Well, when the public voices of feminism are constantly saying you can't be a feminist and be pro-life, it's pretty clear they don't want me marching next to them at a rally any time soon. http://jezebel.com/5972943/there-is-no-such-thing-as-a-pro-life-feminist

I remember that story, it made me happy I'm not on twitter ;). If your job is running a company's social media account, you are probably aware that your tweets could get you fired. At least I would hope so :).

I used to consider myself a feminist, but I am also pro-life. After enough feminists told me I couldn't be pro-life and be a feminist, I stop using the feminist label. It isn't that I refused to claim the title, they didn't want me. And my generation and the one after mine are much more pro-life than my mother and her sister's generation, even though we agree with second wave feminism when it comes to most other issues. I think this is part of the "brand" problem.

Yes, but employee unions make it difficult to fire employees unless the act is a direct violation of the contract. It can be hard for the employer to use discretion, and course the specifics will depend on the union and the contract. My husband has been the manager for union employees that were near impossible to fire, even coming to work drunk in an industrial setting merely ended in a paid suspension. Finally the serial offender physically assaulted another employee while on the clock, and so they were finally able to fire him, but only after he was convicted. I was glad to see Ray Rice fired, I'm not defending the NFL, but Goodall does have to deal with the unions when disciplining and firing players, and so it is complicated. The public backlash gives him a bit more leverage with the union.

I didn't mean on this board, I was speaking in general. You will be attacked by strangers on social media for being politically incorrect. You can lose your job for tweeting the wrong thing, and public figures are evicerated for their gaffes. I'm not saying that this type of reaction is never warranted, but it does give one pause and make people feel like they have to keep up with what is currently correct to avoid backlash.

It's like the boy who cries wolf, so many pundits today are constantly pointing out that this word or that word is now offensive that people start to tune it out. The shark was jumped for me when Chris Matthews said that bringing up Chicago was a racist dog whistle. http://blogs.suntimes.com/politics/2012/08/is_chicago_the_new_dog_whistle_code_word_for_racism.html I was raised to be polite, sensitive, and politically correct. I try hard not to offend. But it really is getting to the point where anything I say is going to offend someone, and censoring myself to the point I never offend anyone would be impossible and miserable. So, I think some people when faced with this situation go to the other extreme, where they stop worrying about it all together. Like the boy who cried wolf, they start tuning out people who demand they stop being offensive because too many words an phrases are suddenly being deemed offensive. I don't think it is because they are mean, I think it is because it is frustrating to have phrases that were not considered offensive your entire life suddenly be placed on the do not use list, a list that is always changing. Who has time to keep up with that? I'm just trying to say that I can see both sides of the issue.

Yes, this is an interesting topic. Christians believe that we can be healed through prayers, our own and the prayers of others, and unexplainable recoveries and healings that we Christians would classify as miracles do occur. I suppose you could consider this superstitious, but Christians obviously do not. My own son experienced what I believe to be a miraculous recovery when he was gravely ill as a newborn. We have no way to prove it was a miracle, but the doctors can't really explain why he became ill or why he suddenly recovered. We attribute it to prayer. The concept of mind over matter and the role of positive thinking in healing is fascinating.

I see. It seemed as though you were trying to imply that this Bull represented the first time that artificial birth control was condemned, but the condemnation of "pharmakea" which was a mix of witchcraft and herbal medicine, including birth control, was condemned from the earliest days of the church. It seems odd to modern readers to condemn it as"witchcraft," but at that time herbal medicine was practiced with many spells and charms to go along with the "potions," it wasn't just medicine, and there was a superstitious "magic" element involved. Not that that justifies witch hunts. The topic of the inquisition and the European witch hunts seems off topic, it is a pretty extensive topic in itself. But you are right, it is very interesting.

I'm not sure what you are saying, or what it has to do with what I'm saying. Artificial birth control has always been condemned by the Catholic Church and was also condemned by Protestants up until 1930. I'm not sure what this Papal Bull has to do with that fact. The Papal Bull you linked too doesn't actually add anything to the conversation, unless you want to talk about the abuses of the Inquisition, but that seems pretty off topic.

Herbal spermicides and abortificatients have also been around for thousands of years. It's hormonal BC that is new, and the morality has changed. Prior to 1930 all Christian denominations condemned the use of artificial birth control on doctrinal grounds. The Church of England endorsed using artificial birth control under certain circumstances in a resolution at the 1930 Lambeth conference, and in the next few decades other denominations followed suit. http://www.lambethconference.org/resolutions/1930/1930-15.cfm

True, but honestly the list of words and phrases that are considered offensive is changing every day, it's become impossible for people to keep up.

I've noticed this as well. My husband has to maintain a nicer wardrobe for work, and it is much easier to find quality clothes for him at department stores than it is for the kids or myself.

I think is it because it would be impossible to eliminate all offensive speech, people simply find new words and "dog whistles" to become enraged over. I'm not saying we shouldn't try not to offend, but political correctness has reached a point where it's impossible not to offend someone.

My grandmother and her family just say they are Irish. I suppose she was Irish American, but honestly in my family we were raised to be Irish. I am only 1/4 Irish, but it's the heritage that was held up above all others, and my mother's siblings always refer to themselves as Irish, even though my grandfather was a kilt wearing Scot, lol. They are also a very patriotic bunch, my Grandfather retired as an officer from the Air Force as did my aunt, uncle and my mother. My other aunt and uncle served for a time in the Army. My own brother served in the Air Force and I have a cousin who served in the Navy and another cousin who is an Army Ranger. Sorry for the thread derail. ETA: my mother is actually in Ireland this week with her siblings, and they are going to visit my grandmothers cousins and their families. My grandmother and grandfather went over to Ireland several times in their younger years to visit family. So the fact that the familial ties are still upheld may be part of the reason for identifying so strongly as Irish.

I'm distressed by all inflation. I have baby clothes I bought in 2000 when my first ds was born that have gone through all 5 of my boys and a few nephews. They were not expensive, they were from Target, Old Navy, even a few things from KMart. They have held up well, I'm really surprised they are still in good enough shape that I'm not embarrassed for my 1 yo to wear them. The clothes I've bought in the last 4 years since my daughters were born have not held up well at all, they are barely making it through my 2 girls. I'm still shopping at the same stores, but the quality has gone down hill. This is hidden inflation, where the prices don't go up dramatically but the quality and quantity go down. I've noticed the same for the adult clothes. I have t-shirts I bought from Target 14 years ago that are still in decent shape, but the thin t-shirts I bought last year have not held up well.

My point was that some people are twisting the definition of selfishness, I was trying to give the Christian definition of the word. There are valid reasons not to have children and according to Orthodox and other Christian groups that doesn't make you selfish. But Christians believe that any sin will hurt the person commiting the sin, so in that regard there is always a victim, even if it is not another person and is simply yourself. For a Christian, sins come between you and your relationship with God. Venial sins, small less serious sins, put a strain on that relationship. Mortal, or serious sins, such as murder, can sever that relationship all together. A huge part of Christianity is the relationship we have with God the Father, most other religions do not include a paternal view of the creator. So the emphasis on avoiding sin in order to maintain our relationship with God is a central aspect of the faith. It's just like any parental relationship we get along with our parents and have a better relationship with them when we are following their rules and showing proper love and respect. Of course God always leaves the door open for the prodigal sons and daughters to return when we do sin. The issue here with cults, fringe groups and sects is that they have all kinds of different and sometimes strange interpretations as to what constitutes a sin, what is selfish, and they come up with rigid rules that often contradict orthodox Christianity. The groups like the QF group that the author was in have very legalistic and strict rules that most other Christians would find baffling at best and abhorent, sinful and abusive at worst.

I'm part Irish, my grandmother is 100 percent Irish and the first of her family born outside of Ireland. We don't find it offensive, but most of the people I know have better things in life to worry about.

I don't understand what you are saying. For a Christian sin is committed against God, but also against other people. The sin of selfishness is committed against whomever your selfish actions will have a negative impact on, that can also include yourself. But, it is also a sin to unjustly judge other people, and I'm not privy to the circumstances surrounding most other people's family decisions, so I couldn't judge them even if I was tempted to. I really don't care or think about how many kids people have, and honestly it's none of my business.

Christians are supposed to "die to themselves," they are supposed to be willing to sacrifice their own desires (not their needs) if it will accomplish good for others. Christians are especially supposed to follow the example of self sacrifice in their marriages. But this unselfish sacrifice is supposed to be done by the husband and the wife. In the context of this conversation we are speaking of Christians, and so selfishness should be something they are trying to avoid. Avoiding selfishness does not mean you don't love yourself , or take care of yourself. God wants us to love all his children and take care of them, including ourselves. The concept of selflessness does NOT mean you should be a doormat or put up with abuse, anyone who can should stand up to abuse. The problem is that fringe groups like many QF families twist the meaning of selfishness, along with many other teachings. It isn't selfish to limit family size because of finances, health, etc. but many QF families will claim that it is. In the case of abusive men, they hold the concepts of pride and selfishness over their spouses head in order to control them. It is sad that so many women are abused in the name of religion, but the religion is being twisted and abused by these people as well.

Have you looked at Don Potter or ElizabethB's free phonics programs? We've used their resources with great success. http://blendphonics.org http://www.thephonicspage.org

Our son had recurrent vomiting due to inflammation caused by severe acid reflux. It was finally diagnosed after 6 months of testing because we were finally able to get into a pediatric GI. The GI doc gave him a prescription for inflammation and the reflux, and it cleared up and hasn't flared up since. I would see the GI right away, vomiting on a regular basis can do a lot of physical damage.

Well, our female friends from college are all now hundreds of miles away, and the only female engineer on his floor is a dear friend who is old enough to be our mother. I just don't see it happening. I know that sounds naive, but he really lacks the social skills. I was his first girlfriend and I decided we would go from friends to a couple when we were sophomores in college. He's my best friend and I love him, but he's an awkward nerdy engineer :). I should give him some credit though, part of why I can't see him cheating is because he is a truly good person who tries hard to follow his faith and stick to his morals. He's a better person than I am, for sure. There are good men out there, he's one of the good guys which is why I pounced on him, having grown up with my parents situation right in front of me.

It's more like I can't imagine him actually being able to woo another woman, we were friends for a long time and so we didn't really "date." He is also oblivious to other women who flirt with him. When we were young and out with friends he would be hit on from time to time as I watched from across the room, and he had no idea what was going. I would just laugh.

Thank you, the Dirda list is great, I knew I was trying to reinvent the wheel :). You've already put a lot of work into this. Most of those books on the Dirda are on my list for middle school high school. I know AO schedules Bullfinch in 4-6th grade, but my boys just couldn't and can't handle it at that age. It is too advanced. I'm saving it for high school. Also on my high school list is Don Quixote, El Cid, Pride and Prejudice and Sherlock Holmes. My older boys read Robinson Crusoe in 3rd grade, but I'm holding off with my 10yo. I'm planning on RC and Gulliver in middle school. I also want my kids to read an advanced translation of Homer in high school. I would also add for high school the Count of Monte Cristo to the list, just a personal favorite, and an American short fiction anthology. We spent almost and entire month on Dante in my World lit class in college. The only other work we spent as much time on was Homer. We covered a lot in two semesters, but I was able to get a lot out of it because I had already taken two years of challenging world history in high school. We didn't always have the time to dive into the hitlstorical context of each work, so I was glad to have a frame of reference ready to go. I forgot about Jospeh Jacobs, we enjoy his fairy tale books very much. I like the way you incorporated fairy tales, folk tales, and poems into the each year of your rotation. I don't like to tie in all the literature selections to the time period, but I can see how it would work well for others and I think this is a very worthwhile project you're undertaking :).

Congratulations! Well done!