Well, that's just how I want to imagine myself. Thank you. LOL, literally, and the kids come running....:lol:

Lol, I submitted before I reviewed. cannot imagine sending my kids in the yard for cigarettes, blech! Although, my dad has been known to send them in the yard for fa--ots :glare: moderately sure he does it strictly to annoy me. well trained puppy doesn't want to write that word anymore.

dangit, I edited too late... and how do you know I'm not just hard up for cigarettes?????

Ah... was that an oopsy then? I can bow away gracefully (and cry into my pillow)... sniffle... I understand....

:lol: LMBO oh, that's hilarious... I was thinking, I'm not sending the kids in the yard to collect f--- anytime soon. Regardless of the 'correct' usage of that word.

If one dc has an extreme reaction to candy, I'd let the person handing out candy know. It's nearly the same as an allergy, treat it as such. I have a scout in our den who is diabetic. I had no idea until I saw his medi-bracelet myself. I felt HORRIBLE that I had been putting his health at risk. It did not hurt me to go get sugar free candy, just for him. However, I would have been crushed if I had somehow hurt him. As for the other scenerios... when dd gets a reward at school, ds understands that it was a reward, something she earned. The same goes for when ds gets something and dd doesn't. The kids are in bunches of random extras, so someone is always getting something. The only dc that has a prob. with this is Luke, but he's two. I can distract him with the toy that has been 'lost' in the glovebox and he forgets about it. All the same, graceful winners, no show-offs, be kind. If there's some nose rubbing, then they lose the reward.

Isn't that funny, I did not think to include environmental issues or political issues at all. We talk, argue, rant about these things so often (throughout our families), that it would not occur to me to 'teach' them. I definitely teach my children to see things as an American and a Christian. IOW, alternate lifestyles, etc. are approached as, we are Christians, God tells us blah blah blah; we are Americans, the Constitution tells us blah blah blah.

My older two dcs and I have discussed some bioethics. I like reading Dean Koontz and many of his books discuss different bioethical issues. Since my kids believe I always get to read the 'good' books, we nearly always end up discussing what I am reading. The glimpses I get into that subject are chilling, but my kids' reactions warm me right back up. Oh, and thanks for the extended def. of myth. I didn't want to argue, but that alternate is always the first that comes to mind.

I think you're okay for now, but if you start to conceal your relationship with your bm (lmho, bio mom, but that's a hilarious abbreviation), then you will have started down the path you wanted to avoid. If your brother says anything, just answer him, like it's the most normal thing in the world for you to be in contact with your bm, which it sort of is.

Oh, sorry, I'm allergic to bioethics. It gives me hives. ;) Lol, which one, the warning to others, meow or so not classical etc? Lol, they all appeal to me :) Anyone want some bean dip? You should try it, it's delicious!

Lol, I didn't even see this the first time. I'm glad I'm not the only one that feels like I learn a lot more than I bargain for from this forum. The Pagan Christian stuff had me hopping. I always wanted to be a fairy when I was little (what I thought all 'good' witches really were). The idea that some form of au natural religion could be in line with Christianity was really exciting. Alas, it did not pan out, but I was glad to have heard of it, all the same.

My bil is our UPS driver. The lady we used to have went a little psycho and stabbed someone's dog with her pen. She was tired of being bit. My own dogs attack me if I am in a UPS uniform (I do seasonal work). My bil does not stab dogs, he used to keep a pocket full of treats he could throw (in a direction other than where he was going), but now he just relies on his diad for defense. You'd be amazed at how vicious the family dog can become when confronted by Big Brown.

Wow, that sounds really sad. While I have found many strong personalities on here, and gotton into my fair share of disagreements (pee is funny), I haven't been tempted to see this as a total loss. I have to reconsider and REALLY think about where I stand on things. I have to review my beliefs and normally my belief is stronger for all this. I have also changed my mind on things, or found I have no idea about something I used to think I knew (the trinity?). Don't hive mates pick off the weak ones for the sake of the hive as a whole.... :001_huh: :lol: Okay, bad example, but I don't think it's as bad as all that.

1.Do you teach your children about other religions? Christians, do you teach them about Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Paganism, etc.? Pagans, do you teach about these other religions as well? Muslims, do teach about the others? Etc., etc. We talk about other religions when they come up. Andrew is in Cub Scouts and we do a lot of things in Scouts that bring us to other places of worship and other beliefs. 2.Do you teach about opposing scientific views? Creationists, do you teach about evolution? Evolutionists, do you teach about creationism? I believe God created evolution... so we're studying BOTH, but from a Christian perspective. I do read to him from places that feel evolution negates creationism, and I do censor the statements I feel go to far. 3.Do you teach opposing moral/social beliefs? Pro-lifers, do you teach about the arguments that exist in favor of abortion? Pro-choicers, do you teach about the arguments opposing abortion? Tricky question... What little we have discussed regarding abortion, I have told dd that scientists can't figure out when life starts, so pro-choice people do not believe that they are aborting a living being. IOW, I do not want her to believe that abortion is not murder, but I do not want her to assume that everyone believes that way and I want her to have compassion for those who have had abortions. Obviously, I could go on and on. These are just a few examples that popped into my head. Is it profitable for your children to understand what skeptical scholars opposed to your way of thinking/believing are saying, and if so, why? Since I want my kids to be able to live in this world, they need to know that not everyone is like them. They need to know there are differing points of few, the merits of those povs. Otherwise, I don't believe they would be prepared. What dangers exist as you examine these opposing belief systems and how do you overcome it? If you DO teach opposing beliefs, do you do it in an objective manner or do you teach them as something others believe and that these beliefs are false and why they are false? I do get uncomfortable, at times, thinking I may be sending my kids to hell in a hand basket. Most of the time, however, I just feel like I'm preparing them for life. Do I spin things? Well, I would like to say no, but that wouldn't be true. Of course, I point out the fallacies, the holes, the loose ends, of course, I want my children to believe in God and Jesus Christ. Like I said before, I do censor things that I feel go to far (for instance, an online science quiz that said 'nothing just pops out of thin air'). Does the benefit of knowing “all sides of the story†outweigh the chance that your children might choose to believe something that you oppose? I would like to believe so.

Do you live in Westmoreland?!? That's exactly what our po person does. You'd think the gravel on our road would cause their car to implode the way they avoid it. I only recently found out that they were supposed to drive to the door anyway. I had gone to the PO, because I was EXPECTING a package. They asked me where the notice was and I said, oh, she doesn't even bother to bring the packages with her. They hemmed and hawwed, once they finally looked, low and behold, my parcel! Now, my magazines are being bent in the wrong direction (again) and if it looks like rain, my box is left open (again). The last parcel was left on the front steps (we have a porch, but I guess she didn't care to throw the parcel upwards). I have the complaints line on speed dial :(

:iagree:

So, I'm just glad I took that leap and got ds out of p.s. and here with me. :D

I think that is worse than tearing someone down. Because you are questioning their actions without any knowledge of them or their true situation. IOW, the comments are negative and they are made against a person that is not known, neither is their real situation. Being negative about someone with nothing to support that negativity other than gossip... how can that not be tearing them down? Because this is not a hypothetical situation. It is a real situation with a real woman and her real children. It's not wrong to form an opinion, but it is wrong to form an opinion about someone about whom you know nothing.

Replace a windshield in one car; transmission in the van; if there's any after that, we're going to get all cash in small bills and just sleep in it. That's probably a much more fiscally responsible thing that what we'd really want to do which would be run around and spend it on things we do not need or want.

:lol: So... as long as having kids would be difficult to impossible, the government will pay to get you more kids. Now it all makes sense :001_huh:

How is that covered by Medicaid? That is a definite government issue.

Calling someone, or alluding to them being, irresponsible, disrepectful, devious and underhanded (that would be the impression I get when it's thought that she might have planned this to get money), that's not tearing someone down? Then, we disagree on what is tearing someone down. My point is that no one knows what those choices are! The 'choices' that people are debating are founded on nothing more than some reporters conjecture and opinion. Debating someone/their choices, based on someone else's opinion of the situation, the details of which they are not privy to, is rediculous, pointless and mean. Maybe if she got a t.v. show we could all love and respect her, oh and then argue for her right to privacy.

No, you're not dictating lifestyle. You're calling her irresponsible with nothing more that he-said-she-said 'facts' to back it up. You're questioning her decisions without knowing anything that led up to them. It seriously bothers me that people would question/tear down/disparrage someone with absolutely no knowledge of this person. For all anyone knows the reporters chose a random neighborhood and started bugging some insane cat lady for comments.

Not here, in the media. The Adolph Hitler kid was one thing. They sought it out. This lady, she's trying to stay anonymous, or at least doing an okay job of staying on the dl, but the media is making her a debate. The only real 'problem' I have with the discussion, besides what has brought it up, is that parents, esp. parents that buck the system, are tearing down someone they do not know, with flimsy 'facts' from a media that does not know anything either. It kills me that parents that face the redicule of family members and proponents of public schools would tear this woman apart. Add in the attraction to the Duggars and it is so rediculous and catty and snide.