Last night my four year old son had nightmares. He usually has episodes where he's inconsolable (for about an hour) once or twice a month. It's not fun for anyone. It's REALLY not fun now that his bed is back in the same room as his six year old sister, so she got a front row seat...at 10:30pm...to all the tears, crying, and screaming.
I laid down with my son in his bed, trying to whisper to him about happy memories from our recent trip to Disneyland hoping that the good thoughts would push out the bad and he could go back to sleep...or at least calm down. We lay there cuddling as I ran my fingers through his ridiculously shaggy hair (he is also afraid of hair cuts).
That's when my daughter, from across the room said, "How come you don't do that to me?"
"Do what?" I responded.
"How come you never get in my bed, snuggle with me, or scratch my head?"
I panicked. It was true. I couldn't remember the last time I snuggled with her at night.
I quickly reminded her of that time she got the flu last year and I spent 2 nights sleeping on the floor in her room to be close to her so I could help her right away.
That appeased her enough to drop it because she did remember (thank goodness).
But that's when I really thought about all the times at bedtime that she asks me to snuggle with her in her bed and my response is "No, you need to go to sleep" right before I give her a hug and kiss and shut the door.
To be fair to me, I don't normally get into my son's bed either, but with baby number three on the way, we are trying to break them of the habit of getting into our bed since we plan on cosleeping with the baby and I can't have my 4 year old kicking the baby in the face all night long.
As I sat there next to my sons bed (because a toddler bed just doesn't work for a toddler and expectant mom) I got honest with myself: I would've never done that for my daughter unless she was seriously sick. Not even for nightmares. I would've...and I have...told her "You're fine, go back to bed" so I can get back to my solitary, hopefully uninterupted grown up time, which as a SAHM the last few years, only happens after kids are in bed. So I can have some moments of sanity.
You see, my daughter is a warrior princess. She is no damsel in distress. She doesn't usually pretend to be Snow White or Cinderella, she likes to be the wicked witch or step sister. She likes to feel powerful (we're working on the idea that she can be powerful and kind...like Elsa). She is the first to throw a punch in a fight with her brother and she doesn't agree with ANYTHING unless she truly believes it. There is no convincing her. These are all qualities that will serve extremely well later in her life, but they sure make her hard to parent now.
She is sassy. She is strong. She is exhausting. And by 7:05pm, nice mommy (if I was nice that day) checks out and mean/impatient mommy checks in. And it's usually because of some of her antics. I just want to be done with her and her argumentative nature at bedtime. And, so, I don't feel like snuggling. Honestly, I just want to be rid of her (of both my kids) for a few hours before I tear myself away from Netflix to go to bed and then wait for the inevitable night-time wakings.
But I've been so, so wrong. In that moment when she asked me, "Why don't you do that for me?" I realized it didn't matter why I didn't snuggle her. This phrase came to mind, "Sometimes the people who need the most love ask for it in the least loving ways." She doesn't know how hard she is on me, all she knows is that she wants...needs...snuggles from her mama. And, in fact, I realized it had been a long time since she asked me, knowing that I'd say no. The few times that I did "snuggle," I literally laid my head on her pillow and said, "I'll stay for one minute." She was so starved for that time she greedily accepted...but I was so obsessed with getting my own time, that I couldn't force myself to do any longer.
Not even if she begged. "I'm making her stronger," I'd tell myself. "She's fine."
Don't get me wrong, I hug her, I kiss her, I tend her owies, I sit her on my lap (or near my lap) and read to her every night, we make up songs together, we dance around, I help her with her homework, and try to let her help me in the kitchen. But I come from family where, to quote Malcolm in the Middle, "Feelings are the F word." We are not particularly tender, we do not say "I love you" when we get off the phone (unless it's to my biological father). I do not hug my siblings; in fact, at a recent family photo shoot, my sister and I were forced to touch. It was weird and awkward...and totally showed in the photo. We love each other, but we do not show or express it unless it's by making fun of each other. We suffer from what we like to call "emotional constipation." My mother loved us, nurtured us, read to us at night, but she also told us to suck it up a lot (she was also a nurse) and left us to cry ourselves to sleep sometimes (as any parent knows is necessary sometimes), and a lot of other things that are probably a result of her being raised by very British/Victorian-ish parents.
I think by the end of the day, this "emotional constipation" comes out and I have nothing left to give my oldest, hardest to parent child. I knew this upbringing and background effected my parenting style and most of it I'm ok with as I've tried to find a good balance of showing my children love with huggies and kissies, but also tried to teach them they can't have everything they want...but refusing bedtime snuggles because I was SO done and wanted to binge watch Vampire Diaries? No. I realized that is something I was doing that I am absolutely NOT ok with. And so, tonight, I will snuggle her. I will snuggle her so hard. I will not let her think there is something more important or somewhere else I'd rather be in those moments. I will not let her think her younger brother is more worthy snuggles during nightmares than she is. I forget, she is only 6 years old!
My daughter will be strong, she will be able to deal with hard things. But she will also know that her mother loved her enough to crawl into her bed and snuggle with her because she needed me.
But probably not every night.
Wednesday, October 14, 2015
Friday, October 9, 2015
Kids Ruin Everything...Even When They Aren't There
I'm going to be honest (aren't I always): yesterday was really hard. My kids weren't behaving, I was cranky from a bad night the night before, I was stressed, anxious, feeling emotional, etc. You know the kinds of days where you pretty much spend the whole time yelling at your kids? And then they lash out at each other and you? Which causes more yelling? And then that all leads to mom guilt.
Stresssss.
I had an appointment scheduled in the evening and even though I thought it should seem like a good idea to get out the house and kidless for a bit, I didn't even want to go to that. I just felt...icky. But I went to my chiropractor/massage appointment in the evening (treating a car accident I got in a couple months ago). I finally got to a place where I thought, "This is what I need, some alone time. A nice massage."
But it didn't go very well. Apparently, despite my smallish baby belly (18 weeks), I am now too big to lay on my tummy. After about 30 minutes, I informed the massage therapist I needed to go on my side because I started to feel a rush of blood to my head, light headed, and nauseated. She was very nice and accommodating and so she rubbed me down on my side. But during that time, my mind just kept racing (and I still wasn't feeling very well, which causes me great anxiety...especially while being butt naked in front of an acquaintance). I could NOT relax. I could not recover. After a few minutes on my side, she asked me what I'd like her to concentrate on next and I just asked to cut it short so I could leave. My anxiety, discomfort, stress, etc. was getting the best of me.
"Kids ruin everything. Vivi and Mac are not even with me and I still don't get to enjoy a massage. Kids ruin things when they're not even there! I NEEDED that massage and now I can't even have it. This sucks." My cranky, depressing thoughts went on. "I'm not even a good mom. I don't even really like being a mom, do I? People say the adore their kids. I don't even like mine" thinking of the crappy things they'd done earlier in the day. Over and over I just kept thinking about how much being a mom sucks while I turned up my gangster rap on the way home.
I snuck into the house while Doug distracted the kids and he left me alone to sob like I needed to (a good cry always makes me feel better).
Happy Ending Part: After a relatively good night's sleep (and as a result of Doug's prayers for me, I'm sure), today I have had that feeling of just being in love with my kids (it was totally unexpected to me, too). I've been loving and appreciating their quirks, the chipped teeth, their big eyes, paying extra attention to what they were telling me, being patient. Adoring them. It's been a GOOD day. Nothing special. Just one filled with love and appreciation for who they are and having them in my life; the laughs they give me, the hugs they give, their unwavering love, the unrestrained excitement when reunited in the Y child care room after my 30 minute workout, and appreciating the fact that my kids trust and me completely, which leads to Vivi telling me about the mean girl at school and some emotional outbursts about being asked to pick up dog poop.
Here's my point in sharing: you're not alone in whatever you feel as a mom of young kids. Ups and downs are name of the game. You don't have to adore your kids every moment of every day...and you shouldn't feel guilty about it. Sometimes I really dislike my kids (I always tell them "I love you, but I don't like what you did). Sometimes I don't like being a mom. Sometimes I let my mind wander and imagine what my life would be like if I never had kids. That usually happens during a crappy day so it revolves around being able to come and go as I please, having extra spending cash, going on more vacations, etc. But, if I was level-headed in that moment (which I'm usually not), I would realize everything I'd have missed: popcorn night on the couch, ridiculous stories out of the mouths of babes, stick figure pictures that say "I luv you," unashamed hand-holding, sweet breath of sleeping babes, snuggles, being the only one who can cure owies, that moment when they realize mom's kisses doesn't actual cure owies, all the milestones, and more.
So don't feel guilty. Just remember every day is a new day to try again and young children have pretty short memories when it comes to mom's screw ups.
And a good night's sleep does WONDERS for everyone :)
Stresssss.
I had an appointment scheduled in the evening and even though I thought it should seem like a good idea to get out the house and kidless for a bit, I didn't even want to go to that. I just felt...icky. But I went to my chiropractor/massage appointment in the evening (treating a car accident I got in a couple months ago). I finally got to a place where I thought, "This is what I need, some alone time. A nice massage."
But it didn't go very well. Apparently, despite my smallish baby belly (18 weeks), I am now too big to lay on my tummy. After about 30 minutes, I informed the massage therapist I needed to go on my side because I started to feel a rush of blood to my head, light headed, and nauseated. She was very nice and accommodating and so she rubbed me down on my side. But during that time, my mind just kept racing (and I still wasn't feeling very well, which causes me great anxiety...especially while being butt naked in front of an acquaintance). I could NOT relax. I could not recover. After a few minutes on my side, she asked me what I'd like her to concentrate on next and I just asked to cut it short so I could leave. My anxiety, discomfort, stress, etc. was getting the best of me.
"Kids ruin everything. Vivi and Mac are not even with me and I still don't get to enjoy a massage. Kids ruin things when they're not even there! I NEEDED that massage and now I can't even have it. This sucks." My cranky, depressing thoughts went on. "I'm not even a good mom. I don't even really like being a mom, do I? People say the adore their kids. I don't even like mine" thinking of the crappy things they'd done earlier in the day. Over and over I just kept thinking about how much being a mom sucks while I turned up my gangster rap on the way home.
I snuck into the house while Doug distracted the kids and he left me alone to sob like I needed to (a good cry always makes me feel better).
Happy Ending Part: After a relatively good night's sleep (and as a result of Doug's prayers for me, I'm sure), today I have had that feeling of just being in love with my kids (it was totally unexpected to me, too). I've been loving and appreciating their quirks, the chipped teeth, their big eyes, paying extra attention to what they were telling me, being patient. Adoring them. It's been a GOOD day. Nothing special. Just one filled with love and appreciation for who they are and having them in my life; the laughs they give me, the hugs they give, their unwavering love, the unrestrained excitement when reunited in the Y child care room after my 30 minute workout, and appreciating the fact that my kids trust and me completely, which leads to Vivi telling me about the mean girl at school and some emotional outbursts about being asked to pick up dog poop.
Here's my point in sharing: you're not alone in whatever you feel as a mom of young kids. Ups and downs are name of the game. You don't have to adore your kids every moment of every day...and you shouldn't feel guilty about it. Sometimes I really dislike my kids (I always tell them "I love you, but I don't like what you did). Sometimes I don't like being a mom. Sometimes I let my mind wander and imagine what my life would be like if I never had kids. That usually happens during a crappy day so it revolves around being able to come and go as I please, having extra spending cash, going on more vacations, etc. But, if I was level-headed in that moment (which I'm usually not), I would realize everything I'd have missed: popcorn night on the couch, ridiculous stories out of the mouths of babes, stick figure pictures that say "I luv you," unashamed hand-holding, sweet breath of sleeping babes, snuggles, being the only one who can cure owies, that moment when they realize mom's kisses doesn't actual cure owies, all the milestones, and more.
So don't feel guilty. Just remember every day is a new day to try again and young children have pretty short memories when it comes to mom's screw ups.
And a good night's sleep does WONDERS for everyone :)
Friday, September 25, 2015
Humanists Let Live
When I wrote my last blog post about abortion, I wasn't being fully transparent. At that point, I was about 10 weeks pregnant, something we weren't quite ready to go public with yet (except to a few friends and family because I felt SO crappy). I've also had some interesting discussions with people about it since then, perhaps some revelations, as well.
Here I am, about 16 weeks along. People ask me all the time "Are you excited?" and I will answer honestly, "I'm getting there." They act a little surprised, but I'll tell the truth. I was done after two children (this is our third). I was happy to be done with diapers. Happy to be able to tell my kids to stay in their room until the sun came up and not feel bad about it. Happy with the way they interacted with eachother. Not sure I wanted to add another 6 years to our in-home parenting years.
But over the last year, my very patient husband (who isn't particularly wild about children, btw) kept dropping, "I feel like we're supposed to have another one. I feel like there's someone else who's supposed to be in this family." I was like, "Good for you. I don't." We are a very faith-based home and, while he NEVER pushed it, he told me that he had prayed and still felt it so. He said "If it were up to me, I'd say nope, but I feel like it's what we're supposed to do and I trust that. But you need to have that confirmation for yourself because you're the one who's going to be doing most of the work."
I wouldn't even pray about it. For a year, I felt conflicted (do I get rid of all the baby stuff or keep it?), but I refused to inquire. I did NOT want an answer. I knew what it would be and I didn't want it. So I never asked. Over the past year, my heart softened and I finally to a place where I could ask and feel like that's where our family should go. I had enough faith to be obedient, but not super excited about it. I got pregnant relatively quickly (confirming that inspiration, I think)...and got serious morning sickness soon after. Which also made it hard to be excited.
Our children (6 and 4) are very excited and it's helped me see what a wonderful addition this child will be to our family...but, having gone through this twice before, I know it's not easy, full of things I don't particularly enjoy, and, unfortunately, that is making me work a bit harder to be excited.
It doesn't mean that I love or will love this sweet baby any less. I just don't have that excitement or anticipation one has with their first. Maybe that makes me a bad person, but I know there are mamas out there who understand. My point in sharing that very personal experience is that there have been times (like I think many women have during pregnancy), where I was like "Oh crap. I'm not sure I want to do this." And maybe I had them more frequently than many.
However, my first real moment of excitement, my first tears of joy came at my 10 week ultrasound. On that black and gray screen I saw what was, several months ago, my empty womb. It was now occupied by someone who wasn't there a couple months ago. It was now occupied by a being that had never existed before.
"I made that. I made that little person. Until 10 weeks ago, he never existed. Now he does. Now he has life, will grow, will occupy space, will love, will cry, will create other life of his own in the future. None of that would've been possible 10 weeks ago because he didn't exist. Now he does." (*note, I call the baby a 'he' because I'm pretty sure it is, but we still don't yet. This is not an announcement to our friends and family lol).
We had created something. We had created the most wonderful something that anyone can create. Life. Human life. True, it mostly looked like a gummy bear. But that gummy bear was occupying a space that was empty, he was not only occupying that space, but he is living and growing.
It made me think of this quote and talk by Dieter F. Uchtdorf "The desire to create is one of the deepest yearnings of the human soul."
Despite my previous reluctance to have another child, I looked at that ultrasound and saw that precious LIFE that had been created. I felt the love of taking "unorganized matter into our hands and mold[ing] it into something of beauty." It was good. It was right. It was not just tissue.
My mind went to the conversation of abortion and, emotionally, I wondered how someone, even if undesired, could extinguish a life that had been miraculously made. A life that had never existed before...and would never exist again if terminated.
I thought about sharing my experience then, but I didn't want to be constantly talking/writing/thinking about abortion, so I just let myself enjoy the experience. I hadn't really thought about it much until a few days ago when I read about the trending #shoutyourabortion on social media. I was angry. I was disgusted. I am pretty moderate and understand that many women become pregnant in difficult circumstances, but what I saw was women shouting out with pride that they had terminated life because they "weren't ready" and "wanted to focus on their career" and I got upset. I resisted the urge to lash out with words at that point. And I'm glad I did.
B why didn't these women let this life live and give it to someone else who would've nurtured it? Why would they not sacrifice 9 months of discomfort to let this human being...be? No one has ever forced a mother to keep an unwanted child, in fact we have a huge part of government and many social agencies devoted to helping moms adopt out their children...and even take them away if it's obvious the mother does not want to do what it takes to take care of them.
What if, instead of abortions, Planned Parented (and other clinics) became the biggest facilitators of affordable adoption? They get to move on and have their careers, etc as they desire and that life gets to live and thrive with a family who wants him or her so badly.
One of the biggest lies the abortion movement has told the public is that an unborn child is "just tissue." Abortion is "just a medical procedure." As I looked at my unborn child in that ultrasound at 10 weeks, I thought "that is not just tissue. THAT is human life" and abortion is a "medical procedure" that ends that individual human life.
As I mentioned previously, I don't want to defund Planned Parenthood. I know they offer many other health services that are valuable. And it's not just about Planned Parenthood for me. It's the practice as a whole. I still think it should be made illegal (except in medically necessary situations) and we need to offer better support to women before, during, and after pregnancy.
If you haven't read this article at A Holy Experience, it summed up my feelings in a much better way then I did about how we need to do better to support the child AND the woman. It is beautiful, loving, and eloquent.
As I pondered all this and read/heard more vitriol from both sides, throwing out lines like "women's rights! My body, my choice! Women support abortion!" etc, I become more entrenched in my belief that, while part of me identifies as feminist, I am definitely more humanist. I considered what it means to be humanist in different situations and heard more people say that identify as humanist (especially with the hot topic of immigration, etc). But I realized that I RARELY heard anyone in the abortion debate identify as humanist. They are feminist...or not (or are feminist but still stand against abortion).
Where are the humanists? Where are the people who have "a strong interest in or concern for human welfare and dignity"? And by that I mean ALL humans. ALL human life, no matter how young. There is not qualification for being cared for by a humanist other than being human...which unborn children are. It doesn't mean we don't care and value the mother less, or wish her less dignity. That would be go against humanism. While feminism promotes that a full-grown woman is more important and valued because she is a woman. I simply can't stand by that.
Humanism means we value the human life for just being human life. We offer it dignity. We offer it support. We care. For all the humans involved. Even if that human kinda looks like a gummy bear for a little while (for didn't we all?). It's not about being "pro-birth" and dropping the humans involved like a hot potato after the placenta comes out. The love and support does not end there.
Nor does it begin there.
If you identify as a humanist, as many liberal AND conservatives do, we value the human life. We demand individuals to be respected, to be cared for...simply because of who they are. Human. Male or female. Child or adult. Infant or elderly. Black or white. It does not matter. Humanists love human life. We let life live. We appreciate the creation of human life because we value human life. We support human life because we believe everyone deserves a measure of dignity.
Is that not something we can all get on board with?
Here I am, about 16 weeks along. People ask me all the time "Are you excited?" and I will answer honestly, "I'm getting there." They act a little surprised, but I'll tell the truth. I was done after two children (this is our third). I was happy to be done with diapers. Happy to be able to tell my kids to stay in their room until the sun came up and not feel bad about it. Happy with the way they interacted with eachother. Not sure I wanted to add another 6 years to our in-home parenting years.
But over the last year, my very patient husband (who isn't particularly wild about children, btw) kept dropping, "I feel like we're supposed to have another one. I feel like there's someone else who's supposed to be in this family." I was like, "Good for you. I don't." We are a very faith-based home and, while he NEVER pushed it, he told me that he had prayed and still felt it so. He said "If it were up to me, I'd say nope, but I feel like it's what we're supposed to do and I trust that. But you need to have that confirmation for yourself because you're the one who's going to be doing most of the work."
I wouldn't even pray about it. For a year, I felt conflicted (do I get rid of all the baby stuff or keep it?), but I refused to inquire. I did NOT want an answer. I knew what it would be and I didn't want it. So I never asked. Over the past year, my heart softened and I finally to a place where I could ask and feel like that's where our family should go. I had enough faith to be obedient, but not super excited about it. I got pregnant relatively quickly (confirming that inspiration, I think)...and got serious morning sickness soon after. Which also made it hard to be excited.
Our children (6 and 4) are very excited and it's helped me see what a wonderful addition this child will be to our family...but, having gone through this twice before, I know it's not easy, full of things I don't particularly enjoy, and, unfortunately, that is making me work a bit harder to be excited.
It doesn't mean that I love or will love this sweet baby any less. I just don't have that excitement or anticipation one has with their first. Maybe that makes me a bad person, but I know there are mamas out there who understand. My point in sharing that very personal experience is that there have been times (like I think many women have during pregnancy), where I was like "Oh crap. I'm not sure I want to do this." And maybe I had them more frequently than many.
However, my first real moment of excitement, my first tears of joy came at my 10 week ultrasound. On that black and gray screen I saw what was, several months ago, my empty womb. It was now occupied by someone who wasn't there a couple months ago. It was now occupied by a being that had never existed before.
We had created something. We had created the most wonderful something that anyone can create. Life. Human life. True, it mostly looked like a gummy bear. But that gummy bear was occupying a space that was empty, he was not only occupying that space, but he is living and growing.
It made me think of this quote and talk by Dieter F. Uchtdorf "The desire to create is one of the deepest yearnings of the human soul."
Despite my previous reluctance to have another child, I looked at that ultrasound and saw that precious LIFE that had been created. I felt the love of taking "unorganized matter into our hands and mold[ing] it into something of beauty." It was good. It was right. It was not just tissue.
My mind went to the conversation of abortion and, emotionally, I wondered how someone, even if undesired, could extinguish a life that had been miraculously made. A life that had never existed before...and would never exist again if terminated.
I thought about sharing my experience then, but I didn't want to be constantly talking/writing/thinking about abortion, so I just let myself enjoy the experience. I hadn't really thought about it much until a few days ago when I read about the trending #shoutyourabortion on social media. I was angry. I was disgusted. I am pretty moderate and understand that many women become pregnant in difficult circumstances, but what I saw was women shouting out with pride that they had terminated life because they "weren't ready" and "wanted to focus on their career" and I got upset. I resisted the urge to lash out with words at that point. And I'm glad I did.
B why didn't these women let this life live and give it to someone else who would've nurtured it? Why would they not sacrifice 9 months of discomfort to let this human being...be? No one has ever forced a mother to keep an unwanted child, in fact we have a huge part of government and many social agencies devoted to helping moms adopt out their children...and even take them away if it's obvious the mother does not want to do what it takes to take care of them.
What if, instead of abortions, Planned Parented (and other clinics) became the biggest facilitators of affordable adoption? They get to move on and have their careers, etc as they desire and that life gets to live and thrive with a family who wants him or her so badly.
One of the biggest lies the abortion movement has told the public is that an unborn child is "just tissue." Abortion is "just a medical procedure." As I looked at my unborn child in that ultrasound at 10 weeks, I thought "that is not just tissue. THAT is human life" and abortion is a "medical procedure" that ends that individual human life.
As I mentioned previously, I don't want to defund Planned Parenthood. I know they offer many other health services that are valuable. And it's not just about Planned Parenthood for me. It's the practice as a whole. I still think it should be made illegal (except in medically necessary situations) and we need to offer better support to women before, during, and after pregnancy.
If you haven't read this article at A Holy Experience, it summed up my feelings in a much better way then I did about how we need to do better to support the child AND the woman. It is beautiful, loving, and eloquent.
As I pondered all this and read/heard more vitriol from both sides, throwing out lines like "women's rights! My body, my choice! Women support abortion!" etc, I become more entrenched in my belief that, while part of me identifies as feminist, I am definitely more humanist. I considered what it means to be humanist in different situations and heard more people say that identify as humanist (especially with the hot topic of immigration, etc). But I realized that I RARELY heard anyone in the abortion debate identify as humanist. They are feminist...or not (or are feminist but still stand against abortion).
Where are the humanists? Where are the people who have "a strong interest in or concern for human welfare and dignity"? And by that I mean ALL humans. ALL human life, no matter how young. There is not qualification for being cared for by a humanist other than being human...which unborn children are. It doesn't mean we don't care and value the mother less, or wish her less dignity. That would be go against humanism. While feminism promotes that a full-grown woman is more important and valued because she is a woman. I simply can't stand by that.
Humanism means we value the human life for just being human life. We offer it dignity. We offer it support. We care. For all the humans involved. Even if that human kinda looks like a gummy bear for a little while (for didn't we all?). It's not about being "pro-birth" and dropping the humans involved like a hot potato after the placenta comes out. The love and support does not end there.
Nor does it begin there.
If you identify as a humanist, as many liberal AND conservatives do, we value the human life. We demand individuals to be respected, to be cared for...simply because of who they are. Human. Male or female. Child or adult. Infant or elderly. Black or white. It does not matter. Humanists love human life. We let life live. We appreciate the creation of human life because we value human life. We support human life because we believe everyone deserves a measure of dignity.
Is that not something we can all get on board with?
Thursday, September 3, 2015
Divorced Kentucky Clerk Denies Same-Sex Marriage Licenses
Kim Davis, a Kentucky county clerk, is making headlines by denying marriage licenses for same-sex couples despite the recent federal court ruling...and several court orders demanding she comply with the federal law.
From what I've seen, most reasonable people think her behavior is unacceptable and I agree. As an elected official, she has a responsibility to uphold the law. If she disagrees with that law because of moral/religous beliefs, that's fine. Make your statement. Disagree. Sacrifice your job. She needs to resign because she cannot uphold the law and that's what she was elected to do.
However, that's not what has bothered me. Over and over again, I've seen people blast this woman's personal life, specifically her marriage history. Apparently, she's been divorced several times and, because of that, she is a hypocrite in disagreeing with same-sex marriage. The tag line goes something like "Protecting the sanctity of marriage by denying same-sex marriage licenses? Says the woman who's been divorced three times."
I find these kinds of attacks abhorrent. For one, unless you know her personally, you do not know the circumstances of her marriages or divorce. Perhaps abuse was involved. Many times, women who marry one jerk tend to marry the same kind of jerk.
But that's not really the point. Christians, even those who support gay marriage, should never use this "look at your history, you don't have any right to stand up for your beliefs" stance. Why? Because we understand that we are all sinners.
"...He that is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone at her." -John 8:7.
I don't swear very often, but occasionally a situation arises where it seems to be the only appropriate reaction. Does the fact that I have sworn in the past negate my right to stand up and say "I think swearing is inappropriate?"
Or, how about this one: before my husband returned to church, he was a quite a drinker. He got himself into some pretty serious trouble. But he has since stopped, never had a drink again, and we don't allow it in our home and we will teach our children the same. Does the fact that he has had alcohol in his past mean he can't say "I believe that drinking alcohol is against what my God what's me to do"?
Or how about anger. We are commanded to turn the other cheek, to be slow to anger. But, seriously, which one of hasn't gotten angry...and knows we won't get angry again.
Or how about the most important of commandments: love your God and love your neighbor as you love yourself. How many of us have chosen to put something else before God? How many of us has treated our neighbor (who is anyone around us) poorly? And it will probably happen again. Because we are human. Life is complicated. Circumstances get difficult. Are we not ALL hypocrites?
Even those of us in this human family who are not Christian or religious can understand that we can believe something while having lived that belief imperfectly. We can preach our belief in the sanctity of all life...while doing everything we can to eliminate the pests in our homes. We can teach our children to love everyone...except those who do not agree with us or those that do bad things. We all live our beliefs imperfectly because, well, we are imperfect. So why do we put people like Kim on blast for being, well, imperfect?
So I have cringed every time I've seen a meme attacking that woman as a hypocrite because of her past choices (which she would probably admit were mistakes...probably in that she should not have married those men or any number of issues that contribute to divorce). Does that mean she cannot believe marriage is sacred? No. She may very well wish for a Godly marriage...but, perhaps, has gone about it the wrong way.
I've seen the same thing with Bristol Palin. The champion of abstinence who makes her living traveling around and encouraging people to wait to have sex until after marriage. She is about to have her second child out of wedlock. People made fun of her. But my heart broke for her. Anyone who has been young understands how hard it can be to be chaste. It IS difficult in this world...and she understands that more than anyone. Does that mean she does not believe people should not wait until after marriage? No, I'm sure she believes it just as much as before. But she messed up. Big time.
Does it make her a hypocrite. Yes. But no more than the rest of us. She just happens to live in the public light.
Hypocrisy is one of the biggest sins. It is what Jesus chastised the Pharisees for over and over again in the New Testament. It is something we must be aware of in ourselves and do our best to stay away from. However, we learn from the scriptures that it was the Lord doing the condemning and he specifically taught with the "...He that is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone at her..." that that is His job. It is above our pay grade. We are not the judge. Probably because he knew that we are all hypocrites on some level and could not justly judge.
God doesn't care where we are on the path, only that we are traveling in the right direction. Would he have us quit and jump off the path when we screw up? No. We ask for forgiveness and jump back on the path. Will we mess up again? Perhaps. Probably. Most likely. Should we jump off the path then? No. We keep on truckin in the right direction. That is all we can do. Who are we to judge where people are on the path if God does not? Who are we to tell people that might as well have jumped off the path and have no right to believe in right or wrong because they screwed up?
I LOVE this quote from this talk: "If we don’t try, we’re just latter-day sinners; if we don’t persevere, we’re latter-day quitters; and if we don’t allow others to try, we’re just latter-day hypocrites. As we try, persevere, and help others to do the same, we are true Latter-day Saints. As we change, we will find that God indeed cares a lot more about who we are and about who we are becoming than about who we once were."
I disagree with what this clerk is doing. Maybe she's doing it because she genuinely believes it. Maybe she's doing it to be a martyr and get a martyr's pay day. Perhaps her past actions haven't made her the poster child for marriage. But that doesn't mean she deserve the right to stand up for what she says she believes.
For we are all hypocrites.
From what I've seen, most reasonable people think her behavior is unacceptable and I agree. As an elected official, she has a responsibility to uphold the law. If she disagrees with that law because of moral/religous beliefs, that's fine. Make your statement. Disagree. Sacrifice your job. She needs to resign because she cannot uphold the law and that's what she was elected to do.
However, that's not what has bothered me. Over and over again, I've seen people blast this woman's personal life, specifically her marriage history. Apparently, she's been divorced several times and, because of that, she is a hypocrite in disagreeing with same-sex marriage. The tag line goes something like "Protecting the sanctity of marriage by denying same-sex marriage licenses? Says the woman who's been divorced three times."
I find these kinds of attacks abhorrent. For one, unless you know her personally, you do not know the circumstances of her marriages or divorce. Perhaps abuse was involved. Many times, women who marry one jerk tend to marry the same kind of jerk.
But that's not really the point. Christians, even those who support gay marriage, should never use this "look at your history, you don't have any right to stand up for your beliefs" stance. Why? Because we understand that we are all sinners.
"...He that is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone at her." -John 8:7.
I don't swear very often, but occasionally a situation arises where it seems to be the only appropriate reaction. Does the fact that I have sworn in the past negate my right to stand up and say "I think swearing is inappropriate?"
Or, how about this one: before my husband returned to church, he was a quite a drinker. He got himself into some pretty serious trouble. But he has since stopped, never had a drink again, and we don't allow it in our home and we will teach our children the same. Does the fact that he has had alcohol in his past mean he can't say "I believe that drinking alcohol is against what my God what's me to do"?
Or how about anger. We are commanded to turn the other cheek, to be slow to anger. But, seriously, which one of hasn't gotten angry...and knows we won't get angry again.
Or how about the most important of commandments: love your God and love your neighbor as you love yourself. How many of us have chosen to put something else before God? How many of us has treated our neighbor (who is anyone around us) poorly? And it will probably happen again. Because we are human. Life is complicated. Circumstances get difficult. Are we not ALL hypocrites?
Even those of us in this human family who are not Christian or religious can understand that we can believe something while having lived that belief imperfectly. We can preach our belief in the sanctity of all life...while doing everything we can to eliminate the pests in our homes. We can teach our children to love everyone...except those who do not agree with us or those that do bad things. We all live our beliefs imperfectly because, well, we are imperfect. So why do we put people like Kim on blast for being, well, imperfect?
So I have cringed every time I've seen a meme attacking that woman as a hypocrite because of her past choices (which she would probably admit were mistakes...probably in that she should not have married those men or any number of issues that contribute to divorce). Does that mean she cannot believe marriage is sacred? No. She may very well wish for a Godly marriage...but, perhaps, has gone about it the wrong way.
I've seen the same thing with Bristol Palin. The champion of abstinence who makes her living traveling around and encouraging people to wait to have sex until after marriage. She is about to have her second child out of wedlock. People made fun of her. But my heart broke for her. Anyone who has been young understands how hard it can be to be chaste. It IS difficult in this world...and she understands that more than anyone. Does that mean she does not believe people should not wait until after marriage? No, I'm sure she believes it just as much as before. But she messed up. Big time.
Does it make her a hypocrite. Yes. But no more than the rest of us. She just happens to live in the public light.
Hypocrisy is one of the biggest sins. It is what Jesus chastised the Pharisees for over and over again in the New Testament. It is something we must be aware of in ourselves and do our best to stay away from. However, we learn from the scriptures that it was the Lord doing the condemning and he specifically taught with the "...He that is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone at her..." that that is His job. It is above our pay grade. We are not the judge. Probably because he knew that we are all hypocrites on some level and could not justly judge.
God doesn't care where we are on the path, only that we are traveling in the right direction. Would he have us quit and jump off the path when we screw up? No. We ask for forgiveness and jump back on the path. Will we mess up again? Perhaps. Probably. Most likely. Should we jump off the path then? No. We keep on truckin in the right direction. That is all we can do. Who are we to judge where people are on the path if God does not? Who are we to tell people that might as well have jumped off the path and have no right to believe in right or wrong because they screwed up?
I LOVE this quote from this talk: "If we don’t try, we’re just latter-day sinners; if we don’t persevere, we’re latter-day quitters; and if we don’t allow others to try, we’re just latter-day hypocrites. As we try, persevere, and help others to do the same, we are true Latter-day Saints. As we change, we will find that God indeed cares a lot more about who we are and about who we are becoming than about who we once were."
I disagree with what this clerk is doing. Maybe she's doing it because she genuinely believes it. Maybe she's doing it to be a martyr and get a martyr's pay day. Perhaps her past actions haven't made her the poster child for marriage. But that doesn't mean she deserve the right to stand up for what she says she believes.
For we are all hypocrites.
Saturday, August 1, 2015
Women Have Choices, We Don't Need Abortion. Here's the Plan...
It is rare that I feel compelled to get up out of bed and write my thoughts these days. But, tonight I do.
Abortion. Harvesting baby parts. It's all over the news. And rightfully so.
I was a bit skeptical when the first video came out and watched the edited version. It didn't look good for Planned Parenthood, but figured they find a way to spin their way out of it or whatever. Then a second and third video, which I honestly didn't watch. More fuel for the conservative right to the anti-abortion/pro-life movement for them. Planned Parenthood/Pro-Choice/Pro-abortion defenders defended it with the expected "it was edited such and such" without really watching it.
Blind support on both sides. What I expected and it didn't affect my previous opinion or behaviors regarding abortion.
When the fourth video that "proved" Planned Parenthood was "harvesting" and "selling" baby parts came out as the most damning video, I figured I'd better watch it and see what was so damning about it.
It was horrifying. But what horrified may not be what you think. Assuming that Planned Parenthood isn't doing anything illegal (which many argue they are), I was horrified by the manner of the conversation.
They called this child's organs "product." They gave it a monetary value. They giggled. They laughed. They callously talked about how useful (and financially valuable) this baby was in pieces. They talked about how it was more valuable "in tact" ie actually born. I was disgusted.
And I kept watching. I heard them crush a skull and the sift through the parts asking if there was any use for the eyeball. No.
That child would've had use for that eyeball.
And that was for a child well within the first trimester at 11.6 weeks, which is legal to abort in every state. It had identifiable HUMAN body parts that apparently have monetary (or research, whatever) value...but not enough value to be allowed to continue to live after doing nothing wrong.
What have we become? Where in our human existence do we casually talk about what we can gain after strategically crushing and destroying the most innocent, vulnerable of life? How can someone look at those little parts and not see life? Not see a being worth protecting? A being worth being given a chance to just...live?
It was in that moment that I solidified my opinion on abortion. I decided I would not just say "Well, I'm pro-choice, but I hope a woman would choose not to have an abortion."
No. It needs to be illegal again. And I'll tell you why. It has little to do with God or anecdotal stories about people that could've been aborted but weren't and grew up to be movers and shakers in our world. Because I know that has little impact on the blind defenders of Planned Parenthood and abortion.
Here's the deal. I'm all for the women's pro-choice movement. Here are the choices women have:
If women have the capacity to decide to have an abortion after getting pregnant, they have the capacity to get on the pill (or whatever) before getting pregnant.
I'm not trying to defund Planned Parenthood, they offer valuable services to communities who need it. I just want to reappropriate their funding: make abortion illegal (except in extreme circumstances like a medical necessity, rape, incest, etc...like any other major medical procedure (or prescription) that is illegal unless deemed necessary by medical professionals) and whatever funding Planned Parenthood got for abortions goes to expanding the resources of prevention. Read that last sentence again before you freak out: abortion would be made illegal except in cases where the pregnancy is a danger to the mother, result of rape or incest, or other extreme circumstances. Which is a very small percentage of the 40 million abortions every year.
Put condoms on every corner. Throw the Pill from parade floats. Increase and improve sex education, which means abstinence only states must suck it up and provide REAL sex education. All in an effort to make sure there is NO excuse for an unwanted pregnancy.
Which, honestly, there isn't really now either. Abortion is simply not a necessary "choice" anymore.
I watched an episode of the Midwife (great show) that takes place in the 1940s in Britain where one mother had more children than she could handle. Like, she literally couldn't feed them all. And then she got pregnant again. She was desperate to get rid of the unborn child because she couldn't even take care of the ones she had. She went to get a back alley abortion...which almost killed her.
I cried for her. I sympathized with the desperation. The feeling of the lack of choices. But do you know how that episode started? She asked for the Pill (a new technology at the time), but was denied. Which is what led to the attempted and dangerous abortion.
Can you imagine that today? Someone walking into a public health service asking for birth control and being denied? Nope. Never. I've been married 10 years and have two children. Why have I never been desperate enough to seek an abortion? We use birth control.
And THAT is why abortion is not necessary and should not be legal. Women don't need that choice anymore. We have plenty of other choices other than wondering if Planned Parenthood is strategically murdering tiny humans so they can use their organs for profit or research (and that is seriously not the point of this blog).
Women do have choices. This isn't the stone age, 1800s, or even 1940s anymore. Want to have sex but don't want to get pregnant? Super. Choose 1) the pill 2) an IUD 3) condoms. Look. Choices. Choices that women didn't have even in the middle of the last century. Abortion is not new, it's only gotten safer for women. What is new is all the options we have to make sure it doesn't get to that point.
Oh I forgot, there is option 4)have irresponsible sex and possibly get pregnant. Under my plan, this means you deal with the consequences of choosing life-making activities without using life-preventing technology. You continue make that life because it did nothing wrong and doesn't deserve to die (and yes, even "clusters of cells" die...skin cells die all the time. Death is death. The difference is skin cells don't have the potential to become a complete human being within a matter of months if just left alone and not sucked out of the womb).
Life has consequences. Choices (and non-choices) have consequences. Sometimes they are hard. But if we give women (and men) all the opportunities, resources, and education in the world to prevent an unwanted pregnancy and they don't take advantage, than they have a responsibility to see it through. It's a nine month commitment at most if she wants...and I bet she'll use birth control next time (and it's less than a murder sentence since so many conservatives call abortion murder). Repeat offenders would be very few if we actually expect people to live with the consequences of their actions.
Because that is not a cluster of cells. By 11.6 weeks that life has organs, as seen in that video. Organs that would help it live, breathe, think, love, see the beauty of life. A body that would have grown, thrived, been loved by someone, and impacted other lives.
It has intrinsic value. Just like the life of a majestic lion or endangered eagles egg. The difference is the potential for that human life is even greater, yet we protect it less. The only philosophy class I took in college was Ethics. The only thing I took from that class is that we place value/priority on something/life based on its potential. What could have more potential than the beginnings of life in the womb?
By all accounts, no one likes abortion. Women don't like getting them. Doctors don't like doing them. Babies don't like getting them. So why do we do them when they simply are not necessary in our day in age? Because we are SO hung up on individual freedom that we can't even see it's wrong to destroy the most vulnerable of lives who can't speak up for themselves.
Women have so many freedoms on how to handle their sexuality and family planning it's laughable when people say they support abortion because they want women to have a choice? They DID have choices. Actually planning ahead choices, not "oh crap, we really should've stopped at the drug store and gotten some condoms" choices. And her/his poor planning or crappy decision doesn't suddenly give her rights of individual freedom priority over the life she created to simply exist. Support her during that process, give her all the medical and emotional support she needs, but do not allow her to end life because of a bad choice when she had all the opportunity to make a better one.
We are so hung up on individual rights that we can't even say, "Hey man, that's wrong. Sorry if that inconveniences you for a few months, but ending that sweet, precious, innocent life is wrong." Even when she had plenty of opportunity to prevent it.
So again, here's the plan: don't defund Planned Parenthood. Make abortion illegal (except in extreme circumstances) and use those funds and resources to get Planned Parenthood, community organizations, and other public health agencies to team up and make sure birth control and sex education is available to anyone and everyone. If we don't make abortion illegal than it will continue to be a safety net and that's just not ok when it could be avoided all together.
What do you think of the plan? Can we do it? I think we can if both sides, but especially my moderate peers stand up and say "THIS is what we want. THIS actually helps women. THIS actually prevents unwanted pregnancy. THIS saves lives."
Abortion. Harvesting baby parts. It's all over the news. And rightfully so.
I was a bit skeptical when the first video came out and watched the edited version. It didn't look good for Planned Parenthood, but figured they find a way to spin their way out of it or whatever. Then a second and third video, which I honestly didn't watch. More fuel for the conservative right to the anti-abortion/pro-life movement for them. Planned Parenthood/Pro-Choice/Pro-abortion defenders defended it with the expected "it was edited such and such" without really watching it.
Blind support on both sides. What I expected and it didn't affect my previous opinion or behaviors regarding abortion.
When the fourth video that "proved" Planned Parenthood was "harvesting" and "selling" baby parts came out as the most damning video, I figured I'd better watch it and see what was so damning about it.
It was horrifying. But what horrified may not be what you think. Assuming that Planned Parenthood isn't doing anything illegal (which many argue they are), I was horrified by the manner of the conversation.
They called this child's organs "product." They gave it a monetary value. They giggled. They laughed. They callously talked about how useful (and financially valuable) this baby was in pieces. They talked about how it was more valuable "in tact" ie actually born. I was disgusted.
And I kept watching. I heard them crush a skull and the sift through the parts asking if there was any use for the eyeball. No.
That child would've had use for that eyeball.
And that was for a child well within the first trimester at 11.6 weeks, which is legal to abort in every state. It had identifiable HUMAN body parts that apparently have monetary (or research, whatever) value...but not enough value to be allowed to continue to live after doing nothing wrong.
What have we become? Where in our human existence do we casually talk about what we can gain after strategically crushing and destroying the most innocent, vulnerable of life? How can someone look at those little parts and not see life? Not see a being worth protecting? A being worth being given a chance to just...live?
It was in that moment that I solidified my opinion on abortion. I decided I would not just say "Well, I'm pro-choice, but I hope a woman would choose not to have an abortion."
No. It needs to be illegal again. And I'll tell you why. It has little to do with God or anecdotal stories about people that could've been aborted but weren't and grew up to be movers and shakers in our world. Because I know that has little impact on the blind defenders of Planned Parenthood and abortion.
Here's the deal. I'm all for the women's pro-choice movement. Here are the choices women have:
- The pill (hundreds of different kinds of birth control pills)
- An IUD
- Condoms
- Abstinence (and do not shake your head at this one because I believe in women and men enough to know they can and do abstain).
If women have the capacity to decide to have an abortion after getting pregnant, they have the capacity to get on the pill (or whatever) before getting pregnant.
I'm not trying to defund Planned Parenthood, they offer valuable services to communities who need it. I just want to reappropriate their funding: make abortion illegal (except in extreme circumstances like a medical necessity, rape, incest, etc...like any other major medical procedure (or prescription) that is illegal unless deemed necessary by medical professionals) and whatever funding Planned Parenthood got for abortions goes to expanding the resources of prevention. Read that last sentence again before you freak out: abortion would be made illegal except in cases where the pregnancy is a danger to the mother, result of rape or incest, or other extreme circumstances. Which is a very small percentage of the 40 million abortions every year.
Put condoms on every corner. Throw the Pill from parade floats. Increase and improve sex education, which means abstinence only states must suck it up and provide REAL sex education. All in an effort to make sure there is NO excuse for an unwanted pregnancy.
Which, honestly, there isn't really now either. Abortion is simply not a necessary "choice" anymore.
I watched an episode of the Midwife (great show) that takes place in the 1940s in Britain where one mother had more children than she could handle. Like, she literally couldn't feed them all. And then she got pregnant again. She was desperate to get rid of the unborn child because she couldn't even take care of the ones she had. She went to get a back alley abortion...which almost killed her.
I cried for her. I sympathized with the desperation. The feeling of the lack of choices. But do you know how that episode started? She asked for the Pill (a new technology at the time), but was denied. Which is what led to the attempted and dangerous abortion.
Can you imagine that today? Someone walking into a public health service asking for birth control and being denied? Nope. Never. I've been married 10 years and have two children. Why have I never been desperate enough to seek an abortion? We use birth control.
And THAT is why abortion is not necessary and should not be legal. Women don't need that choice anymore. We have plenty of other choices other than wondering if Planned Parenthood is strategically murdering tiny humans so they can use their organs for profit or research (and that is seriously not the point of this blog).
Women do have choices. This isn't the stone age, 1800s, or even 1940s anymore. Want to have sex but don't want to get pregnant? Super. Choose 1) the pill 2) an IUD 3) condoms. Look. Choices. Choices that women didn't have even in the middle of the last century. Abortion is not new, it's only gotten safer for women. What is new is all the options we have to make sure it doesn't get to that point.
Oh I forgot, there is option 4)have irresponsible sex and possibly get pregnant. Under my plan, this means you deal with the consequences of choosing life-making activities without using life-preventing technology. You continue make that life because it did nothing wrong and doesn't deserve to die (and yes, even "clusters of cells" die...skin cells die all the time. Death is death. The difference is skin cells don't have the potential to become a complete human being within a matter of months if just left alone and not sucked out of the womb).
Life has consequences. Choices (and non-choices) have consequences. Sometimes they are hard. But if we give women (and men) all the opportunities, resources, and education in the world to prevent an unwanted pregnancy and they don't take advantage, than they have a responsibility to see it through. It's a nine month commitment at most if she wants...and I bet she'll use birth control next time (and it's less than a murder sentence since so many conservatives call abortion murder). Repeat offenders would be very few if we actually expect people to live with the consequences of their actions.
Because that is not a cluster of cells. By 11.6 weeks that life has organs, as seen in that video. Organs that would help it live, breathe, think, love, see the beauty of life. A body that would have grown, thrived, been loved by someone, and impacted other lives.
It has intrinsic value. Just like the life of a majestic lion or endangered eagles egg. The difference is the potential for that human life is even greater, yet we protect it less. The only philosophy class I took in college was Ethics. The only thing I took from that class is that we place value/priority on something/life based on its potential. What could have more potential than the beginnings of life in the womb?
By all accounts, no one likes abortion. Women don't like getting them. Doctors don't like doing them. Babies don't like getting them. So why do we do them when they simply are not necessary in our day in age? Because we are SO hung up on individual freedom that we can't even see it's wrong to destroy the most vulnerable of lives who can't speak up for themselves.
Women have so many freedoms on how to handle their sexuality and family planning it's laughable when people say they support abortion because they want women to have a choice? They DID have choices. Actually planning ahead choices, not "oh crap, we really should've stopped at the drug store and gotten some condoms" choices. And her/his poor planning or crappy decision doesn't suddenly give her rights of individual freedom priority over the life she created to simply exist. Support her during that process, give her all the medical and emotional support she needs, but do not allow her to end life because of a bad choice when she had all the opportunity to make a better one.
We are so hung up on individual rights that we can't even say, "Hey man, that's wrong. Sorry if that inconveniences you for a few months, but ending that sweet, precious, innocent life is wrong." Even when she had plenty of opportunity to prevent it.
So again, here's the plan: don't defund Planned Parenthood. Make abortion illegal (except in extreme circumstances) and use those funds and resources to get Planned Parenthood, community organizations, and other public health agencies to team up and make sure birth control and sex education is available to anyone and everyone. If we don't make abortion illegal than it will continue to be a safety net and that's just not ok when it could be avoided all together.
What do you think of the plan? Can we do it? I think we can if both sides, but especially my moderate peers stand up and say "THIS is what we want. THIS actually helps women. THIS actually prevents unwanted pregnancy. THIS saves lives."
Wednesday, July 22, 2015
Starving for 3 Full-Sized Pancakes...and a Bit of Compassion
The story of a crass restaurant owner vs a vicious "demon" of a 21 month year old is all over the interwebs.
I'll admit, when the story first came out and I hadn't read into the details, I sided with the Darla Neugebaur, the owner of the diner. I certainly have my opinions on current parenting trends (ie I think parents don't let their kids take enough chances, make them soft, too much technology, etc). However, with those issues are other more positive ones: more present parenting, the benefits of early education, mothers/fathers sharing child rearing duties more equally, etc.
I was fully prepared to jump on the "those irresponsible parents should've taken their screaming child out" bandwagon.
However, the more I read about this story, the more uncomfortable I became with that. For the purpose of this article let's just assume that the child was being loud (not screaming at the top of her lungs for 30 minutes like the owner said but more than a one-time whimper...somewhere in the middle lies the truth). I read somewhere (albeit I couldn't find the original source) that other customers said the child wasn't being all that disruptive but cried/complained for about 5 minutes.
But that's neither here nor there. Let's assume the parents should have taken the child out as many think they should have and, honestly, as I probably would've (and have) done.
But they didn't.
And apparently that warrants a verbal assault and borderline physical threat on Facebook.
And people are applauding this woman because the public has a right to eat their overpriced pancakes without the presence of unhappy children more than a child has a right to...be a child...or parents have a right to make an error in judgment.
Then it got kind of sickening.
I completely understand the ignorant comments from people who don't have children (including the owner of this diner). "If I had kids, I would NEVER let them make a peep in a restaurant" bla bla bla. Seriously, shut it. You have no idea what it's like to vacation with a toddler. My six year old was a volatile, terrible sleeper of a toddler. And, oh, vacations. It was the worst on vacation. So seriously, shut it.
But the worst is coming from other parents. To read the judgement when there should be compassion is...heartbreaking. "My child/grandchild ALWAYS behaved in public..." and "We taught our children to bla bla bla." You, my friends, are full of crap or have forgotten what it's like to have toddlers. *Note: child care workers, it doesn't count when it's other people's kids because kids ALWAYS behave better for other adults.
And let's remember that not all children are the same. There are very mild-mannered, quiet children. And there are children, well, like mine. They speak their mind and when they've made up their mind about something there is very little amount of righteous bribery that will sway them. This personality trait will serve them well later in life, but it sure makes them hard to parent and, yes, take out in public sometimes. As they've gotten older, of course, it's gotten easier, but at 21 months? Goodness sakes. And on vacation? Yikes.
Some have commented, "Well, you people don't understand. My child has ADHD/autism/etc..." and then the response is usually "Oh, well, you're probably doing the best you can do. We don't fault parents of kids with special needs..." Let me tell ya something: all 21 month olds have ADHD and special needs. They aren't reasoning, thinking people yet. They feel hunger, they cry. They feel stress, the cry. And how do you know this child doesn't have special needs? Maybe the parents don't even know yet. The point is you DON'T KNOW, so take the owner's advice and shut the hell up.
For the folks saying, "Well, then you shouldn't take them out in public." Srsly? You are probably the same people without children who go on about how kids these days are so sheltered, have no life-experiences, no manners, bla bla bla. How are kids supposed to get those experiences and learn if we just lock them up? And for that matter, how are these parents supposed to learn?
I guess that's what I'm getting at. Assuming the parents should've taken their child out of the restaurant, why can't we just sum that up as a parenting misjudgment instead of putting them on blast as "the problem with parents in today's age." You, without kids: you don't get a say. You, with kids: I'm sure you've made as many parenting mistakes as I have and as the parents in this story have. And instead of saying, "Man, I've been there" or "We all make mistakes, chin up," we're lining up to say "I raised my child to never misbehave in public, which proves I'm doing something right..." which you really probably wrote just to make yourself feel better about all times you've screwed up. Some publicly, most privately.
And to those of you jumped on the "I'm with the owner, kids in restaurants are the worst!" bandwagon, did you even read what she ADMITTED she did? She screamed at a toddler to "shut the hell up." She went on her business Facebook account using foul and crude language to lambast these people and their TODDLER, threatened them, complained about making THREE pancakes (and, omg, pancakes do not take that long to make, especially when the batter is already made), she called the toddler rotten and demon (which she based on this one encounter), told the husband he didn't have any balls, and admitted she thrived on hate.
You want to be on the side of that? I don't care how awful the child's behavior was. Chalk it up to a bad day in the service industry and move on. But people are applauding her for standing up for "people's god-given right to have brunch without disruption." Yes, perhaps the parents should've taken their child out and it's her private business and she can do whatever she wants, but to applaud such disgusting behavior is beyond me. To applaud the verbal assault and online bullying of this family is semi-horrifying. Whatever "rightness" Neugebaur had, she lost in the delivery. Now she's just wrong.
It seems to me that we have put an individual's right to eat overpriced pancakes undisturbed and a disturbed GROWN-ASS woman's right to scream at a toddler over a child's innocence. And over parents who simply made a misjudgment and are probably trying to do their best.
Neugebaur is right. No one needs 3 full-sized pancakes. But we could all dish out a bit more compassion and less judgement.
I'll admit, when the story first came out and I hadn't read into the details, I sided with the Darla Neugebaur, the owner of the diner. I certainly have my opinions on current parenting trends (ie I think parents don't let their kids take enough chances, make them soft, too much technology, etc). However, with those issues are other more positive ones: more present parenting, the benefits of early education, mothers/fathers sharing child rearing duties more equally, etc.
I was fully prepared to jump on the "those irresponsible parents should've taken their screaming child out" bandwagon.
However, the more I read about this story, the more uncomfortable I became with that. For the purpose of this article let's just assume that the child was being loud (not screaming at the top of her lungs for 30 minutes like the owner said but more than a one-time whimper...somewhere in the middle lies the truth). I read somewhere (albeit I couldn't find the original source) that other customers said the child wasn't being all that disruptive but cried/complained for about 5 minutes.
But that's neither here nor there. Let's assume the parents should have taken the child out as many think they should have and, honestly, as I probably would've (and have) done.
But they didn't.
And apparently that warrants a verbal assault and borderline physical threat on Facebook.
And people are applauding this woman because the public has a right to eat their overpriced pancakes without the presence of unhappy children more than a child has a right to...be a child...or parents have a right to make an error in judgment.
Then it got kind of sickening.
I completely understand the ignorant comments from people who don't have children (including the owner of this diner). "If I had kids, I would NEVER let them make a peep in a restaurant" bla bla bla. Seriously, shut it. You have no idea what it's like to vacation with a toddler. My six year old was a volatile, terrible sleeper of a toddler. And, oh, vacations. It was the worst on vacation. So seriously, shut it.
But the worst is coming from other parents. To read the judgement when there should be compassion is...heartbreaking. "My child/grandchild ALWAYS behaved in public..." and "We taught our children to bla bla bla." You, my friends, are full of crap or have forgotten what it's like to have toddlers. *Note: child care workers, it doesn't count when it's other people's kids because kids ALWAYS behave better for other adults.
And let's remember that not all children are the same. There are very mild-mannered, quiet children. And there are children, well, like mine. They speak their mind and when they've made up their mind about something there is very little amount of righteous bribery that will sway them. This personality trait will serve them well later in life, but it sure makes them hard to parent and, yes, take out in public sometimes. As they've gotten older, of course, it's gotten easier, but at 21 months? Goodness sakes. And on vacation? Yikes.
Some have commented, "Well, you people don't understand. My child has ADHD/autism/etc..." and then the response is usually "Oh, well, you're probably doing the best you can do. We don't fault parents of kids with special needs..." Let me tell ya something: all 21 month olds have ADHD and special needs. They aren't reasoning, thinking people yet. They feel hunger, they cry. They feel stress, the cry. And how do you know this child doesn't have special needs? Maybe the parents don't even know yet. The point is you DON'T KNOW, so take the owner's advice and shut the hell up.
For the folks saying, "Well, then you shouldn't take them out in public." Srsly? You are probably the same people without children who go on about how kids these days are so sheltered, have no life-experiences, no manners, bla bla bla. How are kids supposed to get those experiences and learn if we just lock them up? And for that matter, how are these parents supposed to learn?
I guess that's what I'm getting at. Assuming the parents should've taken their child out of the restaurant, why can't we just sum that up as a parenting misjudgment instead of putting them on blast as "the problem with parents in today's age." You, without kids: you don't get a say. You, with kids: I'm sure you've made as many parenting mistakes as I have and as the parents in this story have. And instead of saying, "Man, I've been there" or "We all make mistakes, chin up," we're lining up to say "I raised my child to never misbehave in public, which proves I'm doing something right..." which you really probably wrote just to make yourself feel better about all times you've screwed up. Some publicly, most privately.
And to those of you jumped on the "I'm with the owner, kids in restaurants are the worst!" bandwagon, did you even read what she ADMITTED she did? She screamed at a toddler to "shut the hell up." She went on her business Facebook account using foul and crude language to lambast these people and their TODDLER, threatened them, complained about making THREE pancakes (and, omg, pancakes do not take that long to make, especially when the batter is already made), she called the toddler rotten and demon (which she based on this one encounter), told the husband he didn't have any balls, and admitted she thrived on hate.
You want to be on the side of that? I don't care how awful the child's behavior was. Chalk it up to a bad day in the service industry and move on. But people are applauding her for standing up for "people's god-given right to have brunch without disruption." Yes, perhaps the parents should've taken their child out and it's her private business and she can do whatever she wants, but to applaud such disgusting behavior is beyond me. To applaud the verbal assault and online bullying of this family is semi-horrifying. Whatever "rightness" Neugebaur had, she lost in the delivery. Now she's just wrong.
It seems to me that we have put an individual's right to eat overpriced pancakes undisturbed and a disturbed GROWN-ASS woman's right to scream at a toddler over a child's innocence. And over parents who simply made a misjudgment and are probably trying to do their best.
Neugebaur is right. No one needs 3 full-sized pancakes. But we could all dish out a bit more compassion and less judgement.
Monday, June 29, 2015
The Lord's Evaluation of Life Does Not Include Convincing People Gay Marriage is Wrong
When I was applying to become a Resident Advisor before my sophomore year of college, they ran applicants through a series of screenings. The one I remember was a group discussion about a controversial topic (if memory serves, the topic was actually about residents' right to hang a Confederate flag in their room/window even as it offended other residents). I was ready. In my young mind, I knew I was right and I was ready to show all those evaluating me how smart, quick, assertive, and correct I was. I thought I did pretty well showing everyone how correct I was.
A little while later I received my evaluation, including the criteria of what I was being evaluated on...and a notice that I had been put on the "wait-list" for the job. What?! Hadn't they seen how brilliant I was? Didn't they see how right I was and how boldly I stood up for what was right?!
Turns out, they didn't really care. Being "right" wasn't listed as one of the criteria. However, genuinely listening, not interrupting, etc. WERE some of the criteria. I felt like a fool. I replayed in my mind the times and I had let myself be incredulous at someone's opinion or interrupted or completely shut them down. This was the first time in my life where I realized that in SO many situations it really doesn't matter what you say (even if it's right), it matters HOW you listen and HOW you express yourself.
In the days following the Supreme Court ruling to grant gay couples the right to be married, I have thought of my experience of evaluation of expression many times. For both sides. And it made me wonder, does the Lord really care about politics? Does the Lord really care about the Supreme Court ruling? Does He care whether we voluntarily take care of the poor or we put in place a government that "forces" us to do it as long as the poor are taken care of?
Perhaps the evaluation of our lives is more about HOW we conduct ourselves in relation to others and, of course, our own personal obedience to the ordinances and principals of truth that we know. I would imagine on the Lord's syllabus for our lives, there isn't one bullet point where it says, "Convinced at least 2 people via Facebook that gay marriage is wrong."
As an LDS born and raised where Mormons are the minority (in fact, where religion in general is a minority), maybe I'm just used to being around people who believe differently than me. In fact, no matter we live, we should be kind of used to it. I rarely see Mormons condemning people who choose to drink alcohol. I rarely see Mormons condemning people who have children before they are married. I rarely see Mormons telling people to "take our country back" because pretty much every store everywhere is open on Sundays. These are all things we believe strongly in, so why don't we do it? Because we also know that life is complicated and it is completely unreasonable to hold all people to a standard they don't believe in. It's a losing fight and, honestly, a waste of energy I need to be putting into my own spirituality and my own family. THAT is how the kingdom is established; not politics. And definitely not the interwebs.
I will boldly and lovingly state what I believe in an appropriate place and time...and then let people choose.
I remember having a religious discussion with a friend from high school who asked what Mormons believe about homosexuality and gay marriage. I told her in as a respectful but firm way as possible. A time later she told me she was gay and I panicked remembering our discussion and wracked my brain for anything I could've said that might have hurt her...because she was my friend from childhood and I love her. I was relieved when I realized I didn't say anything I would take back and nothing that caused her to not want to be my friend even though we disagreed. In fact, she was a Mormon defender when she moved to the South and people would make comments :)
But this is how we should conduct ourselves. On both sides. I didn't say what I said to hurt her, but we knew where each other stood...and then we continued on being friends! There was no trying to convince each other. In fact, we need to get ourselves out of the convincing business, my dear LDS. Talk about what we have, what we know, and then let others decide. Some will say yes, some will say no. And the one's who say no, well, that's not on us anymore. So just continue to love on but move on from it. Trying to convince people hardly ever works. With anything.
But let me tell you this: the work of the Lord will go on. There is no need to fear or freak out or tell people they are going to hell or (my personal favorite) "gay marriage is satanic." I remember in the midst of dealing with a broken heart over an ex-boyfriend who just couldn't see the merits of becoming LDS to be with me forever (I was a dumb college girl), I told my father, "But he would make such a good Mormon!" My dad calmly replied, "Vanessa, the work will go forth without him. The stone will not stop rolling because he didn't join the Church." THAT was stick of truth that smacked me in the head, big time.
That is my sentiment to you, my fine LDS. The work will go forth with or without gay marriage. So perhaps, you should consider the fact that, no matter how right you think you are, you are being evaluated on HOW you say what you say...and not actually being right.
Honestly, I don't know what the Lord thinks of a temporal government granting a legal marriage to gay couples. And neither do you. Making judgement calls like that is above my pay grade and it's above yours. So don't do it. Believe in traditional marriage. Stand for Celestial marriage. But do not pretend to know what your Father in Heaven thinks of people in a situation you do not understand. We are not called to do that.
Focus on what you know is on the evaluation (ie YOUR covenants) and remember, there is no requirement for convincing people via Facebook.
Turns out, they didn't really care. Being "right" wasn't listed as one of the criteria. However, genuinely listening, not interrupting, etc. WERE some of the criteria. I felt like a fool. I replayed in my mind the times and I had let myself be incredulous at someone's opinion or interrupted or completely shut them down. This was the first time in my life where I realized that in SO many situations it really doesn't matter what you say (even if it's right), it matters HOW you listen and HOW you express yourself.
In the days following the Supreme Court ruling to grant gay couples the right to be married, I have thought of my experience of evaluation of expression many times. For both sides. And it made me wonder, does the Lord really care about politics? Does the Lord really care about the Supreme Court ruling? Does He care whether we voluntarily take care of the poor or we put in place a government that "forces" us to do it as long as the poor are taken care of?
Perhaps the evaluation of our lives is more about HOW we conduct ourselves in relation to others and, of course, our own personal obedience to the ordinances and principals of truth that we know. I would imagine on the Lord's syllabus for our lives, there isn't one bullet point where it says, "Convinced at least 2 people via Facebook that gay marriage is wrong."
As an LDS born and raised where Mormons are the minority (in fact, where religion in general is a minority), maybe I'm just used to being around people who believe differently than me. In fact, no matter we live, we should be kind of used to it. I rarely see Mormons condemning people who choose to drink alcohol. I rarely see Mormons condemning people who have children before they are married. I rarely see Mormons telling people to "take our country back" because pretty much every store everywhere is open on Sundays. These are all things we believe strongly in, so why don't we do it? Because we also know that life is complicated and it is completely unreasonable to hold all people to a standard they don't believe in. It's a losing fight and, honestly, a waste of energy I need to be putting into my own spirituality and my own family. THAT is how the kingdom is established; not politics. And definitely not the interwebs.
I will boldly and lovingly state what I believe in an appropriate place and time...and then let people choose.
I remember having a religious discussion with a friend from high school who asked what Mormons believe about homosexuality and gay marriage. I told her in as a respectful but firm way as possible. A time later she told me she was gay and I panicked remembering our discussion and wracked my brain for anything I could've said that might have hurt her...because she was my friend from childhood and I love her. I was relieved when I realized I didn't say anything I would take back and nothing that caused her to not want to be my friend even though we disagreed. In fact, she was a Mormon defender when she moved to the South and people would make comments :)
But this is how we should conduct ourselves. On both sides. I didn't say what I said to hurt her, but we knew where each other stood...and then we continued on being friends! There was no trying to convince each other. In fact, we need to get ourselves out of the convincing business, my dear LDS. Talk about what we have, what we know, and then let others decide. Some will say yes, some will say no. And the one's who say no, well, that's not on us anymore. So just continue to love on but move on from it. Trying to convince people hardly ever works. With anything.
 |
| The work will go forth, do not panic. |
That is my sentiment to you, my fine LDS. The work will go forth with or without gay marriage. So perhaps, you should consider the fact that, no matter how right you think you are, you are being evaluated on HOW you say what you say...and not actually being right.
Honestly, I don't know what the Lord thinks of a temporal government granting a legal marriage to gay couples. And neither do you. Making judgement calls like that is above my pay grade and it's above yours. So don't do it. Believe in traditional marriage. Stand for Celestial marriage. But do not pretend to know what your Father in Heaven thinks of people in a situation you do not understand. We are not called to do that.
Focus on what you know is on the evaluation (ie YOUR covenants) and remember, there is no requirement for convincing people via Facebook.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)