Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: neverdem

So, “in an effort to remove the stigma,” they are going to relax the rules. Gee, wonder why the rules are there in the first place. Could they possibly serve the national interest. And isn’t that more important than “removing” stigma? Perhaps we should also “remove the stigma” that is causing unfair discrimination against PEOPLE WHO WANT TO KILL US.


2 posted on 06/16/2007 8:31:09 AM PDT by 3AngelaD (They screwed up their own countries so bad they had to leave, and now they're here screwing up ours)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: 3AngelaD
So, “in an effort to remove the stigma,” they are going to relax the rules. Gee, wonder why the rules are there in the first place. Could they possibly serve the national interest. And isn’t that more important than “removing” stigma?

You seriously think every existing government rule effectively serves the government interest?

3 posted on 06/16/2007 8:35:47 AM PDT by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: 3AngelaD

Actually, I think this is a good thing. Not every mental illness is serious. This would allow the government to examine the individuals on a case-by-case basis. My husband was an officer in the Air Force and left active duty in 1990. After 9/11, he tried to get back on active duty and was denied because he had been treated for depression. It is a shame, because he is a really patriotic and competent man and he had an excellent military record.


13 posted on 06/16/2007 5:51:03 PM PDT by soccermom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson