Read the story below and tell me what you think.
The body of 2-year old Devon Davis was found, ending several days of an intensive search.
The boy's body was found shortly after the search was officially called off in a lake near his home. A DPS helicopter was checking a lake less than a mile from his home one last time when searchers spotted something.
"We have located Devon Davis in a large body of water nearby his home," Capt. Rex Evans with the Liberty County Sheriff's Office said. "Devon is deceased."
Investigators think Devon simply wandered away from his home and ended up in the lake.
Once the discovery was made, state troopers closed the road leading to the Davis' home and the lake.
Earlier in the day, a remote control airplane with photography capabilities flew over the lake and spotted something. The DPS helicopter was checking that out when searchers found Devin's remains. After that, Texas Equusearch founder Tim Miller walked Devon's mother, April Davis, to the back of the yard where Capt. Evans told her that Devon was gone.
"It's difficult. I spent a lot of time with April out here over the last three days, a lot of time and I've gotten very very close to April," Miller said. "We were determined not to give up and it was actually at the end of the search... I don't know why it happened like that."
"Every time it's heartbreaking," Evans said. "They're all very devastated right now."
Earlier in the day, April Davis was in relatively good spirits, heading out with Miller to hand out hundreds of flyers bearing her son's picture and information.
An Amber Alert was issued for Davis on Tuesday. Liberty County sheriff's deputies said Devon wandered off into a wooded area while his mother and 1-year-old sister were napping at their new home in the Sam Houston Lake Estates area near Tarkington at about 3:30 p.m.
Davis said she found the door open and her son was gone. Investigators said Davis told them that Devon opened a latch on the door.
Searchers spent days looking for the toddler. Before the discovery was made, searchers used a drone to try to look for signs as to where he may be.
"The best benefit of that is unmanned and it can fly for hours," Evans said. "Whereas the aircraft that we've been able to have come over can only stay for a short amount of time."
The drone is a remote-controlled miniature plane with cameras that will fly around and take pictures of the area.
Davis appealed to the public for help on Friday. It was the first time she spoke to the media.
"I'm April. I'm Devon's mom. If you know anything, if you've seen anything, please just call somebody. Bring him home with me. He needs to be home with his family. Somebody has to know something, somewhere. Please, help me find my son," April Davis said.
Davis indicated that she thought someone had her son.
"If you're scared, I understand there's a lot of stuff going on," she said. "Do the right thing. Bring him to the hospital. Call somebody. People do not vanish. There is something out there and somebody knows something, somebody saw something somewhere. Please find him. Please help me."
Two sources close to the search and investigation told KPRC Local 2 Friday that Davis failed parts of a polygraph test. The sources declined to elaborate on which parts where failed. They stressed that does not mean anything nefarious happened and polygraphs can be imperfect, especially since Davis is in a very emotional state.
"He is the sweetest child you could ever meet," Davis said of Devon. "He's happy, he's friendly. He's a good kid."
Officials and volunteers searched several days by air, land and water, but found nothing. On Thursday, Liberty County officials said the search changed to a recovery mission, meaning that they don't expect to find the boy alive.
Capt. Rex Evans said he had to have a difficult talk with Devon's parents Thursday morning.
"There is a negative end to this that you kind of have to prepare yourself for," said Evans.
Texas EquuSearch has used sonar devices to look for Devon.
"The problem with doing the sonar is there's just so much debris underneath the water," Miller said. "You get a false image and you have to go back over it two or three times to determine what it is."]
Why is it his fault? According to a chicken shit xtian minister that child was disobedient and therefore he was punished by G'd.
Excuse me? A two year old does not know the difference between right and wrong. My heart goes out to this family.
Actually, your link only proves that you are being judgmental yourself and she had apologized on how she wrote the post and you're still doing what?
That is the question. Now move on. You are getting in deeper and deeper.
"she had apologized on how she wrote the post"
Which I never had issue with, not "how" but, "what".
" you're still doing what?"
Defending myself from personal attacks and not responding in kind.
Again, if you think I have?
[Which I never had issue with, not "how" but, "what".
" you're still doing what?"
Defending myself from personal attacks and not responding in kind.]
Yeah, right. six pages of saying the same old crap.
"Yeah, right. six pages of saying the same old crap."
I've been insulted, maligned, misquoted, lied about.
Yeah, I don't let shit like that go, it's harassment.
…and still, …no addressing the original reply.
As for 2011, what does that have to do with anything? Get a grip.
"As for 2011, what does that have to do with anything?"
This: "I am new to this site and I could not help but to notice the topic and post."
...Like you're about to render an unbiased opinion. And, the OP was the first to welcome you here…
"Get a grip."
I'm good, still looking for an explanation of why it's ethical to use the same means to refute something unethical because the means are unethical….
And having to dodge non sequiturs, insults, pure fabrications… deceits.
That last one bugs me, I never let theists get away with it, do you?
…matter o' fact, I don't think any -ist gets a pass on that one.
Yet still, …nothing to address the original reply I made in the thread.
Please report it, be my guest.
Wow, hasn't this thread got out of hand!?!
My take on this thread was that Regina was sharing her frustration about a comment she heard during a discussion. Granted, it should have been stated that the quote was taken from her private discussion, but given that this is now known, I do not see the difference between this and if she had heard it said on TV or read in a paper (I do understand that there have other implications due to the wider effect of media coverage, and how sound-bites can be a lot more damaging when broadcast to large audiences rather than made in private conversations). The end effect is similar - she heard something which shocked her and she posted it up.
I don't see the point or relevance of most of the discussion after page 1, and I honestly don't see how Regina is "using this to justify her animosity against the minister" - if anything his anonymity here very much tells me otherwise. I will not rule out the possibility that this is a minister who repeatedly has an effect on her, but this is not how this post came across to me.
The story is tragic, and the fact that ANYONE (famous or otherwise) can make a comment such as mentioned above is shocking.
If, during discussion with colleagues at work, a workmate said something similar about such a story, I would hope that I could share my disgust or frustration at him/her on here without having to name names and cite references.
In future, Regina, remember to mention that it was a personal conversation in the original post, and perhaps this whole issue won't blow up again.
FWIW, I have many friends in Canada and know it to be a very nice place. Let's not go down the slippery slope of playground name-calling. From either side.
"Wow, hasn't this thread got out of hand!?!"
Indeed, the thread has derailed into a personal attack, insults and deliberate false portrayal of of me and my defending myself against the attacks, …instead of addressing a salient, on-topic question posed about ethics.
"...it should have been stated that the quote was taken from her private discussion"
Actually, she probably should have read the site rules, or maybe address dissenting opinion directly, instead of indulging in character assassination and victim playing in order to deflect from the issue.
"I don't see the point or relevance of most of the discussion after page 1, and I honestly don't see how Regina is "using this to justify her animosity against the minister"
What then is the purpose of posting the entire pasted article (with nothing to do with race or religion)? There is actually a term for this type of thing, related to its being unethical and intellectually dishonest. The OP calls it "bull$hit" when someone ties a polemic to a tragedy with no direct correlation, it's otherwise known as an opportunistic exploitation of suffering.
I get the some won't make that connection, I understand that some won't see the hypocrisy in indulging in the same mode of justification that one is being critical about themselves. That doesn't mean it stops being a hypocritical tactic, by definition. It was this point that, my still unanswered reply was addressing. I wasn't alone in noticing it either, but the first to ask why it was okay to do so when it came to light that there was an issue of false pretense in regards to posting the story.
It is this point that I have not diverged from in order to indulge in insults.
Still no answer, instead a tirade of personal attacks, non sequiturs, straw man arguments, racist attacks, etc. I have not indulged in such things, you will not find a single instance of me attacking anybodies character, race, mental health, etc. I even found those insulting me trying (unsuccessfully) to rally others with misrepresentations in the chat room (screen-capped).
Only a simple question of the ethics of tying a polemic to a tragedy.
" I would hope that I could share my disgust or frustration at him/her on here without having to name names and cite references."
I would have the same question of ethics if you were to do so by the same means as the OP, do look up the definition of "trolling" (verb) in its internet context.
"Let's not go down the slippery slope of playground name-calling. From either side."
Let's not try to portray this as anything other than one-sided, …unless you have proof otherwise. And no, questioning a posts ethics, and expressing differences of opinion are not personal attacks.
So yeah, keep misrepresenting me in a thread, and I'll continue addressing it. There is no site rule against defending yourself from harassment.