pattygreen

She does now.

lellow, I shall agree to disagree then, as you say. ok bye.

WOW!!! Unbelievable. Are you wound a little tight today? What's with the defense? We're only discussing breast feeding here, not politics or religion or anything. Did I say that? The kid is fat and can wait for his food till he gets home? No. I said "at that age, a child can wait till he gets home to have breast milk and he can be given something else to satisfy him till then." And as for offending the baby, Babies are not able to comprehend what's happening at their age. Get real. BTW, Breast milk at 1 or 2 or 3 years old is not their meal.

She's got round the clock care, a home, people to help her, and the finances to do it. What's your problem now? I told you she would be rich and you all were upset that it would be on your dime. I knew it wouldn't. She can thank all of you for making her so popular and for making all of this possible, though.

This Clebrity Science article states that it will cost her $135,000. a month??!! just to have care for the 8 babies. NOT. If I hired 4 CNA's (2 babies each) at $10./hr. for 24 hours a day it would cost $29,760. per month. She doesn't need anyone to care for her first 6. She could continue to do that. How everyone OVER exagerates the expense of it is beyond me.

Oh, you'll get what you voted for alright! A national debt that far outweighs what ANY past president has ever dreamed of spending. (And all the past presidents put together have never spent that much) Do you understand that with just the stimulus package alone, you could spend 1 million dollars a DAY for the next 480 YEARS, YEARS!!!! and not reach the amount of money that Obama proposed to spend in his first 2 months of being president??!! NO Joke!!! AND he claims to have the national deficit cut in half by the end of his first term. :thumbup: What a dreamer! It's just not possible. Our kids and great, great grandkids will be in debt forever. When the people turn their hearts away from God and choose to live their own way, He will give them what they desire. So, yes, you will get what you voted for, but in the end you may not like it.

bjean, they are very important counts, as you say, and unless we agree upon them, we shall always be in opposition where abortion and choice is concerned. So, now we see how the debate can never be resolved in society. Pro choicers and anti-abortionists will never see eye to eye and come to an agreement concerning laws in this country. Since laws are made by humans with differing views on when life actually begins, and since there could be either view in office at any time, I think that every woman needs to consider what their own conscience speaks to them, and do accordingly. I can only hope to convey the message that every individual life is worthy of respect, despite how it came into being. Because I feel strongly that life begins at conception, I will continue to share my views with those considering abortion, for the babys sake. God bless.

I don't think a 1 year old or older needs to be breast fed in public. By this age you can give him a cracker or babyfood to satisfy him till you get home. An infant, yes, because they are usually fed on demand, and need to be nurished asap. Don't exagerate. You're not 'suffocating' them by being discreet. I asked a few men how they feel about it, and they said they didn't care if women breastfed in public, but were more comfortable if they covered. Believe me when I say, It's not offensive at all to me. I wished I could have breast fed my 7, but I wasn't able. I know it is the natural way to feed your child. God provided the breasts for this reason. But the breasts are also a sexual body part, and because of this, I feel they need to be covered.

What specific 'word' here offended you? I re- read it all. Was it: marriage not being a human 'right'? Is it: marriage is a God ordained covenant? Is it: homosexuality is a sin? Or is it: that they need to call their relationship something other than 'marriage'? How does any of these words offend you? Like I said, all of these things are what God says about homosexuals and marriage, not me. I personally don't care what anyone else chooses to do. It only bothers me that God himself is offended by our actions.

Most men don't have an issue with women breastfeeding in public, and would turn their head. But if moms were discreet, they could stand there and chat and not have to turn their head and be uncomfortable. Some woman just want to do what they feel is their 'right' to do and don't care how it might affect others around them. They have a 'too bad for you' attitude. 'If you don't like it, don't look' attitude. 'I have my rights' attitude. Sheesh! Just be discreet why don't ya?!

You get what you vote for. Wait and see.

The bible is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. God has not changed his viewpoint on the issue of homosexuality, so it is current and relevent. It may not be loving to those who are homosexuals, cause who wants to hear that your lifestyle is offensive to your creator. Not me. I know. My lifestyle was offensive to God for many years as a glutton. It hurt to know that he was displeased with my sin. If what God says about homosexuals living in sin offends you, then your problem is with God, not me.

We conservatives want limited government, public morality and free enterprise. I believe the government is only supposed to provide services that an individual can not such as military, police, fire, emergency, road care. But instead, it is a fat sow that lazy people suckle from. I would like to see a prohibition of abortion and same sex marriage licenses, a support of the 2nd ammendment right to bare and keep arms, the death penalty and stronger law enforcement, parental control of education, private medical care and retirement plans, weakening or canceling of failed social support programs, support enforcement of current laws regarding immigration and tightening of border security, lower taxes, a strong national defense, less power for the federal government and more for local and state government, support of laws against pornography, and term limits for gov. employees.

Why do people compare the issue of same sex marriage with black people and slavery? They are two different issues. Slaves had a right to be free. And it had nothing to do with their skin color, it was because they are human beings. Homosexuals don't have a right to be married, for marriage is not a human right. Marriage is a GOD ordained covenant between a man and a woman where they say vows before Him. Homosexuality is a sin before God, black skin color is not. Therefore, if homosexuals want to have a relationship with someone of the same sex, that is as committed as a man and a woman who marry, then they need to form their own covenant of some kind. But not marriage. That's God's covenant and he instituted it for MEN and WOMEN. Call it a civil union or whatever name you like, but 'marriage' is already being used. Whether homosexuals are born that way or not is irrelevent. The act of sex is a choice that every human has. Homosexuals may choose to sleep with the same sex or choose not to.

Whether it was invented today or in the beginning of time, what does that matter. Either way it's still not right to me.

I'm not saying that men lusting after a breast feeding breast is ok, I'm just saying why put it out there. The fact is, that men like to look at boobs. It's just the way it is. They are turned on by boobs, so why would any mom want to expose them, even if they are breast feeding? Let's look at that side of the issue.

I said she sounded high and mighty because of her saying "you're the one who has a problem with it, so you go throw a blanket over your head." Breast feeding is already 'normalized'. Everyone accepts it as a way to feed your baby. It's the 'revealing' of the breast, which is a sexual part of the womans body, that is not 'normal'. Why can't women be discreet about showing their boob while they breastfeed? Is that too much to ask?

The main focus is on the embryo more so than the mother simply because the embryo can not defend himself and the mother is the one who is doing the deed. None the less, antiabortionists DO care about the mother, but not at the expense of the baby. I'm sure that if the prochoicer saw the embryo as a life from the moment of conception as we do, they would understand our plight and why we are sooooo against abortion. For if you KNEW that life began at conception, there would be no debate here. Since you don't believe that life begins at conception, wouldn't you say that it's better to be safe than sorry? What if life DOES begin at conception, and you are all wrong? You've been killing human beings without realizing it. On the other hand, if I'm wrong, what's there to lose? Noones life is at stake.

Bingo!:biggrin:

You seem to have quite a high and mighty attitude about your right to breast feed anywhere, anyway, anyhow. If someone is uncomfortable with your breast being exposed, wouldn't you want to relieve them of their discomfort? You are right when you say that at one time it was offensive to show a womans ankles, and it isn't now. But it still is uncomfortable today for some to witness breastfeeding. So be it. If in your opinion, it isn't a question of modesty, then I guess you will go on making people feel uncomfortable while you feed your child when it could be just as comfortable for you to be discreet. I personally am not uncomfortable witnessing a woman feed her baby, but I can understand why someone might be. Especially a man. The breast is a natural way for babies to get fed, but it's also a ntural way for a man to get turned on. Let's say that a man feels it is normal to pick his nose,(whether you think it's normal or not) and if everyone did it in public, it would become less offensive. Should he pick his nose? Who cares if it might offend some? It's normal to him. In all things, we should try to think of the other person. Your baby won't be offended if he gets fed under wraps.

I used that analogy to point out that we all do things that we shouldn't have. I used the gluttony thing, cause most here could relate to that. It doesn't make us crazy, just that we all make bad decisions in life without thinking through the consequences at times. Also, even though you say that her choices affected her children, I can say that our choices to overeat don't only affect us.. What about our children and loved ones? We are too fat to run around and play with our kids, we die an early death and others have to raise them, our Doctor bills for obesity related health problems have to be paid by someone, etc. Our sin of gluttony affects others, too, not just ourselves. I understand that these are 2 different analogies, but not really. The sins of one affects everyone.

President Obama has one thing and one thing only going for him. He can talk. He makes the best speeches. But that won't save the economy. He is VERY self confident. So much so, he seems to me almost arrogant. Proverbs teach that 'when pride comes, then comes disgrace, but with humility comes wisdom.' He is not a very humble man. The bible states that 'the wisdom of man is foolishness to God.'

Why not? In this world, anything goes. I'm not saying I agree with this, cuz I don't at all. I believe the design of our children should be up to God. But, the world wants to do things their way, not God's way. So, they will reap the consequences of their choices. IVF is now going to be supported by your tax dollars for stem cell research. We can kill baby human beings for research so we can find cures for other human beings now. Before it was... "we can only kill babies if MOM doesn't want to carry them for 9 months", now it's... "We can kill babies to find cures for diseases, too." So, this doesn't surprise me at all. What I don't understand is why anyone would want to choose the eye color or hair or skin color of their child. Isn't that just one of the beautiful surprises that await mom and dad after the birth? I personally never wanted to even know the gender of my children before they were born. But that's just me. I loved the surprise of it in the delivery room. As far as where do we draw the line, I say do it naturally. God is the author of life.

Who said she needed a loan?

No, I didn't stop to think that the counseling wasn't because of having an abortion because that's what they were refering it to. They said that people get counseling after an abortion. I asked... Why? For feelings of guilt or sorrow. Why would they feel guilty or sorrowful over what they believe is a blob of tissue? I understand that you may have needed counseling for your situation. But that's not what I am talking about. I'm talking about needing counseling because of the 'choice' they made.