Archived page

    “Even after a judge required ACS to reunite Ms. Rivers with her baby, ACS continued to subject Ms. Rivers to needless court proceedings and a litany of conditions that interfered with her parenting of TW for months, while the unlawful removal of her baby was ratified by senior ACS leadership,” the complaint reads. “This was not because ACS was trying to protect TW; this was because Ms. Rivers is Black.”

  • AngryHumanoid@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m contrasting this conversation with the one I had with OP yesterday, where explaining the actions of the hospital from a position of how they and CPS operate shows why they did some of what they did and agreeing with the parts that the courts said we’re wrong, and we both came to a better understanding of why each other felt they way they did.

    Then there’s you, who care more about buzzwords and stirring anger about “human rights” and absolutely no ability to back up your statements. You should have stayed on Reddit, you’d do better there.

    • halvo317@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You never even responded to the points in my first comment. Why would I dignify this conversation?

      • AngryHumanoid@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You threw up a strawman that was never claimed in the article and now say the burden is on me to disprove it. I forwarded you to the discussion I had with OP and you again made a claim against me without citing anything I actually said. You are not coming off well in this attempt at a conversation. You need to cite specifics.