Cappy... do you live in Chris's closet?

I'm going to leave for Gliese 581 c (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gliese_581_c). Anyone coming with me?
You had better get going, it seems to be a long way off. If you see this guy tell him I said hi.

3391

Liquid water? On this planet there is liquid water - as opposed to powdered water, gas water?
I mean - is there any other kind of water?

Liquid water? On this planet there is liquid water - as opposed to powdered water, gas water?
I mean - is there any other kind of water?Yes, gaseous and solid (ice).

Don't forget bottled, spring, desighner, reverse osmosis triple filtered, and tap water.

Well, okay, I forgot about solid.

Taking prayer out of schools
That was a bad idea...

Taking prayer out of schools
That was a bad idea...

Why so?

Ive seen several grids showing the drop in morals of students from the time (1979? Ish) that they took it out. The facts are that the moralsof this country were based upon a christian character. Love thy God, Love thy Neighbor, don't lie don't steal obey your parents (in which is right) don't commit adultery, do not bow down to false idols, don't murder, don't want what's not yours, and keep the sabbath holy. (Way out of order I know)
But look where we are.
Sex is rampant, perversion just as much
We murder
We lie
We disrespect our parents
We get drunk on sat, sleep in on sun.
Money is our idol.
Most of us say "theres probably a God out there, but theres no telling which is right"
We steal, wanting what's not ours
And we hate other people

And yes I believe that this is a result of taking God, and communicstion with God out of school. Why? Because you are taking young, impressionable people, teaching them about life and logic, telling them in essance, the laws of our God, but when they ask "why is it that we have to follow these rules?" there's no answer.
Leaving them to believe that morals are rules set up by society to govern and control...
Leaving them wanting to rebel, because we all just die. End of story.

Hello snave:

Not bad stuff, but shouldn't parents teach that at home? The schools have enough trouble teaching the three R's. I don't want them teaching about God too. By the way, whose God are they going to teach is right? Yours or mine?

excon

If you need a book to give you morals then there may be another problem present. I really don't need anyone to tell me not to murder or sleep with my neighbour's wife or respect my parents.

For me to say that them teaching of any other God than mine- the God the of the Bible, Jesus Christ, then I would either be saying "I dont believe what i say i do"
Or "I do believe everything in the bible, I just dont care if youre going to hell"

And I do.

But so many Christians settle, and compromise, and submit, which really makes you wonder, doesn't it?

So in answer to your question: Our schools should teach of the God of Jacob and Isaac.

For me to say any different would mean I don't care

-When I do

I wish prayer was back in school, also. I remember Bible study when I was in school - although it was gone by the time I was in second grade.
But, I think the way the world is today - it wouldn't work - just because, we would all argue about "Who's God - your's or mine". And nothing would get accomplished.
We teach our child about God, we are proud that at age 6 she has asked Jesus into her heart as her one true Saviour.
I believe the Bible is a guide on how to live your life. I wish more people did also.

excon brings up a good point.

Which God should we pray too? And in choosing one God, are we then saying that that is THE only God? I am not sure if that is the message we should be sending.

Besides, religion is a personal choice and each personal has a different relationship with their God. To place it in the classroom would generalize religon. Making it far less a personal relationship, and more a mandated action

I'm going to play devil's advocate with you, Snave.

Prayer in public schools is a violation of the separation of Church and state. State meaning "my taxpayer money" and Church being "a select church, usually Christianity".

If you want your kids to pray, send them to a parochial school. I'm not paying taxes to teach kids to pray. Better yet, teach them to pray at home! Teachers are overworked enough as it is, without making them pray to a god they may or may not believe in. *Teachers* should not be the ones teaching kids morals. That's the job of *parents*.

Also... I think that fewer people would have a problem with prayer in schools if it weren't for the fact that the people pushing for it are predominantly Christian. How about... we pray to Hindu gods on Monday, and have Buddhist prayers on Tuesday. Wednesdays would be for Muslim prayers, and Thursdays for pagans. That would leave Fridays open for atheists to just have a moment of silence for non-prayer. How does that work for you? It's prayer!

Your statistics are skewed. There's a huge decline in parental responsibility in the timeframe that you're mentioning as well.

As far as the rest goes... here's a quote for you:

The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they allow disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children now are tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers. `

That quote is usually attributed to Socrates. Socrates was around before Christ was even reputed to be born. The problems you're listing aren't new problems. They're not even problems that were fixed for a while by the conversion of half the world to Christianity. Heck, people who call themselves Christian have murdered and abused and disrespected authority for hundreds of years!

Personally, I'd pull my kid out of any public school that did have prayer. That, or I'd fight to have my non-majority (and any other religion I could think of) prayers heard as often as Christian prayers.

And this is why we won't live to see prayer back in school...

I agree with you Syn.

Agreed 100% with Synnen. The culprit is not lack of prayer in school it's the steady decline in quality parenting.

No one can agree on anything. Religion is just one of them. As a Christian - I would have a problem if my daughter was asked to pray to Budda or any other god. Her one true saviour is Jesus Christ. So, I would pull her out of a school that required her to pray to anyone else but Him.
We are so divided.

Excon brings up a good point.

Which God should we pray too? And in choosing one God, are we then saying that that is THE only God? I am not sure if that is the message we should be sending.

Besides, religion is a personal choice and each personal has a different relationship with their God. To place it in the classroom would generalize religon. Making it far less a personal relationship, and more a mandated action

Look, me offending 1000 people is worth it if one believes. A persons soul is always going to be more important. People are going to get offended, especially in this country, where ever word is tact filled and people never really convey the message they want.
Something I know is that you can never argue anyone into your belief system, you can never force it either...
But to say that its completely against the rules?

Christianity is not cigarette smoke...
Its not going to hurt you

Let the kids pray, and read their Bible.
If you want to say don't let the teachers preach to the kids
That's fine.But don't condemn a child or teen for loving their God, or wanted to let someone else see what they have found

I am a devote Catholic. But, I agree with Syn. School is a place for learning, not for worship. UNLESS you chose to send your child to a school that combines both together. I would be personally offended if any person told my child how, when, or who to worship. It is not fair to ask those who do not believe to pray. Just as it is not fair to ask someone to pray to a God that is not their God.

I don't think pushing religon on anyone, in schools or door to door, or any other way is right. Religon is a personal choice.

As a Christian - I would have a problem if my daughter was asked to pray to Budda or any other god. Well at least you understand where we come from. :)

Look, me offending 1000 people is worth it if one believes. a persons soul is always going to be more important. People are going to get offended, especially in this country, where ever word is tact filled and people never really convey the message they want.
Something I know is that you can never argue anyone into your belief system, you can never force it either...
but to say that its completely against the rules?

Christianity is not cigarette smoke...
Its not going to hurt you

Let the kids pray, and read their Bible.
If you want to say dont let the teachers preach to the kids
thats fine.But dont condemn a child or teen for loving their God, or wanted to let someone else see what they have found

School districts cannot offend people like an individual can. And they cannot chose one religon over another. That is a form of prejudice.

Im not saying take a particular time and devote it to prayer, Im saying that locally 3 teens have been suspended from schools in my region because they were reading their bible or praying. Granted parents are not doing their jobs...
But don't punish the kids who do have good parents

Hello again, snave:

Offending me is a hell of a way to enlighten me. In fact, what you want to do is indoctrinate me. I don't like being offended. I offend back.

excon

Last year, in kindergarten - my daughter would pray at snack time. Ask God to bless her food. Her teacher told her not to because it wasn't "allowed". (some of you may have heard this story before) We told her to just say it in her head - we didn't want to go toe to toe with the school.
At Thanksgiving this year we had a "feast" in the classroom - her teacher was going to have them say grace - but there is a muslim child in the class and she didn't want to offend anyone. So we didn't.
My daughter did however say her grace.
She asks people all the time if they go to church or if the believe in Jesus. Keep in mind she is 6 - if they say no, she tells them they are going to go to hell.
That is how she has been taught. That is what we believe. And kids are brutally honest - I do not tell her not to say these things - because if I tell her not to, does it tell her that she should be ashamed of what she is learned or that what she has learned is wrong?

I am not sure where you live, but where I teach if students read a bible during lunch or study hall that is their personal time and they can do what they want.

Snave, how could they be suspended? All they were doing was praying and reading? Out loud or to themselves? Were they attempting to preach?
I don't get it.
Is that a lawsuit waiting to happen?

I agree with you too Synnen. I was thinking along the same line.

Separation of Church and State is one of the basic founding priniciples, and considered the most important one to the founding fathers, of the United States. It is part of the First Amendment to our Constitution.

Our religions, our values, our moral code of conduct, must be taught at home.

Snavelover, I think the problems you are pointing out are problems because we seem to be lacking in parental skills more than anything else. People expect teachers to be babysitters and teach children right from wrong. That is the real problem. Some parents are not spending the time with their children necessary, or others are lacking a moral compass themselves. I have seen supposedly religious people, lie, steal, cheat, covet,. all the sins. There has been a breakdown in traditional values, not from lack of religion being taught in schools, but from parental guidance and teaching. Parental responsibility seems to be in crisis in this country.

Look, me offending 1000 people is worth it if one believes. a persons soul is always going to be more important.

The problem with that is you don't have a monopoly on what saving a soul is about. You think you do, but you don't. I don't either, NO ONE does!

I've said this before. I do not believe that the teachings of Jesus Christ, teachings that spoke about love and peace, about the golden rule, can be reconciled with a teaching that says either you worship this way or you will be damned.


Let the kids pray, and read their Bible.
If you want to say dont let the teachers preach to the kids
thats fine.

Yes, let the kids pray, but at an appropriate time in an appropriate place. A PUBLIC school is not such a time or place.


But dont condemn a child or teen for loving their God

I agree, but aren't you doing just that? Aren't you saying we should condemn someone for loving their god if it isn't the one you believe in?


or wanted to let someone else see what they have found

Again I agree as long as the person is interested. But too often its trying to force what they found.

She asks people all the time if they go to church or if the believe in Jesus. Keep in mind she is 6 - if they say no, she tells them they are going to go to hell.
That is how she has been taught. That is what we believe. And kids are brutally honest - I do not tell her not to say these things - because if I tell her not to, does it tell her that she should be ashamed of what she is learned or that what she has learned is wrong?
Along with teaching her your beliefs about hell, you might also include some instruction about tact and respect for others' beliefs.

Holy Crap, I must have missed that post OG.

NowWhat, you really let your 6 year old daughter tell people they are going to hell if they are not of your religion?

I think that Scott did a nice job addressing Snave.

Maybe instead of focusing on religon in a public school we should focus our time on teaching our students acceptance of others beliefs, differences, and ideas. Accepting that others might think differently then you, might worship differently then you, and might look differently then you, just might make the world a better place.

Tuscany, what you are suggesting is what I was taught in school. They did not teach religion in school when I was a kid and that was a long, long time ago. Pre 1979 (way pre). We were taught that we should accept and appreciate the differences found in this world. My parents taught me the same, taught me their religion, taught me the difference between right and wrong and, I believe my moral compass is just fine.

Teachers aren't babysitters and should not be expected to teach moral grounding. I wouldn't want a stranger teaching my children the difference between right and wrong. I want complete control over that and would take full responsibility for it. Therein lies the problem with this country. Not enough parents willing to do their jobs or knowing how to do their jobs properly.

Frankly, I have always been of a mind that we should teach a full year of parenting classes in schools. There should be tests. Use the 3 strike rule. Any student that completely flunks his/her final exam, 3 times in a row, should be sterilized. Why don't we do that? I think that solution would resolve the problems that snave states are so rampantly out of control, much more efficiently than teaching religion in schools.

Ruby, I love you.

I've been preaching sterilization of people too stupid to parent for a few years now! I'm so glad I'm not the only one that thinks that breeding is not a "right" but a privilege.

Ive seen several grids showing the drop in morals of students from the time (1979?? ish) that they took it out. The facts are that the moralsof this country were based upon a christian character. Love thy God, Love thy Neighbor, dont lie dont steal obey your parents (in which is right) dont commit adultery, do not bow down to false idols, dont murder, dont want whats not yours, and keep the sabbath holy. (Way out of order i know)
but look where we are.
Sex is rampant, perversion just as much
We murder
we lie
we disrespect our parents
we get drunk on sat, sleep in on sun.
money is our idol.
most of us say "theres probably a God out there, but theres no telling which is right"
we steal, wanting whats not ours
and we hate other people

And yes i believe that this is a result of taking God, and communicstion with God out of school. Why? Because you are taking young, impressionable people, teaching them about life and logic, telling them in essance, the laws of our God, but when they ask "why is it that we have to follow these rules?" theres no answer.
Leaving them to believe that morals are rules set up by society to govern and control...
leaving them wanting to rebel, because we all just die. end of story.



Don't mean to be rude Snave but all this coming from someone who openly admits to this below. So how come the Bible and God hasn't helped you have any morals and respect?

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/dating/im-so-rebellious-hate-88324.html

It's a bit hard for you to mount and argument in its favour given some of your posts!

Great call Skell! Snave, you sound like two different people. WTH? What gives?

Last year, in kindergarten - my daughter would pray at snack time. Ask God to bless her food. Her teacher told her not to because it wasn't "allowed". (some of you may have heard this story before) We told her to just say it in her head - we didn't want to go toe to toe with the school.
At Thanksgiving this year we had a "feast" in the classroom - her teacher was going to have them say grace - but there is a muslim child in the class and she didn't want to offend anyone. So we didn't.
My daughter did however say her grace.
She asks people all the time if they go to church or if the believe in Jesus. Keep in mind she is 6 - if they say no, she tells them they are going to go to hell.
That is how she has been taught. That is what we believe. And kids are brutally honest - I do not tell her not to say these things - because if I tell her not to, does it tell her that she should be ashamed of what she is learned or that what she has learned is wrong?

WOW!! I am greatly offended by this. I find this very sad actually and a perfect example of what is wrong with today's society. You want to preach tolerance and love but you find it OK for your daughter to show complete intolerance and lack of love and respect for her piers. No wonder the world is in the shape it is. And by the sounds of it is only going to get worse by the time your daughters generation is old enough to vote.

Im not Muslim and if I had child your daughters class I would also be offended if he / she was made to say grace. I would much prefer they pray to the FSM, but I bet you wouldn't.

And your daughter isn't being honest by telling other children that they are going to hell if they do not believe in Jesus Christ. Not in the slightest. She is being disrespectful and downright rude. Now she doesn't know that and one can't blame her. The blame is squarely on your shoulders and I find it appalling that you justify her behaviour.

Last year, in kindergarten - my daughter would pray at snack time. Ask God to bless her food. Her teacher told her not to because it wasn't "allowed". (some of you may have heard this story before) We told her to just say it in her head - we didn't want to go toe to toe with the school.
At Thanksgiving this year we had a "feast" in the classroom - her teacher was going to have them say grace - but there is a muslim child in the class and she didn't want to offend anyone. So we didn't.
My daughter did however say her grace.
She asks people all the time if they go to church or if the believe in Jesus. Keep in mind she is 6 - if they say no, she tells them they are going to go to hell.
That is how she has been taught. That is what we believe. And kids are brutally honest - I do not tell her not to say these things - because if I tell her not to, does it tell her that she should be ashamed of what she is learned or that what she has learned is wrong?

I have to go along with the other comments about this appalling behavior. I will repeat what I said in my other post to Snave:

I've said this before. I do not believe that the teachings of Jesus Christ, teachings that spoke about love and peace, about the golden rule, can be reconciled with a teaching that says either you worship this way or you will be damned.

You need to teach your daughter tolerance and respect for other views. I know its hard and confusing, but that's what parenting is about. But I ask you, what is worse, confusing your child or teaching them bigotry?

Are you kidding me? Ignorance? Who's ignorant? She is 6 years old. She believes in God. She wants to know why people go to hell - we tell her. She wants to know how people go to heaven - we tell her.
Children are blunt - they haven't learned the art of political correctness.
We send her to church - she asks the same questions to them. She gets her answers. Church and God are a part of her life. When she asks her friends if they go to church and if they believe in God - she is asking because she got answers from her parents and the church.
I am not going to tell her not to say what she believes. She is not wrong in what she says. If you do not believe that Jesus died on the cross for your sins and that he is your one true saviour - then you go to hell. Pretty simple. That is what I believe.
I find it offensive that you would expect me not teach my daughter to STAND for what she believes in.

If you were born in another country other than the on you live in than you would be labeled by many as an extremist. That is exactly what you sound like in my opinion.

If I were to adopt your attitude then you and your daughter would be going to what I consider hell. If heaven is full of people with attitudes like yours then I think ill take my chances with the devil thanks.

Standing up for what you believe and having tolerance and respect for others are two complete different things. Your daughter and you aren't standing up for what you believe in. Not even close.

I find it wonderful that your daughter has chosen Jesus as her one and only Saviour. I really do. And I hope that choice leads her to living a life full of good morals and love. I would also hope that that choice she has made would help her learn respect and tolerance but it appears it doesn't. So in my opinion it looks as though she has made a bad choice. If in fact she has made the choice herself. As a 7 year old I highly doubt it!

Come on people - she is 6 years old. She doesn't know that there are Muslims and Buddhist and all of that. She doesn't know that everyone Doesn't believe the way she does. More than one God? That is foreign to her right now. She isn't rude - she ask a question and then tells what she has been taught.
She is blunt - most kids are. I don't know of any kid that doesn't say exactly what is on their mind.
This is what we believe - this is what we teach her. And for the record - she did make the decision on her own. We had nothing to do with it. She was at church and when I picked her up - she came out and was so happy that "Now she gets to go to heaven and have the supper." (the Lord's Supper if you don't know - grape juice and really hard bread)
We are laying our foundation - when she is old enough to understand that everyone doesn't believe the way she does - tolerance will be taught.

And we aren't extremist - far from it. I know what I believe and that is what my daughter is being taught. How is that extreme.
She is being taught math too, when she asks what is 2 +2 and her friend gives the answer 5, she tells them they are wrong there too.
You may say that is totally different and to you it may be. Not for her. This is what she is being taught. The fundamentals of the Bible at this point. She can't quote scripture or anything, but she knows the basics. She understands what happens if you don't believe in God. She also invites these kids to church and most come - half of her 1st grade class attends on Wednesday night. She has more love for other people than most kids I know. If she thinks that she has upset you, she apologizes - after she cries about it because she doesn't like the idea of hurting your feelings. If her friends show interest in her things - she gives them the item. More stuff leaves my house because of that.
So to say I am teaching certain things like not showing love - you have no idea what you are talking about.

I accept what you are saying. She is too young to understand it all. And yes children do say what they think. As I said I never put blame on her. I was just a bit concerned that you appeared to be justifying her actions and indeed encourage them.

Your last line gives me some comfort. That is good. But some of your previous posts made it appear that not only were you OK with her telling other kids they were going to hell but you were actually proud of it.

It is the same old story. Not everyone thinks the way you do. Your god and your heaven is not a place I want to be, nor by the sounds of it would be welcome, if involves the intolerance I see practiced by many of its 'residents'.

If you do not believe that Jesus died on the cross for your sins and that he is your one true saviour - then you go to hell. Pretty simple. That is what I believe.
I find it offensive that you would expect me not teach my daughter to STAND for what she believes in.

And you are entitled to believe that. I am happy you find comfort in that. But you are not entitled to impose your beliefs on others.

What might happen if your daughter has a friend whose parents have taught their child that if you they are kind and considerate and respect others, if they don't lie or break the law, that they will go to heaven. But those parents don't believe in Christ as the savior. Can you imagine the trauma your daughter might cause to that child by telling her she's going to hell??

How dare you take that risk?

And think how your daughter might feel if causes such traume in a friend?

Try thinking of the consequences of your actions instead of being so self absorbed in your own beliefs.

"If you do not believe that Jesus died on the cross for your sins and that he is your one true saviour - then you go to hell. Pretty simple. That is what I believe."


A comment like this is quite extreme in my view.

I am proud of my daughter. I am proud that she is beginning to understand God. That she is willing to ask people about it. That she is strong enough to stand for what she believes in. Not afraid to share. I am proud of her.
I guess when I said she does this "all the time" - I have heard her ask the neighbor boy a couple of times. I actually thought it was funny. (I am sure there will be 2 more pages of post for that statement)

I am proud of my daughter - she is kind, respectful, has manners and is a good girl.

Well, then I am extreme. I am offensive.
I believe in God.

I think you're going to hell.

You appear to be backtracking a little.

I am sure she is a good girl as I am sure you're a good mother and good women too. And you should be proud of your daughter. Of course, but it doesn't mean you have to be proud of all her actions.

A lot of people would argue though that telling other children they are going to hell is not well mannered, kind or respectful.

But you have gone from 'all the time' to a 'couple of times'.

Well, then I am extreme. I am offensive.
I believe in God.

I think you miss the point. But nevertheless it seems to be a common theme amongst religions so one should not expect yours to be different to any other. It is sad though!

Okay - I retract my statement - she does it all the time. Better?
And No, I am not going to hell. I am right with God.

And No, I am not going to hell. I am right with God.Nope, my beliefs are that your type is going there directly, do not pass Go, do not collect $200.

I am also thanking God right now that no one can rate anyone on this thread. My Rep. would go down the drain.

It'll be full of people you know - it ain't all bad!

Nope, my beliefs are that your type is going there directly, do not pass Go, do not collect $200.

Well, then I'll meet you there.

Okay - I retract my statement - she does it all the time. Better?
And No, I am not going to hell. I am right with God.

You just don't get it do you? How did you feel when Need said he thought you were going to hell? Now put yourself in someone else's place. Even more, imagine you were a 6 year old!

I don't think they understand what hell is. The way we have explained it is the worst place you could imagine.

Well, you know what?

I think you're going to be reborn as a lower life form, one that isn't tolerated by most. Like... a bug.

THAT will teach you tolerance for your NEXT lifetime.

After a few hundred, you'll get it pretty close to right.

PS--Christ taught tolerance. Christ didn't teach "You'll burn in hell". It floors me that people can call themselves Christian and not do as Christ would.

Also, I am secure in my faith. If someone wants to say I am going to hell - go ahead. Doesn't bother me much. I know where I am going.

I don't think I have said that anyone would burn in hell.
And, if I believe in reincarnation - it might bother me that you hope I come back as a bug. But since I don't...

I have tolerance. But, you are jumping on me because of what I am teaching my daughter. Not what I am teaching YOUR daughter - MY daughter.
You keep saying that religion should be taught in the home - that is what I am doing - so what gives?

So they are condemning there "friends" to the worst possible place imaginable? That's kindness...

Also, I am secure in myself. If you want to say I'm going to hell, go ahead. Doesn't bother me one bit. In fact I'm looking forward to getting there. I reckon there might be more tolerant, kind and respectful people there than in your heaven. Plus it is no secret I love the warm weather.

Your also teaching her intolerance, which does affect MY daughter.

No one is jumping on you for teaching religion. Not at all. Give me an example of that happening here please!

You are completely missing the point.

My daughter isn't going around screaming at people - YOU ARE GOING TO HELL!
She says it in a matter of fact kind of way. Like, Oh look the sky is blue.

Please tell me what the point is? I must be missing it.
It's o.k. to teach, but don't use it? What?

Doesn't matter whether she screams, sings it or farts it out her ar$e. She is still saying it.

The point is that it isn't about you teaching your daughter religion. It is about you teaching her some tolerance and respect. And you showing some yourself! Which you aren't at all!!

You know what?

You're right. You SHOULD teach your daughter as you believe. I'm glad that you are doing so! I'm glad that you ARE teaching your daughter faith and morals.

I (and others, it seems) am just upset that you are so caught up in your faith that you can't see that intolerance is one of the biggest problems in this country. Teaching her that someone will go to hell for not believing in Christ is great--that is what a lot of Christianity teaches. However, not teaching the right and wrong times to talk about it is bad. Would you want someone --the neighbor kid, perhaps -- to tell your daughter that there is no Santa? While at 6 you could comfort her and explain it, that would ruin something inside of her forever. Teaching that you go to hell for not believing in Christ is okay. Not teaching her that there is a time and place for talking about it is not so okay.

However... you ARE right. It's YOUR child, and you have the right and privilege to raise her as you believe is right.

I give respect when it is earned or deserved.

You are right, there is a time and place for everything. I agree.
My goal is not to teach intolerance. She has grown up in the church - for her it is like, yeah, there's a God - Duh. Who wouldn't believe that. That is all she knows. So when she asked me "How do you get into heaven?" I told her. When she asked me "why do people go to hell?" I told her.
I don't want her to upset anyone. It is just like something that is a no brainer for her.
We definitely do not teach her to be rude, disrespectful or intolerant.
If that is what you think of me as a parent - you are wrong and I am sorry you got that impression.

Synnen made the point perfectly!

There are several points you are missing. The first point is one that Synnen and I have tried to make. That Christ taught tolerance and love. Not intolerance. The second point is that you should be teaching your child about tolerance and respect for others. The final point is that you need learn to respect what other's believe.

I don't think they understand what hell is. The way we have explained it is the worst place you could imagine.

Hi Nowwhat. I think you kind of need to reread what you wrote here. I am sure most parents explain it to their children the same way. It is hard for their minds to comprehend but they conjure up something very scary. So, yes, even though they don't really understand completely, they have a good understanding that it is a very, very bad place to be. You said that your daughter speaks out about what she believes in. So, she does believe there is a hell and that it is the worst place you can be thrust into.

Your daughter sounds like a sweet little girl. I think you are a decent person. I have not seen you force your beliefs onto anyone here. You are kind to people and dispense good advice. I notice from your posts that you have strong beliefs but you have never told me in the posts that we share, or anyone else from what I have seen, that we are going to hell because we don't embrace JC as our Lord and Saviour. You don't openly condemn us. Am I wrong about that? Please correct me if I am. I took from your posts that although you believe I (and any non-believers) am going to hell, you would never be rude and attack me for it.

I think what these people are trying to get across to you is this consideration. Yes, your daughter is 6. But she is old enough to understand the difference between right and wrong because you take the time to explain things to her, as any good parent does. You should be reiterating to her what she has been taught in Church. That is your responsibility as a parent. But, it is just taking that extra step to explain to her that even though you and she know that a non-believer is going to hell, it is hurtful to tell that to someone's face. That is what the others are trying to say here. Sometimes the things we know to be true should not be spoken out loud. Why go out of our way to point out something that is hurtful to someone. Just saying it, won't make any of us convert. It will just get us upset and angry at the person telling us that. I think you understand that. When you are talking about a 6 year old saying that to other children, that is a very scary thing for the other child to have to handle. Your daughter doesn't like to upset people or hurt their feelings. You said that she cries when she thinks she has done this. So, before another child or someone says something back to her, that might upset her, you just need to explain that sometimes it is not a good idea to tell people that they are going to hell because she will scare them and in doing this, it hurts their feelings and makes them upset. She will understand that.

Thank you Ruby for saying it how you did. It was perfect.

And for the record NowWhat, I share the same thoughts about you as Ruby does in her second paragraph. I truly do. That is why it was a little surprising to me to read a few of things you posted. Perhaps I over reacted but if you re-read them you may see why. If you don't then I fear I may have been wrong in my initial assumptions!

I guess I am trying to explain something and not doing a good job. My daughter has never said this to try and condemn someone or to try and make them feel bad. I don't urge her to say these things. I guess I have never told her not to say them because she is saying what I believe. But - I do not want another child to be scared. So - when the opportunity presents itself - I will tell her that maybe she shouldn't say it like that because she could scare someone. And that is not her or my intent.
I wish I could control what comes out of her mouth sometimes. Like when she was 3 and saw a man in Walmart with a patch on his eye and she screams out "ahoy me hardy" (from the wiggles TV show - captain feathersword) - I could have crawled under a rock.
Or when she told my mother-in-law this weekend that my husband didn't like his dad (they are divorced - so she gets it) but still.. I could go on with the comments that are made that she doesn't even think about. I mean, they made a TV show out of nothing other than what comes out of kids mouths. (Kids say the darndest things)

I do not push my beliefs on other people. I feel strongly about what I believe and wish that everyone could know God the way I do. I think that it is sad if you aren't saved because you will miss out on the reward of heaven. Saying that - if you don't believe - that is your choice. I am not going to sit here and say you are terrible. I am just not that person. The only time I really go into "attack" mode is when my parenting comes into question. Just because I try to do the best I can. And EVERY decision I make with this child is over analyized. I am fearful that I will make a mistake and we all know we don't get do-overs in parenting. So - I do go on the defensive when it comes to parenting. That is really the only subject that I would "attack" someone. And then there is the married man subject - but I try not to judge.
I will not condemn anyone - because I am so far from perfect - I don't have the right.
But - I am not going to shy away from teaching my daughter about God or any other things I feel are important. If I don't teach her - who will?

Hi Nowwhat - I like the others have found you to be wonderful on this site and your daughter sounds like a little sweetheart, good for you. Personally, if I were you, I would take my little girl out of that school and place her in a religious school where prayer is allowed. I would be furious that they told my little girl she could not pray quietly to herself before she had her lunch. How dare they! What they should have done was called you at home and asked you to talk with your daughter about praying and how others may be offended or hurt or whatever someone would be in hearing a little girl pray. For God sake, they made a little girl feel like she was doing something bad because she was praying? And you wish to have them teach about God to our children, NO THANKS. That lesson should be done at home. Period. Nowwhat, I would seriously consider have your little girl attend a religious school.

To me, today's problems originate at home. Sorry, I really hate to say that, because I know that parents are trying so hard, parents are so tired. I am not a parent, but I see them coming into work even before the sun rises, just so little Johnny can have everything that they didn't have growing up. It just breaks my heart. There is a very nice guy in work who just had a little baby. His wife has to go back to work when the baby is 6 weeks old. I asked who will be watching the little baby, he answered that they are putting the 6 week old baby in daycare. Does that not break your heart? I felt so terrible for him, for his wife and for the little baby.

Now here is where most of you will get upset at me. But it is how I feel and shame on me for feeling this way, with not being a parent. There is no way shape form that I would leave the schools teach my child anything but their studies. Morals? Religion? Sorry, that would be my job and my job alone. The schools should expect to receive little children in the morning who have been taught right versus wrong before they enter the school door, so the teacher will be able to conduct the days teachings without having to be a babysitter or disaplinarian. Personally, if I did have children, I would not send them to public school. I would send little cutie Allheart right to Catholic school, because I would want her to pray during the day, I would want what I teach at home to be followed through during her or his day, but I would never expect the public schools to teach about God. I would love for God to be present in the public schools, for some sort of general prayer, to get the children's day started, but because of all the diversity and all the various forms of religion, and for those who don't practice any, I guess that would become more of a negative, then the beautiful positive it could potentially be.

I think most of our problems here started when no one was home. When both parents are running out the door off to work and little Johnny is being dropped off somewhere at 5 am.
I know people will get upset at me for saying that, but I am only making an observation.
Parents see little Johnny for maybe 2 to 3 hours a day and the parents are just plum tired. Oh, I know it's quality not quantity. If I was forced to pinpoint when things started to detoriate, bam, I would have to say, there's your starting point.

I say bring back the days, where Moms stayed home, Dads went out to work to bring home the bacon and little Johnny was at home listening intently to the lessons that Mom was teaching him about right and wrong. I think bringing back those days would make a world of difference.

**And now Allheart is going to run and hide as I know folks will get upset at my above suggestion**, but I would love to hear what all of you think about it, but do it with love, okay:D

Wow.
I am so going to hell I guess. I believe in God and in my religon, but I don't believe in belittling others for their choice of God. And my God says that he loves all equally. Pretty much Syn and I are on the same page.

Guess I will be in hell with a lot of other people. But hey the way I look at it is if there are going to be that many people in hell then we are set. Someone has to know how to turn the air conditioning on, others must be into construction and can build us homes, still others are Drs and will keep us healthy. Me... I'll educate the masses.

Wow.
I am so going to hell I guess. I believe in God and in my religon, but I don't believe in belittling others for thier choice of God. And my God says that he loves all equally. Pretty much Syn and I are on the same page.

Guess I will be in hell with a lot of other people. But hey the way I look at it is if there are going to be that many people in hell then we are set. Someone has to know how to turn the air conditioning on, others must be into construction and can build us homes, still others are Drs and will keep us healthy. Me...I'll educate the masses.


Tuscany,

I am right there with you as well. I do love my faith, but that is only because it fits me, like a good shoe. It's perfect for ME, it's what I know and love, but surely is not THE faith. I could never imagine feeling that way nor telling another they are going to hell if they don't... blah blah blah.

Heaven help us :) LOL ( that's meant as a funny people :).

And you wish to have them teach about God to our children, NO THANKS. That lesson should be done at home. Period. Nowwhat, I would seriously consider have your little girl attend a religious school.

To me, today's problems originate at home. Totally agree with you there.



There is a very nice guy in work who just had a little baby. His wife has to go back to work when the baby is 6 weeks old. I asked who will be watching the little baby, he answered that they are putting the 6 week old baby in daycare. Does that not break your heart? I felt so terrible for him, for his wife and for the little baby.I agreee that 6 weeks is way too early. But don't feel terrible for them, they are trying to get by. Feel worse for Nowwhat raising a bigot (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/bigot).



Now here is where most of you will get upset at me. But it is how I feel and shame on me for feeling this way, with not being a parent. There is no way shape form that I would leave the schools teach my child anything but their studies. Morals? Religion? Sorry, that would be my job and my job alone. The schools should expect to receive little children in the morning who have been taught right versus wrong before they enter the school door, so the teacher will be able to conduct the days teachings without having to be a babysitter or disaplinarian. You are dead on there.



I think most of our problems here started when no one was home. When both parents are running out the door off to work and little Johnny is being dropped off somewhere at 5 am.
I know people will get upset at me for saying that, but I am only making an observation.
Parents see little Johnny for maybe 2 to 3 hours a day and the parents are just plum tired. Oh, I know it's quality not quantity. If I was forced to pinpoint when things started to detoriate, bam, I would have to say, there's your starting point.

I say bring back the days, where Moms stayed home, Dads went out to work to bring home the bacon and little Johnny was at home listening intently to the lessons that Mom was teaching him about right and wrong. I think bringing back those days would make a world of difference. I don't know of ANY parents who drop their kids off at 5 a.m.; perhaps you made a gross exageration to make a point? You may be a little young to fully understand that times have changed in the work world. No longer is there job security or the great benefits that existed 2 generations ago. Most couples must work to get by. The U.S. has become an increasingly comsumerist society where the appearance of wealth has taken an unprecedented priority. So much so that most American families are wallowing under crushing personal debt. Now the parents really need to work longer hours et. you can see the vicious circle there. To me THAT is the problem that has negatively affected parenting.


**And now Allheart is going to run and hide as I know folks will get upset at my above suggestion**, but I would love to hear what all of you think about it, but do it with love, okay:DI hope I did OK. :)

LOL feeling the love NK -

You did really well and great points. But sadly, there are children dropped off at 5 am (at people's homes, not official Daycare. ) The work day over here seems to start earlier and earlier because you are right, we here in America just never stop wanting. Bigger houses, better cars, far away vacations. If we were able to cut that out, then maybe two people wouldn't have to work? I'm asking as I am not sure myself.

Now here is where I will get clunked on the head... you are SO right about job security. It's just awful. I really feel for these young kids starting today. This is only a question, would there by more jobs available and would job security be better, if it was mainly only men in the workplace? I'm only asking as to trying to find solutions and wishing for days gone by...

p.s. NK, believe it or not I am probably older than you think ( 44) just my mind hasn't caught up with me yet :). Does anyone know when that actually happens :).

That's an interesting question. I'm not sure of the cause/effect relationship between women entering the workforce and the decline in job security. Unfortunately that cat is out of the bag and will never be reversed except on a couple by couple case. Personally I love the fact that my wife is well-educated and has a good job (lawyer). I always loved smart women. I don't wish for days gone by, I wish I won the lottery so that I could work 6 months of the year and spend the rest of the time with the wife and kids travelling and doing stuff together.

That's really nice NK and I hope you win that lottery!!

I still would much rather be back in the day. Life seemed simpilier and happier. Grant you people struggled back then as well, but there was a pride factor and a hard work ethic in place. Now we all are looking for everything so fast and to me, so much is getting lost along the way.

p.s. NK, beleive it or not I am probably older than you think ( 44) just my mind hasn't caught up with me yet :). Does anyone know when that actually happens :).

It happens when the bones start to ache and you suddenly realize you aren't able to do the things you used to do.

AH, I agree completely with you.

NK, I think Nowwhat understands what I am saying and will correct the situation at home. Her intention is not to raise a bigot at all. I think it has more to do with timing and recognizing that her daughter understands a lot more at this age than NW realizes.

Nowwhat, I understand completely what you are saying about stuff coming out of kids mouths. It is hard not to laugh sometimes AND half the time you do want to jump in a hole when they say something embarrassing. Parenting is not easy. Kids just say whatever is on their minds. Personally, I think that is the greatest thing about them. They are so untouched by sarcasm, skepticism, and all the other stuff we eventually grow into. But, this is the time that you can start explaining the right and wrong, and the consequences of stating what is on her mind. Like, the man with the eye patch. Explaining that she watches a TV show, but in real life, not everyone is a pirate and the doctor makes the man wear the eyepatch because his eye has been hurt. So, the man is very unhappy he has to wear an eyepatch because no one understands that he isn't really a pirate and it hurts his feelings. Or, explaining to her about the situation with your Father in Law. Hey, we don't always know all the right words to explain it at the time it is happening, but usually we are presented with a situation at some point that is a perfect example that she WILL understand. It is just a matter of being watchful for those situations when they present themselves. It is recognizing that everything that happens in our lives have the potential to become important life lessons for your daughter.

I guess I am trying to explain something and not doing a good job. My daughter has never said this to try and condemn someone or to try and make them feel bad. I don't urge her to say these things. I guess I have never told her not to say them because she is saying what I believe. But - I do not want another child to be scared.

Ok, now you are getting the point. I will say, like the others, I was a bit surprised by your stance here. From previous posts, I did not get that you were that type of person. What I think went on here is that your pride in your daughter (justifiable) and your strong religious beliefs led you to not consider fully the consequences of your daughter's actions. I think we have helped you see the potential consequences. I think you will be protecting your daughter if you can teach her some diplomacy.


But - I am not going to shy away from teaching my daughter about God or any other things I feel are important. If I don't teach her - who will?

And no one is asking you to. All we are asking is that, along, with those teachings you include instruction on how to interact with others and that certain things should be kept private. I would also suggest that an emphasis should be placed on teaching what Christ stood for. Love, tolerance, respect, consideration and those values make a much more positive and potent message then promoting the punishments of non-belief. Isn't it better to teach a child (or anyone for matter) that being a good person and treating people fairly and with consideration is its own reward, then teaching them to believe a certain way or you will be punished?

And no one is asking you to. All we are asking is that, along, with those teachings you include instruction on how to interact with others and that certain things should be kept private. I would also suggest that an emphasis should be placed on teaching what Christ stood for. Love, tolerance, respect, consideration and those values make a much more positive and potent message then promoting the punishments of non-belief. Isn't it better to teach a child (or anyone for matter) that being a good person and treating people fairly and with consideration is its own reward, then teaching them to believe a certain way or you will be punished?


Could this be said any better? Just beautiful Scott. So worth repeating... just perfect.

I love the fact that I am a woman in the workforce. But, I sometimes wonder what it will be like when I have kids. My mom was a stay at home mom until I was in 4th grade. I sometimes think that that is what I want to do. But, then I worry that I will be bored at home (I know moms don't laugh at me).

You won't be bored at home Tuscany. It is all in how you approach it. Personally, I feel one parent should be home for the first 5 years of a child's life. But that is me. To me, those are the years that they are like sponges and their personalities are formed, and you have the most influence. There is always something new every day to see what your child has discovered how to do. I understand that people have financial needs, but all of this should be planned out. I would hate having anyone else teach my child the basics. Once they are in school full time, that is when our work lives can get back on track.

Just my opinion. Along with that sterilization thingy I mentioned earlier. Take it all with a grain of salt. Add a margarita to it if you like.

Early on I didn't mind being in the workforce, I actually LOVED what I did and I guess do.
But I guess I just see so much and wish things were different.

My Mom had to go to work. There were 5 of us and my parents were divorced. I used to love to go to my friends house. It was just such a nice feeling having their Moms home.

Please for all you wonderful women who contribute amazing things to this world, I more than respect and admire what you do. There are times I am actually speechless at work at some of the powerful and incredible women I have the honor to work with and for.

I just wonder what we would look like today if more women were home. It's just a curiosity that I have.

I do however, admire strong powerful women. Both my Mom and Grandmom are/were the most strongest women I have ever met. Oh anyway, I hope none of our wonderful women out there take any offense. I just do have that knawing curiosity.

Tuscany,
Your worries are valid. I think my wife is that way. I took 4 months parental leave for our first because she was a little overwhelmed and I wanted to bond with my little one. For our second she took the full year (god I love Canada). Our daycare is in a home with 3 other kids and the lady is wonderful. We drop off at 8:20 and pick up at 4:30.

Ruby,
Absolutely correct that the first 5 years are crucial. I took a Developmental Psychology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developmental_psychology) course when I was 18 and was fascinated by it.

I would NEVER want it to go back to the days of no women in the workforce, or of women staying home to raise the kids while their men supported them.

What of the women who never marry? Should they be blocked out of the "man's world" of working because they don't have kids? Or the women--like me--without kids? Plus... women are marrying later and later. I LOVE the idea of being able to support yourself so that you aren't settling for whatever man comes along to get you out of your parents' house.

Women have worked too long and too hard (haha.. love the pun) for equality to have it be set back 50 years.

Depending on a couples' education level, though... some couples CAN make it work so that one partner stays home with the kids while the other works. I probably have an equal number of friends where the guy stays home as I have friends where the woman is at home.

My husband and I have already started figuring out how we can budget everything so that when and if we do have kids, we'll be able to have one of us stay home to raise them, at least until they are school-aged.

While I would LOVE to stay at home and cook and clean and watch soaps and eat bonbons... frankly, there's no way we'd ever afford a home of our own, or a new car, or going to a movie if I did! His paycheck pays for the essentials. My paycheck is split between perks (like name brand mac'n'cheese and GOOD coffee) and going into savings for a house, new furniture, a new car--BIG purchases.

Could we live without that stuff? Sure, we could. Should we have to? Absolutely not.

I completely understand what you are saying Synn. I really do. I just think I was born to late. LOL.

I stay at home and most days I love it. I can't imagine not being available. In the beginning I was so busy with a new baby. Now she is 6 and a little more independent and in school most of the day. So, my days are filled with cleaning and getting stuff ready for dinner. It gets boring some days.
I have looked into go back to work while she is at school and there just isn't anything out there. I think people take one look at my resume and see I haven't worked in almost 7 years and toss it. It gets frustrating.

Oh Now you are so blessed to be able to stay home. I can see though how that could get boring.

Could you maybe volunteer at a hosptial and that could also help to build your resume.

I do volunteer work. I help with the school with a reading program. It takes kids that need a little extra help with reading and you work one on one with them. I help out with the hospital getting "Kid Packs" together. They are packs of little things like coloring books and crayons - for those kids that might come into an emergency room and it gives them something to do while they wait. I volunteer with the local food bank. And I am a member of the school PTO.

It does help break up the routine a bit. I am blessed that I can be here for my child. I love being the room mom and planning the parties and helping out in class. I love the flexiblity of it all.
But those days where all I have to do is get my kid to school and then pick her up. That in between time is boring! But, I do get to catch up on my soaps. :)

Now you are living my dream life!! LOL. Oh embrace those down hours. You have filled your days up nicely. And don't down play getting your child off to school and picking them up, that would be the highlight of my day. What a great feeling!!

I wish I could stay home and watch TV. :(

I wish I could stay home and watch tv. :(


Awwww NK there really isn't much good on anymore. I actually like the peace and quiet better or music.

Come On Down Allheart You are the next contestant on the Price is Right

Come On Down Allheart You are the next contestant on the Price is Right


LOl Tuscany... OH MY GOD. That was my Father-in-law's favorite show ( dirty ole man that he was, knew nothing about prices, he just loved the girls).

I'm not much for game shows AT ALL. I stink at it just plain awful. I use to watch/tape All my Children, for years, but then life took on drama of it's own (with elderly getting sick and all) and we just stopped watching it (shhhh don't tell anyone, but Mr. Allheart would watch it with me. Oooh he would kill me for telling that one.) But it just got old.

Bascially the shows I like are Big Brother - Surviror and American Idol. I guess reality shows.

Too funny though Tuscany... come on down...

I used to play hookie from school so that I could watch that with my Grandpa. And I could have Grandma's homemade tomato soup and grilled cheese sammies

I used to play hookie from school so that I could watch that with my Grandpa. And I could have Grandma's homemade tomato soup and grilled cheese sammies


Tuscany - how sweet is that. Great memories there and nothing like grill cheese and tomato soup!

I wish I could stay home and watch tv. :(

I go to work and play online ;)

I actually watch less TV and spend more time on this computer - now that I found this site! I am addicted!!
When you stay at home - you don't get much adult interaction - so, this almost counts right?

I actually watch less tv and spend more time on this computer - now that I found this site! I am addicted!!!
When you stay at home - you don't get much adult interaction - so, this almost counts right?


LOL - it defintely does count and having a hard time pulling away myself here.

Well, I have tried talking to the dog and although he is a great listener - he's not much of a conversationalist.

Now that's where you and I differ GREATLY lol. Me and my little one have great conversations and there are times I prefer bantering with my little one then some humans :).

It amazes me how they know your every mood. It kills me when I am sad. She normally sits on my lap while I am on the computer and something's can make you cry a little, she gets so upset. She's a little maltese.

Mine is a 70 lb. lab/bulldog mix. But he thinks he's a lap dog!

Okay, I just got an email warning me about Strawberry Crystal Meth.
It is supposed to look like candy - such as pop rocks. Has anyone heard of this? It is said to be targeting children.
What the heck?

I actually watch less tv and spend more time on this computer - now that I found this site! I am addicted!!!
When you stay at home - you don't get much adult interaction - so, this almost counts right?
I haven't turned on my TV in a week, and am thinking of getting the cable TV cut off.

When I get mass e-mails I always check to make sure it isn't an Urban Legend. Apparently, it isn't, and is of great concern. I never heard of this until you posted it NW.

Urban Legends Reference Pages: Strawberry Meth (http://www.snopes.com/horrors/drugs/candymeth.asp)

DEA: Flavored meth use on the rise - USATODAY.com (http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-03-25-flavored-meth_N.htm)

One more thing to worry about. I would almost bet that if someone (another kid) offered my kid "candy" at school - she would take it.
I guess I will add this to the warning list. :(

Yes, thank for letting us know. Hopefully other parents will stop by and see your post.

You know, how is this necessary (do meth addicts really care what it taste like). Candy drugs? It's just creepy. Ugh, drugs are a scourge on society that just won't go away. All the lives ruined it is sad to consider, someone trying to cause more use by flavoring them.

Outlawing drugs was one of those stupid, puritan things this country did wrong.

Legalize and regulate.

Then, all of a sudden, it's not big business anymore. Or rather... we could decrease the national deficit with it. End the war on drugs, and you take out idiotic prison sentences for possession of an ounce of marijuana, AND you're making money off the people that just HAVE to have it.

As far as flavoring drugs goes... haven't you heard of flavored liquors? Strawberry vodka, etc? I mean... if people really want to get drunk, they don't need flavors, but I want my alcohol to TASTE good.

I'm not saying that drugs are good. I do, however, think that more people would be willing to get help for drugs if they didn't face a felony jail sentence for askign for hellp.

Outlawing drugs was one of those stupid, puritan things this country did wrong.

Legalize and regulate.

Then, all of a sudden, it's not big business anymore. Or rather....we could decrease the national deficit with it. End the war on drugs, and you take out idiotic prison sentences for possession of an ounce of marijuana, AND you're making money off the people that just HAVE to have it.

As far as flavoring drugs goes....haven't you heard of flavored liquors? Strawberry vodka, etc? I mean...if people really want to get drunk, they don't need flavors, but I want my alcohol to TASTE good.

I'm not saying that drugs are good. I do, however, think that more people would be willing to get help for drugs if they didn't face a felony jail sentence for askign for hellp.


I am not even going to comment on this.

LOL Matt. I think you just did!;)

Many moons ago, the Chinese had an unbelievable problem with opium addicts. They don't have that problem today. Why? One reason. Executions. Anyone caught with opium got their heads lopped off. Long lines of dopers getting their heads lopped off and everyone in town watching.
I say legalize weed, and execute the meth addicts. Ya, I believe that would do the trick and end the problem.
Oh, but that is horrible and cruel and mean and nasty you say. If that is your reaction then I say you really don't know the nature of meth and meth addicts. And they are really just killing themselves, but slowly. Too slow for me. I say do everyone a big favor and just expidite themselves imposed suicide, then we can keep our lawn mowers, power tools, car stereos, yard furniture, garden hoses, and anything else left lying around that the vampires snatch in the wee hours of the morning.
I HATE TWEEKERS! ALL GETERED UP AND READY FOR ACTION! EXECUTE THEM ALL!:D

LOL Matt. I think you just did!;)

Yes quite a Homer.3530

There are legal drugs - alcohol and nicotine. Look at all the damage they cause.
All the taxes and regulation cannot control the damage they do.
But the lawyers are making money off the law suits.

Someone ask - why flavor this drug. It is to get young kids hooked. It looks like pop rocks and even pops in their mouths like that candy. Kids don't know that they are doing meth. I think it is disgusting.
As far as legalizing drugs... I don't know. Meth is cooked in a lab somewhere and killing pretty much all those who get hooked.
Pot... I think it is natural and it's uses can be good - like for cancer patients.

I just know that right now - I have a young child that loves candy - so this is a concern. It really scares me.

Many moons ago, the Chinese had an unbelievable problem with opium addicts. They don't have that problem today. Why? One reason. Executions. Anyone caught with opium got their heads lopped off. Long lines of dopers getting their heads lopped off and everyone in town watching.
I say legalize weed, and execute the meth addicts. Ya, I believe that would do the trick and end the problem.
Oh, but that is horrible and cruel and mean and nasty you say. If that is your reaction then I say you really don't know the nature of meth and meth addicts. And they are really just killing themselves, but slowly. Too slow for me. I say do everyone a big favor and just expidite their self imposed suicide, then we can keep our lawn mowers, power tools, car stereos, yard furniture, garden hoses, and anything else left lying around that the vampires snatch in the wee hours of the morning.
I HATE TWEEKERS! ALL GETERED UP AND READY FOR ACTION! EXECUTE THEM ALL!:D

Maybe the government can save money on the executions as well by allowing all you good law abiding citizens to kill the meth addicts for them with the guns under your pillows. Actually they could make money by charging people for the opportunity to hunt down and kill them in some deserted town or game park. Kind of like that movie Running Man. Plus it will give you all target training with your semi automatics so when the baddies come, or it is time to overthrow the government you aren't all out of practice. :D

okay, I just got an email warning me about Strawberry Crystal Meth.Hello Now:

Nahhh.

excon

What do you mean Nahh? Nothing to worry about? Please...

I just read the USA Today article. I think this is actually a real concern. Not only are they cooking it with a strawberry flavor, but chocolate and other soda flavors.
This new form is moving from west to east across the country.

Maybe the government can save money on the executions as well by allowing all you good law abiding citizens to kill the meth addicts for them with the guns under your pillows. Actually they could make money by charging people for the opportunity to hunt down and kill them in some deserted town or game park. Kind of like that movie Running Man. Plus it will give you all target training with your semi automatics so when the baddies come, or it is time to overthrow the government you arent all out of practice. :D

I'll open the first hunting range. Zebra painted jeeps and all. Bonus points for spear kills. Good idea!

I'll open the first hunting range. Zebra painted jeeps and all. Bonus points for spear kills. Good idea!

Will there be a bow or black powder season? I am all for the dealers getting it this way. They (dealers) do nothing but ruin lives in order to profit financially.

Don't forget the users too Matt. They need to be punished too!

Dont forget the users too Matt. They need to be punished too!!

I honestly can never tell if you are joking or not. I have some sympathy for users, but seriously the dealers are scum of the earth.

I was referring to Mag's post. He wants them all beheaded. Dealers, users, crooked cops caught with it, your brother, your aunt. Everyone. I was just reminding you not to forget the users. You can shoot them too!

Excon. Hello. You are wrong.

NW, you have every right to be concerned.

Matt, Skell was reacting with full sarcasm to Magprob's post.

Skell, actually I wouldn't mind getting in on that one. It would be motivation for me to finally apply for a license and purchase a gun. I would not leave anyone out either. That concept would be rather fun and has the potential to make Magprob scads of money.

magprob. Many of your posts are filled with violent thoughts. Most recently, this one and the Paris Hilton one. Why are you so full of rage and hate? Are you running low on your Spam supply? Please go shopping and restock your shelves.

Hello Ruby:

Well, I saw what the fuss is all about. I only ask you to consider who is doing the telling. These are the same people who said Iraq had WMD's.

That's not to say there isn't flavored meth out there – but the rest surrounding it is pure guvm't crap.

excon

Hello excon:

I don't give a rat's behind about all the rest of the propaganda. That was not what I was reacting to. It appeared you didn't believe that this was a threat to children and that Nowwhat should not be concerned. I disagreed.

Ruby

Hello Ruby:

Well, I saw what the fuss is all about. I only ask you to consider who is doing the telling. These are the same people who said Iraq had WMD’s.

That’s not to say there isn’t flavored meth out there – but the rest surrounding it is pure guvm’t crap.

excon


I am with the con on this. The media, and the government seem to enjoy freaking people out. There is always something scary and uncontrollable.
Shouldn't crack have destroyed the world by now? What about ocycotin?
Shouldn't the whole country be robbing drugstores? New laws controlling the access to the raw materials used in meth seem to be working at least some what. (you are going to love this)
The real problem with this is the meth (or Ice) being made in huge labs in Mexico and shipped across the border. If the United States would effectively control it's borders, maybe it would help.

Hello again, Ruby:

Certainly Nowwhat has reason to be concerned. Drugs are bad and she should watch her kids carefully.

Should she be more concerned today than she was last year when meth tasted shtty? No.

excon

PS> However, I DO have a problem with parents who are watching their kids for drug use, but let them drink. THAT is much more prevalent today, than chocolate meth.

I applaud Now What for being concerned about what is going on in the drug world. It directly affects the world that her child is being raised in.

However, I would be less concerned about the flavored meth and more concerned about the cocktail parties that students are now hosting. We had a meeting on them earlier in the year.

It seems the new "in" thing is to steal prescription meds from adults or wherever they can get them. They then go to a party location. Place all the meds into a bowl, stir it up, grab a handful, wash it down with alcohol, and wait to see what reaction they get. Scary stuff...

Hello drugwarriors:

Have you ever wondered what happened to soporific's like Quaaludes? They're gone. They're absolutely GONE. That's because the government decided to DO something about it, and they did!

Doesn't that get you to wonder why they don't DO something about meth instead of scaring you about it? They could, if they wanted to.

Matt's right. It isn't about drugs. It's about control. Fear does wonders for that.

excon

I applaud Now What for being concerned about what is going on in the drug world. It directly affects the world that her child is being raised in.

However, I would be less concerned about the flavored meth and more concerned about the cocktail parties that students are now hosting. We had a meeting on them earlier in the year.

It seems the new "in" thing is to steal prescription meds from adults or wherever they can get them. They then go to a party location. Place all the meds into a bowl, stir it up, grab a handful, wash it down with alcohol, and wait to see what reaction they get. Scary stuff...


This is exactly the kind of stuff I am talking about. I mean it seems that many pills would just make you sick.

In a neighboring school they had a high school student die from a "cocktail" that she mixed at a party.

I am so going to miss the days when I still pick out what my daughter wears. I am not ready for this kind of stuff. Luckily I have a few years (hopefully) before cocktail parties. It just seems that the obstacle course of parenting is getting bigger and bigger.

Nowwhat, it is very important to stay up to date on what the kids are doing. You are right. The obstacle course gets bigger and more difficult as they get older.

What Tuscany is talking about is a new "game" the kids are playing. They call it "Skittles" because the effect of all the different colored pills looks like the candy.

excon, I agree with you about the drinking problem that exists. But, in Nowwhat's case, her daughter is 6 years old. She is afraid that an older child will offer her daughter something under the pretext of it being candy. Very legitimate concern if it looks like Pop Rocks. She just has to warn her not to accept any offers of food or candy from ANYONE, kids or adults, unless Nowwhat says it is okay.

In a neighboring school they had a high school student die from a "cocktail" that she mixed at a party.\\
I am not doubting you Tusk. But I saw this on a episode of CSI, and I kept thinking they are just going to give someone bad ideas.

It makes me sick to think that people sit around and think things up like this. I mean, target young kids with something that looks like pop rocks? Even went so far as to make them "sizzle". Who are these people?
And these parties - I hope when she is old enough - we have taught her to be smarter than this.
My mom use to tell me that you never know how your body is going to react to drugs. What could be fine for one could kill another. It didn't matter if it was pot - whatever.
So, I had the fear of God put in me about drugs - I was so afraid to try anything. The most adventurous I ever got was to smoke pot when I was a senior in HS. Which looking back - I think I navigated o.k. - my boyfriend was put in rehab during that time because of her acid and coke problems.
Now I can understand my parents more - because this really frightens me with my daughter.

The flavored meth, might as well be poisoned candy. Like I said these "dealers" (and I am talking about the ones that hang out at the
Dr's office also) have got to be dealt with. I am not seriously saying kill them, but if everyone knew that a couple of convictions could lead to deportation to Canada, well they might think twice.








I just wanted to see if anyone was actually reading. If not Canada than maybe like Idaho? Sort of like a escape from NY thing. Except of course it wold be escape from Idaho. (Doesn't have the same ring)

Well, I have heard Canada is perfect - so... we wouldn't want to tarnish that! :)

We know of some people that got caught and arrested for, among other things, had the makings of a meth lab in their home. The had two small boys, 3 and 12 months, living there with them. THe kids have been taken away and they await trial. Well, the husband got busted again with a full meth lab in another location (a space he was renting) - while out on bond. The mom failed a drug test and blah blah blah. What are they thinking?
These places that have the labs in them are toxic. When disposing of these materials - the police wear Haz-Mat suits. If someone purchases a home, unknowingly, that was a lab - they can get sick. If you purchase one knowingly - the only way to make habitable is to basically gut it and start over.
And this what is being put in your body? This what these sicko's have no problem pushing on to my child and others?
I am getting angry just thinking about and starting to see the point of view of those who said they should be shot!

Yes it is a foul thing, in some communities cocaine is still destroying things and people left and right. 20 years later. Meth is possibly even more crazy.

I wouldn't mind being deported to Canada if they would accept me. I don't think I would like Idaho. Magprob live there and look how he has turned out. Must be something in those potatoes.

The flavored meth, might as well be poisoned candy. Like I said these "dealers" (and I am talking about the ones that hang out at the
dr's office also) have got to be dealt with. I am not seriously saying kill them, but if everyone knew that a couple of convictions could lead to deportation to Canada, well they might think twice.








I just wanted to see if anyone was actually reading. If not Canada than maybe like Idaho? Sort of like a escape from NY thing. Except of course it wold be escape from Idaho. (Doesn't have the same ring)

The same element is moving to Idaho now and selling the meth that is made in Mexico. They just stabbed someone in the Lowe's parking lot last week. That's OK and we should treat them like Rock Stars. Like a group hug and everything. We will talk with them and then they will be nice. Group hugs! Group hugs!

I found this online today, I couldn't help but put it in this discussion to see how many people agreed with it.

"Like a lot of folks in this state, I have a job. I work, they pay me.

I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as they see fit.

In order to get that paycheck--I am required to pass a random urine test,
which I have no problem with.

What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who
don't have to pass a urine test.

Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare check, because I
have to pass one to earn it for them?

Please understand, I have no problem with helping people get back on their
feet. I do, on the other hand, have a problem with helping someone sit on their butt.

Could you imagine how much money the state would save if people had to pass
a urine test to get a public assistance check?"
Dysan.net

I think that's a GREAT idea.

While we're at it, let's have random testing for parents, too! If you can't pass a random piss test, you can't keep your kids! Think of those thousands of desperate, loving couples that would be glad to raise those kids!

What makes me so angry is police will send out helicopters, dogs and god knows what getting hold of stupid little asbo teenagers/adults but when there is a proven peadophile sitting in his little chair in his little house the police don't do a thing about it! It's sickening!
Itry and tell people we should do something about it but no one wants to hear it they bury it under their hats! It's sick and that's one of th thing that drives me mental!

The other is doll dossers! People who can't be botherd going to work so they go on the doll! I don't work but I don't doll doss! Its not my money I haven't earned so why should I get it? I know there are genuine people out there that have genuine reasons like peopl who CAN'T work! But urgh! DOLL DOSSERS GET OFF YOUR FAT BACKSIDES AND MAKE SOMETHING OF YOURSELVES!!

I found this online today, I couldn't help but put it in this discussion to see how many people agreed with it.

"Like a lot of folks in this state, I have a job. I work, they pay me.

I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as they see fit.

In order to get that paycheck--I am required to pass a random urine test,
which I have no problem with.

What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who
don't have to pass a urine test.

Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare check, because I
have to pass one to earn it for them?

Please understand, I have no problem with helping people get back on their
feet. I do, on the other hand, have a problem with helping someone sit on their butt.

Could you imagine how much money the state would save if people had to pass
a urine test to get a public assistance check?"
Dysan.net

You know, that is a great idea! I think I will fax my reps on that one.

#386 Ashleysb - agree with you
- however I would give the offender ONE shot at rehab - that is it-
fail another drug screen and you are no longer eligible for HUD
housing, a 'welfare check ,' disability, medicaid.
The consequences have to be real for people to decide and
be personally responsible for their actions.
- I would also include unexplained controlled prescription drugs
[ lortab, xanax etc. ] as a positive drug test.
- There would have to be a certain amount of time 'clean' [ 2 years?]
for and individual to become eligible for benefits again.

I know the civil libertarians would go crazy but people in crucial jobs should also undergo random drug screens if they don't already.
Airline pilots, doctors, nurses, truck drivers to name a few.

Most companies have a drug testing policy in place. My husbands company does. They can enforce it any time they wish. They normally don't unless things start happening on the job.

Personally, I refuse to work in a job where I need to be drug tested.

If I worked at a job where being high/drunk could easily hurt or kill someone, that would be different... but I'm a desk jockey. To me, that's an invasion of privacy. What if I test positive for something because of something I've eaten or because of a medication that has been prescribed to me by my doctor?

I'm personally of the opinion that it's an invasion of my privacy, and I'll quit rather than take a piss test... even though I haven't done drugs since I was in college years ago.

This whole topic just makes me angry. I'm so tired of laws that take away from personal freedoms in order to give "security" to everyone else. What the heck difference does it make if the guy at the music store in the mall smokes pot or not? What's next? Denying jobs to people who have chronic depression and need to be medicated for it? Denying jobs to people NOT taking their medication? Employers having access to your medical records? Thanks, but no thanks. I'll take my chances that my fast food order was wrong.

Like I said... if your job could endanger the lives of others if something goes wrong when you're SOBER--like an airline pilot, someone in the military, anyone in the medical field, a truck driver or a parent--then you should be tested. Anyone else--well, if they're not performing to the standards of the job, there's a reason to fire them already, isn't there?

I agree with Synnen. Careful consideration has to be given to drug testing in the public domain. It can quite easily become an invasion of privacy issue.

Down here sportsman get tested for 'recreational' (I hate that word to refer to drugs as) drugs as well as performance enhancing. In my opinion that is wrong. Sure, trest them for perforamce enhancing drugs every day of the week, but recreational drugs that more likely have a negative impact on performance should not be tested for IMO. Society (unless in a job such as Synnen outlined above) does not get drug tested in their place of work. I don't come to my office each day and pee into a cup to be tested for snorting a few lines of cocaine last night. And frankly if I did, that's my business. Everyone in my office would be up in arms if they were tested for recreational drugs that it was an invasion of privacy, yet when they here of one of their sports stars getting caught for smoking some weed they want them hung, drawn and quartered. Society has some double standards sometimes when it comes to things like this!

Most companies have a drug testing policy in place. My husbands company does. They can enforce it any time they wish. They normally don't unless things start happening on the job.

What does your husband think about this?

Hello again:

People, People, People, how you have gone astray... For shame.

The idea of drug testing people in the workplace is for safety, not to find out if people are moral. However, given what I've read here, it's not surprising to hear that you people have turned it into that.

Tell me, whose safety is compromised because some person on welfare get's loaded??

Does that mean I believe in welfare? No. Does that mean I believe in drugs? No. It DOES mean that I don't believe in testing ones morals for participation in a government program.

You think testing for morals is good, huh?? Wait till they have a test for infidelity. I'll bet you'll change your tune then, all right...

excon

My husband doesn't care. Normally, a test is done at the time of hire. And if an accident occurs then another one is done. If an accident happens - it cost his company lots of money and they could lose more if they lose the customer.

I think the point of having welfare participants take a test (this is how I interperted it) is to make sure that government dollars weren't being spent on drugs. That if they are on federal assistance it is to better themselves - not to buy drugs. And I am not saying that just because you are on welfare means you do drugs. I don't know if I agree with having a test like this performed - but it is aggravating seeing a lot of people on welfare doing things like drugs or finding a way to "cheat" the system. There are people out there that need assistance and then there are those that want to make it a lifestyle.

Hello again:

People, People, People, how you have gone astray...... For shame.

The idea of drug testing people in the workplace is for safety, not to find out if people are moral. However, given what I've read here, it's not surprising to hear that you people have turned it into that.

Tell me, whose safety is compromised because some person on welfare get's loaded??????

Does that mean I believe in welfare? No. Does that mean I believe in drugs? No. It DOES mean that I don't believe in testing ones morals for participation in a government program.

You think testing for morals is good, huh??? Wait till they have a test for infidelity. I'll bet you'll change your tune then, alright....

excon

I agree with you excon. Testing for morals is NOT GOOD!!
Testing for safety is!

And to answer your question about Quaalude's. I think Anthony Keidis and Chili Peppers ate them all.

My husband doesn't care. Normally, a test is done at the time of hire. And if an accident occurs then another one is done. If an accident happens - it cost his company lots of money and they could lose more if they lose the customer.

I think the point of having welfare participants take a test (this is how I interperted it) is to make sure that government dollars weren't being spent on drugs. That if they are on federal assistance it is to better themselves - not to buy drugs. And I am not saying that just because you are on welfare means you do drugs. I don't know if I agree with having a test like this performed - but it is aggravating seeing alot of people on welfare doing things like drugs or finding a way to "cheat" the system. There are people out there that need assistance and then there are those that want to make it a lifestyle.

So should they test welfare recipients for alcohol too. Should they not be able to have a drink with some of the money they receive. I know alcohol is legal but surely the principle remains the same?

I agree that is frustrating and downright wrong when you see welfare money being spent in the wrong manner. But who are we to say what is spending that money rightly or wrongly? It is treading a very very fine line when you begin to test society for drugs in my opinion.

Just get rid of the welfare system entirely.

Churches are built to give to the needy, right? So... have someone in need join a church!

No... seriously... I really want to get rid of welfare, at least on the state and national level. Make charity local. If you KNOW the guy it's going to, it makes it a bit easier to understand why they're getting it.

Now... disasters are something else. When a Hurricane Katrina or a tornado like what happened this past Friday happen, well... that's when I want to help someone further from home.

Frankly... the idea that DVD players and movies and alcohol and such SHOULD be purchased while on public assistance... that just floors me. If I can't afford to go out to a movie with my husband because there just isn't enough money after buying food and paying the bills... why the HELL should someone else get to on taxpayer dollars?

We figured out one time that we'd be better off to start making half of what we currently make and go on welfare. We'd get more stuff, work half as hard, get a chance to buy a house at a lower price, get more and better food, and still have money to play with! THAT is where I call bull.

People should have to EARN perks. A roof over your head and enough food to eat should be enough from public assistance. Everythign else is pure bull.

I agree Synenn about people having to earn perks. But how do you moderate it and who decides what is a perk?

I don't know how you could regulate what people are using the money for. What do you think about establishing a time limit for welfare? Giving a certain amount of time to get out the hole you are in?
There are people out there that have more kids just to stay on welfare. They cheat the system.
My husbands family had to go on welfare when he was a child. There were four kids and his mom was unable to work due to her health - they needed it. They got on their feet and got off it. It bothered his parents to actually take this help - but they had to. They weren't o.k. with letting everyone else take care of them.

Oh and most churches do have an outreach program for the community. My church and another in town offer free meals once a month to the community. They teamed up with the food bank. With our town and the neighboring town - a person can find a free meal once a week - every week.
That counts for something.

I think what's wrong with this world is that we have become selfish and selfcentered, and we don't give much credit to our maker!

Hello again:

Didn't we do the welfare reducing thing years ago?? Wasn't it under Ronald Reagan? Didn't we stop the cycle? I think we did. I think the story of the mother who stays at home to have more children to increase her welfare checks are stories of the past. I think the people on welfare today, REALLY need it.

Ok, not everybody, and there are scammers, but I don't think it's the problem it once was. Of course, I come from a belief that the government ought to be the ultimate backstop. I understand there are those amongst you who don't share that belief.

excon

Okay, at the advice of , RubyPitbull I have started a new thread. A new discussion.

Sort of talking out what we feel is wrong with this world - or our country. What we can do to fix it or make it better.

What tops your list as the most important issue?

There are lots to choose from

How we handle our criminals - is it fair or right that a non violent criminal gets 20 years for not paying his taxes and the guy he shares his cell with killed a child, but will get out in 7 with good behavior? Am I the only one that finds that disturbing?
(I guess that is what gets me going)

Or how about the war? How much longer do our guys have to fight and die? When can they come home? What is the war really about anyway?

What makes you angry? How would you change it if you could?

So here is my post - I hope you find it thought provoking.
As far as the criminal justice system, this country was founded by the dominant race, white men, white rich men. And they still hold the power in this country. The system is set up in so many ways to fail minority groups and low income citizens.
First, the three strikes rule and you are out law. OK, I sold drugs to support my family and I live in an impoversihed area to begin with. I grew up in it, learned it, yeah there were opprotunties for college, but hey, I have to support my family. So I go sell my drugs, it beats the $5.15 I made at McD's. So I go to jail and do my time right?? I am freed back into society to start over. Rude awakening. Now you have a felony and you cannot pay anyone to give you a job. So the kids need to eat, so sell the crack. Get my point?
Everyone give 10%, time and money. God's word is the cure.

I saw a frontline show on qualudes. They disappeared because the fda [or some other guv't agency] convinced/negotiated with the only country that made the essential ingredient.

Meth on the other hand be made by anyone with various ingredients readily available.

Hello again:

Didn't we do the welfare reducing thing years ago??? Wasn't it under Ronald Reagan? Didn't we stop the cycle? I think we did. I think the story of the mother who stays at home to have more children to increase her welfare checks are stories of the past. I think the people on welfare today, REALLY need it.

Ok, not everybody, and there are scammers, but I don't think it's the problem it once was. Of course, I come from a belief that the government ought to be the ultimate backstop. I understand there are those amongst you who don't share that belief.

excon


I disagree with you on this. I have a member of my family who is on welfare and she completely does not need it. Her daughter has everything she ever wanted (4 portable DVD players, an MP3 player, a TV in her bedroom, you name it she has it). Plus they pay to board their 3 horses at a local farm, and did I mention that they drive a realitively new Jeep. Yet they are on welfare, and they get free Thanksgiving dinners. This past year the daughter was a child on the "giving" tree at a local church.

This woman gets a kick out of what she can get from the government for "free."

Okay - I want your opinions on this -

Prostitution. I was reading today, where a madam from D.C. got arrested. Should it be legal? This is something I have never given much thought to - so I don't know if I have a strong opinion either way. But - I know you guys have opinions on everything - so please share.

And something to think about - is sex ever free anyway? Just a thought.

And something to think about - is sex ever free anyways? just a thought.Wow, expand on that please.

Well, let me think of how to say this...

If my husband is in a bad mood, we can do the deed and he's in a better mood. My price to pay for an attitude adjustment.
Or if I am not in the mood, but he is - we do the deed and I have a happy husband. Again, My price for a happy husband.

Or here's one - a guy takes a girl he's been dating for a month, out for a really expensive dinner. At the end of the dinner he expects a pay off sex.

Isn't there a comedian that has a line in his act that goes something like this -

"She wanted foreplay - I say, I bought you pizza, you knew I wanted to F. ya"

I don't think I have ever thought about describing sex as "the deed." Anywhose, I don't think I want to touch that whole price thing you just described.

Regarding prostitution, it seems to work pretty well in Nevada and in other countries where it is legal and regulated. So, my feeling is, why not? I think it should be legalized.

I was trying to be nice by saying "the deed". :)
Does that make me a prude?

Yea, I don't think all women or men view sex as a reward for something. That said it is certain that some women use it as a means to an end and that's not right. Of course men fall for it so it's a vicious cycle.

And you have never heard the AC/DC song Dirty Deeds?

If you have two consenting adults - one of which will be getting paid - what is the difference?
And some women feel that they have no other option than to strip or become a hooker to make ends meet.

LOL NK.

No, NW, it doesn't make you a prude, it's just that there are a lot of words that come into my mind regarding sex before the word "deed" would find it's way in there. Kind of has a negative connotation to it to me, and I have never thought of it is a "deed." But, I guess you could build a case for it.

Prostitution is considered the oldest profession in the world.

I never thought of it as negative - huh - you really think it sounds negative?

Plus, I can have a conversation with him on the phone with my kid in earshot and say "deed" and he knows what I mean - but she doesn't.

I think what she's saying is that while we may not always pay for sex in monetary ways, we all pay for sex one way or another :P

Like... sometimes I have to COOK! And make STEAK! And then I have to wear slinky clothing! All just to get sex! It's outrageous!

I realize that it's part of the give and take of married life, but in a way it IS coin in a marriage. How many relationships fail due to one person or another feeling that they are not "paid" enough with sexual relations of some sort? Or feel like they're being overcharged for it?

It's an interesting question, honestly.

Oops, I was talking in the context of a marriage. I guess I didn't make that clear at all.

Thank you, synnen, I was beginning to think I was the only one that thought this way!
Or the only one that "pays" for sex in marriage!

Well, yeah, in marriage - or relationships - sex is used to manipulate a situation. Not every marriage - but I have heard where someone will withhold sex in order to get their way.
And women aren't the only ones that are guilty of that.

Okay, Synn. I guess I know where you stand. LOL. I never really thought of it that way.

NW, I know what you are saying. It does make sense to use that word on the phone with your husband in front of your daughter. I guess using it as a regular part of your vocabulary, prompted you to say that here.

For me, whenever I hear "the deed" it always sounds like it is a chore. I am not sure why I make that connection. I have never viewed sex as a chore.

Does begging count as paying for it?

magprob, only if you actually get it.

I think begging counts.
As does buying roses, box of chocolates, fancy jewlery, etc. etc..

That makes sense NW. LOL

Ruby, you are lucky that it has never been thought of as a chore.

Don't get me wrong, I like our intimacy - but there has been a time or two in the last 13 years where I just wanted to go to sleep!

I guess a lot of people feel that way. More women than men, I suppose.

I'm not saying that I "pay" for sex every time... it's still a loving connection with my husband. But... the older we get, the less likely it is that we're both in the mood at the same time. The one NOT in the mood generally concedes to the other, within reason. Sometimes a little flirting and foreplay will get me in the mood even if I wasn't before!

But the point is... EVERYTHING is a coin in marriage. How I view it or how you do is completely different than what some other people may view it. As long as a couple agrees on what is worth how much, then the marriage flourishes. For instance... in my house, grocery shopping is MAJOR coin, because we both HATE it. Dishes, on the other hand--not so much.

I just wonder - if "hooking" was legal - would little businesses be set up in the strip mall? Would there still be street walkers? Would the cost be regulated?

I guess it depends on the law. Most countries in which it is legal have a red light district and it is regulated.

Synnen,
Wife and I call it "brownie points". If I go out after work one evening then she has one evening in the bag for herself in the near future. The sex thing is a concern since the more a marriage progresses the more the wife seems to control the sex. That annoys most men.

I 'pay' for mine by being extremely good at it! LOL ;)

Oh - this has nothing to do with anything that we have talked about - but I wanted to remind everyone that SUNDAY is Mother's Day. Don't forget your Mom or Wife!

I havent turned on my tv in a week, and am thinking of getting the cable tv cut off.

Just say no to cable.