid of death at all.

But like Semus said, just not today.

Quote from: "john d reuben"

Quote from: "Guest"

Use ajax's real name while saying he molests his son, and see what happens.

No one knows anyones name here.  We are only guessing that thewho is John Reuben.  No one knows for sure.

No. It's been said positively, John. You are the Who.

No. It's been said positively, Ajax. You are the Who
or

No. It's been said positively, John. You are Ajax

See what I mean?  This abstract thinking just sails right over your head, Ajax, every time.  You have no facts... you never do.