kbordson

How serious is the "job" of being a Parent? I was going to make this as a poll, but I didn't really want the light and casual answers that one can check with a lil click. edit to add: and for the record, this is NOT about President Obamas speech. Just about parenting in general

I can.

It's almost as bad as quoting the Onion.

I could... but considering the unbiased skillz of that editorial... not worth the bother.

So... did you copy and paste that from the Onion?

Right now there is a flash no matter what he says and does. And it's not just his inexperience. Most of this flash was based on FUD intentionally spread by his opposition. Too much of the GOP is focused on saying 'no' rather than trying to contribute useful proposals. The party needs to move on - the Bush administration is over, and was a total failure. The midterm elections start in about 6 months and it would be great if new leaders (not quitters from Alaska) emerge. The problems are too significant to leave to a single party. WOW! Ya know..... there are just as many things wrong with that post as there are with many of the "GOP" posts/ attitudes. You do know that BOTH sides have messed up, right? You do know that BOTH sides have valid concerns and not so "valid" "paranoia" issues. Blindly following EITHER side is a folly.

Your bias is showing. (and for what it's worth, I have SEVERAL friends that game hunt. One even has a trophy room that I tend to refer to as the "Hall of Death". . . but just because it's something that I wouldn't do, does NOT mean that they are lesser people than me because they would do that. When you start feeling SUPERIOR because your beliefs are so much more "enlightened"... that's when you need to be careful to check your ego at the door. Likewise, you shouldn't judge a young woman that has an abortion in her past... which I think SHOULD hit pretty close to home here. Peoples decisions are based on his/her beliefs and expectations out of life. What the choice of one is does NOT have to be the choice of others. And acting "better" because you wouldn't hunt or you would NEVER have an abortion or you believe/don't believe in "alternative lifestyles" .... just shows that you're not "better.")

I agree. Parents SHOULD cover the morality of sex/relationships/ect. But Health class is an appropriate place to discuss medical topics - biology, pathology, infectious agents. It is an appropriate place to discuss cancer, teratogens (smoking) and safe practices. I don't think that it would be considered the parents failure to have health classes in school. Should the parents teach, model and expect healthy lifestyles? OF COURSE. But a lot of people don't honestly KNOW why they can't take antibiotics when they have the "cold." Now, if the parents are competent to teach those subjects, then sure, fine, wonderful... as long as it is taught at home. edit to correct spelling errors.... HEY, I never claimed to be competent to teach spelling.

The spirit of the class is good: Don't bully. My opinions from considering BOTH sides though. 1. The book should NOT be banned. (Tango makes three - the gay penguin book) 2. School should NOT teach K-5 about sexuality. Health class in middle/high school should cover those topics. So... a lesson plan on bullying - ok. But keep the added topics out. Sounds simple enough. Why would the schools fight to include such controverial debate?

The location of my wife. Why would you check for me? I don't care if you look! that's very gracious but I respectfully call BS Why? Not all women are threatened by other women. I have even pointed out NICE examples of the female form to my husband... COMPLETELY confident that he would NOT be pushing me to the side, running over there to sniff at "strange."

Well... I guess if even nuns use it... why not? I probably could somehow work it into my work day. ummmmm. No.

Doctor, Happy Birthday!! Doctor.

The funny thing is, there is no war. On the topic of THIS THREAD, we are actually in agreement. As far as "showing off". . . . you know I don't need to do that. I'm just ordinary and normal. I blend. No need to show off.

"Is that a speculum in your speedo, or are you just happy to see me?"

Yes... I've seen one or two do ... rather silly things. But I said MOST of the men... MOST of them don't seem to do much more than watch the short skirt walk by or glance at the view of cleavage... now, if they're thinking more distracting thoughts... I can't argue for that. But MOST seem to have it together. It's not that we have it together; It's just that our tongues have gone rigid, and we know if we try to talk, a bunch on incoherent babel will come out, making a less favorable impression than if we just stay quiet. And trust me, our thoughts are rated "X". Tongues? I thought it was something else that would go rigid? But... even with X (or R or PG13) thoughts... I would still give most of you's guys more credit that that study might infer. I just don't think that a pretty girl would be that paralyzing to most guys, but not having the deficient Y chrm, I guess I might not think the same.

Dude?! How can you "check" the vagina? Do you carry your wife's speculums around on the beach?!

Exactly my point (#1 in this thread): Quod erat demonstrandum. Ummm. still nope.

i think he's managing you very well

Not a hate thing. See my post in the "coming apart at the seams" thread - I replied to that one first. (it's QUITE annoying that there are two threads on this)

Actually... it's not a larger audience that is the problem. It's a much smaller audience. An audience of one, two, or maybe a couple more. Personally, I don't have any progeny of my own... but that speech sounds VERY similar to what I have been saying to my stepson for years. Trying to get him to "tolerate" school... trying to get him to do sylvan... but the REALITY is that a speech from the president wouldn't have changed him. Interest from his PARENTS is what he needed. There are some things in the speech that I don't like. (call me whatever... but there are parts that I truly didn't like... if I had a child, I would want my child to get an education for THEMSELVES, to further his/her knowledge, for his/her future... not for what they ccan do for their country; and I don't like all the personal "character development" type stuffs... honestly, most kids would think it would probably be "kinda boring") But overall, it's "not bad" - I would give it a C+, maybe even a B. But, I still don't want government elected officials talking to children.

Oh come on! We have seen those old pics of yours; We know you have seen guys get stupid in person! Yes... I've seen one or two do ... rather silly things. But I said MOST of the men... MOST of them don't seem to do much more than watch the short skirt walk by or glance at the view of cleavage... now, if they're thinking more distracting thoughts... I can't argue for that. But MOST seem to have it together. Maybe it is an experience thing like John relates to... cuz otherwise how would HE even function enough to breathe... being married to such a hottie!

For all your claims to be so open-minded... that comment seems rather xenophobic. Or are you "joking" about it... "joking" in a backhanded, insulting way.... kinka like other "jokes" in this thread. The "not funny" kind of jokes - like the initial photo.

You don't have the FREEDOM not to pay income tax either. This is just another right wing scare tactic brought to you by a bunch of proven liars. I posted a direct link to HR 3200, specifically to that point. Read the Bill.

For the sake of my vanity.... cuz most of the men that I talk to haven't lost they mind. I'm going to argue against that study - an "n" of 40? What kind of statistical significance can you get with 40? (cuz I wouldn't want to discuss the "pretty woman" part)

This one is more like a fine - to punish those who claim that they cannot afford health insurance, yet they somehow make enough money to own a rig and skydive. After seeing quite a few examples right here, now I fully support this part of the bill. But is kinda supports mnealtx statements - allows access to income/tax records to calculate that "fine" or "tax" or whatever term is to be used. You will not have the FREEDOM to be without. Why do some actually make the CHOICE to be without. Because they might want the doctor to actually be working FOR them and not for the Government. I have some friends that are actually do feel that way. They don't want insurance nor would they want the government plan. But with this bill - they will be "fined" on that choice. Should someone be given the choice to be without insurance? Depends on if they would be able to pay their bills independently if they were to need care. And note... there are also exemptions in the bill for "religious" beliefs (amish, maybe scientologist?) Is that a violation of church and state? Everyone NEEDS insurance... well... except this religious group. They don't need to pay.