Michelle Duggar is expecting # 18

[Cheryl in NM]

Peek,

 

I like the way you wrapped this all up! I tried to rep you, but apparently I did that in the recent future. So...REP...!

[nancypants]

Peek,

 

I like the way you wrapped this all up! I tried to rep you, but apparently I did that in the recent future. So...REP...!

 

The recent future. That sounds like it should be a movie title or something. ;)

[Jenny in Atl]

...and we know it's not a surprise because many Christian parents have been homeschooling for THAT reason for decades.

 

Well, since these were Christian Homeschooled children who behaved badly, I guess their folks have not learned much from their experiences as the bullied.

[Quiver0f10]

Please know I am only speaking for what my husband and I believe. I am not speaking for the whol QF community.

 

 

 

I am of the belief that we are to submit to our husbands in their desires and requests. I would not condemn a woman for not following her QF convictions if her husband desires not to have more children. It goes both ways though. Should the husband be QF and the wife not then I do believe that she should still submit to his requests.

 

Does that answer your questions?

 

I whole heartedly agree! I had posted something and then deleted it, but basically I had to submit to my husband in something similar to this once and it was hard, but in submitting to my own husband, I was freed and it then became between God and my DH. I hope that make sense LOL.

[Cheryl in NM]

The recent future. That sounds like it should be a movie title or something. ;)

 

I knew that didn't sound right!:blush: I'm a bit frazzled today! :huh: The "recent past"!

[OnTheBrink]

I wonder if this woman wears seatbelts...

 

If so, why?

 

Most likely because of Romans 13:1, which says: Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God.

 

There's a seat belt law in (I think) all states. So, wearing a seatbelt really has nothing to do with trusting God on safety, it has to do with obeying the laws of the land, and when in obedience to the laws of the land, you're in obedience to God.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

Most likely because of Romans 13:1, which says: Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God.

 

There's a seat belt law in (I think) all states. So, wearing a seatbelt really has nothing to do with trusting God on safety, it has to do with obeying the laws of the land, and when in obedience to the laws of the land, you're in obedience to God.

 

Game, set, and match to Michelle. :001_smile:

[RebeccaC]

==========

I was another kid who's mom was out of the loop and raising siblings. I guess I fall under the old "you're as scarred as you want to be" philosophy cuz I really didn't mind that aspect of it. i had LOTS of problems dealing w/ my mom and other outside issues that caused me grief, but the actual household/ mothering tasks didn't affect ME like they do some.

 

===============

 

 

 

Ya know I think that this philosophy has been misused in this thread and even in some other threads where I have read it. Choosing how scarred one is is something that adults do not children. It is a maturity thing. Children do not have the logic skills to make such choices.

 

Again this is my 2 cents worth and probably comes down to me being a INPF ;) it is a good vs evil thing for me not a good vs sort bad and awe shucks it will be all right because as an adult the kids will choose not to be too scarred...... or don't talk about things that will or might cause a wound that will scar because ....tada.... how scarred you are is your choice,....... well ya........ that is true when you are 30 but not when you are 3 or 8 or 12..... minimizing has it place, and that is what the "you are as scarred as you want to be" philosophy is in this thread when it comes to what is happening now, in real time, to children and teens in some families.

 

Co-parenting is not healthy for any of the children but is most unhealthy for the young child who bonds with the older and in my opinion any one who thinks that older children as co-parents is God's provision for them to be QF is in sin...... but that is my opinion and I think that most child psychologist would view it very poorly.

[Kimber]

I couldn't rep you again, but well said!!!!!!!!

[cin]

I know I'm late in responding (It's NOT been a good day!). But as far as people's questions and rude remarks....They do exist across the board. I 'only' have 2 littles. As stated earlier, they are adopted, and OBVIOUSLY are not genetically related to me or my husband. We get alot of kind questions, but the one that I *HATE* is....are they sisters? OF course they ARE. They are being raised by the same parents!!!! Did you raise 2 little girls? Are they sisters? Do they think of themselves as sisters? Do I want the thought that they are NOT sisters entering their heads? Thank You for planting that seed you old bit@#. I usually just vaguely state that one is from China and one from Vietnam. And then there was that one dense broad who restated it for me: So they're not related? :001_rolleyes:

 

Ok, that's off my chest. On another note...my friend who has a couple of kids from India has been asked if their father is black. (Think small town Nebraska, Old bitties). She looked them straight in the eye and told them she wasn't sure, she'd never seen them. :smilielol5: You coulda knocked them over with a feather.

 

Rude people are everywhere. But we need to put them in their place.

[Peek a Boo]

Well, since these were Christian Homeschooled children who behaved badly, I guess their folks have not learned much from their experiences as the bullied.

 

I agree. Being Christian is not about being nice, smart, or moral.

 

unfotunately bullies trample all kinds of religious fences. every religion will have some extremists :(.

 

=======

 

and Rebecca, i do agree that we need to minimize scarring. That's a BIG reason i homeschool. There's a difference tho in whether the task of managing a household affects each person the same. It had a harmful effect on you, it didn't on me. People react differently to the same challenge.

 

I also know that we are simply NOT able to know the extent of how much "parenting" the older siblings do, vs how *little* the mom does. The fact that siblings may be heavily involved doesn't necessarily negate mom's role, if in fact she is continuing to mother :) There are some parents who simply don't parent, regardless how many children they have.

[Storm Bay]

Ya know I think that this philosophy has been misused in this thread and even in some other threads where I have read it. Choosing how scarred one is is something that adults do not children. It is a maturity thing. Children do not have the logic skills to make such choices.

 

.

 

I agree. Sometimes adults don't even realized how scarred they are from childhood right away. It can take quite a bit of time to heal, but if you still have to see the people responsible for scarring, it can take much longer. Sometimes you don't want to cut them off completely because to do so means you have to cut yourself off from family members who weren't involved in that.

 

But I suspect that Peek-a-Boo wasn't actually talking so much about abuse as just the regular mistakes and personality differences, etc that go on. For example, my dad made us stay home Saturday mornings to do chores when all of our friends were free to do what they wanted ( and this is fact). We hated it, but that was something you could choose to be scarred over or not--in fact it taught important values. But when he was verbally abusive to a couple of us, that led to scarring and required lots of healing as an adult. We didn't even know what verbal abuse WAS, and he was very popular and extremely good at his work, etc, so that didn't help.

[Storm Bay]

Well, since these were Christian Homeschooled children who behaved badly, I guess their folks have not learned much from their experiences as the bullied.

 

Ah, but most likely these particular kids were never bullied themselves. At any rate, there are ignorant people in just about every circle you can find, even in intellectual ones.

[SpecialClassical]

We have two adopted children. They are both African American and people are always asking if they are brother and sister. You know, real siblings. :rolleyes: Drives me nuts! I have the exact same feelings as you. Gee, people, thanks a lot for planting doubts in their heads! :glare:

 

I don't mind the interest, but not in front of my children. Think, people, think! If I can't answer what they are really asking without the kids hearing, I just say yes. Because they are brother and sister.

 

Of course my adopted kids make assumptions as well. One night my son, at 5yrs old, asked our bio daughter (13yrs old) who her birth mom was. She pointed to me and he laughed and said, "No, that's your mom, who is your birthmom?":lol:

[Kelli in TN]

Most likely because of Romans 13:1, which says: Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God.

 

There's a seat belt law in (I think) all states. So, wearing a seatbelt really has nothing to do with trusting God on safety, it has to do with obeying the laws of the land, and when in obedience to the laws of the land, you're in obedience to God.

 

Yup. Now that you say that, it makes perfect sense.

[Kelli in TN]

Ya know I think that this philosophy has been misused in this thread and even in some other threads where I have read it. Choosing how scarred one is is something that adults do not children. It is a maturity thing. Children do not have the logic skills to make such choices.

 

that is what the "you are as scarred as you want to be" philosophy is in this thread when it comes to what is happening now, in real time, to children and teens in some families.

 

.

 

 

Gosh, I think I coined the phrase first in this thread and if it has caused pain and misunderstanding, please forgive me.

 

I used in terms of my relationship with one of "supposedly adult" children who chooses to make much over the fact that she was born to a family of six children and money was tight and yada, yada, yada. And she has :nopity: suffered in ways that we cannot imagine, that even her soriority sisters cannot believe. Even this very night she wept because she was going to have to wait to buy something she wants. Indeed, she would have to wait all the way until Friday and if we loved her, really loved her we could certainly help her out even though we pay her phone bill and her auto insurance and we just filled up her gas tank and gave her a gift card to Kroger and direct deposit $25 per week into her account and pay for her books and invite her to dinner whenever I am cooking one of the 2-3 foods that she likes and so on and so forth.

 

I was not really meaning the real scars of abuse. But I will say that even in that, I have had some...shall we say....experiences......in my very strange and fractured childhood and I simply choose to repress all that and go on.

 

Someday my head might explode, but for today I am okay!!!!:D

[*anj*]

Game, set, and match to Michelle. :001_smile:

That's true. I repped her for that because it was indeed a perfect answer. :)

[*anj*]

Well, since these were Christian Homeschooled children who behaved badly, I guess their folks have not learned much from their experiences as the bullied.

 

Nah, these were kids whose families wear the label "Christian." And that has absolutely nothing to do with what is in their hearts. Or their parents' hearts. They might be Christian kids who did something sincerely jerky and mean spirited, or they might be non-Christians who did something sincerely jerky and mean spirited. Either way, the outcome is the same.

 

Just because you go into a building once a week and hang out there doesn't mean that you are the thing. What's that saying about being in McDonald's doesn't make you a cheeseburger?

 

Ignoramuses come in all shapes and sizes.

[Mrs Mungo]

And Mrs. Mungo, I'm absolutely positive that using "Nursing Nazi" has a hurtful effect. As does berating a mom for making a decision OTHER THAN nursing.

 

*I* (and I can only speak for myself) have never berated a mom for not nursing. In fact, I made the suggestion a few times that people should back away from this debate because I realize it is hurtful.

 

Let me restate. It hurts *me* when *I* see people called Nursing Nazis because *I* have had people call *me* that when *I* have *never* berated someone for not breastfeeding or insinuated in *any* way that not nursing (for whatever reason) is abusive. So, you are lashing out with words that hurt *other people* than the person you intend. That's my point. I wasn't abusive to anyone and yet I feel a little abused by you due to a guilt by association thing.

[Jenny in Atl]

Nah, these were kids whose families wear the label "Christian." And that has absolutely nothing to do with what is in their hearts. Or their parents' hearts. They might be Christian kids who did something sincerely jerky and mean spirited, or they might be non-Christians who did something sincerely jerky and mean spirited. Either way, the outcome is the same.

 

Just because you go into a building once a week and hang out there doesn't mean that you are the thing. What's that saying about being in McDonald's doesn't make you a cheeseburger?

 

Ignoramuses come in all shapes and sizes.

 

Yes, but all the more ironic since these were Christian homeschoolers in a Christian music program at a church run by Christian mothers who have the kids pray before they begin lessons. So, maybe the children of these women are not what their mothers hope them to be? I doubt this group of children got the ideas they spouted on their own. It starts in the home, right?

[Slartibartfast]

 

And Mrs. Mungo, I'm absolutely positive that using "Nursing Nazi" has a hurtful effect. As does berating a mom for making a decision OTHER THAN nursing. When you continually assert an opinion that makes a mom feel like CRAP cuz she can't nurse or has some emotional hang up about nursing, and don't support her in finding SOME way to feed her child and still stay sane enough to raise them, then YES, you [a general "you"] are deserving of the title. If you [again, general 'you'] don't want to be called that, then be Very Careful about how you present such information and how you support the Whole Family [like Quiver has in her posts about large families]. I don't consider anyone and everyone who *supports* nursing to be some sort of Nursing Nazi. But if you are ready to report a mom for ABUSE because they simply don't want to nurse?, then yeah, you're sounding intolerant, harsh, and dictatorial and need to reconsider the way you present your opinion if you don't like the title.

 

But as you noted, there are always going to be combative types that don't care what someone else is trying to say, they will call you all kinds of stuff. Nursing Nazi. Abusive. We've all been there in some form.

 

We have some that would be borderline Homeschool Nazis too --they make a family feel like a failure because a child is being sent to school. Just about any topic has those extreme supporters who go rabid and REFUSE to consider any other course.

 

 

 

 

It is not appropriate to equate people with Nazis because they are militant about homeschooling or breastfeeding. As far as I am aware they are not committing genocide or invading Poland.

 

Associating homeschooling or breastfeeding with horrific acts against humanity is vulgar and offensive.

 

It is an insult to their victims and the Jewish people. You aren't just insulting bf or hsers, it is not nice to Jewish people. I am sure they would MUCH rather be harassed about BF than stuck in a gas chamber or have their entire family murdered in front of them.

 

I certainly have never harassed anyone for choosing to FF or any other parenting choice but calling others Nazis is not cool.

[Guest Shanna]

Most likely because of Romans 13:1, which says: Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God.

 

There's a seat belt law in (I think) all states. So, wearing a seatbelt really has nothing to do with trusting God on safety, it has to do with obeying the laws of the land, and when in obedience to the laws of the land, you're in obedience to God.

 

man you got to post it before I did. :D

[Kimber]

Yes, but all the more ironic since these were Christian homeschoolers in a Christian music program at a church run by Christian mothers who have the kids pray before they begin lessons. So, maybe the children of these women are not what their mothers hope them to be? I doubt this group of children got the ideas they spouted on their own. It starts in the home, right?

 

My mother, a devout Christian and a single mom, raised my sister and myself to understand that Christians are no less sinful than anyone else. The only difference between Christians and non is that Christians are supposed to acknowledge their sinful natures and acknowledge the need for salvation. Becoming a Christian, as I understand it, does not make one sin free, only free of sin.

 

Sometimes as Christians we think we're holier than others, but that is far, far, far, far from the truth. It is because of our sin that we need a savior, and even when we accept Christ as such, we still sin.

 

Christians are not perfect. And I know, because I am one. :)

[Peek a Boo]

It is not appropriate to equate people with Nazis because they are militant about homeschooling or breastfeeding. As far as I am aware they are not committing genocide or invading Poland.

 

Associating homeschooling or breastfeeding with horrific acts against humanity is vulgar and offensive.

 

It is an insult to their victims and the Jewish people. You aren't just insulting bf or hsers, it is not nice to Jewish people. I am sure they would MUCH rather be harassed about BF than stuck in a gas chamber or have their entire family murdered in front of them.

 

I certainly have never harassed anyone for choosing to FF or any other parenting choice but calling others Nazis is not cool.

 

 

Sis, if you had bothered reading the few posts in which i already discussed this [or bothered looking up the word NAZI], you'd learn that there is a LOT more to the term "nazi" than your limited study of history and vocabulary. Try searching for my posts on the matter. There is no insult to Jews unless they wish to be insulted no matter what.

 

Nobody is equating ANYONE to gassing people. sheesh. this is getting old explaining, but I'll take it as an opportunity every time. And for the record, not every person who belonged to the Nazi party gassed and murdered people. Read up on the history of the Nazi party while you're reading Webster's. Assumptions don't make one look very educated.

 

It might not be "cool", but it's spot on if one is being harsh, dictatorial, and intolerant. being one who literally fits the description of a Nursing Nazi isn't cool either. If the shoe fits and all that.

 

=======================

 

Mrs. Mungo --I understand that YOU may feel hurt, but again, I am going to stand by my stance that if indeed someone ELSE is being hurtful, mean, cruel, dictatorial, and harsh about 'nursing no matter what' w/o taking into account anyone's personal situations, opinions, or feelings, I can't offer more than to let the phrase rest on those who ARE dictatorial, harsh, and intolerant of mothers who don't subscribe to a particular person's opinion.

 

i can be fairly tolerant or a lot of things, but someone taking personal offense where NONE was intended --and CLARIFIED that none is intended --is more than I'm willing to apologize for. I can't change how other people think and i can't change Webster's.

 

I can sit here and say that it makes ME hurt when others accuse Christians of "not following God's Plans" when i believe they may very well BE following God's Plans, but nobody's going to sit back and shut up over THAT, will they? No..... it is OK to question another's christian beliefs w/ your own opinion of theology, but it's not OK to use a word in a perfectly suitable context because someone else has a skewed understanding of the word or wants to take on the hurt of another.

 

It's ok to commiserate w/ a Muslim being bullied by another religion, but it's "not appropriate" to refer to Christians being bullied by another religion.

 

Political correctness is NOT my cuppa tea.

where's my catwoman avatar.......

 

If you don't like it, put me on ignore.

[Peek a Boo]

My mother, a devout Christian and a single mom, raised my sister and myself to understand that Christians are no less sinful than anyone else. The only difference between Christians and non is that Christians are supposed to acknowledge their sinful natures and acknowledge the need for salvation. Becoming a Christian, as I understand it, does not make one sin free, only free of sin.

 

Sometimes as Christians we think we're holier than others, but that is far, far, far, far from the truth. It is because of our sin that we need a savior, and even when we accept Christ as such, we still sin.

 

Christians are not perfect. And I know, because I am one. :)

 

Kimber, I am constantly amazed at how many people [myself at times and other Christians included] haven't figured out what makes a Christian a Christian.

[Slartibartfast]

Sis, if you had bothered reading the few posts in which i already discussed this [or bothered looking up the word NAZI], you'd learn that there is a LOT more to the term "nazi" than your limited study of history and vocabulary. Try searching for my posts on the matter. There is no insult to Jews unless they wish to be insulted no matter what.

 

Nobody is equating ANYONE to gassing people. sheesh. this is getting old explaining, but I'll take it as an opportunity every time. And for the record, not every person who belonged to the Nazi party gassed and murdered people. Read up on the history of the Nazi party while you're reading Webster's. Assumptions don't make one look very educated.

 

I am actually aware of what the Nazi party is today. It is for White Nationalists.

 

I am sure not all Nazis or "White Nationalists" do gas people but that doesn't mean I am ok with it nor do I think equating militant bfers with racists is ok.

 

I find your argument disturbing.

It might not be "cool", but it's spot on if one is being harsh, dictatorial, and intolerant. being one who literally fits the description of a Nursing Nazi isn't cool either. If the shoe fits and all that.

I stated I didn't harass people for their parenting choices but I guess reading isn't a requirement. :D

[Peek a Boo]

I am actually aware of what the Nazi party is today. It is for White Nationalists.

 

I am sure not all Nazis or "White Nationalists" do gas people but that doesn't mean I am ok with it nor do I think equating militant bfers with racists is ok.

 

I find your argument disturbing.

 

 

and i find people who fit the description of a Nursing Nazi disturbing and "not ok", so I guess we're even.

[Mrs Mungo]

Mrs. Mungo --I understand that YOU may feel hurt, but again, I am going to stand by my stance that if indeed someone ELSE is being hurtful, mean, cruel, dictatorial, and harsh about 'nursing no matter what' w/o taking into account anyone's personal situations, opinions, or feelings, I can't offer more than to let the phrase rest on those who ARE dictatorial, harsh, and intolerant of mothers who don't subscribe to a particular person's opinion.

 

i can be fairly tolerant or a lot of things, but someone taking personal offense where NONE was intended --and CLARIFIED that none is intended --is more than I'm willing to apologize for. I can't change how other people think and i can't change Webster's.

 

So...let's see if I can get this straight so we're clear.

 

It's BAD for Reya to give information from scientific studies that show breastmilk is superior to formula because it makes some moms feel bad.

 

It's FINE for you to throw around terms like Nazi (which certainly is NOT a synonym for fascist, at BEST those who espoused Nazi beliefs were racist) and if it hurts me...well...that's just collateral damage. Is that what you're saying?

 

A little more on Nazi ideals. One of the main tenants of the Nazi party was the idea that some people were Lebensunwertes Leben or "unworthy of life." This may have been because they were Jewish, Jehova's Witness, homosexual or whatever. I absolutely refuse to agree with Nazi apologism in any form, period. I happen to know quite a lot about the history.

 

It's ok to commiserate w/ a Muslim being bullied by another religion, but it's "not appropriate" to refer to Christians being bullied by another religion.

 

Have I said this somewhere? I must have missed it.

 

Not liking how you expressed your opinion on one topic and not liking you or your posts in general are two very different things and your attitude ticks me off a little. I thought we could talk to each other as equals and adults, my mistake.

 

eta: I am letting this be my final word on the topic. I had to try pretty hard to be level-headed about this and I'm still not sure I was successful.

[Slartibartfast]

and i find people who fit the description of a Nursing Nazi disturbing and "not ok", so I guess we're even.

 

How am I a "nursing Nazi" *exactly*

 

I believe I have posted here ONCE in regard to breastfeeding. I said my mother breastfed me but the Drs told her to give me rice cereal due to me being a big baby and now I have horrible food allergies.

 

I have food allergies, I must be a Nazi.

[Peek a Boo]

How am I a "nursing Nazi" *exactly*

 

I believe I have posted here ONCE in regard to breastfeeding. I said my mother breastfed me but the Drs told her to give me rice cereal due to me being a big baby and now I have horrible food allergies.

 

I have food allergies, I must be a Nazi.

 

did I call YOU a Nursing Nazi??? apparently not. please take the time to bother w/ a search and find out exactly what I said before making assumptions.

[Slartibartfast]

did I call YOU a Nursing Nazi??? apparently not. please take the time to bother w/ a search and find out exactly what I said before making assumptions.

 

and i find people who fit the description of a Nursing Nazi disturbing and "not ok", so I guess we're even.

 

Who are you referring to here?

 

I said I found your argument disturbing so you are just *randomly* calling someone a Nursing Nazi in your rebuttal to me?

[Peek a Boo]

So...let's see if I can get this straight so we're clear.

 

It's BAD for Reya to give information from scientific studies that show breastmilk is superior to formula because it makes some moms feel bad.

 

It's FINE for you to throw around terms like Nazi (which certainly is NOT a synonym for fascist, at BEST those who espoused Nazi beliefs were racist) and if it hurts me...well...that's just collateral damage. Is that what you're saying?

 

NO, I think it pretty darn arrogant of ANYONE to think that their opinions of nursing no matter what should be militantly applied to others. Did I call Reya a Nursing Nazi? if she came off like that to someone, then perhaps she might want to reconsider her presentation of her opinion. Did I not offer Webster's definition of Nazi, clarifying exactly what I was referencing?? please find that post so we ARE clear. i was obviously not defending the historical Nazi party.

 

YES, i am saying that if you are going to refuse to listen to clarifications about a term that is being used correctly, then I really can't help you, and yeah, we have then lost the adult conversation level. If you want to call that collateral damage, then I guess we are at an impasse.

 

 

and no --you did not say anything like that [that I'm aware of], but the whole tone of this entire thread is really starting to tick me off too.

[Peek a Boo]

Who are you referring to here?

 

I said I found your argument disturbing so you are just *randomly* calling someone a Nursing Nazi in your rebuttal to me?

 

 

I am REFERRING to anyone who is harsh, dictatorial, and intolerant of those who choose not to nurse, or those who choose to supplement. I am not "randomly" calling someone a Nursing Nazi --I am saying that I find people who fit that description disturbing. If you fit that description, then yes, i would consider you a nursing nazi. Do you think parents should be jailed on abuse charges for not nursing? Do you feel like you should pummel a family w/ your opinion that if they choose a method other than your idea of a "perfect nursing schedule" they are a failure and doing their children harm??

I could go on, but I think most reasonable people who have bothered reading my posts in this thread understand what I'm saying. they might not agree with it, but they know whether it applies to them or not and that I'm NOT calling anyone who supports nursing a Nursing Nazi. read up a bit.

[Slartibartfast]

So...let's see if I can get this straight so we're clear.

 

It's BAD for Reya to give information from scientific studies that show breastmilk is superior to formula because it makes some moms feel bad.

 

It's FINE for you to throw around terms like Nazi (which certainly is NOT a synonym for fascist, at BEST those who espoused Nazi beliefs were racist) and if it hurts me...well...that's just collateral damage. Is that what you're saying?

 

NO, I think it pretty darn arrogant of ANYONE to think that their opinions of nursing no matter what should be militantly applied to others. Did I call Reya a Nursing Nazi? if she came off like that to someone, then perhaps she might want to reconsider her presentation of her opinion. Did I not offer Webster's definition of Nazi, clarifying exactly what I was referencing?? please find that post so we ARE clear. i was obviously not defending the historical Nazi party.

 

YES, i am saying that if you are going to refuse to listen to clarifications about a term that is being used correctly, then I really can't help you, and yeah, we have then lost the adult conversation level. If you want to call that collateral damage, then I guess we are at an impasse.

 

 

and no --you did not say anything like that [that I'm aware of], but the whole tone of this entire thread is really starting to tick me off too.

 

 

FWIW Websters

 

1: a member of a German fascist party controlling Germany from 1933 to 1945 under Adolf Hitler2often not capitalized a: one who espouses the beliefs and policies of the German Nazis : fascist b: one who is likened to a German Nazi: a harshly domineering, dictatorial, or intolerant person

What was your argument again? The German Nazis gassed people.

 

When LLL invades Poland your point will have merit

[Peek a Boo]

My ARGUMENT is the definition you chose to ignore:

 

 

a harshly domineering, dictatorial, or intolerant person

 

really, if you are ready to imprison someone because they don't feed THEIR child the way you think they should, you are LIKENED to a German nazi in being HARSHLY DOMINEERING, DICTATORIAL, and INTOLERANT. Wanna look up "likened" while we're at it? really, it's all right there in the definition and my previous explanations.

 

 

see my posts below before making too many more assumptions:

 

there are 18 posts referencing the term "nazi" in this thread.

start at the bottom [my first post] and work your way up.

 

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/search.php?searchid=417301

[Slartibartfast]

My ARGUMENT is the definition you chose to ignore:

 

 

a harshly domineering, dictatorial, or intolerant person

 

really, if you are ready to imprison someone because they don't feed your child the way you think they should, you are LIKENED to a German nazi in being HARSHLY DOMINEERING, DICTATORIAL, and INTOLERANT. Wanna look up "likened" while we're at it? really, it's all right there in the definition and my previous explanations.

 

 

see my posts below before making too many more assumptions:

 

there are 18 posts referencing the term "nazi" in this thread.

start at the bottom [my first post] and work your way up.

 

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/search.php?searchid=417301

 

I quoted the dictionary as it is there in the Merriam Webster page.

 

1: a member of a German fascist party controlling Germany from 1933 to 1945 under Adolf Hitler2often not capitalized a: one who espouses the beliefs and policies of the German Nazis : fascist b: one who is likened to a German Nazi: a harshly domineering, dictatorial, or intolerant person

The first definition is a "German Nazi" and the second definition is "likened to a German Nazi"

 

IT ISN'T OK TO LIKEN PEOPLE TO NAZIS

[Mrs Mungo]

Peek-

 

I lied, I'm going to make one more post.

 

If you are adamant about using a term that *several* well-reasoned, intelligent posters said they find offensive then your point will be missed. When people say "hey, this term is offensive" sometimes it's best to say sorry and find another way to make your argument. ANY point you had is completely lost in your insistence on your correctness of the semantics of it.

[Peek a Boo]

I quoted the dictionary as it is there in the Merriam Webster page.

 

The first definition is a "German Nazi" and the second definition is "likened to a German Nazi"

 

IT ISN'T OK TO CALL PEOPLE NAZIS

I'm guessing you realize that ALL definitions of a word rarely apply to a word at once, right?? Dictionary use 101. And if you had bothered READING my clarifications, I already mentioned that I was specifically using defintion THREE, focussing on "a harshly domineering, dictatorial, or intolerant person."

 

Now, let's look at "likened" since that's giving you some trouble:

 

 

the word "likened" is a synonym for "compare":

 

1: to represent as similar : liken <shall I compare thee to a summer's day? — Shakespeare>

2 a: to examine the character or qualities of especially in order to discover resemblances or differences <compare your responses with the answers> b: to view in relation to <tall compared to me> <easy compared with the last test>

 

So I am going to EXAMINE the HORRIBLE qualities of a German Nazi, specifically the areas of being "a harshly domineering, dictatorial, or intolerant person."

 

Note that when it shared the definition, it did NOT reference the qualities of murderous evil people. there's a reason for that. You are missing it.

 

It is ABSOLUTELY ok to call someone who is exhibiting Nazi-like behavior a NAZI. If you don't like it, then I suggest you make it a life goal to make sure that those who support nursing aren't Nazi-like in their behavior.

 

Christians have acted like Nazis in blowing up abortion clinics.

Islamists have acted like Nazis in their jihads.

 

being "Nazi-like" isn't a new thing.

[Peek a Boo]

Peek-

 

I lied, I'm going to make one more post.

 

If you are adamant about using a term that *several* well-reasoned, intelligent posters said they find offensive then your point will be missed. When people say "hey, this term is offensive" sometimes it's best to say sorry and find another way to make your argument. ANY point you had is completely lost in your insistence on your correctness of the semantics of it.

 

Mrs. Mungo, considering the responses I have received privately in this thread, the "several" posters are in the minority. But I am absolutely up for pointing out the improper understanding of a term.

[Nestof3]

If you take this logic all the way out, why would you buckle up your children in car seats? Why would you insist they wear a bike helmet? Why would you even choose to feed them healthy food? If they're going to die anyway, what does it matter? And if God's going to do what God's going to do, why even pray? For me, this logic seems to be overreaching Calvinism and venturing into waters in which he never thought we would swim. Now, although I am reformed and the sovreignty of God has become a sweet doctrine to me, as Jonathan Edwards said, I see election/predestination/etc. existing side by side with man's right to choose.

 

Though your post was not the only one that mentioned seat belts, I will just copy and paste this one since it was the first one. I think I may have not been clear.

 

What I don't understand is the QF theology that breaks apart, in my opinion, according to logic.

 

QF theology states:

 

God opens and closes the individual womb

God is in total control of the birth and death of that womb

He creates the life in the womb and also controls the miscarriages

 

 

If a person believes God has this much control, my question is, why go to the hospital and rely on a doctor. The person has already stated that they believe God is in control of the womb. If this is true, and the person can trust God to open the womb, why can't the person trust God to finish it?

 

I personally believe life and death are part of the natural world He created. I believe babies come from eggs and sperm that join regardless of divine providence. It is a natural function like eating and having to rid the body of waste, and drinking water because the body needs water. I have seen many wombs which people would claim were "closed by God" yet man is able to open them by artificial means. This only proves that God does not open and close the womb.

 

I am not saying that God cannot and does not act at certain times for a specific purpose, but I do not claim to know when He is acting and when the natural laws are in effect.

 

The reason my cousin got pregnant with three different babies from three different fathers is because she had sex when she was ovulating each time. It is simply science.

 

I agree with you that life is a mixture of predestination and free will to choose. I just see that birth and death are indeed very much in our control, within our will, and I think it is okay to use the brain we have to determine how many children are best for our own family.

 

Yes, I wear a seatbelt for the same reason I look both ways before crossing a street. I don't believe that just because a car slams into another and kills a person that it must mean it was God's will any more than I believe that just because we are capable of getting pregnant means we should.

 

Now, as I've said before, I don't consider it a negative thing for any family to choose any number of children to have. I think it's wonderful if a family wants to have 15 children. Honestly I do. It's when they start trying to tell me that I don't trust God enough while they do, and then they refuse to take that trust path all the way. It seems we all have our own trust level. It seems to me that if you are willing to say for certainty that God will provide for your children because He opened the womb for each of them, then you should be willing to say that He will also provide a safe passage out of that womb.

 

I do not have that level of trust, nor do I claim to.

[Mrs Mungo]

Mrs. Mungo, considering the responses I have received privately in this thread, the "several" posters are in the minority.

 

You aren't the only one to have received private responses.

 

But I am absolutely up for pointing out the improper understanding of a term.

 

Your understanding isn't the only understanding.

 

I can understand YOU find it OK to call people Nazis. *I* do not. It may be OK in your community and/or culture. It is *not* considered OK in other communities and/or cultures. Open yourself up for the possibility that other people see it differently and that doesn't make them wrong.