Thread: Interesting Costume

He is only 5 years old. 5 year old children don't look to hurt people in such a way. My son was a soldier that was exposed to chemical agents for Halloween,and at the time we lived at Fort Benning Georgia and honestly no one took offense to it. If the mom feels unsure about it,maybe she can talk to him about it in terms a 5 year old would understand. But irregardless, no one should say anything out of the way to a 5 year old if he still decides to dress that way,because after all he is just a 5 year old.

Anyone see 28 days later? There are dead soldiers in that! Personally, I woulnd't want my child dressing like that. But, from the mentality of the child, for example: My dd was a princess last halloween. She decided half way through halloween that she wanted something scarire. I didn't want to mess up the outfit on the first year. Well, sure enough, I ask her what she wants to be...her answer..."a princess.....a dead princess". She loves dressing up regardless (She is almost 7) so the mentality is that, well, I am killing 2 birds with one stone...I will be a princees and something scary at the same time. Politics and a 7 yr old...come on....if the person was in their teens, I would have a problem with it. But, if someone wants to protest the war, they are totally allowed to.

Sorry, but this is a non issue...this is fantasy..not politics for a 7 yr old.

Originally Posted by Vee030473

He is only 5 years old. 5 year old children don't look to hurt people in such a way. My son was a soldier that was exposed to chemical agents for Halloween,and at the time we lived at Fort Benning Georgia and honestly no one took offense to it. If the mom feels unsure about it,maybe she can talk to him about it in terms a 5 year old would understand. But irregardless, no one should say anything out of the way to a 5 year old if he still decides to dress that way,because after all he is just a 5 year old.

I agree and irregardless is not a word.

Irregardless is a word that many mistakenly believe to be correct usage in formal style, when in fact it is used chiefly in nonstandard speech or casual writing. Coined in the United States in the early 20th century, it has met with a blizzard of condemnation for being an improper yoking of irrespective and regardless and for the logical absurdity of combining the negative ir- prefix and -less suffix in a single term. Although one might reasonably argue that it is no different from words with redundant affixes like debone and unravel, it has been considered a blunder for decades and will probably continue to be so.

Per websters....Hm....Not arguing, just find it intrguing how words are created and then become part of the natural language. It doesn't make sense, really, with the prefix....funny when you really think about it.

Sorry, but this is a non issue...this is fantasy..not politics for a 7 yr old.

This is not about politics or the child for that matter, it is about the poor mother/sister/brother/father who opens the door and sees a visual picture of what may have been the last few seconds of a loved ones life. It is about humanity and compassion, and civility. Wanna protest the war that's oone thing, but to insensitivly go around oblivious of the feelings of others is one of the biggest problems in society right now. It's up to the parent, what kind of a person do they want their kids to be?