# "War on Women" #9



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Designer1234 said:


> The dissension between ourselves is because there are those who don't want women to be treated with respect for the first time and to be given the right to choose what they do with their own lives and bodies.
> 
> Why should someone on the Far right decide for someone who is facing a huge decision, what she is allowed to do with Her life? I am not suggesting abortion - I am suggesting each woman be allowed to make that decision as it is her life and her body and her future. Not to be decided by a group of men and Religious right wingers whose decides on what she should do. yet it is decided by the Right that they have the right to decide whether a woman should be 'required' to follow their ideas. It should be each persons right to choose.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I think the dissention is because women want to be right. They have little tolerance for anyone else's thoughts or ideas. And very little patience for hearing the opinions of others.


Certain women? Women on KP? Women in general?
I've always had a ton of patience, but when someone hammers away at the same old thing, with the same old arguments, my patience wears thin.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

cynthia627 said:


> Yes Constitutional Law. It was great because it was in a specialized Institution for really bright kids. It was fun I have to say.
> 
> No central Jersey to Bklyn. So about 1 1/2 hrs away.
> 
> My friend is a full Professor and an attorney. She wanted me to have a second full-time career which I did not want. So I did not pursue the invitation.


It speaks volumes that you have enough satisfaction in your current life to give up a job like that. (Also, that's too long a trip.)


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Like a cow, Susanmos2000 regurgitated her vile and despicable attack on Yarnie from a year or so ago, lied again about her (Susan's) horrific words and justified it on that thread, on Mother's Day. Not to mention, on a day when Yarnie is experiencing incredible pain and suffering as well.
> 
> Choose your friends wisely and with your eyes wide opened.


But continue to believe all the rot fed to you by the repub congressmen and pundits! And KPG . . .


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Actually, in deference to Yarnie's troubles I cut her some slack and refrained from drawing attention to the two whoppers she told on Sunday evening.
> 
> That being clear, do you really wish to continue this?


She does not lie. You are the liar. Her Daddy is at death's door. That is the only thing she said Sunday. Her plans for her son to take her out for Brunch was delayed because she had to rush 3 hours awhile to go see her Daddy in the hospital. You need to mind your own business and stop stirring garbage up! You need to get a real life You are the one that need to be clear and stop continuing this!


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Wow! You paint with a broad brush! Your statements are not representative of all or even most women on the right. Do you base your statements on the few women you interact with here on KP? In truth, I don't know ANY women who oppose birth control! To say that we vehemently oppose it is truly a lie.
> 
> As to your last paragraph, IF women exerted CONTROL over their sex and reproductive lives, we wouldn't be having this discussion. With the exception of rape, every woman has a choice. The choice being whether to take birth control, whether to have unprotected sex or whether to engage in sex with someone she's not committed to building a future with. Abortion kills human life! Why does that human not have a choice, when the woman already made her choice? We must protect our children. They are the only innocent among us!


So it's all the woman's fault because she has no control?


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Today is a "spare the air" day, so I'm going to get my walk in before the air becomes too polluted. But global warming and how we take care of the earth isn't a problem.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Her Daddy is at death's door. That is the only thing she said Sunday. Her plans for her son to take her out for Brunch was delayed because she had to rush 3 hours awhile to go see her Daddy in the hospital.'

I am sorry to hear about Yarnie's troubles. I think many of us were unaware of this situation. I send her peace and hope and I am sure my fellows on this thread do so also.


----------



## cynthia627 (Sep 15, 2013)

I know but my MIL was sick, BIL was sick too. So sometimes life gets in the way......



Poor Purl said:


> It speaks volumes that you have enough satisfaction in your current life to give up a job like that. (Also, that's too long a trip.)


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Wow! You paint with a broad brush! Your statements are not representative of all or even most women on the right. Do you base your statements on the few women you interact with here on KP? In truth, I don't know ANY women who oppose birth control! To say that we vehemently oppose it is truly a lie.
> 
> As to your last paragraph, IF women exerted CONTROL over their sex and reproductive lives, we wouldn't be having this discussion. With the exception of rape, every woman has a choice. The choice being whether to take birth control, whether to have unprotected sex or whether to engage in sex with someone she's not committed to building a future with. Abortion kills human life! Why does that human not have a choice, when the woman already made her choice? We must protect our children. They are the only innocent among us!


I don't know about RW women, but the men have been doing all they can to do away with birth control. Rick Santorum was even disgusted just thinking about it. And I fear that the women often do what their men want them to do.

I won't get into the distinction between human life and potential life, though I think it's a very important one. I'll ask a different question: Why hasn't the right fostered legislation to force parents to donate organs to their post-born children who may need them? Why should a pregnant woman have to donate her entire body to keep "alive" what doesn't yet seem alive to her, but once there is a living child, all bets are off?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> She does not lie. You are the liar. Her Daddy is at death's door. That is the only thing she said Sunday. Her plans for her son to take her out for Brunch was delayed because she had to rush 3 hours awhile to go see her Daddy in the hospital. You need to mind your own business and stop stirring garbage up! You need to get a real life You are the one that need to be clear and stop continuing this!


You do realize, don't you, that it was Janeway who brought the whole thing up, not Susan. Janeway had to trot out the *lie* that Susan said "enjoy" the seizure.

I'm sorry that Yarnie is going through such a terrible time. But maybe it's her own friends who could stop being so nasty for a while and just try to comfort her, instead of looking for things to accuse others of doing.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

SQM said:


> "Abortion kills human life! Why does that human not have a choice"
> Because an embryo (or lesser biological status) has no capacity for thinking. It is a mass of cells.
> 
> Please don't have an abortion. Many of us pledged not to do so. However, please keep your religious and political beliefs out of my daughter's vagina. You have no more right to dictate that than you do to ask her to wear a burka. I will do everything in my power to protect my daughter from right winged conservatives.


Very well said.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

SQM said:


> Her Daddy is at death's door. That is the only thing she said Sunday. Her plans for her son to take her out for Brunch was delayed because she had to rush 3 hours awhile to go see her Daddy in the hospital.'
> 
> I am sorry to hear about Yarnie's troubles. I think many of us were unaware of this situation. I send her peace and hope and I am sure my fellows on this thread do so also.


Thank you!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I thought the idea was to teach critical thinking. Are the students led and used? And the majority stands for it? Mission failed.



MarilynKnits said:


> One of the few positives in teaching to standardized testing criteria is that it protects students from biased, sometimes warped views of teachers who have been seduced by extreme views.
> 
> We have seen how colleges have been invaded by extremely left wing teachers, viz Rutgers recent embarrassment involving Condoleeza Rice. There are also extreme right wing people ready to warp students in the other direction.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I think the dissention is because women want to be right. They have little tolerance for anyone else's thoughts or ideas. And very little patience for hearing the opinions of others.


The dissension, in my opinion is because some of the population feel they have a right to interfere with a woman's choice to do what she feels is right for her in a very difficult circumstance.

They - not just women but men and women, believe they have the God Given right to decide for all women something that should be her own decision. I am not pushing abortion, I am pushing the right for every woman to choose what she will do.

You are making a flat statement that women have little tolerance for anyone elses thoughts or ideas-- what has that to do with a woman being told that she has no choice as to what she will do with her own body and life? It seems to me you are doing exactly what you accuse all women of doing.

During history, if you remember, wars have been started and fought by men -- not women -- Women have been the ones who have suffered most by 
the choices of men -- yes, they might make a choice you don't agree with,but that is her choice and has nothing to do with you or any one else, men or women.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

If someone is TRULY 'delicate' wouldn't it be better not to engage in a challenging debate?


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> I don't know about RW women, but the men have been doing all they can to do away with birth control. Rick Santorum was even disgusted just thinking about it. And I fear that the women often do what their men want them to do.
> 
> I won't get into the distinction between human life and potential life, though I think it's a very important one. I'll ask a different question: Why hasn't the right fostered legislation to force parents to donate organs to their post-born children who may need them? Why should a pregnant woman have to donate her entire body to keep "alive" what doesn't yet seem alive to her, but once there is a living child, all bets are off?


Good question.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Well put, as always.



Designer1234 said:


> The dissension between ourselves is because there are those who don't want women to be treated with respect for the first time and to be given the right to choose what they do with their own lives and bodies.
> 
> Why should someone on the Far right decide for someone who is facing a huge decision, what she is allowed to do with Her life? I am not suggesting abortion - I am suggesting each woman be allowed to make that decision as it is her life and her body and her future. Not to be decided by a group of men and Religious right wingers whose decides on what she should do. yet it is decided by the Right that they have the right to decide whether a woman should be 'required' to follow their ideas. It should be each persons right to choose.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

alcameron said:


> Today is a "spare the air" day, so I'm going to get my walk in before the air becomes too polluted. But global warming and how we take care of the earth isn't a problem.


Wish I could walk with you Al


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> I agree with you, Designer. On the surface the rightists' agenda re: abortion seems cut and dried--no right to choose except in cases of rape or incest, or if the mothers' health is seriously at risk.
> 
> But the mere fact that most also vehemently oppose those measures (birth control, sex ed) that would reduce the rate of unwanted pregnancy shows that the issue is far from simple. Their hidden agenda was never clear to me until an ultra-conservative on another thread told me point blank that abortion was wrong because it allowed pregnant single moms to avoid "paying the piper".
> 
> ...


That's frightening.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thank you Cynthia. Many of us know the difference without inspecting curriculum vitae. You write intelligently, based on fact and logic. I always appreciate your comments.



cynthia627 said:


> Do you have such a boring life that you can go over every post anyone has made?? How much time did that take you?? Did you feel it was a gotch-ya moment?? Think again Oh miss intelligent investigator!!
> 
> I have a masters in Social Studies with a concentration in Constitutional Law, and almost a PhD. I was planning to attend Law School but then babies came along.
> 
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I'm with you. No argument here.



SQM said:


> "Abortion kills human life! Why does that human not have a choice"
> Because an embryo (or lesser biological status) has no capacity for thinking. It is a mass of cells.
> 
> Please don't have an abortion. Many of us pledged not to do so. However, please keep your religious and political beliefs out of my daughter's vagina. You have no more right to dictate that than you do to ask her to wear a burka. I will do everything in my power to protect my daughter from right winged conservatives.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> Thank you!


I have pm'd Yarnie with my condolences and my sadness about her situation. We have all been in her situation. I hurt for her as do, I am sure all of you. Since the Powers that be have decided that there can be no pm's accepted, I hope you will pass my 
heartfelt and I mean hearfelt hope that her Father is not in pain or suffering and that she has her family and friends around her at this time. Hopefully, she will know that I mean it. I did not post it on the other thread, in order to avoid further nastiness which is not acceptable in my opinion at this time. You know I mean it CB.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Designer1234 said:


> The dissension, in my opinion is because some of the population feel they have a right to interfere with a woman's choice to do what she feels is right for her in a very difficult circumstance.
> 
> They - not just women but men and women, believe they have the God Given right to decide for all women something that should be her own decision. I am not pushing abortion, I am pushing the right for every woman to choose what she will do.
> 
> ...


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> She does not lie. You are the liar. Her Daddy is at death's door. That is the only thing she said Sunday.


Really?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> "Abortion kills human life! Why does that human not have a choice"
> Because an embryo (or lesser biological status) has no capacity for thinking. It is a mass of cells.
> 
> Please don't have an abortion. Many of us pledged not to do so. However, please keep your religious and political beliefs out of my daughter's vagina. You have no more right to dictate that than you do to ask her to wear a burka. I will do everything in my power to protect my daughter from right winged conservatives.


I stated no religious or political belief! Abortion kills human life. That is fact! Never have I wanted to be anywhere near your daughters vagina. Nor have I ever asked her to wear a burka! Where do you get this stuff?!?  I merely clarified where women's choices actually take place. And I ask you, where does the right of human life take place? We're not just talking about a woman's body. There is the body of a child to consider, regardless of the stage of it's development. There is no such thing as a mass of cells. Those cells are a developing child!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

cynthia627 said:


> :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
> 
> What they don't understand is that we want others to have a CHOICE.


Not counting rape, women do have a choice! They choose whether to use birth control. They choose whether to have unprotected sex. They choose whether to have sex before they are ready. That is choice!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

alcameron said:


> Certain women? Women on KP? Women in general?
> I've always had a ton of patience, but when someone hammers away at the same old thing, with the same old arguments, my patience wears thin.


Women in general, most women but not all. You and most of us have no patience for anyone who disagrees with us. You hammer away with the best of us.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Really?


What is wrong with you!!!!!! Let it go!
Your friends need to help you stop being so nasty. You are looking very bad right now.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I stated no religious or political belief! Abortion kills human life. That is fact! Never have I wanted to be anywhere near your daughters vagina. Nor have I ever asked her to wear a burka! Where do you get this stuff?!? I merely clarified where women's choices actually take place. And I ask you, where does the right of human life take place? We're not just talking about a woman's body. There is the body of a child to consider, regardless of the stage of it's development. There is no such thing as a mass of cells. Those cells are a developing child!


A pregnant woman is just that: a woman, one person. The cells she carries in her uterus are part of that woman, not a separate organism, until they've grown enough to have a brain and a circulatory system.

Only in certain religions is the woman simply a vehicle for a new little soul and therefore with no choice of her own. But here she has the choice of terminating or carrying the pregnancy to term.

Of course, if a baby is born to that woman, nobody else cares whether it lives or dies, just as long as its soul gets counted.

Why are we shouting like this? I can't figure out how to unbold it all.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

alcameron said:


> So it's all the woman's fault because she has no control?


Fault? That's your word, not mine! I merely stated that excepting rape, women make their own choices! I see no fault. Merely natural consequences of poor decision making. Women should empower themselves and take control of their own bodies by doing what is best for themselves in the first place. Then there would be no need to have a discussion about killing babies.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Ugga bugga.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I stated no religious or political belief! Abortion kills human life. That is fact! Never have I wanted to be anywhere near your daughters vagina. Nor have I ever asked her to wear a burka! Where do you get this stuff?!? I merely clarified where women's choices actually take place. And I ask you, where does the right of human life take place? We're not just talking about a woman's body. There is the body of a child to consider, regardless of the stage of it's development. There is no such thing as a mass of cells. Those cells are a developing child!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

And damn them all to hell if they make a mistake and risk their lives? This is indeed a war on women. Men don't have these problems.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Not counting rape, women do have a choice! They choose whether to use birth control. They choose whether to have unprotected sex. They choose whether to have sex before they are ready. That is choice!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> Her Daddy is at death's door. That is the only thing she said Sunday. Her plans for her son to take her out for Brunch was delayed because she had to rush 3 hours awhile to go see her Daddy in the hospital.'
> 
> I am sorry to hear about Yarnie's troubles. I think many of us were unaware of this situation. I send her peace and hope and I am sure my fellows on this thread do so also.


Thank you for showing your compassion. I love it when differences are set aside for those in pain. And I've seen it several times lately. Kudos to all of us who care.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> What is wrong with you!!!!!! Let it go!
> Your friends need to help you stop being so nasty. You are looking very bad right now.


Sorry, dear--it seems that you are the one who isn't willing to let this go. Yarnie is having difficulties right now (for which I'm truly sorry), but I will not allow you or your cronies to use that sad fact to blackmail me into silence.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

We see the fallacy in this thinking, not to mention strangers are judging strangers about legal procedures. That's why they attempt to cut off access to more and more women....why they harass people at clinics....and on and on. This is about something besides philosophy.



Poor Purl said:


> A pregnant woman is just that: a woman, one person. The cells she carries in her uterus are part of that woman, not a separate organism, until they've grown enough to have a brain and a circulatory system.
> 
> Only in certain religions is the woman simply a vehicle for a new little soul and therefore with no choice of her own. But here she has the choice of terminating or carrying the pregnancy to term.
> 
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

And I'm with you.



susanmos2000 said:


> Sorry, dear--it seems that you are the one who isn't willing to let this go. Yarnie is having difficulties right now (for which I'm truly sorry), but I will not allow you or your cronies to use that sad fact to blackmail me into silence.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

damemary said:


> And I'm with you.


Thanks, Dame.

Enough is enough.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Not counting rape, women do have a choice! They choose whether to use birth control. They choose whether to have unprotected sex. They choose whether to have sex before they are ready. That is choice!


The right to those choices is also the law. The Libs on this thread cannot bear the thought that _no_ "war or women" that they can use as an election agenda for votes exists, so they make that phrase and events up.

It isn't going too well for the Dem party presently, so we'll hear lots more soon about all the "wars on women" that don't exist.

Precisely, the point made by the original poster of this thread too.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> I don't know about RW women, but the men have been doing all they can to do away with birth control. Rick Santorum was even disgusted just thinking about it. And I fear that the women often do what their men want them to do.
> 
> I won't get into the distinction between human life and potential life, though I think it's a very important one. I'll ask a different question: Why hasn't the right fostered legislation to force parents to donate organs to their post-born children who may need them? Why should a pregnant woman have to donate her entire body to keep "alive" what doesn't yet seem alive to her, but once there is a living child, all bets are off?


Rick Santorum has absolutely nothing to do with what I think!I think that very few women follow and take his advice. Truly empowered women don't just do what their man wants. And a man who loves you would most certainly want you to follow your heart and mind, to make your own decisions. I know that you will say, not all women have a man who cares. But again, that comes down to a woman's choice. Women really need to make better choices! And we should be encouraging them to do that, not making excuses for them. Would anyone WANT their daughters to go through this?

As to your last thought, a woman is "donating" nothing. Her body is still her own but there is life within her that SHE created. That life matters too. After 9 months she can choose to walk away. But she chose to create that life and has at least the responsibility to not destroy it. She has donated nothing except for the life of another human being.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Wow! You paint with a broad brush! Your statements are not representative of all or even most women on the right. Do you base your statements on the few women you interact with here on KP? In truth, I don't know ANY women who oppose birth control! To say that we vehemently oppose it is truly a lie.
> 
> As to your last paragraph, IF women exerted CONTROL over their sex and reproductive lives, we wouldn't be having this discussion. With the exception of rape, every woman has a choice. The choice being whether to take birth control, whether to have unprotected sex or whether to engage in sex with someone she's not committed to building a future with. Abortion kills human life! Why does that human not have a choice, when the woman already made her choice? We must protect our children. They are the only innocent among us!


I think you have overlooked one important point in your argument above. Your words "The choice being whether to take birth control, whether to have unprotected sex ......." Sorry I am using the ipad and it will not cut and paste for me. Back to my point. You are aware that the only 100%, totally effective method of birth control is TOTAL abstinence, of course you are. Birth control pills fail for a variety of reasons. Taking antibiotics or other medication cancels their effect, the woman is ill, vomits within hours of taking the pill, or a number of other reasons. Condoms break or leak. IUD devices fail because of many reasons. The list goes on. So an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy does result even if the woman is taking precautionary measures. My youngest child is an example. I was taking the pill when I fell pregnant, an no I did not miss a day, nor was I taking any other medication, nor was I ill at the time of conception. What the doctor said was "Oh, another Serial C failure". I was taking Serial C, it is probably not available now but was in use in Australia in 1973. I may not have the correct spelling. The doctor then added "Baby will probably be born with a smile on his face and both hands clutched, the hands will be holding the birth control pills." Yes he had a sense of humour.

My husband did not want children and when I told him I was pregnant he hit the roof and demanded I have an abortion. I could see no reason to have an abortion so I refused. When my son was born with medical difficulties he threw that at me again. "You knew I did not want children so you should have had an abortion." My son was six minutes before he drew his first breath. Apgars 1/1 and 6/5. He was an elective caesar at 37.5 weeks. I took this for over six years until one day I snapped and told him I was taking the pill when I fell pregnant. I asked him what precautions he was taking when I fell pregnant. I added if he did not want to have children he should have made sure he could not have children, he should have had the snip. Yea, birth control is not the responsibility of the woman and only the women. Men also have a responsibility to avoid unplanned pregnancies. Unfortunately his brothers wife weighed in on his side and told me that it was only the women's responsibility, not the man's. No I did not smack he one, I just walked away.

I had had an abortion four years earlier when I was married to my first husband. It was performed on medical grounds. I suffered a very bad case of German Measles, which can have devastating effects on the foetus. The doctor I was seeing at that time told me that I was suffering from German Measles and when I told him I thought I was pregnant he just told me that there was nothing I could do and that I would have a baby with some form of disability. He said there were no legal grounds for abortion. This was 1969. He was wrong. Abortion was legal on medical grounds. It was a few weeks before my mother convinced me to see another doctor. Blood tests pro ed I did have German Measles in the immediate past. Two blood tests to confirm levels in the blood. The result, the abortion was then performed by an operation, a histerotomy, not sure of spelling. This op was the reason why my last son had to be born by caesar, they were frightened of the old scar on the uterus rupturing during delivery. It was in a higher position on the uterus than a normal caesar scar. To make matters even worse, the mother in law weighed in, sprouting "that is God's judgement for you having an abortion. When you have an abortion God punishes you by causing your next child to be deformed or have medical difficulties.

So please stop blaming the woman for all unplanned pregnancies. Birth control methods do fail. Please acknowledge that the man also has a responsibility to prevent unwanted and unplanned pregnancies.

No, I am not anti abortion, I am pro choice. The woman who is facing the unplanned and unwanted pregnancy makes the choice. Women have always sought abortions and legal abortions are so much safer than the old back alley torture chambers.

Women are more than 'a uterus on legs - a mobile birth chamber'.


----------



## peacegoddess (Jan 28, 2013)

Here is how some Smith College students and faculty fight the War on Women.


IMF Chief Cancels Smith College Commencement Address After Protest 

The head of the International Monetary Fund has canceled a commencement speech at Smith College after students and faculty voiced protest. Nearly 500 people signed a petition opposing the appearance of Christine Lagarde, calling the IMF "a primary culprit in the failed developmental policies implanted in some of the worlds poorest countries ... strengthening imperialist and patriarchal systems that oppress and abuse women worldwide." Following the petition, Lagarde said she is withdrawing to "preserve the celebratory spirit of commencement day." The move comes one week after Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice cancelled a commencement address at Rutgers University following a wave of campus protest.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> The dissension, in my opinion is because some of the population feel they have a right to interfere with a woman's choice to do what she feels is right for her in a very difficult circumstance.
> 
> They - not just women but men and women, believe they have the God Given right to decide for all women something that should be her own decision. I am not pushing abortion, I am pushing the right for every woman to choose what she will do.
> 
> ...


I was speaking in generalities. I did not disinclude myself. My statement pertained to dissention in general, not as it pertained to a specific issue. I still stand by my statement.


----------



## peacegoddess (Jan 28, 2013)

EveMCooke said:


> I think you have overlooked one important point in your argument above. Your words "The choice being whether to take birth control, whether to have unprotected sex ......." Sorry I am using the ipad and it will not cut and paste for me. Back to my point. You are aware that the only 100%, totally effective method of birth control is TOTAL abstinence, of course you are. Birth control pills fail for a variety of reasons. Taking antibiotics or other medication cancels their effect, the woman is ill, vomits within hours of taking the pill, or a number of other reasons. Condoms break or leak. IUD devices fail because of many reasons. The list goes on. So an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy does result even if the woman is taking precautionary measures. My youngest child is an example. I was taking the pill when I fell pregnant, an no I did not miss a day, nor was I taking any other medication, nor was I ill at the time of conception. What the doctor said was "Oh, another Serial C failure". I was taking Serial C, it is probably not available now but was in use in Australia in 1973. I may not have the correct spelling. The doctor then added "Baby will probably be born with a smile on his face and both hands clutched, the hands will be holding the birth control pills." Yes he had a sense of humour.
> 
> My husband did not want children and when I told him I was pregnant he hit the roof and demanded I have an abortion. I could see no reason to have an abortion so I refused. When my son was born with medical difficulties he threw that at me again. "You knew I did not want children so you should have had an abortion." My son was six minutes before he drew his first breath. Apgars 1/1 and 6/5. He was an elective caesar at 37.5 weeks. I took this for over six years until one day I snapped and told him I was taking the pill when I fell pregnant. I asked him what precautions he was taking when I fell pregnant. I added if he did not want to have children he should have made sure he could not have children, he should have had the snip. Yea, birth control is not the responsibility of the woman and only the women. Men also have a responsibility to avoid unplanned pregnancies. Unfortunately his brothers wife weighed in on his side and told me that it was only the women's responsibility, not the man's. No I did not smack he one, I just walked away.
> 
> ...


Eve,
Thank you for your story! It takes courage to share your situation here on this site. You are a strong woman in all ways!


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Country Bumpkins said:


> What is wrong with you!!!!!! Let it go!
> Your friends need to help you stop being so nasty. You are looking very bad right now.


Right now? She has been that way for as long as I've been reading her posts since I've been on KP. (I wasn't around when she made the original vile post.)

Reporting to Admin and ignoring all the despicable people who insult and turn on others and then lie to shield their blame is what we all need to do.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> I think you have overlooked one important point in your argument above. Your words "The choice being whether to take birth control, whether to have unprotected sex ......." Sorry I am using the ipad and it will not cut and paste for me. Back to my point. You are aware that the only 100%, totally effective method of birth control is TOTAL abstinence, of course you are. Birth control pills fail for a variety of reasons. Taking antibiotics or other medication cancels their effect, the woman is ill, vomits within hours of taking the pill, or a number of other reasons. Condoms break or leak. IUD devices fail because of many reasons. The list goes on. So an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy does result even if the woman is taking precautionary measures. My youngest child is an example. I was taking the pill when I fell pregnant, an no I did not miss a day, nor was I taking any other medication, nor was I ill at the time of conception. What the doctor said was "Oh, another Serial C failure". I was taking Serial C, it is probably not available now but was in use in Australia in 1973. I may not have the correct spelling. The doctor then added "Baby will probably be born with a smile on his face and both hands clutched, the hands will be holding the birth control pills." Yes he had a sense of humour.
> 
> My husband did not want children and when I told him I was pregnant he hit the roof and demanded I have an abortion. I could see no reason to have an abortion so I refused. When my son was born with medical difficulties he threw that at me again. "You knew I did not want children so you should have had an abortion." My son was six minutes before he drew his first breath. Apgars 1/1 and 6/5. He was an elective caesar at 37.5 weeks. I took this for over six years until one day I snapped and told him I was taking the pill when I fell pregnant. I asked him what precautions he was taking when I fell pregnant. I added if he did not want to have children he should have made sure he could not have children, he should have had the snip. Yea, birth control is not the responsibility of the woman and only the women. Men also have a responsibility to avoid unplanned pregnancies. Unfortunately his brothers wife weighed in on his side and told me that it was only the women's responsibility, not the man's. No I did not smack he one, I just walked away.
> 
> ...


I'm stunned by your account, Evie--you're one brave woman. Bravo on having the courage and strength to make the right choice for you in more than one very difficult circumstance.

:thumbup:


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> A pregnant woman is just that: a woman, one person. The cells she carries in her uterus are part of that woman, not a separate organism, until they've grown enough to have a brain and a circulatory system.
> 
> Only in certain religions is the woman simply a vehicle for a new little soul and therefore with no choice of her own. But here she has the choice of terminating or carrying the pregnancy to term.
> 
> ...


Before most women even know they're pregnant, their baby's brain and circulatory system have already begun developing. These start to develop in the 5th week of pregnancy which is only two weeks after fertilization.http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-living/pregnancy-week-by-week/in-depth/prenatal-care/art-20045302


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> Ugga bugga.


What does that mean? If it is meant as a statement of fact, please provide evidence.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> What does that mean? If it is meant as a statement of fact, please provide evidence.


Oh, man. I waited for data and evidence a couple of days prior for a discussion I attempted to generate and data and evidence was to be forthcoming and never materialized. Please don't hold your breath! :-D


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> And damn them all to hell if they make a mistake and risk their lives? This is indeed a war on women. Men don't have these problems.


This is just one war that women commit on themselves. "Men don't have these problems". What would you do about that? We can't change nature. Men suffer different consequences.  They have to pay child support for 18 years, unless the baby is given up for adoption. I know that you're going to say that some men can't be found, or don't pay. Again, it come down to a woman's choices. She picked him! As women, we should be more discriminating. The consequences are enormous for us. That's the message I'd like to teach to young women.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Ugga bugga is a highly technical phrase referring to the absence of thought or logic in the comment. You may also see it referred to as 'same old same old.' Always happy to translate.

Any further questions, please feel free to ask.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> What does that mean? If it is meant as a statement of fact, please provide evidence.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I don't agree. Punishment seems to be more your answer than helping. We have different viewpoints.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> This is just one war that women commit on themselves. "Men don't have these problems". What would you do about that? We can't change nature. Men suffer different consequences. They have to pay child support for 18 years, unless the baby is given up for adoption. I know that you're going to say that some men can't be found, or don't pay. Again, it come down to a woman's choices. She picked him! As women, we should be more discriminating. The consequences are enormous for us. That's the message I'd like to teach to young women.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> The right to those choices is also the law. The Libs on this thread cannot bear the thought that _no_ "war or women" that they can use as an election agenda for votes exists, so they make that phrase and events up.
> 
> It isn't going too well for the Dem party presently, so we'll hear lots more soon about all the "wars on women" that don't exist.
> 
> Precisely, the point made by the original poster of this thread too.


I think there's a war on ALL of us! I think that division is purposely created to maintain the current political system and status quo. We are all distracted by our differences when we should be united in learning what is wrong and trying to fix it. I see BOTH sides espousing ideas that were handed to them on silver platters. Both sides need to realize that we and everything we live for, is under attack. I want to empower women to make the best decisions for themselves, BEFORE they have anything to regret! Can we all agree on that?


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> This is just one war that women commit on themselves. "Men don't have these problems". What would you do about that? We can't change nature. Men suffer different consequences. They have to pay child support for 18 years, unless the baby is given up for adoption. I know that you're going to say that some men can't be found, or don't pay. Again, it come down to a woman's choices. She picked him! As women, we should be more discriminating. The consequences are enormous for us. That's the message I'd like to teach to young women.


"Choose carefully" is an excellent lesson to teach young women, but the divorce rate stands at about 50% in our country--obviously all those marriages gone wrong are the result of more than bad choices.

People grow and change over the course of a lifetime--the man you married in 1980 may be an entirely different person twenty years later. Too, no man and woman can predict all the ups and downs they'll experience as a married couple before they take their vows--things like job layoffs, a chronically-ill child, or a stagnating economy can change any preconceived notions about what people thought they'd do in this or that situation.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

EveMCooke said:


> I think you have overlooked one important point in your argument above. Your words "The choice being whether to take birth control, whether to have unprotected sex ......." Sorry I am using the ipad and it will not cut and paste for me. Back to my point. You are aware that the only 100%, totally effective method of birth control is TOTAL abstinence, of course you are. Birth control pills fail for a variety of reasons. Taking antibiotics or other medication cancels their effect, the woman is ill, vomits within hours of taking the pill, or a number of other reasons. Condoms break or leak. IUD devices fail because of many reasons. The list goes on. So an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy does result even if the woman is taking precautionary measures. My youngest child is an example. I was taking the pill when I fell pregnant, an no I did not miss a day, nor was I taking any other medication, nor was I ill at the time of conception. What the doctor said was "Oh, another Serial C failure". I was taking Serial C, it is probably not available now but was in use in Australia in 1973. I may not have the correct spelling. The doctor then added "Baby will probably be born with a smile on his face and both hands clutched, the hands will be holding the birth control pills." Yes he had a sense of humour.
> 
> My husband did not want children and when I told him I was pregnant he hit the roof and demanded I have an abortion. I could see no reason to have an abortion so I refused. When my son was born with medical difficulties he threw that at me again. "You knew I did not want children so you should have had an abortion." My son was six minutes before he drew his first breath. Apgars 1/1 and 6/5. He was an elective caesar at 37.5 weeks. I took this for over six years until one day I snapped and told him I was taking the pill when I fell pregnant. I asked him what precautions he was taking when I fell pregnant. I added if he did not want to have children he should have made sure he could not have children, he should have had the snip. Yea, birth control is not the responsibility of the woman and only the women. Men also have a responsibility to avoid unplanned pregnancies. Unfortunately his brothers wife weighed in on his side and told me that it was only the women's responsibility, not the man's. No I did not smack he one, I just walked away.
> 
> ...


My heart goes out to you! No woman should ever be in that position. My oldest son has Cerebral Palsy. I understand the grief and difficulty. I'm not about " blaming" anybody. I'm about teaching women to make choices that are best for them. You were in a terrible situation! But looking back, can't you see that you chose a man who loved himself more than he loved you? Wouldn't you want to share the idea of choosing right instead of assuring simple solutions to major problems? I can feel your pain through what you write. Oh, that none of us had to go through what you went through. I think we should be teaching young women that they don't HAVE to have sex before they are ready. Absolutely everything in our society today, says have sex! Have sex with everybody, all the time! I think we should be teaching them and empowering them to make smart choices without regrets. Oh, that they could learn from our mistakes!


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Not counting rape, women do have a choice! They choose whether to use birth control. They choose whether to have unprotected sex. They choose whether to have sex before they are ready. That is choice!


Birth control has a substantial fail rate.

You know we don't go along with your opinions so why are you being provocative? Pointless waste of everyone's time.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> I think you have overlooked one important point in your argument above. Your words "The choice being whether to take birth control, whether to have unprotected sex ......." Sorry I am using the ipad and it will not cut and paste for me. Back to my point. You are aware that the only 100%, totally effective method of birth control is TOTAL abstinence, of course you are. Birth control pills fail for a variety of reasons. Taking antibiotics or other medication cancels their effect, the woman is ill, vomits within hours of taking the pill, or a number of other reasons. Condoms break or leak. IUD devices fail because of many reasons. The list goes on. So an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy does result even if the woman is taking precautionary measures. My youngest child is an example. I was taking the pill when I fell pregnant, an no I did not miss a day, nor was I taking any other medication, nor was I ill at the time of conception. What the doctor said was "Oh, another Serial C failure". I was taking Serial C, it is probably not available now but was in use in Australia in 1973. I may not have the correct spelling. The doctor then added "Baby will probably be born with a smile on his face and both hands clutched, the hands will be holding the birth control pills." Yes he had a sense of humour.
> 
> My husband did not want children and when I told him I was pregnant he hit the roof and demanded I have an abortion. I could see no reason to have an abortion so I refused. When my son was born with medical difficulties he threw that at me again. "You knew I did not want children so you should have had an abortion." My son was six minutes before he drew his first breath. Apgars 1/1 and 6/5. He was an elective caesar at 37.5 weeks. I took this for over six years until one day I snapped and told him I was taking the pill when I fell pregnant. I asked him what precautions he was taking when I fell pregnant. I added if he did not want to have children he should have made sure he could not have children, he should have had the snip. Yea, birth control is not the responsibility of the woman and only the women. Men also have a responsibility to avoid unplanned pregnancies. Unfortunately his brothers wife weighed in on his side and told me that it was only the women's responsibility, not the man's. No I did not smack he one, I just walked away.
> 
> ...


 I am so sorry about your hurt and the hurt and attitude of the other person who was responsible for the pregnancy (I bet he didn't admit he had anything to do with it.) I also bet if he had to face the situation he would have run, not walked to get an abortion.

Just a warning -- they will attack you for posting this information - it will be thrown in your face - so be prepared. We will however cover your back. The people on these threads will only read what they want to believe and will not hesitate to throw your hurt and pain in your face.

We have been over this on and on -- we don't agree with those who insist they have a right to tell a woman what she should do . I personally would never consider an abortion, (not that there is the faintest chance now) but never would have as far as I know -That was my choice -- but for some one like Rick Santorius (?) or anyone else to have the right to attack a woman who decides she has to have an abortion for whatever reason is against what women have been fighting for for years. The man just carries on and sometimes doesn't even remember the act - the woman is left with the choice. that is a fact.

You insist on demanding we agree with you -- we don't! nothing we say will change your minds and nothing you say will change ours so leave it alone. Don't demand we 'talk' about it when your views are just as written in stone as ours. that is a fact. Just go back and agree with your friends-- no problem. YOu have a right to your opinion, but we all have a right to ours too. It is not something that you can suddenly convince us when we have been arguing about this since these threads started. Joey and you will not change our minds, we will never change yours. leave it alone please???


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Oh, man. I waited for data and evidence a couple of days prior for a discussion I attempted to generate and data and evidence was to be forthcoming and never materialized. Please don't hold your breath! :-D


Haha! I won't!


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Before most women even know they're pregnant, their baby's brain and circulatory system have already begun developing. These start to develop in the 5th week of pregnancy which is only two weeks after fertilization.http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-living/pregnancy-week-by-week/in-depth/prenatal-care/art-20045302


yeah and it is able to make such great use of its brain. It can even talk you out of having an abortion.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Designer1234 said:


> The dissension between ourselves is because there are those who don't want women to be treated with respect for the first time and to be given the right to choose what they do with their own lives and bodies.
> 
> Why should someone on the Far right decide for someone who is facing a huge decision, what she is allowed to do with Her life? I am not suggesting abortion - I am suggesting each woman be allowed to make that decision as it is her life and her body and her future. Not to be decided by a group of men and Religious right wingers whose decides on what she should do. yet it is decided by the Right that they have the right to decide whether a woman should be 'required' to follow their ideas. It should be each persons right to choose.


What you say makes sense. You respect individuals and their autonomy to make decisions that affect themselves.

Whatever our view on abortion, same sex marriage, or other personal decisions, we should not have the audacity to impose our views on others. As long as somebody's way of living does not impede upon somebody else's personal choices, it is an MYOB situation. The real crime is politicizing and codifying issues which involve such intimate personal choices.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> What you say makes sense. You respect individuals and their autonomy to make decisions that affect themselves.
> 
> Whatever our view on abortion, same sex marriage, or other personal decisions, we should not have the audacity to impose our views on others. As long as somebody's way of living does not impede upon somebody else's personal choices, it is an MYOB situation. The real crime is politicizing and codifying issues which involve such intimate personal choices.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> Ugga bugga is a highly technical phrase referring to the absence of thought or logic in the comment. You may also see it referred to as 'same old same old.' Always happy to translate.
> 
> Any further questions, please feel free to ask.


Well, thank you for your definition. However I did put thought and logic into my comment so I don't see as it applies. "Same old same old" applies to the argument on both sides. I'm here to discuss and share ideas. Neither side may change the other but where is the harm in sharing? Every once in a while, we might gain just a shred of knowledge.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

I'm about teaching women to make choices that are best for them. 

There you go again - you are taking it upon yourself to say what is best for them. It is not your business what she chooses to do. Who are you to make that decision. YOu do this in all your posts. You are right - you are never wrong . Just go back to people who will agree with you and tell you how right you are. We don't think so!! I don't believe you have the 'right to teach women to make their choices. how do you know what is best for them. You act so darned superior and all knowing.

I try to talk to you but your are so condescending and feel so self important that you feel you can decide for hundreds of women who you don't know and don't want to know how they should react to a very powerful time in their lives -- They should be able to choose -- not you.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> I don't agree. Punishment seems to be more your answer than helping. We have different viewpoints.


We DO have different viewpoints. But why should anyone be "punished"? Choices made thoughtfully, lead to rewards, not punishment. I would rather see women make choices that lead to the fulfillment of their dreams, rather than their nightmares and regrets.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> It speaks volumes that you have enough satisfaction in your current life to give up a job like that. (Also, that's too long a trip.)


The trip would be the killer for me. Taking the train with a change in Newark is at least being eased with the newly instituted one seat ride. But I took a bus that wandered through Somerset, Middlesex, and Union Counties among others up to the helix and through the Lincoln Tunnel. Then the cross town shuttle (a Toonerville sort of train in my commuting years) and uptown to Hunter College. This after a day of teaching. And my husband had the trip uptown to City for his MS. It was local in service courses for us thereafter!


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Well, thank you for your definition. However I did put thought and logic into my comment so I don't see as it applies. "Same old same old" applies to the argument on both sides. I'm here to discuss and share ideas. Neither side may change the other but where is the harm in sharing? Every once in a while, we might gain just a shred of knowledge.


I don't think your goal is as innocent as you claim. This topic has been going on for weeks and nobody is going to change her mind. You know our ideas on this topic. Do you expect a miracle to happen here and that we social liberals are going to change our minds after 40 plus years of supporting abortion? Please find a topic that would generate something of real value.


----------



## peacegoddess (Jan 28, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I think there's a war on ALL of us! I think that division is purposely created to maintain the current political system and status quo. We are all distracted by our differences when we should be united in learning what is wrong and trying to fix it. I see BOTH sides espousing ideas that were handed to them on silver platters. Both sides need to realize that we and everything we live for, is under attack. I want to empower women to make the best decisions for themselves, BEFORE they have anything to regret! Can we all agree on that?


I vote an alternative party because it seems like you, I believe the Dems and Reps perpetuate a certain status quo. Have you explored other political party positions?


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> We DO have different viewpoints. But why should anyone be "punished"? Choices made thoughtfully, lead to rewards, not punishment. I would rather see women make choices that lead to the fulfillment of their dreams, rather than their nightmares and regrets.


How do you know what will fulfill a woman's dreams - you are 
not that person. YOu don't know what nightmares and regrets caused the pregnancy in the first place. It is her business. to have the right to choose.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> My heart goes out to you! No woman should ever be in that position. My oldest son has Cerebral Palsy. I understand the grief and difficulty. I'm not about " blaming" anybody. I'm about teaching women to make choices that are best for them. You were in a terrible situation! But looking back, can't you see that you chose a man who loved himself more than he loved you?


How can a woman possibly win in such cases? Seems reasonable to expect a couple to agree beforehand on whether they do/don't want children. But any woman can become pregnant using any birth control method--should Lady X (who knows she doesn't want a child) pick a man who _does_ in case a "whoopsie" baby turns up? And what if it doesn't? Is she then obligated to bear a child because she knew before marriage that her future spouse wanted one?


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

peacegoddess said:


> I vote an alternative party because it seems like you, I believe the Dems and Reps perpetuate a certain status quo. Have you explored other political party positions?


It is not a bad idea-- I do not support abortion -- I support the right of women to choose what happens to their own bodies which is a private matter.

I am not going to discuss this any more with you or any one else except to say that: I would be heart broken if my granddaughter chose an abortion, however, I would support her as I feel strongly that she has the God given right, the same as men, and other women to choose. I would talk to her and if she asked my opinion I would give it (even if she doesn't ask me to be honest) however - if she decided she would get an abortion I would support her completely as she has, in my opinion the right to make that choice.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

damemary said:


> I thought the idea was to teach critical thinking. Are the students led and used? And the majority stands for it? Mission failed.


It is indeed unfortunate that critical thinking is not emphasized. It takes effort and has to begin at home before formal schooling even starts.

And oh, my, does it get children into trouble at school! Our daughter thought for herself from an early age and wanted reasonable answers as to why something should be done. "Because I am the (teacher, mother, principal, etc) and I say so" was not an acceptable answer for her. Can't remember how many times I was called to school until they figured out I was proud of her for not being a sheep.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> "Choose carefully" is an excellent lesson to teach young women, but the divorce rate stands at about 50% in our country--obviously all those marriages gone wrong are the result of more than bad choices.
> 
> People grow and change over the course of a lifetime--the man you married in 1980 may be an entirely different person twenty years later. Too, no man and woman can predict all the ups and downs they'll experience as a married couple before they take their vows--things like job layoffs, a chronically-ill child, or a stagnating economy can change any preconceived notions about what people thought they'd do in this or that situation.


What if we could teach our daughters to look for a man who put her needs first. And we taught her to put her mans needs first? And what if we taught our sons the same thing? What if we taught our children that sex was an expression of love, not entertainment? What if we taught them that marriage was a process and that each would grow with the other , as long as they chose wisely? What if we taught them that marriage is not disposable and worth fighting for? Excepting for abuse, addiction and adultery, it was worth it to make it work. Why can't we do that? Why can't we teach them to make choices that don't lead to regrets?


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> What if we could teach our daughters to look for a man who put her needs first. And we taught her to put her mans needs first? And what if we taught our sons the same thing? What if we taught our children that sex was an expression of love, not entertainment? What if we taught them that marriage was a process and that each would grow with the other , as long as they chose wisely? What if we taught them that marriage is not disposable and worth fighting for? Excepting for abuse, addiction and adultery, it was worth it to make it work. Why can't we do that? Why can't we teach them to make choices that don't lead to regrets?


Certainly all of us want our children to make good choices. do you honestly think that most parents want their child to be pregnant and face this horrendous decision. It is not however just our childrenl -- it is all ages.

I raised my daughter to respect herself and her body I explained sex and love (two different things to her) . She accepted it and lived with good preparation and knowledge. Some people don't live that way. I am taking a break as I am starting to over react and get frustrated and unkind. I find you extremely difficult to talk to and I realize once again that it is hopeless. I am not interested in further discussion with you.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Isn't yarnie's Dad of advanced age and expected to sometime soon go on to another Life? I hope he is not suffering but dying goes with living. And if they believe in Heaven, what is the worry?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> Birth control has a substantial fail rate.
> 
> You know we don't go along with your opinions so why are you being provocative? Pointless waste of everyone's time.


A woman decides to have sex knowing that birth control can fail. It is still a choice. If she doesn't want to take the risk, she shouldn't engage in risky behavior. Why are saying I'm being provocative? Am I only allowed to say things you agree with? Why is discussion a waste of time? Why do those on left think that its OK to tell someone they're not welcome to share their opinions on "their" thread, and yet continue to do the same on the right's thread? Why do I get told that anyone can comment on any post they want, when they do it, but I'm told I'm being provocative and wasting time, when I do? Anyone's opinion is just that! All are equally valid.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> Certainly all of us want our children to make good choices. do you honestly think that most parents want their child to be pregnant and face this horrendous decision. It is not however just our childrenl -- it is all ages.
> 
> I raised my daughter to respect herself and her body I explained sex and love (two different things to her) . She accepted it and lived with good preparation and knowledge. Some people don't live that way. I am taking a break as I am starting to over react and get frustrated and unkind. I find you extremely difficult to talk to and I realize once again that it is hopeless. I am not interested in further discussion with you.


Designer1234
I admire your patience. There are times when I just have to step away or the idiocy of others will get the best of me - that will never happen.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> I am so sorry about your hurt and the hurt and attitude of the other person who was responsible for the pregnancy (I bet he didn't admit he had anything to do with it.) I also bet if he had to face the situation he would have run, not walked to get an abortion.
> 
> Just a warning -- they will attack you for posting this information - it will be thrown in your face - so be prepared. We will however cover your back. The people on these threads will only read what they want to believe and will not hesitate to throw your hurt and pain in your face.
> 
> ...


I have never demanded that anyone agree with me. Did you just make that up? I don't and can't demand that we talk. Plenty are willing! I've never tried to change anyone's mind. I've never said you're wrong. I've only ever shared my opinion, just as you share yours! I don't attack you! I don't tell you to go away! That's what you do! I don't force you to read or comment on my posts. And yet? You do! Do I not have the same rights as you? I was courteous when I was asked to leave loll. Do you think you can ask me to leave here too, because you disagree with what I say? I've been courteous. You have not.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> I am so sorry about your hurt and the hurt and attitude of the other person who was responsible for the pregnancy (I bet he didn't admit he had anything to do with it.) I also bet if he had to face the situation he would have run, not walked to get an abortion.
> 
> Just a warning -- they will attack you for posting this information - it will be thrown in your face - so be prepared. We will however cover your back. The people on these threads will only read what they want to believe and will not hesitate to throw your hurt and pain in your face.
> 
> ...


I do not understand your post. You warned that people would attack me then you seem to have done that in your last paragraph.
I am sorry to have upset you but I do not understand your last paragraph. I do not wish to alter your mind, I am not demanding you agree with me. I do not agree with Joey or share her views. I have strong views but they are not written in stone. I do not understand what you mean about me going back and agreeing with my friends. I can only say I am sorry if my post appeared that I was trying to change your mind or point of view as this was not my intention. I can only say that I am sorry and apologise if I appeared dogmatic. I would like to withdraw my posting.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> A woman decides to have sex knowing that birth control can fail. It is still a choice. If she doesn't want to take the risk, she shouldn't engage in risky behavior. Why are saying I'm being provocative? Am I only allowed to say things you agree with? Why is discussion a waste of time? Why do those on left think that its OK to tell someone they're not welcome to share their opinions on "their" thread, and yet continue to do the same on the right's thread? Why do I get told that anyone can comment on any post they want, when they do it, but I'm told I'm being provocative and wasting time, when I do? Anyone's opinion is just that! All are equally valid.


You and I are alike in many ways. You ask thoughtful questions and yet are repeatedly told to stop conversing with those who are settled in on this thread.

The Libs on this thread say they want engaging discourse and then repeatedly tell any non-Lib to shut up and/or go away.

Ever wonder why they are even on KP never mind settle in on threads not begun by Libs?

I do. Yet, we'll not ever get the answer to that question either.

(hint: they don't want discussion - they want control)


----------



## peacegoddess (Jan 28, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> A woman decides to have sex knowing that birth control can fail. It is still a choice. If she doesn't want to take the risk, she shouldn't engage in risky behavior. Why are saying I'm being provocative? Am I only allowed to say things you agree with? Why is discussion a waste of time? Why do those on left think that its OK to tell someone they're not welcome to share their opinions on "their" thread, and yet continue to do the same on the right's thread? Why do I get told that anyone can comment on any post they want, when they do it, but I'm told I'm being provocative and wasting time, when I do? Anyone's opinion is just that! All are equally valid.


So should women have sex only when they want to become pregnant?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> yeah and it is able to make such great use of its brain. It can even talk you out of having an abortion.


Facts are facts! Poor Purl said; "The cells she carries in her uterus are part of that woman, not a separate organism, until they've grown enough to have a brain and a circulatory system.". I was merely pointing out that she was basically agreeing with me. The baby is a separate " organism".


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

SQM said:


> yeah and it is able to make such great use of its brain. It can even talk you out of having an abortion.


Well, it might kick you, but you won't feel it, at least not for awhile----


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> A woman decides to have sex knowing that birth control can fail. It is still a choice. If she doesn't want to take the risk, she shouldn't engage in risky behavior. Why are saying I'm being provocative? Am I only allowed to say things you agree with? Why is discussion a waste of time? Why do those on left think that its OK to tell someone they're not welcome to share their opinions on "their" thread, and yet continue to do the same on the right's thread? Why do I get told that anyone can comment on any post they want, when they do it, but I'm told I'm being provocative and wasting time, when I do? Anyone's opinion is just that! All are equally valid.


It is fine with me if you post - but you and I are not ever going to be able to discuss because we believe completely different things.

I personally find that you feel you have the right to talk down and I am not imagining it. Maybe you feel the same way about me - but I do know that we have opposite opinions and nothing is going to change that. You are allowed to say whatever you wish, I don't agree with you so it is much better if I just stay out of your way. I find you hard to reason with and disagree with nearly everything you say. You imply that all women are the same -- we aren't. 
As I said - talk to the others, I just don't agree with you or with Joey or anyone who wants women to answer to strangers as to how she should react about her personal feelings in an important and worrisome and frightening period in her life. Let her ask your opinion but don't judge her and threaten her with what will happen. if she doesn't want those opinions.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I have never demanded that anyone agree with me. Did you just make that up? I don't and can't demand that we talk. Plenty are willing! I've never tried to change anyone's mind. I've never said you're wrong. I've only ever shared my opinion, just as you share yours! I don't attack you! I don't tell you to go away! That's what you do! I don't force you to read or comment on my posts. And yet? You do! Do I not have the same rights as you? I was courteous when I was asked to leave loll. Do you think you can ask me to leave here too, because you disagree with what I say? I've been courteous. You have not.


 :thumbup:


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> You and I are alike in many ways. You ask thoughtful questions and yet are repeatedly told to stop conversing with those who are settled in on this thread.
> 
> The Libs on this thread say they want engaging discourse and then repeatedly tell any non-Lib to shut up and/or go away.
> 
> ...


Yes KPG -- you are well know to be reasonable, kind and willing to discuss and not attack???? not likely --- You have been answered over and over. These are open forums. that is the answer.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> What if we could teach our daughters to look for a man who put her needs first. And we taught her to put her mans needs first? And what if we taught our sons the same thing? What if we taught our children that sex was an expression of love, not entertainment? What if we taught them that marriage was a process and that each would grow with the other , as long as they chose wisely? What if we taught them that marriage is not disposable and worth fighting for? Excepting for abuse, addiction and adultery, it was worth it to make it work. Why can't we do that? Why can't we teach them to make choices that don't lead to regrets?


Probably because sex, pregnancy, and their outcomes (which is what we're really talking about) are not matters that women have complete control over. All birth control methods fail--the only sure way not to get pregnant is to remain abstinent. That might be possible if one remains single--in marriage that's grounds for divorce or even annulment.

And of course pregnancy is the biggest crap shoot of all. No woman can be absolutely certain that the child she produces will be healthy and sound. The only way a woman can completely avoid the difficulties and heartache that come with giving birth to a child with severe defects is to never get pregnant--which means never having sex--which precludes any possibility of marriage.

Frankly, a vow of eternal celibacy and chastity is the only possible choice a young woman can make to avoid all the regrets you've mentioned. Does that seem at all likely or even desirable to you?


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> I do not understand your post. You warned that people would attack me then you seem to have done that in your last paragraph.
> I am sorry to have upset you but I do not understand your last paragraph. I do not wish to alter your mind, I am not demanding you agree with me. I do not agree with Joey or share her views. I have strong views but they are not written in stone. I do not understand what you mean about me going back and agreeing with my friends. I can only say I am sorry if my post appeared that I was trying to change your mind or point of view as this was not my intention. I can only say that I am sorry and apologise if I appeared dogmatic. I would like to withdraw my posting.


Eve, I am not sure if you think I was attacking you. I wonder if my post was put in the middle my answers to one of hers by mistake? If so it was not deliberate and in no way was an attack on you. I

I admire you and would never ridicule or question your posts.

I just went back and read my post -- not sure what I did but I think, If I remember - I was answering the other poster and included it with my answer to you somehow. I have absolutely no idea how I did it --

I feel for everything you went through -- I was just warning you that they will use it to attack you -- eg. MIB. so be prepared - I want you to know that you are brave and I admire you and 
am happy to be your friend - We have never had any problem and I doubt we ever will. I apologize if my weird post upset you and I am glad you asked me because I might have missed the fact that I seemed to attack you. There is no way I would do that as we are on the same page. Shirley


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> I'm about teaching women to make choices that are best for them.
> 
> There you go again - you are taking it upon yourself to say what is best for them. It is not your business what she chooses to do. Who are you to make that decision. YOu do this in all your posts. You are right - you are never wrong . Just go back to people who will agree with you and tell you how right you are. We don't think so!! I don't believe you have the 'right to teach women to make their choices. how do you know what is best for them. You act so darned superior and all knowing.
> 
> I try to talk to you but your are so condescending and feel so self important that you feel you can decide for hundreds of women who you don't know and don't want to know how they should react to a very powerful time in their lives -- They should be able to choose -- not you.


Where did I say I was right and you were wrong? I was expressing my own opinion and I'm tired of you accusing me of saying something I didn't! You accuse me of being condescending! WHERE have I been condescending? You don't try to talk to me. You make accusations. You accuse me of saying things I never said and you accuse me of meaning things I didn't mean. I say what I mean! I'm entitled to my opinion as much as you are entitled to yours! You seem to have a hard time allowing anyone to speak if they don't agree with you! Well, I don't agree with you, and I will not stop talking. I'm not going to be run off again! As so many of you pointed out to me the other day, we can post wherever we want!


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> I do not understand your post. You warned that people would attack me then you seem to have done that in your last paragraph.
> I am sorry to have upset you but I do not understand your last paragraph. I do not wish to alter your mind, I am not demanding you agree with me. I do not agree with Joey or share her views. I have strong views but they are not written in stone. I do not understand what you mean about me going back and agreeing with my friends. I can only say I am sorry if my post appeared that I was trying to change your mind or point of view as this was not my intention. I can only say that I am sorry and apologise if I appeared dogmatic. I would like to withdraw my posting.


Evie--that last paragraph was written by Nebraska. Somehow it got included when Nebraska blockquoted Designer (who wrote the first three paragraphs)


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I stated no religious or political belief! Abortion kills human life. That is fact! Never have I wanted to be anywhere near your daughters vagina. Nor have I ever asked her to wear a burka! Where do you get this stuff?!? I merely clarified where women's choices actually take place. And I ask you, where does the right of human life take place? We're not just talking about a woman's body. There is the body of a child to consider, regardless of the stage of it's development. There is no such thing as a mass of cells. Those cells are a developing child!


They get this stuff from listening to the "people in the know" on MSNBC. You are wasting your time KFB, the LWN say they want an intelligent discussion, yet, as usual, not one of them here is offering one. They only offer the same talking points over and over, so much so you can't tell who it is you are actually conversing with.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> I don't think your goal is as innocent as you claim. This topic has been going on for weeks and nobody is going to change her mind. You know our ideas on this topic. Do you expect a miracle to happen here and that we social liberals are going to change our minds after 40 plus years of supporting abortion? Please find a topic that would generate something of real value.


Innocent? Who said I'm innocent? Those are your words,not mine. I'm looking for common ground, ways to prevent abortion. Most everyone here says they don't like abortion, they just believe in choice. So why would anyone object to conversation about preventing the need for abortion? I think that people disagree just to disagree! Oh, and I tried to find another topic last week, remember? I was run off for not agreeing, AGAIN!


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> I am so sorry about your hurt and the hurt and attitude of the other person who was responsible for the pregnancy (I bet he didn't admit he had anything to do with it.) I also bet if he had to face the situation he would have run, not walked to get an abortion.
> 
> Just a warning -- they will attack you for posting this information - it will be thrown in your face - so be prepared. We will however cover your back. The people on these threads will only read what they want to believe and will not hesitate to throw your hurt and pain in your face.
> 
> ...


Thank you for your last post. Above is the post that upset me as I could not understand the last paragraph, it seemed so different from the rest of the post. That is why I apologised for upsetting you.

If you read the last paragraph of the quote above you will see what I mean. Perhaps the posts have become jumbled and mixed.

I have just read the posts made after I started my reply. Something weird is going on, gremlins in the system. But thank you everyone on clearing this matter for me. I am back to bed. 3.15 am, I just got out of bed for a glass of water and a visit to the little girls room. Thank you once again for the clarification, I could not understand what was being said.


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I think the dissention is because women want to be right. They have little tolerance for anyone else's thoughts or ideas. And very little patience for hearing the opinions of others.


I think that women have been treated as brood mares, helpmeets,servants, or delicate little flowers with no sense or intellectual value. This has been going on for centuries all over the world and continues to this day even in this country. (Research "Patriarchy" for some unbelieveable stuff.) What's especially hurtful is when women figuratively "stab each other in the back." Women are fed up, and rightfully so, but as a society both men and women have a very long way to go to achieve any lasting balance.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

peacegoddess said:


> I vote an alternative party because it seems like you, I believe the Dems and Reps perpetuate a certain status quo. Have you explored other political party positions?


Yes! One person agrees! I have explored an alternate party. They make it neatly impossible to get the alternative parties on the ballot. We need at least three parties to break up what we've got. In my opinion, we have two parties who do the same things. Nothing changes beyond the rhetoric. They say different things but they do the same things. They all represent those with money and power. It only divides people.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> How do you know what will fulfill a woman's dreams - you are
> not that person. YOu don't know what nightmares and regrets caused the pregnancy in the first place. It is her business. to have the right to choose.


Did I ever once intimate that I knew what every woman's dream was? NO! I didn't! Stop accusing me of saying things I didn't say! Just stop!


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

soloweygirl said:


> They get this stuff from listening to the "people in the know" on MSNBC. You are wasting your time KFB, the LWN say they want an intelligent discussion, yet, as usual, not one of them here is offering one. They only offer the same talking points over and over, so much so you can't tell who it is you are actually conversing with.


 :thumbup: Agreed. They don't want discussion, they want control. They preach tolerance and are the most intolerant of anyone I've encountered. They repeatedly say they'll ignore anyone with whom they do not agree as they cannot tolerate another position and cannot justify their own. Yet they come back insulting and attacking the very same position and people again. When all else fails, they'll make it personal.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> Thank you for your last post. Above is the post that upset me as I could not understand the last paragraph, it seemed so different from the rest of the post. That is why I apologised for upsetting you.
> 
> If you read the last paragraph of the quote above you will see what I mean. Perhaps the posts have become jumbled and mixed.
> 
> I have just read the posts made after I started my reply. Something weird is going on, gremlins in the system. But thank you everyone on clearing this matter for me. I am back to bed. 3.15 am, I just got out of bed for a glass of water and a visit to the little girls room. Thank you once again for the clarification, I could not understand what was being said.


The last part of the post was part of a post I was sending to another poster - (you know who) and somehow it was included in my post to you. glad it is straightened out.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Did I ever once intimate that I knew what every woman's dream was? NO! I didn't! Stop accusing me of saying things I didn't say! Just stop!


Unfortunately, your request will fall on deaf ears. Mine did. In fact, it only resulted into further unfounded accusations and attacks. You are best to stop responding entirely.

Sad, but save your sanity. :lol:


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> How can a woman possibly win in such cases? Seems reasonable to expect a couple to agree beforehand on whether they do/don't want children. But any woman can become pregnant using any birth control method--should Lady X (who knows she doesn't want a child) pick a man who _does_ in case a "whoopsie" baby turns up? And what if it doesn't? Is she then obligated to bear a child because she knew before marriage that her future spouse wanted one?


Perhaps people could talk before they get married. Find out who they are marrying. I doubt that this was the very first time he showed his selfish, controlling nature. It would be nice if young women could learn how to choose a caring partner, someone who puts their loved one's needs above their own.


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Yes! One person agrees! I have explored an alternate party. They make it neatly impossible to get the alternative parties on the ballot. We need at least three parties to break up what we've got. In my opinion, we have two parties who do the same things. Nothing changes beyond the rhetoric. They say different things but they do the same things. They all represent those with money and power. It only divides people.


I would like to see both parties done away with. As you said, they are basically the same in what they do and how they do it. We need people in Congress that will represent us, after all, that is what they were elected to do, not fulfill their own agendas and bank accounts. There should also be term limits which would eliminate career politicians.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

I saw some chance of The Tea Party making headway into finally, the first grass-roots formed National party since our only two-party system.

TTP actually did impact some decisions and legislation in its newly formed stage.

However, I'm no longer certain that group will be an actual third National party, and I see no other forming either. The Green Party never made any impact that I'm aware of.

I would like to see a solid Libertarian and Constitutional National party.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

peacegoddess said:


> So should women have sex only when they want to become pregnant?


No, I didn't say that. Women should know that every time they have sex, they risk pregnancy. Sex IS the means of reproduction, after all. I don't believe it was ever intended as random entertainment. It feels good biologically speaking, so as to encourage reproduction and thus prevent the dying off of a species. Without judgment and self control, we would be no different than animals, who breed, carry their offspring to term and nurture until maturity. Hmm.....


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> It is fine with me if you post - but you and I are not ever going to be able to discuss because we believe completely different things.
> 
> I personally find that you feel you have the right to talk down and I am not imagining it. Maybe you feel the same way about me - but I do know that we have opposite opinions and nothing is going to change that. You are allowed to say whatever you wish, I don't agree with you so it is much better if I just stay out of your way. I find you hard to reason with and disagree with nearly everything you say. You imply that all women are the same -- we aren't.
> As I said - talk to the others, I just don't agree with you or with Joey or anyone who wants women to answer to strangers as to how she should react about her personal feelings in an important and worrisome and frightening period in her life. Let her ask your opinion but don't judge her and threaten her with what will happen. if she doesn't want those opinions.


Where have I talked down to you? Where have I implied that all women are the same? When have I judged any woman? Please stop putting words in my mouth. I never said those things and I get tired of you accusing me of saying things I didn't.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Perhaps people could talk before they get married. Find out who they are marrying. I doubt that this was the very first time he showed his selfish, controlling nature. It would be nice if young women could learn how to choose a caring partner, someone who puts their loved one's needs above their own.


Well, I hardly think that always putting one's spouse's needs (whether those of the husband or wife) first is the foundation of a healthy marriage. And if they both tried that they'd doubtless cancel each other out, rendering the marriage null and void 

Seriously, though, I do agree that women (and men) need to take marriage seriously, make careful choices, and talk over issues like birth control and children before they commit themselves. Doing so would doubtless lower the divorce rate and lead to healthier, happier families.

Still, there are no guarantees in life. In a good marriage both spouses need to recognize that life is unpredictable and learn to roll with the punches. To me those qualities seem more important than all the planning and preparation in the world.


----------



## peacegoddess (Jan 28, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> No, I didn't say that. Women should know that every time they have sex, they risk pregnancy. Sex IS the means of reproduction, after all. I don't believe it was ever intended as random entertainment. It feels good biologically speaking, so as to encourage reproduction and thus prevent the dying off of a species. Without judgment and self control, we would be no different than animals, who breed, carry their offspring to term and nurture until maturity. Hmm.....


So then for a woman who enjoys sex with her partner, but they agree they do not want children either now or never, and their birth control fails, then must they have an unwanted baby?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Probably because sex, pregnancy, and their outcomes (which is what we're really talking about) are not matters that women have complete control over. All birth control methods fail--the only sure way not to get pregnant is to remain abstinent. That might be possible if one remains single--in marriage that's grounds for divorce or even annulment.
> 
> And of course pregnancy is the biggest crap shoot of all. No woman can be absolutely certain that the child she produces will be healthy and sound. The only way a woman can completely avoid the difficulties and heartache that come with giving birth to a child with severe defects is to never get pregnant--which means never having sex--which precludes any possibility of marriage.
> 
> Frankly, a vow of eternal celibacy and chastity is the only possible choice a young woman can make to avoid all the regrets you've mentioned. Does that seem at all likely or even desirable to you?


Is that what you heard me say? Making decisions that you won't regret doesn't mean that bad things won't happen to you. It only means that you will have someone loving and caring to help you through it. Having a child with severe defects is not the worst that can happen to you. And in fact, can teach you a lot about love. Sometimes, occasionally, people make the right choices and end up in wrong situations. No statement holds true for everyone. But for most, bad choices lead to bad outcomes. Good choices lead to good outcomes.


----------



## peacegoddess (Jan 28, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> I saw some chance of The Tea Party making headway into finally, the first grass-roots formed National party since our only two-party system.
> 
> TTP actually did impact some decisions and legislation in its newly formed stage.
> 
> ...


Check out some local governments where Greens have made a big impact. One is Humboldt County, CA

Many a budding statesperson has begun on a local level.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> Eve, I am not sure if you think I was attacking you. I wonder if my post was put in the middle my answers to one of hers by mistake? If so it was not deliberate and in no way was an attack on you. I
> 
> I admire you and would never ridicule or question your posts.
> 
> ...


I understood that you were not attacking her, but me. At least you acknowledge that it was an attack!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Evie--that last paragraph was written by Nebraska. Somehow it got included when Nebraska blockquoted Designer (who wrote the first three paragraphs)


It was NOT written BY me! It was written TO me!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Before most women even know they're pregnant, their baby's brain and circulatory system have already begun developing. These start to develop in the 5th week of pregnancy which is only two weeks after fertilization.http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-living/pregnancy-week-by-week/in-depth/prenatal-care/art-20045302


I'm not home so can't look things up, but how can the fifth week of pregnancy occur two weeks after fertization? That implies that pregnancy begins three weeks before fertilization.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> It was NOT written BY me! It was written TO me!


Oops--sorry, Nebraska.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

maysmom said:


> I think that women have been treated as brood mares, helpmeets,servants, or delicate little flowers with no sense or intellectual value. This has been going on for centuries all over the world and continues to this day even in this country. (Research "Patriarchy" for some unbelieveable stuff.) What's especially hurtful is when women figuratively "stab each other in the back." Women are fed up, and rightfully so, but as a society both men and women have a very long way to go to achieve any lasting balance.


I've seen no evidence of any of those things in my lifetime! And I'll be 59 years old, later this week. So who of us is treated like a brood mare, helpmeet, servant or little flower? I can't imagine any woman in this country who is in that position unless they want to be.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> The last part of the post was part of a post I was sending to another poster - (you know who) and somehow it was included in my post to you. glad it is straightened out.


How childish!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

soloweygirl said:


> I would like to see both parties done away with. As you said, they are basically the same in what they do and how they do it. We need people in Congress that will represent us, after all, that is what they were elected to do, not fulfill their own agendas and bank accounts. There should also be term limits which would eliminate career politicians.


I agree! Our founding fathers never intended our representatives to suck off the public teat forever. Sessions were to be short and productive not drawn out and permanent. They certainly never intended a redistribution of wealth!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> I saw some chance of The Tea Party making headway into finally, the first grass-roots formed National party since our only two-party system.
> 
> TTP actually did impact some decisions and legislation in its newly formed stage.
> 
> ...


I would like to see a solid Libertarian and Constitutional parties also!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Well, I hardly think that always putting one's spouse's needs (whether those of the husband or wife) first is the foundation of a healthy marriage. And if they both tried that they'd doubtless cancel each other out, rendering the marriage null and void
> 
> Seriously, though, I do agree that women (and men) need to take marriage seriously, make careful choices, and talk over issues like birth control and children before they commit themselves. Doing so would doubtless lower the divorce rate and lead to healthier, happier families.
> 
> Still, there are no guarantees in life. In a good marriage both spouses need to recognize that life is unpredictable and learn to roll with the punches. To me those qualities seem more important than all the planning and preparation in the world.


If a man puts his wife's needs first and a wife puts her husband's needs first, both have their needs met! If each puts their own needs first, they are in competition with each other and neither has their needs met.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> We DO have different viewpoints. But why should anyone be "punished"? Choices made thoughtfully, lead to rewards, not punishment. I would rather see women make choices that lead to the fulfillment of their dreams, rather than their nightmares and regrets.


And it was the Great Satan, Planned Parenthood, where many of us learned at a young age what the range of choices was. Nobody pressured us to use or not to use birth control. Nobody pressured for abortion, adoption, or raising a surprise baby. We were told the options and the pros and cons of the various options. We were given time to study and make informed decisions.


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Is that what you heard me say? Making decisions that you won't regret doesn't mean that bad things won't happen to you. It only means that you will have someone loving and caring to help you through it. Having a child with severe defects is not the worst that can happen to you. And in fact, can teach you a lot about love. Sometimes, occasionally, people make the right choices and end up in wrong situations. No statement holds true for everyone. But for most, bad choices lead to bad outcomes. Good choices lead to good outcomes.


Just curious, what is the worst thing that can happen? Having worked with physically and mentally handicapped people for over 20 years, I can count on one hand the number of couples who handled their child's disabilities without resorting to drugs, alcohol, or other destructive behaviors. And regarding choices, often "bad" or "good" can't be readily determined within the time frame allowed.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

peacegoddess said:


> So then for a woman who enjoys sex with her partner, but they agree they do not want children either now or never, and their birth control fails, then must they have an unwanted baby?


If the birth control fails, they HAVE a baby! Killing a baby is a choice that comes after. But they already have a baby. That's reproduction.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I agree! Our founding fathers never intended our representatives to suck off the public teat forever. Sessions were to be short and productive not drawn out and permanent. They certainly never intended a redistribution of wealth!


Or a Harry Reid who effectively shut down our most prestigious house of Congress, the US Senate, by making certain nothing could be accomplished for years, intentionally.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> I'm not home so can't look things up, but how can the fifth week of pregnancy occur two weeks after fertization? That implies that pregnancy begins three weeks before fertilization.


Pregnancy begins on the first day of your cycle. (Thats how they calculate it). The egg has already started maturation? Read the link to know more.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Oops--sorry, Nebraska.


Thank you!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

maysmom said:


> Just curious, what is the worst thing that can happen? Having worked with physically and mentally handicapped people for over 20 years, I can count on one hand the number of couples who handled their child's disabilities without resorting to drugs, alcohol, or other destructive behaviors. And regarding choices, often "bad" or "good" can't be readily determined within the time frame allowed.


I don't believe that! I, too have worked with disabled children. I've not seen that at all. Most will fight to get their children's needs met and are always there for them.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Or a Harry Reid who effectively shut down our most prestigious house of Congress, the US Senate, by making certain nothing could be accomplished for years, intentionally.


Harry Reid is not the first nor the last to play that game. They ALL play games! Neither side is innocent or well intending! They all follow an agenda!


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I've seen no evidence of any of those things in my lifetime! And I'll be 59 years old, later this week. So who of us is treated like a brood mare, helpmeet, servant or little flower? I can't imagine any woman in this country who is in that position unless they want to be.


Well, I've seen those things--and I'm only in my forties. I still remember how my mother and every other housewife on the block had to drop everything at five o'clock to get dinner on the table--the dresses I had to wear to school, even on the coldest days--the "boy" books (The Red Badge of Courage, Old Yeller, Johnny Tremain) assigned in English because "girls will read about boys, but boys won't read about girls"--how my best friend works all day in an office and then spends her evenings cooking and cleaning.

Things have changed for the better in the past few decades--but not enough, I'm afraid.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I agree! Our founding fathers never intended our representatives to suck off the public teat forever.


You do have a way with words, Nebraska!


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Harry Reid is not the first nor the last to play that game. They ALL play games! Neither side is innocent or well intending! They all follow an agenda!


I'll disagree. Never before in history have I've seen such divisiveness and destruction of the rule of law and partisanship as I've seen by Reid in his position in the Senate. Reid *is* the first to shut down the Senate, actually institute the "nuclear option" to protect his Party and stop the filibuster and bring bills to the floor, discussion, voting, etc. such as he did. Also, he has publicly defamed and lied about and used the Senate floor to do so against members of only the Republ party. This is disgraceful; not politics.

I have a more positive attitude than you do and do not believe they all play games and all do not have good intentions or follow an agenda. I'm an optimist, not naive, educated, involved and observant.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> If a man puts his wife's needs first and a wife puts her husband's needs first, both have their needs met!


Well, no--if his need is to put her needs first then she'll be fulfilling those by putting her needs above his--he's still getting the short end of the stick.

But never mind--I was speaking facetiously.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Facts are facts! Poor Purl said; "The cells she carries in her uterus are part of that woman, not a separate organism, until they've grown enough to have a brain and a circulatory system.". I was merely pointing out that she was basically agreeing with me. The baby is a separate " organism".


What baby? I dont agree with you.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Pregnancy begins on the first day of your cycle. (Thats how they calculate it). The egg has already started maturation? Read the link to know more.


Are you implying that an unfertilized egg is already what you would call a baby? Huh!


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> A woman decides to have sex knowing that birth control can fail. It is still a choice. If she doesn't want to take the risk, she shouldn't engage in risky behavior. Why are saying I'm being provocative? Am I only allowed to say things you agree with? Why is discussion a waste of time? Why do those on left think that its OK to tell someone they're not welcome to share their opinions on "their" thread, and yet continue to do the same on the right's thread? Why do I get told that anyone can comment on any post they want, when they do it, but I'm told I'm being provocative and wasting time, when I do? Anyone's opinion is just that! All are equally valid.


because we have discussed this topic from a zillion angles and never go anywhere. I am always happy to hear from you but I don't like spinning my wheels.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

knitpresentgifts said:


> You and I are alike in many ways. You ask thoughtful questions and yet are repeatedly told to stop conversing with those who are settled in on this thread.
> 
> The Libs on this thread say they want engaging discourse and then repeatedly tell any non-Lib to shut up and/or go away.
> 
> ...


it is the constant repetition that is killing 'us'.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Well, I've seen those things--and I'm only in my forties. I still remember how my mother and every other housewife on the block had to drop everything at five o'clock to get dinner on the table--the dresses I had to wear to school, even on the coldest days--the "boy" books (The Red Badge of Courage, Old Yeller, Johnny Tremain) assigned in English because "girls will read about boys, but boys won't read about girls"--how my best friend works all day in an office and then spends her evenings cooking and cleaning.
> 
> Things have changed for the better in the past few decades--but not enough, I'm afraid.


What about Helen Keller, Laura Ingalls Wilder and Harriet Tubman? We read those and more. When studying past wars, you won't find much written from a woman's perspective because women weren't in wars.

I still get dinner (at 5:30 though). I consider it a privilege to be a housewife, homemaker, stay at home mom, whatever you want to call it. When we both worked, we had no time together as a family. It seemed we worked day and night. Days off were filled with shopping, laundry and cleaning. I love the freedom to do my work when I want, and have time to spend with my husband and family. Both of my daughters in law had Moms who worked outside the home and both have chosen to be stay at home Moms themselves. We don't look at it as punishment or enslavement. We love nurturing our children and spending more time with them.

The dresses? You got me on that! That sucked! But fashion changes. Who knows what the future will hold.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> You do have a way with words, Nebraska!


Hahahaha!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> I'll disagree. Never before in history have I've seen such divisiveness and destruction of the rule of law and partisanship as I've seen by Reid in his position in the Senate. Reid *is* the first to shut down the Senate, actually institute the "nuclear option" to protect his Party and stop the filibuster and bring bills to the floor, discussion, voting, etc. such as he did. Also, he has publicly defamed and lied about and used the Senate floor to do so against members of only the Republ party. This is disgraceful; not politics.
> 
> I have a more positive attitude than you do and do not believe they all play games and all do not have good intentions or follow an agenda. I'm an optimist, not naive, educated, involved and observant.


Oh, how I wish I could be optimistic about what's going on in our government! I think they all work for the same people, and its not us! I think there's no real difference in the two parties. They SAY different things but they DO the same things. The wars go on and on, no matter who is in power. We lose more and more of our rights, no matter who is in power. And the people get poorer and poorer, no matter who is in power. Both sides have spent to oblivion. They've spent trillions of dollars and say we owe it. They have bankrupted us! All of them! Laws are written by lobbyists who lobby both sides. Government contracts make the rich, richer. The jobs have gone away because of trade agreements, written by lobbyists, that benefit the rich. Nothing changes! Neither party does anything to fix any of it! Things just get worse and worse! Soon we will have no middle class at all! They all say they're for the middle class but all have contributed to its demise or done nothing to reverse it. I wish I could be optimistic, but I think its too late to go back. I feel bad for my children and grandchildren.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> What baby? I dont agree with you.


You said the cells were not a separate organism until they'd grown a brain and respiratory system. I showed you that they developed these very early on. Therefore, they are separate.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> Are you implying that an unfertilized egg is already what you would call a baby? Huh!


I'm saying that DOCTORS count from the beginning of your cycle.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Oh, how I wish I could be optimistic about what's going on in our government! I think they all work for the same people, and its not us! I think there's no real difference in the two parties. They SAY different things but they DO the same things. The wars go on and on, no matter who is in power. We lose more and more of our rights, no matter who is in power. And the people get poorer and poorer, no matter who is in power. Both sides have spent to oblivion. They've spent trillions of dollars and say we owe it. They have bankrupted us! All of them! Laws are written by lobbyists who lobby both sides. Government contracts make the rich, richer. The jobs have gone away because of trade agreements, written by lobbyists, that benefit the rich. Nothing changes! Neither party does anything to fix any of it! Things just get worse and worse! Soon we will have no middle class at all! They all say they're for the middle class but all have contributed to its demise or done nothing to reverse it. I wish I could be optimistic, but I think its too late to go back. I feel bad for my children and grandchildren.


This is why I love Neb. Great political analyst. Love ya!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> because we have discussed this topic from a zillion angles and never go anywhere. I am always happy to hear from you but I don't like spinning my wheels.


And yet, you still respond. I will respond to those who comment to me. Feel free to change the subject any time you wish. I'm open to discussing almost anything.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> This is why I love Neb. Great political analyst. Love ya!


Are you saying you agree with my analysis of our political system? Even the democrats?


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Are you saying you agree with my analysis of our political system? Even the democrats?


I always loved your political analyses. The rest I disagree with. But you have a great understanding of the underpinnings of our political system. I have always claimed that. Just am grateful that safe abortions are available and I don't think god as people envision him exists. Can I still be invited to the get together you all are having on FF?


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Oh, how I wish I could be optimistic about what's going on in our government! I think they all work for the same people, and its not us! I think there's no real difference in the two parties. They SAY different things but they DO the same things. The wars go on and on, no matter who is in power. We lose more and more of our rights, no matter who is in power. And the people get poorer and poorer, no matter who is in power. Both sides have spent to oblivion. They've spent trillions of dollars and say we owe it. They have bankrupted us! All of them! Laws are written by lobbyists who lobby both sides. Government contracts make the rich, richer. The jobs have gone away because of trade agreements, written by lobbyists, that benefit the rich. Nothing changes! Neither party does anything to fix any of it! Things just get worse and worse! Soon we will have no middle class at all! They all say they're for the middle class but all have contributed to its demise or done nothing to reverse it. I wish I could be optimistic, but I think its too late to go back. I feel bad for my children and grandchildren.


Some questions if you are so inclined to answer:
1) What is your definition of rich? (i.e. $ amount net worth) 
2) Are you a registered voter, and if, so, which party? Do you vote?
3) Do you think Reagan and Clinton each bankrupted "us?" 
4) Do you see a difference with the present Admin as compared to any other Admin? 
5) Have you every lobbied or met or known or worked for a lobbyist? 
6) Do you believe Congress writes legislation and if so is it responsible for making sure the laws are carried out and does same?
7) Have you ever started or created something that earned you self-employed income?
8) Have you ever served in a public capacity?
9) Ever been to state or federal capitols and sat in on public sessions?
10) Have you ever contributed $ or time to anyone's political campaign?

I actually feel sorry for you because you don't have any faith or hope in our government and see no differences or good in any of the people who serve in Congress, the White House and perhaps the military.


----------



## peacegoddess (Jan 28, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> What about Helen Keller, Laura Ingalls Wilder and Harriet Tubman? We read those and more. When studying past wars, you won't find much written from a woman's perspective because women weren't in wars.
> 
> I still get dinner (at 5:30 though). I consider it a privilege to be a housewife, homemaker, stay at home mom, whatever you want to call it. When we both worked, we had no time together as a family. It seemed we worked day and night. Days off were filled with shopping, laundry and cleaning. I love the freedom to do my work when I want, and have time to spend with my husband and family. Both of my daughters in law had Moms who worked outside the home and both have chosen to be stay at home Moms themselves. We don't look at it as punishment or enslavement. We love nurturing our children and spending more time with them.
> 
> The dresses? You got me on that! That sucked! But fashion changes. Who knows what the future will hold.


Read up on your women's history.

Women in the War for Independence, civil war, women driving medical vehicles in WWI, women as nurses in the Crimean War and all wars. Ancient history has Bodeica and her daughters, the list could go on.

Some mothers do not have a choice to stay home and many who work outside of the home often do not get the same pay for the same job as men.

Not every woman has as nice a life as you and your daughters and many made what they thought were "good choices" that did not result in good out comes.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> How childish!


It was not intentional -


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> And yet, you still respond. I will respond to those who comment to me. Feel free to change the subject any time you wish. I'm open to discussing almost anything.


Neb, several of us have tried to tell you, they don't want discussion, only control. Talk to those who don't insult and attack you.

If you're not sure who we mean, ask those you trust by PM.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Neb, several of us have tried to tell you, they don't want discussion, only control. Talk to those who don't insult and attack you.
> 
> If you're not sure who, ask those you trust by PM.


I see your side and this side pretty much the same. We are set in our viewpoints after many decades. So we come to an impasse. I love having you ladies here but I have a short attention span and we seem to be getting nowhere in changing minds and hearts. Anyway, your side is better at ignoring. You organized yourself better against us than we have against you. But why should we agree? The world goes on no matter what we think or believe.


----------



## peacegoddess (Jan 28, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> I need to disagree with your statement that women "do not get the same pay for the same job as men." It is already illegal for them to not receive the same pay for the same job and the same number of hours worked.
> 
> Women may work less hours, especially if they have children. They will probably take more time off, because they have children. If a need arises at school, it will usually be the mother that is called. Therefore, time off from work. Women with children will work less than single women, because they have children.
> 
> ...


Much of what you say is true. However just because something is illegal does not stop employers from treating employees in an illegal manner. If the person does not have the time, knowledge, and resources to sue their employer, then they often suck it up and go on working for the lesser wage.

It is illegal to dump pollutants into waters that supply the drinking and bathing water for towns and cities and we have recently seen how that all came to pass.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Oh, how I wish I could be optimistic about what's going on in our government! I think they all work for the same people, and its not us! I think there's no real difference in the two parties. They SAY different things but they DO the same things. The wars go on and on, no matter who is in power. We lose more and more of our rights, no matter who is in power. And the people get poorer and poorer, no matter who is in power. Both sides have spent to oblivion. They've spent trillions of dollars and say we owe it. They have bankrupted us! All of them! Laws are written by lobbyists who lobby both sides. Government contracts make the rich, richer. The jobs have gone away because of trade agreements, written by lobbyists, that benefit the rich. Nothing changes! Neither party does anything to fix any of it! Things just get worse and worse! Soon we will have no middle class at all! They all say they're for the middle class but all have contributed to its demise or done nothing to reverse it. I wish I could be optimistic, but I think its too late to go back. I feel bad for my children and grandchildren.


As bleak as you have drawn the picture, you certainly seem to have nailed the truth here.

There are two major political parties - they have a party at the expense of the rest of us.

Running for office has become so expensive with the costs of advertising on modern media, only wealthy people can afford to do so. And they enact laws that benefit themselves and others like themselves.

We can only hope that there will be some really rich people with a higher level of morality and scruples who will choose to run for office. But I regretfully believe that anybody who is worthy of public office is disgusted with the mud thrown during campaigns and wouldn't lower themselves to participate.

Anybody ever read "The History of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire"?


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Anybody ever read "The History of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire"?


No but I know enough about history to realize that no civilization lasts forever. And certainly when an empire over extends they are doomed to fail. Think England, USSR, Netherlands, France, USA, Spain.


----------



## Camacho (Feb 3, 2013)

I've started skipping a lot of pages, so I may have missed it, but has anyone thought about what happens when a contraceptive fails? And I have recently learned that subsidized medical insurance may not always pay for the most effective forms of contraception that are available to women with money. What happens if the husband is disabled and cannot work?


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Camacho said:


> I've started skipping a lot of pages, so I may have missed it, but has anyone thought about what happens when a contraceptive fails? And I have recently learned that subsidized medical insurance may not always pay for the most effective forms of contraception that are available to women with money. What happens if the husband is disabled and cannot work?


I had a birth control failure but it turned out just fine. A friend of mine had 3 birth control failures. She tried them all and none worked for her. One baby was born probably holding the IUD.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I still get dinner (at 5:30 though). I consider it a privilege to be a housewife, homemaker, stay at home mom, whatever you want to call it. When we both worked, we had no time together as a family. It seemed we worked day and night. Days off were filled with shopping, laundry and cleaning. I love the freedom to do my work when I want, and have time to spend with my husband and family. Both of my daughters in law had Moms who worked outside the home and both have chosen to be stay at home Moms themselves. We don't look at it as punishment or enslavement. We love nurturing our children and spending more time with them.


Hmm...it's hard to explain exactly what I mean. Of course stay-at-home moms (and the occasional dad) still bear most of responsibility of getting the food on the table each night. But these days the point is for everyone to sit down, enjoy a healthy dinner, and spend some quality time together as a family.

But that really didn't seem to be the motivation when I was growing up. Neither my dad nor my friend's fathers were ogres, but it was like an important guest (or a restaurant critic) was due on the stroke of six, and by God everything better be ready. My friends were always sent home at that time, the laundry was yanked off the line and bundled into the house, and there was a lot of nervous hustling and bustling as my mother tried to cook the meal and do ten other things besides.

Three decades later it's really hard for me to understand that mindset, but from what I saw going on in my friends' houses it was far from unique. It was routine to be sent out to play in the yard between five and six--not for the health benefits, but because neighborhood moms were afraid of getting tracks on the linoleum just as good ol' Dad was coming up the walkway.

Even as a child this never seemed quite right to me--now, as an adult, I think it's positively medieval. And it certainly doesn't reflect well on women's position in society in the 50s, 60s, and even the 70s. No one flutters and fusses like that for an equal partner.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> I am wondering why President Obama is talking about women having the same pay as men. Since equal pay is the "Law of the Land," He needs to quit talking about it and enforce it. What good would another law do, if he does not enforce the one he has.


What is sad ,Mrs Somma, is that the same conversation was being held 30 years ago when I was a new mom and had to work. There is still the same wage discrepancy - almost the exact same percentage as in the early '80s. Something is truly off. And to the moms who were able to stay home - you were lucky. In NYC two incomes are needed.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

SQM said:


> I had a birth control failure but it turned out just fine. A friend of mine had 3 birth control failures. She tried them all and none worked for her. One baby was born probably holding the IUD.


I know how that goes--my son owes his conception to a broken thermometer (Natural Family Planning).


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> The trip would be the killer for me. Taking the train with a change in Newark is at least being eased with the newly instituted one seat ride. But I took a bus that wandered through Somerset, Middlesex, and Union Counties among others up to the helix and through the Lincoln Tunnel. Then the cross town shuttle (a Toonerville sort of train in my commuting years) and uptown to Hunter College. This after a day of teaching. And my husband had the trip uptown to City for his MS. It was local in service courses for us thereafter!


MarilynKnits
so much for our backward Transportation System. Will we live long enough to get from the 19th to the 21st Century?


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> I'll disagree. Never before in history have I've seen such divisiveness and destruction of the rule of law and partisanship as I've seen by Reid in his position in the Senate. Reid *is* the first to shut down the Senate, actually institute the "nuclear option" to protect his Party and stop the filibuster and bring bills to the floor, discussion, voting, etc. such as he did. Also, he has publicly defamed and lied about and used the Senate floor to do so against members of only the Republ party. This is disgraceful; not politics.
> 
> I have a more positive attitude than you do and do not believe they all play games and all do not have good intentions or follow an agenda. I'm an optimist, not naive, educated, involved and observant.


knitpresentgifts
where have you been for so many years?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I think there's a war on ALL of us! I think that division is purposely created to maintain the current political system and status quo. We are all distracted by our differences when we should be united in learning what is wrong and trying to fix it. I see BOTH sides espousing ideas that were handed to them on silver platters. Both sides need to realize that we and everything we live for, is under attack. I want to empower women to make the best decisions for themselves, BEFORE they have anything to regret! Can we all agree on that?


Frankly, what you want and what society and/or the universe want are very different, and I think the latter will hold more sway on what actually happens.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> yeah and it is able to make such great use of its brain. It can even talk you out of having an abortion.


Thank you. Is that during the Republican phase of development?


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Some questions if you are so inclined to answer:
> 1) What is your definition of rich? (i.e. $ amount net worth)
> 2) Are you a registered voter, and if, so, which party? Do you vote?
> 3) Do you think Reagan and Clinton each bankrupted "us?"
> ...


knitpresentgifts
could you get a little more nosy? Holy Cow, you enter one's house by kicking in the door. What a way to go. Do your boots have steel toes?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> We DO have different viewpoints. But why should anyone be "punished"? Choices made thoughtfully, lead to rewards, not punishment. I would rather see women make choices that lead to the fulfillment of their dreams, rather than their nightmares and regrets.


You may have spent the last few years studying a particular school of economics, but you clearly haven't spent any time studying psychology. And even choices made thoughtfully are subject to the vagaries of chance.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Designer1234 said:


> How do you know what will fulfill a woman's dreams - you are
> not that person. YOu don't know what nightmares and regrets caused the pregnancy in the first place. It is her business. to have the right to choose.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## rocky1991 (May 8, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I agree! Our founding fathers never intended our representatives to suck off the public teat forever. Sessions were to be short and productive not drawn out and permanent. They certainly never intended a redistribution of wealth!


For sure, they never intended that the bottom 99% to give all their money to the top 1%, but lo and behold, that is what has happened in the past 30 years or so


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Hmm...it's hard to explain exactly what I mean. Of course stay-at-home moms (and the occasional dad) still bear most of responsibility of getting the food on the table each night. But these days the point is for everyone to sit down, enjoy a healthy dinner, and spend some quality time together as a family.
> 
> But that really didn't seem to be the motivation when I was growing up. Neither my dad nor my friend's fathers were ogres, but it was like an important guest (or a restaurant critic) was due on the stroke of six, and by God everything better be ready. My friends were always sent home at that time, the laundry was yanked off the line and bundled into the house, and there was a lot of nervous hustling and bustling as my mother tried to cook the meal and do ten other things besides.
> 
> ...


I guess I grew up in a more enlightened household. Dad was the first boy after six sisters, and the girls let him know they were not his servants. "We cook, you cook, we do laundry, you do laundry" and he had his chores, as did my Uncle Bob who came after him. Grandma worked with Grandpa in the upholstery shop downstairs. When everybody grew up, Dad joined the business doing deliveries and helping with the actual work of rebuilding sofas, sewing slip covers, etc. as Grandma got older. Mother kept acing civil service tests and worked her way up in a State agency and was the main breadwinner.

Dad was a better "homemaker" than Mother and had more flexible hours. He got supper on the table and she cleaned up afterwards. They used a commercial laundry which was affordable in those years.

After Grandpa passed away and they had to give up the business, the five surviving adult kids helped support Grandma. Dad was offered a business opportunity in the Midwest by an uncle and we moved. He and Mother worked together in the store, grocery shopped together, fixed meals together, and had a really egalitarian life. Neither one loved to clean, and employed someone to do the house once a week and dust and sweep the store a couple of times a week.

It beat living like Alice and Jerry.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> What if we could teach our daughters to look for a man who put her needs first. And we taught her to put her mans needs first? And what if we taught our sons the same thing? What if we taught our children that sex was an expression of love, not entertainment? What if we taught them that marriage was a process and that each would grow with the other , as long as they chose wisely? What if we taught them that marriage is not disposable and worth fighting for? Excepting for abuse, addiction and adultery, it was worth it to make it work. Why can't we do that? Why can't we teach them to make choices that don't lead to regrets?


Oh, boy, this definitely shows you don't know much about psychology! We can teach and talk and give advice forever, and it will never bring about real change.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> knitpresentgifts
> could you get a little more nosy? Holy Cow, you enter one's house by kicking in the door. What a way to go. Do your boots have steel toes?


And when she visits and uses the loo, she probably always checks out the medicine cabinet.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> I guess I grew up in a more enlightened household. Dad was the first boy after six sisters, and the girls let him know they were not his servants. "We cook, you cook, we do laundry, you do laundry" and he had his chores, as did my Uncle Bob who came after him. Grandma worked with Grandpa in the upholstery shop downstairs. When everybody grew up, Dad joined the business doing deliveries and helping with the actual work of rebuilding sofas, sewing slip covers, etc. as Grandma got older. Mother kept acing civil service tests and worked her way up in a State agency and was the main breadwinner.
> 
> Sure does! I'm envious.
> Dad was a better "homemaker" than Mother and had more flexible hours. He got supper on the table and she cleaned up afterwards. They used a commercial laundry which was affordable in those years.
> ...


Sure does! I'm envious.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> I think you have overlooked one important point in your argument above. Your words "The choice being whether to take birth control, whether to have unprotected sex ......." Sorry I am using the ipad and it will not cut and paste for me. Back to my point. You are aware that the only 100%, totally effective method of birth control is TOTAL abstinence, of course you are. Birth control pills fail for a variety of reasons. Taking antibiotics or other medication cancels their effect, the woman is ill, vomits within hours of taking the pill, or a number of other reasons. Condoms break or leak. IUD devices fail because of many reasons. The list goes on. So an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy does result even if the woman is taking precautionary measures. My youngest child is an example. I was taking the pill when I fell pregnant, an no I did not miss a day, nor was I taking any other medication, nor was I ill at the time of conception. What the doctor said was "Oh, another Serial C failure". I was taking Serial C, it is probably not available now but was in use in Australia in 1973. I may not have the correct spelling. The doctor then added "Baby will probably be born with a smile on his face and both hands clutched, the hands will be holding the birth control pills." Yes he had a sense of humour.
> 
> My husband did not want children and when I told him I was pregnant he hit the roof and demanded I have an abortion. I could see no reason to have an abortion so I refused. When my son was born with medical difficulties he threw that at me again. "You knew I did not want children so you should have had an abortion." My son was six minutes before he drew his first breath. Apgars 1/1 and 6/5. He was an elective caesar at 37.5 weeks. I took this for over six years until one day I snapped and told him I was taking the pill when I fell pregnant. I asked him what precautions he was taking when I fell pregnant. I added if he did not want to have children he should have made sure he could not have children, he should have had the snip. Yea, birth control is not the responsibility of the woman and only the women. Men also have a responsibility to avoid unplanned pregnancies. Unfortunately his brothers wife weighed in on his side and told me that it was only the women's responsibility, not the man's. No I did not smack he one, I just walked away.
> 
> ...


Eve, I've been delaying responding to your message because I'll never do it justice, but I should at least tell you how much I admire you. You made some very tough decisions, for the most part on your own, with no help from the other affected person - the unwilling father. It takes a total lack of understanding to believe such decisions are easy and obvious.

You old Bogan, you!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Facts are facts! Poor Purl said; "The cells she carries in her uterus are part of that woman, not a separate organism, until they've grown enough to have a brain and a circulatory system.". I was merely pointing out that she was basically agreeing with me. The baby is a separate " organism".


Okay, you win on a technicality, but I don't agree with you in the least. I'd need a _working_ brain and circulatory system before I'd consider thinking of the fetus as a baby.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

maysmom said:


> I think that women have been treated as brood mares, helpmeets,servants, or delicate little flowers with no sense or intellectual value. This has been going on for centuries all over the world and continues to this day even in this country. (Research "Patriarchy" for some unbelieveable stuff.) What's especially hurtful is when women figuratively "stab each other in the back." Women are fed up, and rightfully so, but as a society both men and women have a very long way to go to achieve any lasting balance.


Thank you, maysmom.

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

maysmom said:


> Just curious, what is the worst thing that can happen? Having worked with physically and mentally handicapped people for over 20 years, I can count on one hand the number of couples who handled their child's disabilities without resorting to drugs, alcohol, or other destructive behaviors. And regarding choices, often "bad" or "good" can't be readily determined within the time frame allowed.


And again.

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Some questions if you are so inclined to answer:
> 1) What is your definition of rich? (i.e. $ amount net worth)
> 2) Are you a registered voter, and if, so, which party? Do you vote?
> 3) Do you think Reagan and Clinton each bankrupted "us?"
> ...


OK, here we go!
1. My definition of rich are the multi billionaires. Predominately, those who own the federal reserve and the central banks of the other countries (they're the same people). I guess I would consider Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, and the others who can afford to buy the politicians. 
2. I'm a registered republican even though I keep telling myself I'm going to change to an independent. And yes, I do vote! But not for those who have proven themselves to be liars. And today, but not for any incumbents. 
3. I think Reagan and Clinton and Bush and Bush Jr and Obama have ALL bankrupted us! Especially Obama but including all presidents since the federal reserve act was signed in 1913. The federal reserve act was DESIGNED to steal from the people and bankrupt the country. Read about it. You will probably agree.
4. I see a big difference between this administration and previous ones. Things are speeding up. But I believe he is a puppet, like the others. I believe that for many years, we have been on a track to eliminate the middle class, take away our constitutional rights and to take away the sovereignty of our country. I believed Bush when he said we will have a new world order. Those who pull the strings, want to control the whole world, a one world government. We are losing our sovereignty to the UN as we speak.
5. I've never lobbied or known a lobbyist. I think it should be illegal to buy influence! I despise everything they stand for!
6. Not only does congress not write legislation, they rarely even read it! Rand Paul introduced a bill that said they had to read the bills before voting on them. It hasn't come up for a vote. Big surprise!
7. My husband has been self employed, twice! I honor small business owners! They are helping to hold up our country as crony capitalists try to tear it down! I'm a firm believer in capitalism! Just not the corrupt crony capitalism we have today. Those who buy favor and influence regulation designed to put small business owners out of business, are destroying the country!
8. No. I have served on PTAs and volunteered in the schools 3-5 days a week for over 20 years. We all do what we can. I would not be a good politician! I don't lie and I speak my mind.
9. I have attended school board meetings, city council meetings and state legislative sessions. I have spoken publically at these meetings. Even had my name in the paper for it.
10. Rarely, in fact I can only think of once.

Finally, I believe that our country has been taken over and it grieves me. I love my country. I think that our country has left GOD and that GOD has left our country! I think that the only way our country can ever return to its former greatness is if we return to GOD! I know I'm going to get a lot of grief for that statement, but it IS what I believe! And NO one can convince me otherwise!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> If the birth control fails, they HAVE a baby! Killing a baby is a choice that comes after. But they already have a baby. That's reproduction.


Not according to U.S. law.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Pregnancy begins on the first day of your cycle. (Thats how they calculate it). The egg has already started maturation? Read the link to know more.


As I said earlier, you win on a technicality.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

peacegoddess said:


> Read up on your women's history.
> 
> Women in the War for Independence, civil war, women driving medical vehicles in WWI, women as nurses in the Crimean War and all wars. Ancient history has Bodeica and her daughters, the list could go on.
> 
> ...


I know that women participated in wars but I'm not aware of any books having been written about it that long ago.

I agree that not all women have a choice. I was just making the point that I didn't consider it servitude.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> You said the cells were not a separate organism until they'd grown a brain and respiratory system. I showed you that they developed these very early on. Therefore, they are separate.


First, I'll be the first to admit that what I said is not necessarily the case. Second, all I said is that those are necessary conditions; I didn't say they were sufficient.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Neb, several of us have tried to tell you, they don't want discussion, only control. Talk to those who don't insult and attack you.
> 
> If you're not sure who we mean, ask those you trust by PM.


I understand. I know who you mean. But what is one sided conversation? If you only talk to people you agree with, you will never learn anything new. I hear some from D&D say not to talk here and to ignore but I see the very people talking here and not ignoring. I've only ever been nice and polite on D&D. Am I still welcome there, if I choose to post here?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> I see your side and this side pretty much the same. We are set in our viewpoints after many decades. So we come to an impasse. I love having you ladies here but I have a short attention span and we seem to be getting nowhere in changing minds and hearts. Anyway, your side is better at ignoring. You organized yourself better against us than we have against you. But why should we agree? The world goes on no matter what we think or believe.


Must people agree to carry out conversation or discussion? I thought there were TWO sides to every issue.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

peacegoddess said:


> Much of what you say is true. However just because something is illegal does not stop employers from treating employees in an illegal manner. If the person does not have the time, knowledge, and resources to sue their employer, then they often suck it up and go on working for the lesser wage.
> 
> It is illegal to dump pollutants into waters that supply the drinking and bathing water for towns and cities and we have recently seen how that all came to pass.


I agree!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> As bleak as you have drawn the picture, you certainly seem to have nailed the truth here.
> 
> There are two major political parties - they have a party at the expense of the rest of us.
> 
> ...


Absolutely! I agree! I've not read the book but have been hearing a lot about it lately.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> You are so right! Woodrow Wilson started discrimination. Then our country really slid downhill fast once they took the Bible out of schools. I have a copy of the Texas school textbook for teaching the Bible (1948). In my one room school, we said a generic prayer, Thanking God for our food, every day before lunch. Then in 1963, my English Professor had to give a disclaimer, that we were reading Poetry when we studied some of the Psalms. They were in the textbook.


"Woodrow Wilson started discrimination"? Where did that come from?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Hmm...it's hard to explain exactly what I mean. Of course stay-at-home moms (and the occasional dad) still bear most of responsibility of getting the food on the table each night. But these days the point is for everyone to sit down, enjoy a healthy dinner, and spend some quality time together as a family.
> 
> But that really didn't seem to be the motivation when I was growing up. Neither my dad nor my friend's fathers were ogres, but it was like an important guest (or a restaurant critic) was due on the stroke of six, and by God everything better be ready. My friends were always sent home at that time, the laundry was yanked off the line and bundled into the house, and there was a lot of nervous hustling and bustling as my mother tried to cook the meal and do ten other things besides.
> 
> ...


In my home, my Dad usually cooked dinner when he got home. It was usually eggs, cornbread or pancakes. Except on Sunday, when he cooked the pheasants he'd gotten by hunting.

I thought the kids with normal families were lucky!


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> You are so right! Woodrow Wilson started discrimination. Then our country really slid downhill fast once they took the Bible out of schools. I have a copy of the Texas school textbook for teaching the Bible (1948). In my one room school, we said a generic prayer, Thanking God for our food, every day before lunch. Then in 1963, my English Professor had to give a disclaimer, that we were reading Poetry when we studied some of the Psalms. They were in the textbook.


Surely, Joey, you don't think that mandatory Bible readings in school are fair to children from Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, and other non-Christian backgrounds? And even if you're willing to let that pass, which Bible? As a Catholic mom I certainly wouldn't want my son to listen to passages out of the King James or any of the more recent Protestant Bibles.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Frankly, what you want and what society and/or the universe want are very different, and I think the latter will hold more sway on what actually happens.


You're right but shouldn't we try? After all who IS society? And where does change begin?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> You may have spent the last few years studying a particular school of economics, but you clearly haven't spent any time studying psychology. And even choices made thoughtfully are subject to the vagaries of chance.


Anything CAN be subject to chance. But not everything IS.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

rocky1991 said:


> For sure, they never intended that the bottom 99% to give all their money to the top 1%, but lo and behold, that is what has happened in the past 30 years or so


I agree!


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> You may have spent the last few years studying a particular school of economics, but you clearly haven't spent any time studying psychology. And even choices made thoughtfully are subject to the vagaries of chance.


That was one of the great tenets of Existentialism. We are forced to make decisions without knowing the outcome.

My favorite Existential statement was: No one can take a bath for you. Still pondering that almost 45 years later.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Must people agree to carry out conversation or discussion? I thought there were TWO sides to every issue.


There are two sides for every issue - the one you believe and the one you don't believe.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Oh, boy, this definitely shows you don't know much about psychology! We can teach and talk and give advice forever, and it will never bring about real change.


You may be right. But one thing I know for sure is that what we're doing now, doesn't work.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> That was one of the great tenets of Existentialism. We are forced to make decisions without knowing the outcome.
> 
> My favorite Existential statement was: No one can take a bath for you. Still pondering that almost 45 years later.


This reminds me of a really bad joke:

Two lushes are sitting in a bar, and one announces "I gotta go take a pee." The other says "I gotta go, too, but I don't think I can stand up. Will you go for me?" Lush #1 says "Sure, pal" and heads for the loo. A few minutes later he returns and hits Lush #2 on the head. "Why'd you do that?" the seated one asks. "Because you played a trick on me. You didn't have to go."


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> And when she visits and uses the loo, she probably always checks out the medicine cabinet.


Really?!? What would make you speculate about such a thing? She was merely trying to figure out where I was coming from. I was free to answer or not!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Okay, you win on a technicality, but I don't agree with you in the least. I'd need a _working_ brain and circulatory system before I'd consider thinking of the fetus as a baby.


Why do you think the brain and circulatory system are not working?


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Why do you think the brain and circulatory system are not working?


Have you seen this?
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10154075301610147&set=a.10153417026450147.1073741827.286781440146&type=1&theater


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> As I said earlier, you win on a technicality.


Oh, I like it when I'm right. It doesn't happen very often.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Why do you think the brain and circulatory system are not working?


For one thing, the link you sent me to said that they *begin* to develop at 5 weeks, not that they're fully formed.

And now I'm crying Uncle! I'm too tired to go on with this. Goodnight.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> You are so right! Woodrow Wilson started discrimination. Then our country really slid downhill fast once they took the Bible out of schools. I have a copy of the Texas school textbook for teaching the Bible (1948). In my one room school, we said a generic prayer, Thanking God for our food, every day before lunch. Then in 1963, my English Professor had to give a disclaimer, that we were reading Poetry when we studied some of the Psalms. They were in the textbook.


Thank you. I was not aware that Woodrow Wilson started discrimination. I'll have to look into that. I was aware that prayer and bible study used to be part of our education.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Country Bumpkins said:


> Have you seen this?
> http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10154075301610147&set=a.10153417026450147.1073741827.286781440146&type=1&theater


I hadn't seen that in particular but I knew it to be true.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Thank you. I was not aware that Woodrow Wilson started discrimination. I'll have to look into that. I was aware that prayer and bible study used to be part of our education.


The country became too diverse in Wilson's time. I think he was elected in 1912, when we were having our great influx of immigrants. Chrisitans came, of course, but so did other religions. So maybe it was no longer feasible to have one-size fits all prayers.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> For one thing, the link you sent me to said that they *begin* to develop at 5 weeks, not that they're fully formed.
> 
> And now I'm crying Uncle! I'm too tired to go on with this. Goodnight.


OK. I quit! Change of subject! Who likes the band "Heart"? You know, Ann and Nancy Wilson? I love Heart! Anybody else?


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Eh! My ex used to claim the same thing. (In reference to the posted poster.)


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> OK. I quit! Change of subject! Who likes the band "Heart"? You know, Ann and Nancy Wilson? I love Heart! Anybody else?


Not sure about the band as a whole, but I've always loved "Never". Great song.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Camacho said:


> I've started skipping a lot of pages, so I may have missed it, but has anyone thought about what happens when a contraceptive fails? And I have recently learned that subsidized medical insurance may not always pay for the most effective forms of contraception that are available to women with money. What happens if the husband is disabled and cannot work?


Camacho
you are asking much too much of some folks, thinking is not in their arsenal nor compassion or Christianity as they so often claim to practice. No proof here.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Not sure about the band as a whole, but I've always loved "Never". Great song.


I love " Never"! But "Crazy on You" is my favorite!


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I love " Never"! But "Crazy on You" is my favorite!


I liked their dad.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

jeoysomma
hope you have had a splendid day as I have had. Life is good. I guess I am living right to have such pleasures.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Pregnancy begins on the first day of your cycle. (Thats how they calculate it). The egg has already started maturation? Read the link to know more.


Knitter from Nebraska
the medical profession wishes it was that easy. It isn't.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

SQM said:


> I liked their dad.


I know it's kind of hokey, but I alway liked Neil Young's "Harvest Moon" as well.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> I liked their dad.


Wrong Wilson's. Their Dad was a military man and then a teacher.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> I know it's kind of hokey, but I alway liked Neil Young's "Harvest Moon" as well.


I love that album! Not hokey!


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I love that album! Not hokey!


If you say so, Nebraska.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> If you say so, Nebraska.


Ah! We agree! We should keep up this discussion! It could be fun! How about "The Who"?


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Ah! We agree! We should keep up this discussion! It could be fun! How about "The Who"?


Can you name a few of their songs? It's funny, but I generally am more familiar with song titles than the album they're on or even the group that sings them. A few exceptions are Enja, Kate Bush, and of course really popular (at least in their day) groups like REM and the Beatles.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Can you name a few of their songs? It's funny, but I generally am more familiar with song titles than the album they're on or even the group that sings them. A few exceptions are Enja, Kate Bush, and of course really popular (at least in their day) groups like REM and the Beatles.


"Who Are You" "Won't Get fooled Again" "I Can See For Miles" "Pinball Wizard"


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Wrong Wilson's. Their Dad was a military man and then a teacher.


I'm pathetic. But I still can like the military man/teacher.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> I am wondering why President Obama is talking about women having the same pay as men. Since equal pay is the "Law of the Land," He needs to quit talking about it and enforce it. What good would another law do, if he does not enforce the one he has.


There are other "laws of the land" that many people keep talking about---particularly abortion. Should we not discuss it because it is the "law of the land?" You don't believe that, do you? That it should not be discussed?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I think abortion is a ridiculous topic for us to debate. First of all, many/most of us are not personally affected at this stage of our lives. And our opinions are set in stone, ie unlikely to change in any significant way. IMHO


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Designer1234 said:


> I'm about teaching women to make choices that are best for them.
> 
> There you go again - you are taking it upon yourself to say what is best for them. It is not your business what she chooses to do. Who are you to make that decision. YOu do this in all your posts. You are right - you are never wrong . Just go back to people who will agree with you and tell you how right you are. We don't think so!! I don't believe you have the 'right to teach women to make their choices. how do you know what is best for them. You act so darned superior and all knowing.
> 
> I try to talk to you but your are so condescending and feel so self important that you feel you can decide for hundreds of women who you don't know and don't want to know how they should react to a very powerful time in their lives -- They should be able to choose -- not you.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Not all women who choose to have abortions have nightmares and regrets. Open mind.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> We DO have different viewpoints. But why should anyone be "punished"? Choices made thoughtfully, lead to rewards, not punishment. I would rather see women make choices that lead to the fulfillment of their dreams, rather than their nightmares and regrets.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Welcome to my world. I was that child, but my parents were not so enlightened.



MarilynKnits said:


> It is indeed unfortunate that critical thinking is not emphasized. It takes effort and has to begin at home before formal schooling even starts.
> 
> And oh, my, does it get children into trouble at school! Our daughter thought for herself from an early age and wanted reasonable answers as to why something should be done. "Because I am the (teacher, mother, principal, etc) and I say so" was not an acceptable answer for her. Can't remember how many times I was called to school until they figured out I was proud of her for not being a sheep.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Aren't you setting everyone up to be codependent, looking at everyone's life but their own? What about personal knowledge? Give up your dreams for a rule?



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> What if we could teach our daughters to look for a man who put her needs first. And we taught her to put her mans needs first? And what if we taught our sons the same thing? What if we taught our children that sex was an expression of love, not entertainment? What if we taught them that marriage was a process and that each would grow with the other , as long as they chose wisely? What if we taught them that marriage is not disposable and worth fighting for? Excepting for abuse, addiction and adultery, it was worth it to make it work. Why can't we do that? Why can't we teach them to make choices that don't lead to regrets?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Campaign Finance Reform anyone?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Thank you. I was not aware that Woodrow Wilson started discrimination. I'll have to look into that. I was aware that prayer and bible study used to be part of our education.


Which prayer and whose Bible?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> I liked their dad.


Who was their dad? The only Nancy Wilson I know is this one: 



 . I've met the man who wrote this song.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> I think abortion is a ridiculous topic for us to debate. First of all, many/most of us are not personally affected at this stage of our lives. And our opinions are set in stone, ie unlikely to change in any significant way. IMHO


But we can still tell other people how to live their lives, can't we?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> Aren't you setting everyone up to be codependent, looking at everyone's life but their own? What about personal knowledge? Give up your dreams for a rule?


How insightful of you.

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> Campaign Finance Reform anyone?


Sure. Until the Supremes cut in.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Which prayer and whose Bible?


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Why not?

If we like to hear ourselves talk go ahead, but no one else is listening. If, however, we wish to accomplish something, it is probably better to go clean the bathroom or anything that needs done.



Poor Purl said:


> But we can still tell other people how to live their lives, can't we?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thank you.



Poor Purl said:


> How insightful of you.
> 
> :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

And another topic that needs attention. I was hoping it was time for natural replacement. Lifetime terms? Ridiculous, especially when you're as demented as Scalia, Thomas etc. IMHO



Poor Purl said:


> Sure. Until the Supremes cut in.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

As with most of her comments, logic has no place.



alcameron said:


> There are other "laws of the land" that many people keep talking about---particularly abortion. Should we not discuss it because it is the "law of the land?" You don't believe that, do you? That it should not be discussed?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Who was their dad? The only Nancy Wilson I know is this one:
> 
> 
> 
> . I've met the man who wrote this song.


Ann and Nancy Wilson of Heart.http://youtu.be/p0OX_8YvFxA
Tried to pick one everyone would recognize, Barracuda!


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Ann and Nancy Wilson of Heart.http://youtu.be/p0OX_8YvFxA
> Tried to pick one everyone would recognize, Barracuda!


Yep, as so often happens I knew the song but not the group. I like it too--but oh those gals are so thin--emaciated, really. No Mama Cass types in that band--they all need to gain at least twenty or thirty pounds.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Yep, as so often happens I knew the song but not the group. I like it too--but oh those gals are so thin--emaciated, really. No Mama Cass types in that band--they all need to gain at least twenty or thirty pounds.


Not as thin anymore. Here's a link to a concert we went to a couple of years ago in Council Bluffs. My hubby is the one in the hat. I'm in front of him. You cant see me.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

SQM said:


> I had a birth control failure but it turned out just fine. A friend of mine had 3 birth control failures. She tried them all and none worked for her. One baby was born probably holding the IUD.


Your post may have been in jest but in the early 70 s there were babies born with the coil, an IUD, embedded in their scalp. Failed IUD also led to first trimester miscarriages.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

damemary said:


> I think abortion is a ridiculous topic for us to debate. First of all, many/most of us are not personally affected at this stage of our lives. And our opinions are set in stone, ie unlikely to change in any significant way. IMHO


damemary
chiselled into Granite I say.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Not as thin anymore. Here's a link to a concert we went to a couple of years ago in Council Bluffs. My hubby is the one in the hat. I'm in front of him. You cant see me.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Huckleberry said:


> Knitter from Nebraska
> Sorry, but that is not music, it is very annoying noise to my ears.


To each, his own. I love it!


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> OK. I quit! Change of subject! Who likes the band "Heart"? You know, Ann and Nancy Wilson? I love Heart! Anybody else?


Yup--Magic Man, Straight On, Dreamboat Annie, Even it Up, all the rocking ones. Ann could sure belt 'em out.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Hmm...it's hard to explain exactly what I mean. Of course stay-at-home moms (and the occasional dad) still bear most of responsibility of getting the food on the table each night. But these days the point is for everyone to sit down, enjoy a healthy dinner, and spend some quality time together as a family.
> 
> But that really didn't seem to be the motivation when I was growing up. Neither my dad nor my friend's fathers were ogres, but it was like an important guest (or a restaurant critic) was due on the stroke of six, and by God everything better be ready. My friends were always sent home at that time, the laundry was yanked off the line and bundled into the house, and there was a lot of nervous hustling and bustling as my mother tried to cook the meal and do ten other things besides.
> 
> ...


You are bringing back memories here. The really good housewife would have the children fed, washed and in their pjs and ready for bed before the master of the house came home. That way HE was not disturbed by their chatter. The good wife would also greet the man with a smile, wearing a fresh apron and fresh lipstick, her hair held in place with a hairnet - no sign of hair rollers either. She would pour him a beer, whisky, tea or whatever. He would sit down and read the newspaper and she would wait on him. He would always be served first, ahead of anyone else, and be given the best portions of meat, etc. Washing up, the man help?????? You jest, a man get dishpan hands. Men did not hang the washing on the line, change the baby's nappy, hear the children's reading or spelling, I could go on.

Fortunately, my mother did not go in for that malarky. Tea, or you call it dinner, was served when it was ready, always around 6.00 pm. If you were not home your dinner was placed over a saucepan of water to keep it warm. My father did not receive any special privileges because he was a male, mind you he was an alcoholic and a drug addict, prescription drugs - a result of war injuries. He was more often off his head at tea time so we would leave him to it, to drown in his own self inflicted miseries in his bedroom.

But boy are you correct with what did happen in the majority of households. Just watch the old TV show 'Bewitched' to see who was the head of the house and who obeyed and took second place. Remember, in its time 'Bewitched' was prime time TV. Standards and attitudes have changed for the better, today's men, for the most, do share the tasks. But I remember the bad old days, and yes women did go out to work then, with no daycare centres to mind the children either.


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Yep, as so often happens I knew the song but not the group. I like it too--but oh those gals are so thin--emaciated, really. No Mama Cass types in that band--they all need to gain at least twenty or thirty pounds.


Ann's been close to the Mama Cass size for quite awhile. But, she can sing!


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

SQM said:


> What is sad ,Mrs Somma, is that the same conversation was being held 30 years ago when I was a new mom and had to work. There is still the same wage discrepancy - almost the exact same percentage as in the early '80s. Something is truly off. And to the moms who were able to stay home - you were lucky. In NYC two incomes are needed.


Two incomes are needed in Perth. You cannot pay the mortgage, or rent, on a single i come unless that income is over $150,000 a year. Even then it is a struggle.


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

damemary said:


> Why not?
> 
> If we like to hear ourselves talk go ahead, but no one else is listening. If, however, we wish to accomplish something, it is probably better to go clean the bathroom or anything that needs done.


You can sing in the bathroom while you work, the acoustics are usually better. Remember the 3 Dog Night song "Liar?" Some of it was recorded in a tiled restroom, if I recall correctly.

I need tea.


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> I know it's kind of hokey, but I alway liked Neil Young's "Harvest Moon" as well.


"Heart of Gold," my fave.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Huckleberry said:


> knitpresentgifts
> could you get a little more nosy? Holy Cow, you enter one's house by kicking in the door. What a way to go. Do your boots have steel toes?


Remember, they have ways and means of making you talk, so be prepared, get the story straight.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Not as thin anymore. Here's a link to a concert we went to a couple of years ago in Council Bluffs. My hubby is the one in the hat. I'm in front of him. You cant see me.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> "Who Are You" "Won't Get fooled Again" "I Can See For Miles" "Pinball Wizard"


"Squeeze Box." And the instrumental "Overture to Tommy." Good ol' Roger. Sad that most rock stars haven't aged as well as their fans, lol. Have you seen a recent photo of Robert Plant? I could just cry.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> Two incomes are needed in Perth. You cannot pay the mortgage, or rent, on a single i come unless that income is over $150,000 a year. Even then it is a struggle.


Oh Gee! And I had Perth on my radar for retirement cities.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Surely, Joey, you don't think that mandatory Bible readings in school are fair to children from Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, and other non-Christian backgrounds? And even if you're willing to let that pass, which Bible? As a Catholic mom I certainly wouldn't want my son to listen to passages out of the King James or any of the more recent Protestant Bibles.


Thank you for your post. I was educated at a convent and know the differences between the Catholic Bible and the Protestant Bibles. In primary school we studied Bible History, the old testament but emphasis was not placed on a daily reading of the Bible. We were more geared towards good works and helping others. Who is your neighbour? And the parable of the Good Shepherd were more important than reading the Bible.

Were you a member of The Legion of Mary whilst at school, and have to make weekly visits to the elderly, the sick and the mother with many children, and had to run errands or do chores for these people? I enjoyed doing these visits.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

maysmom said:


> Yup--Magic Man, Straight On, Dreamboat Annie, Even it Up, all the rocking ones. Ann could sure belt 'em out.


  Still can!


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> Remember, they have ways and means of making you talk, so be prepared, get the story straight.


Sarah Palin's "baptism" should do the trick.

:twisted:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> Why not?
> 
> If we like to hear ourselves talk go ahead, but no one else is listening. If, however, we wish to accomplish something, it is probably better to go clean the bathroom or anything that needs done.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Love it, Nebraska--what an experience! As a teen-age my mother was a huge Ricky Nelson fan, and some twenty-five years later she had a chance to attend a small performance he held at a county fair. It was definitely a no-frills performance but thrilled her nonetheless. Even I was a little awed to be within arm's reach of a guy I'd seen countless times on grainy Ozzy and Harriet reruns.
> 
> He was very gracious, too--if he felt it was a comedown for a former TV to be playing at a tiny public event he didn't let it show. And of course his audience of mostly middle-aged ladies was wildly enthusiastic and made a huge fuss over him. At one point he wiped his streaming forehead on a bit of old towel, glanced over, and then handed it over with a smile to woman who had her hand out and was literally jumping up and down. She clutched it to her chest and for a second looked as if she was going to keel over in the aisle--her day was made, for sure.
> 
> I know all the stories about Nelson's drug use and marital difficulties and awful untimely death, and doubtless they're all true. But something has to be said for a person willing to put himself out like that (for financial peanuts, no doubt) to make so many people so very happy. I wish things had worked out for him in the end.


Brings to mind his song "Garden Party". Would have loved to see him.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> And another topic that needs attention. I was hoping it was time for natural replacement. Lifetime terms? Ridiculous, especially when you're as demented as Scalia, Thomas etc. IMHO


Oh, boy, do those two need a rest. Retirement in Florida would do them, and the world, a lot of good, though maybe not Florida.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

maysmom said:


> "Squeeze Box." And the instrumental "Overture to Tommy." Good ol' Roger. Sad that most rock stars haven't aged as well as their fans, lol. Have you seen a recent photo of Robert Plant? I could just cry.


Oh, and "Magic Bus"! I've seen Robert Plant. Probably all the drugs.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Ann and Nancy Wilson of Heart.http://youtu.be/p0OX_8YvFxA
> Tried to pick one everyone would recognize, Barracuda!


Everyone but me. I've been listening to jazz from the age of 12, so missed out on all the groups you others know.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> Knitter from Nebraska
> Sorry, but that is not music, it is very annoying noise to my ears.


Mine, too, Huck. But I like Nebraska's husband's hat.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

damemary said:


> I think abortion is a ridiculous topic for us to debate. First of all, many/most of us are not personally affected at this stage of our lives. And our opinions are set in stone, ie unlikely to change in any significant way. IMHO


It would be great if we could have a real dialogue, but we've proved we can't. Our opinions are, indeed, set in stone.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

maysmom said:


> "Heart of Gold," my fave.


Okay, that one I know. Always liked Neil Young. In fact, Crosby, Stills, and Nash, too.

Or do I have them confused with someone else?


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

damemary said:


> Campaign Finance Reform anyone?


Some of us who always disagree might agree on this subject. I'd like to see serious limitations on the amounts of money people can contribute to candidates they want to support along with some limits on how long political campaigns can last. For example, candidates for President and incumbent Presidents spending a couple of years campaigning doesn't seem right at all to me.

Then there's the massive monitoring the NSA is doing of US citizen's communiations. There was a great segment of "Frontline" on last night how this was deemed legal and put in place. I know some of us will say that if we aren't doing anything wrong, we don't need to be afraid of having all our personal communications monitored AND RECORDED, but I don't think that argument holds water anymore.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

maysmom said:


> Sarah Palin's "baptism" should do the trick.
> 
> :twisted:


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> You are bringing back memories here. The really good housewife would have the children fed, washed and in their pjs and ready for bed before the master of the house came home. That way HE was not disturbed by their chatter. The good wife would also greet the man with a smile, wearing a fresh apron and fresh lipstick, her hair held in place with a hairnet - no sign of hair rollers either. She would pour him a beer, whisky, tea or whatever. He would sit down and read the newspaper and she would wait on him. He would always be served first, ahead of anyone else, and be given the best portions of meat, etc. Washing up, the man help?????? You jest, a man get dishpan hands. Men did not hang the washing on the line, change the baby's nappy, hear the children's reading or spelling, I could go on.
> 
> Fortunately, my mother did not go in for that malarky. Tea, or you call it dinner, was served when it was ready, always around 6.00 pm. If you were not home your dinner was placed over a saucepan of water to keep it warm. My father did not receive any special privileges because he was a male, mind you he was an alcoholic and a drug addict, prescription drugs - a result of war injuries. He was more often off his head at tea time so we would leave him to it, to drown in his own self inflicted miseries in his bedroom.
> 
> But boy are you correct with what did happen in the majority of households. Just watch the old TV show 'Bewitched' to see who was the head of the house and who obeyed and took second place. Remember, in its time 'Bewitched' was prime time TV. Standards and attitudes have changed for the better, today's men, for the most, do share the tasks. But I remember the bad old days, and yes women did go out to work then, with no daycare centres to mind the children either.


I remember my mother, brother and I knowing my Dad did a hard day's work, being happy he was home and making our home an oasis for all of us. Sure, we conformed to various sex-related roles at home but we created something we all valued. Am I the only person around here who had a generally happy and good family? I hope not.


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Oh, and "Magic Bus"! I've seen Robert Plant. Probably all the drugs.


My favorite Led Zep song is "Trampled Underfoot." Don't hear it too much nowadays.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Oh, how I hate hot weather. I'm headed for the kitchen to do a bit of cooking before it gets too hot. Welcome to another Spare the Air Day, too.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

My Mom was a stay at home Mom. My Dad worked in a mill and was President of the Union. We were close to extended family, especially my Mom's parents and 5 siblings. A good way to grow up.



MaidInBedlam said:


> I remember my mother, brother and I knowing my Dad did a hard day's work, being happy he was home and making our home an oasis for all of us. Sure, we conformed to various sex-related roles at home but we created something we all valued. Am I the only person around here who had a generally happy and good family? I hope not.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

damemary said:


> My Mom was a stay at home Mom. My Dad worked in a mill and was President of the Union. We were close to extended family, especially my Mom's parents and 5 siblings. A good way to grow up.


Both of my parents worked. With 5 kids, a mortgage, tuition for Catholic schools etc. However, we were a solid family. We did sit down for dinner together every night.
As tired as they were, they worked again at home to ensure that our homework was done, our uniforms were ready for the next day, and lunches were made. I don't think they sat down until we were in bed.
Today, many (both parents) are working both full and part time jobs to keep the bills paid and food on the table. 
The days of June Cleaver are gone. Long gone.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> The schools were started by churches for the purpose of reading the Bible. Many places the school and church were in the same building. Even Harvard was a Divinity school.


 It's a good thing that we have progressed.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

How true. What could provide a secure life for a family even with both parents working is gone. Now they're lucky if they have a roof over their heads and almost enough food. All the while CEO's make millions. I truly don't see why there isn't more protest.



BrattyPatty said:


> Both of my parents worked. With 5 kids, a mortgage, tuition for Catholic schools etc. However, we were a solid family. We did sit down for dinner together every night.
> As tired as they were, they worked again at home to ensure that our homework was done, our uniforms were ready for the next day, and lunches were made. I don't think they sat down until we were in bed.
> Today, many (both parents) are working both full and part time jobs to keep the bills paid and food on the table.
> The days of June Cleaver are gone. Long gone.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> You are bringing back memories here. The really good housewife would have the children fed, washed and in their pjs and ready for bed before the master of the house came home. That way HE was not disturbed by their chatter. The good wife would also greet the man with a smile, wearing a fresh apron and fresh lipstick, her hair held in place with a hairnet - no sign of hair rollers either. She would pour him a beer, whisky, tea or whatever. He would sit down and read the newspaper and she would wait on him. He would always be served first, ahead of anyone else, and be given the best portions of meat, etc. Washing up, the man help?????? You jest, a man get dishpan hands. Men did not hang the washing on the line, change the baby's nappy, hear the children's reading or spelling, I could go on.
> 
> Fortunately, my mother did not go in for that malarky. Tea, or you call it dinner, was served when it was ready, always around 6.00 pm. If you were not home your dinner was placed over a saucepan of water to keep it warm. My father did not receive any special privileges because he was a male, mind you he was an alcoholic and a drug addict, prescription drugs - a result of war injuries. He was more often off his head at tea time so we would leave him to it, to drown in his own self inflicted miseries in his bedroom.
> 
> But boy are you correct with what did happen in the majority of households. Just watch the old TV show 'Bewitched' to see who was the head of the house and who obeyed and took second place. Remember, in its time 'Bewitched' was prime time TV. Standards and attitudes have changed for the better, today's men, for the most, do share the tasks. But I remember the bad old days, and yes women did go out to work then, with no daycare centres to mind the children either.


Your analysis is spot-on, Evie! Those were really difficult days for women, and when I look back at some of the attitudes and images we accepted as normal I'm aghast:

--the Crisco (a solid vegetable shortening) ad that showed the Lord of the Manor sitting at the table grading the Little Woman on the quality of her French fries ("C--kind of soggy....A+--no greasy taste!" )

--a print ad for Eze-Off that depicted a grimy, frazzled housewife with her head in the oven trying frantically to clean it with a can of inferior product. That image seemed to turn up in all our mother's magazines--Sister and I would each pick a side and turn pages until we came to the picture then--"You're the dirty lady!" one of us would carol while the other hung her head in mock shame.

--the Old Maid card game--we'd sequentially draw, match up, and lay down pairs of cards until all were gone save the Old Maid--the one single card in the deck that had a picture of a crone on it


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Your analysis is spot-on, Evie! Those were really difficult days for women, and when I look back at some of the attitudes and images we accepted as normal I'm aghast:
> 
> --the Crisco (a solid vegetable shortening) ad that showed the Lord of the Manor sitting at the table grading the Little Woman on the quality of her French fries ("C--kind of soggy....A+--no greasy taste!" )
> 
> ...


How about Ring Around the Collar, where a man with a dirty neck filthies up his shirt, but it's his wife who's ashamed because she didn't clean it right?


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

damemary said:


> My Mom was a stay at home Mom. My Dad worked in a mill and was President of the Union. We were close to extended family, especially my Mom's parents and 5 siblings. A good way to grow up.


My mom was a stay at home mom, too. My dad was a stationery engineer and very active in his union, as well. His father had been a union organizer in the 20s and 30s. My mother is the youngest of six girls so I have piles of cousins but they had all disperesed around the country by the end of the 50s. The four of us were more of a litttle army of suport for each other, though my grandparents also lived with us at various times.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Fumblefingers got me on this post. Have to wait until they remember how to type...


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

maysmom said:


> My favorite Led Zep song is "Trampled Underfoot." Don't hear it too much nowadays.


Mine's a toss up between "Stairway to Heaven" and "Misty Mountain Hop".


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> What progression? Now high school graduates have to take remedial classes just to get admitted to College. Many are not able to read above a 3rd grade level.
> 
> In the day, an eighth grade education was as good or better than high school is today. With a high school education you could teach in a one room school. A college education was almost unheard of. Many of our Presidents did not go to college.


And this was all due to having god (or lack of god) drummed into their heads?
:roll:


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> What progression? Now high school graduates have to take remedial classes just to get admitted to College. Many are not able to read above a 3rd grade level.
> 
> In the day, an eighth grade education was as good or better than high school is today. With a high school education you could teach in a one room school. A college education was almost unheard of. Many of our Presidents did not go to college.


Hey Mrs. Somma, I am agreeing with you. The textbook I am co-authoring is for college students who need help with reading and writing. Of course, I assume some will be foreign students but some will certainly be victims of poor educations here.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> It had to do with having a solid education. Non of this, time wasting, homosexual, transvestite, transgender stuff, or sex education. Moral education was taken care of in the home. I will agree, there were homes then. And then there were morals. Very few single mothers or unwed parents.
> 
> When God was removed from the schools, so was morality.


There are way more immoral activities than having sex outside of marriage.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> It had to do with having a solid education. None of this, time wasting, homosexual, transvestite, transgender stuff, or sex education. Moral education was taken care of in the home. I will agree, there were homes then. And then there were morals. Very few single mothers or unwed parents.
> 
> When God was removed from the schools, so was morality.


Gee, you are so judgemental today, Mrs. Somma.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> FYI: A good part of the Bible is history. The Psalms are poetry. The Proverbs are ways to live a good life. The Bible can be studied as a book without bringing in a denomination or a specific religious creed. Today The Bible can legally be studied in Public school as history and literature, as an elective subject.
> 
> As far as the version, it is usually King James. But it doesn't matter. All versions have the same information as far as history and literature. A good class would use several versions. The Douay version is very similar to the King James with a few extra chapters
> 
> The schools were started by churches for the purpose of reading the Bible. Many places the school and church were in the same building. Even Harvard was a Divinity school.


The primary school topic was not 'the Bible AS HISTORY' but 'Bible History', mainly a brief history of the Jewish tribes that existed at the time the Old Testament was written. We did not study Psalms as poetry or proverbs as a way to live a good life. As for a good class having several versions of the Bible, I do not think this would be so in a Catholic School. The Douay version may be VERY SIMILAR to the King James with a few extra chapters, but VERY SIMILAR is not the same. You are very similar to me in that you have one head, two arms attached to the top of your body with two legs attached to the bottom of your body, but you are not the same  you are different.

The three convents I attended were not in the same building as the church, they were separate buildings. One school was very tiny, only three classrooms teaching primary school, year 1 through to year 7, with less than 100 pupils in all, but it was a separate building.

Catholic schools in Australia were not established to teach or encourage the reading of the Bible, they were established by the Irish nuns to ensure the Catholic children were taught the Catechism and about the Catholic Church. In fact the Bible was not read in any of my schools, nor were we encouraged to read it. My grandmother had the family bible but we did not have one in our house. I inherited the bible from grandma and gave it to my daughter. None of my siblings have ever had a bible in their house. The Bible History lessons we had were more stories than Bible reading. I guess that is peculiar to Australia. Not a lot of Australian households own bibles and fewer read them, apart from the very religious, who generally do now belong to what we Aussies term 'main stream religions". C of E, Catholic, Uniting Church, Salvos, to name a few. We do not have many of the Religious bodies in Australia that you have in America, or should I say USA.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> Gee, you are so judgemental today, Mrs. Somma.


Why is today different from any other day?


----------



## sumpleby (Aug 3, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> When God was removed from the schools, so was morality.


Codswallop.

Kids are only in school about 30 hours per week. Laying aside hours for sleep, their families have roughly 82 hours each week to instill religion into their children. If that isn't enough, there is something wrong with either the parents or the religion.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> There are way more immoral activities than having sex outside of marriage.


Don't you think morality is still taught in public schools? Certainly teachers have moral compasses and conduct classrooms "morally." Honesty, kindness, tolerance, respect, being truthful, and doing what's right are just a few "morality lessons" being taught in our schools everyday. It seems to me that some adults in Congress, on the Supreme Court, and on TV/radio could benefit from spending a week in a classroom. Even civility is all but gone from how our president is treated. And some of those people who profess a strong committment to God throw their morals out the window when dealing with others. Is it moral to "buy" politicians? Is it moral for Congressmen/women to accept lavish gifts from donors? The list of immoral behavior goes on, and I think it has little to do with removing God or prayer from the classroom.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Why is today different from any other day?


because Mrs. Somma is leaning right instead of left?


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> It had to do with having a solid education. None of this, time wasting, homosexual, transvestite, transgender stuff, or sex education. Moral education was taken care of in the home. I will agree, there were homes then. And then there were morals. Very few single mothers or unwed parents.
> 
> When God was removed from the schools, so was morality.


I may have misunderstood you, but when I was a child there were homosexuals, transvestites living in society. No transgender because the operation was not available. BUT we were brought up to respect their views, we were taught that they were normal people with a different sexual preference, but still people. We were taught that they were not evil, to be hated and that they were not hated by God.

Very few single or unwed mothers, really? No, the parents were forced into a shotgun marriage to avoid the shame. We had a saying 'shotgun marriages do not last'. The child was forcibly removed from the unmarried mother at birth. There were unwed mothers and illegitimate children during the Victorian era.



> When God was removed from the schools, so was morality


.
_Religion needs morality to survive, but morals are not dependent upon religion_.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

alcameron said:


> Don't you think morality is still taught in public schools? Certainly teachers have moral compasses and conduct classrooms "morally." Honesty, kindness, tolerance, respect, being truthful, and doing what's right are just a few "morality lessons" being taught in our schools everyday. It seems to me that some adults in Congress, on the Supreme Court, and on TV/radio could benefit from spending a week in a classroom. Even civility is all but gone from how our president is treated. And some of those people who profess a strong committment to God throw their morals out the window when dealing with others. Is it moral to "buy" politicians? Is it moral for Congressmen/women to accept lavish gifts from donors? The list of immoral behavior goes on, and I think it has little to do with removing God or prayer from the classroom.


You said it. And now that corporations are deemed to be people, they could use a little morality as well. Is it moral to destroy the drinking water for a whole town and not pay to have it restored? Is it moral to create oil spills and not clean up after yourself? Is it moral to lie about important situations like global climate change so that you can continue to make obscene profits? Is it moral to pay your employees so little that they have to apply for Medicaid and other governmental supports, while you are making billions?


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> You said it. And now that corporations are deemed to be people, they could use a little morality as well. Is it moral to destroy the drinking water for a whole town and not pay to have it restored? Is it moral to create oil spills and not clean up after yourself? Is it moral to lie about important situations like global climate change so that you can continue to make obscene profits? Is it moral to pay your employees so little that they have to apply for Medicaid and other governmental supports, while you are making billions?


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> because Mrs. Somma is leaning right instead of left?


That's something only you, I, and MarilynKnits will get.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> That's something only you, I, and MarilynKnits will get.


Care to explain or not? At first I thought it had something to do with left-handedness, but I guess I'm wrong.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> I may have misunderstood you, but when I was a child there were homosexuals, transvestites living in society. No transgender because the operation was not available. BUT we were brought up to respect their views, we were taught that they were normal people with a different sexual preference, but still people. We were taught that they were not evil, to be hated and that they were not hated by God.
> 
> Very few single or unwed mothers, really? No, the parents were forced into a shotgun marriage to avoid the shame. We had a saying 'shotgun marriages do not last'. The child was forcibly removed from the unmarried mother at birth. There were unwed mothers and illegitimate children during the Victorian era.
> 
> _Religion needs morality to survive, but morals are not dependent upon religion_.


Is that from Proverbs? It ought to be.

The way you describe views on homosexuality shows Australia to have been way ahead of the US and the UK in that regard. (I loved _Priscilla, Queen of the Desert_.)


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

alcameron said:


> Care to explain or not? At first I thought it had something to do with left-handedness, but I guess I'm wrong.


At the Passover seder, some people traditionally sit leaning to the left. It has to do with being able to sit comfortably, as a free person, but leaving your right hand available to eat with.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

sumpleby said:


> Codswallop.
> 
> Kids are only in school about 30 hours per week. Laying aside hours for sleep, their families have roughly 82 hours each week to instill religion into their children. If that isn't enough, there is something wrong with either the parents or the religion.


Exactly, sumpleby. I wouldn't have much respect for a god who could only function in one venue, anyway.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

alcameron said:


> Care to explain or not? At first I thought it had something to do with left-handedness, but I guess I'm wrong.


during Passover - we ask the question - Why is this night different from any other night? PP made a play on that when she remarked on Mrs. Somma's post. I replied with a play on a directive from passover that we are suppose to eat leaning left, I think. PP knows more about the details than I do. So that was the joke.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> At the Passover seder, some people traditionally sit leaning to the left. It has to do with being able to sit comfortably, as a free person, but leaving your right hand available to eat with.


Wouldn't work for me, the leftie. Now I'm going to go googling to see if I can find a picture of an orthodox family Seder.

Time to close the house up for the hot, "spare the air day" before we get too warm in here. My poor dogs are lying on the cool tile. Might have to join them by tonight.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

alcameron said:


> Wouldn't work for me, the leftie. Now I'm going to go googling to see if I can find a picture of an orthodox family Seder.
> 
> Time to close the house up for the hot, "spare the air day" before we get too warm in here. My poor dogs are lying on the cool tile. Might have to join them by tonight.


Leave some space for me, Al. It hit 92 yesterday, and today is supposed to be even worse.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

SQM said:


> during Passover - we ask the question - Why is this night different from any other night? PP made a play on that when she remarked on Mrs. Somma's post. I replied with a play on a directive from passover that we are suppose to eat leaning left, I think. PP knows more about the details than I do. So that was the joke.


How's this?


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Leave some space for me, Al. It hit 92 yesterday, and today is supposed to be even worse.


And I'm supposed to be making treats for knitting tomorrow. I have "stuff" in my freezer but it's all chocolate, and there are a few odd ones in my group who don't eat chocolate. Quel dommage!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

alcameron said:


> Wouldn't work for me, the leftie. Now I'm going to go googling to see if I can find a picture of an orthodox family Seder.
> 
> Time to close the house up for the hot, "spare the air day" before we get too warm in here. My poor dogs are lying on the cool tile. Might have to join them by tonight.


Is it that hot already?

I googled. All I got were pictures of food, fitting for a Jewish occasion but not especially helpful.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

alcameron said:


> How's this?


Oh Al you are so cute.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

alcameron said:


> How's this?


That's it! It's usually only the father who leans.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Is it that hot already?
> 
> I googled. All I got were pictures of food, fitting for a Jewish occasion but not especially helpful.


It's not that hot yet, but our upstairs gets very warm and stuffy. Hot here isn't like hot on the East coast or even Minnesota. No humidity. We're spoiled.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

alcameron said:


> It's not that hot yet, but our upstairs gets very warm and stuffy. Hot here isn't like hot on the East coast or even Minnesota. No humidity. We're spoiled.


Hot here can be ghastly. Today it's only in the 60s, thank Icebergs.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

SQM said:


> Oh Al you are so cute.


His wife should knit him a cuter yarmulke. She could practice her intarsia or something.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Au revoir, shalom, and ciao. I'm being beckoned.
Latergators


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

alcameron said:


> And I'm supposed to be making treats for knitting tomorrow. I have "stuff" in my freezer but it's all chocolate, and there are a few odd ones in my group who don't eat chocolate. Quel dommage!


Yes, those poor things--and you too. I can't imagine trying to fire up the oven until this heat wave is over. I was planning to make chicken with rice for dinner, but no way I'm going near my stove before tomorrow. Looks like it'll be a rotisserie bird from the grocery plus a nice cool salad.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> The primary school topic was not 'the Bible AS HISTORY' but 'Bible History', mainly a brief history of the Jewish tribes that existed at the time the Old Testament was written. We did not study Psalms as poetry or proverbs as a way to live a good life. As for a good class having several versions of the Bible, I do not think this would be so in a Catholic School. The Douay version may be VERY SIMILAR to the King James with a few extra chapters, but VERY SIMILAR is not the same. You are very similar to me in that you have one head, two arms attached to the top of your body with two legs attached to the bottom of your body, but you are not the same  you are different.
> 
> The three convents I attended were not in the same building as the church, they were separate buildings. One school was very tiny, only three classrooms teaching primary school, year 1 through to year 7, with less than 100 pupils in all, but it was a separate building.
> 
> Catholic schools in Australia were not established to teach or encourage the reading of the Bible, they were established by the Irish nuns to ensure the Catholic children were taught the Catechism and about the Catholic Church. In fact the Bible was not read in any of my schools, nor were we encouraged to read it. My grandmother had the family bible but we did not have one in our house. I inherited the bible from grandma and gave it to my daughter. None of my siblings have ever had a bible in their house. The Bible History lessons we had were more stories than Bible reading. I guess that is peculiar to Australia. Not a lot of Australian households own bibles and fewer read them, apart from the very religious, who generally do now belong to what we Aussies term 'main stream religions". C of E, Catholic, Uniting Church, Salvos, to name a few. We do not have many of the Religious bodies in Australia that you have in America, or should I say USA.


Catholics and Protestants have a very different approach the reading and studying the Bible. In fact, being able to read the Bible for one's self and interpret it freely is a cornerstone of Protestantism. Catholics leave interpretation of the Bible to priests who are supposed to have some expertise. It's far more important for individual Catholics to adhere to the teachings of the Church which are the same for all Catholics. I prefer this. I see it is as a unifying influence on Church members. Individual interpretation of the Bible seems all to divisive to me.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MaidInBedlam said:


> Catholics and Protestants have a very different approach the reading and studying the Bible. In fact, being able to read the Bible for one's self and interpret it freely is a cornerstone of Protestantism. Catholics leave interpretation of the Bible to priests who are supposed to have some expertise. It's far more important for individual Catholics to adhere to the teachings of the Church which are the same for all Catholics. I prefer this. I see it is as a unifying influence on Church members. Individual interpretation of the Bible seems all to divisive to me.


As a child and into my teens, most of my friends were Catholic. I thought they were so lucky. They didn't have to think about what they believed and what it meant. They only had to go to church, take communion and go to confession. That was it! They were saved. I on the other hand needed to search. I needed to figure out what and why I believed. I searched for a church and never found one. Some of the loneliest times of my life were in a church surrounded by people.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

alcameron said:


> Wouldn't work for me, the leftie. Now I'm going to go googling to see if I can find a picture of an orthodox family Seder.
> 
> Time to close the house up for the hot, "spare the air day" before we get too warm in here. My poor dogs are lying on the cool tile. Might have to join them by tonight.


I just closed the windows and blinds on the side of the house that gets the afternoon sun. The cats are stretched out on the floor, there're all sorts of cold things made for lunch and dinner and lots of iced tea to bathe in if necessary. I ain't goin' outside unless there's a HUGE emergency. Thank goodness the bedrooms are at the back of the house and heavily shaded.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> As a child and into my teens, most of my friends were Catholic. I thought they were so lucky. They didn't have to think about what they believed and what it meant. They only had to go to church, take communion and go to confession. That was it! They were saved. I on the other hand needed to search. I needed to figure out what and why I believed. I searched for a church and never found one. Some of the loneliest times of my life were in a church surrounded by people.


I'm not inclined to be told what to think, but really prefer Catholicism because I feel like a part of a worldwide Church. I even wish the universal language of the Church was still Latin.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I hear some from D&D say not to talk here and to ignore but I see the very people talking here and not ignoring. I've only ever been nice and polite on D&D. Am I still welcome there, if I choose to post here?


Dear K from N - look at what you are saying. Step back and ask yourself just what is going on when you have to ask people if you are still welcome to converse among them. Are you being coerced to go against your freedom of association?

You have every right in the world to speak where you are drawn to speak to express your opinions. My opinions differ from yours but we can maintain a civil dialog. You probably reject my perspective on many issues. That probably goes both ways. But if you and I don't hear each other out and try to understand one another what does that say about either of us as thoughtful people?

I have opened the D&D forum on occasion. It seems to be a love fest among people who share opinions in common. That is fine; we all need supportive friends. But I have seen comments I view as offensive as well. Because one doesn't agree with my views, or Purl's views, or Dame's views, there is no reason to insult and disparage the person and use demonizing language about the person with whom you disagree.

Your upbringing and family history are different from mine. Your living situation is also different. I am sure our opinions are colored by our life experiences as well as our present surroundings. Meeting people of different opinions and backgrounds should be an enriching and broadening experience, not one fraught with insult and innuendo.

I know I have been snarky at times in response to comments that I consider rude and thoughtless. If my comments have offended you, I find that regretful. I really try, but sometimes my warped sense of humor and a degree of cynicism are difficult to fight.

Meanwhile, choose your friends wisely and keep them close. Keep your enemies closer so you know what they are up to.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> In my home, my Dad usually cooked dinner when he got home. It was usually eggs, cornbread or pancakes. Except on Sunday, when he cooked the pheasants he'd gotten by hunting.
> 
> I thought the kids with normal families were lucky!


What is "normal"? It sounds as if you had a loving father who shared in the responsibility of caring for his family. That is a beautiful kind of normal.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

SQM said:


> There are two sides for every issue - the one you believe and the one you don't believe.


Actually I heard that there are three sides. My side, your side, and the real truth. We all bring our package of life experience to the table. That is what influences our beliefs.


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

alcameron said:


> And I'm supposed to be making treats for knitting tomorrow. I have "stuff" in my freezer but it's all chocolate, and there are a few odd ones in my group who don't eat chocolate. Quel dommage!


Dommage for them, tres bon for you!


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> As a child and into my teens, most of my friends were Catholic. I thought they were so lucky. They didn't have to think about what they believed and what it meant. They only had to go to church, take communion and go to confession. That was it! They were saved. I on the other hand needed to search. I needed to figure out what and why I believed. I searched for a church and never found one. Some of the loneliest times of my life were in a church surrounded by people.


I am in 100% agreement with you on nearly everything (I don't think Catholics are particularly lucky.)


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Thank you. I was not aware that Woodrow Wilson started discrimination. I'll have to look into that. I was aware that prayer and bible study used to be part of our education.


That is a broad comment. Did he personally institute racial discrimination, sex discrimination, religious discrimination, age discrimination? Was there no discrimination in the world (the country? Washington DC?) before Mr. Wilson became President?

When you find documentation in neutral sources like the Christian Science Monitor, the Wall Street Journal, or the International Herald Tribune, I would like my horizons expanded by reading about it.

As a non Christian, I was dreadfully uncomfortable during Christmas and Easter being indoctrinated with a religious perspective that was often antagonistic to my own. Father Coughlin exclaimed his hate on the radio. Boys I knew got beaten up because "they killed god". Think of what it was like - put on my Mary Janes and think how you would have felt.

Religion is deeply personal. This country was founded by deists who wanted to avoid having a State religion and give people religious freedom. That is 1. Freedom of religion, to be able to believe as you choose, and 2. Freedom from religion, from being forced to observe in a way different from what you choose. Religions expression belongs in the home, church, synagogue, mosque and temple. It does not belong in the broader community except within each person's heart.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Wrong Wilson's. Their Dad was a military man and then a teacher.


The other Wilsons are Wendy and Carney of Wilson Philips, whose Dad's music many of us love.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

damemary said:


> Campaign Finance Reform anyone?


Unfortunately, in our dreams. You and I know who make the laws about that. And about Initiative and Referendum.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> Two incomes are needed in Perth. You cannot pay the mortgage, or rent, on a single i come unless that income is over $150,000 a year. Even then it is a struggle.


Same here in the Northeastern US. The cost of living is so high that many families need two two job members just to afford rent, food, and clothing. Perhaps this is why numerous immigrant families share housing, so there are enough adults bringing in income that people can have some level of comfort.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

joeysommaI
When God was removed from the schools said:


> What level of personal responsibility by parents was lacking if we had to depend upon the schools to impart morality? God belonged in parochial schools and religious day schools. People paid to have their children educated within their religious precepts. But people who did not want their children to have religious experiences outside the purview of family had the right to have schools religion neutral.
> 
> Atheists and agnostics are people too. And entitled to peaceful lives within their own parameters without busy bodies telling them how to think.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> As a child and into my teens, most of my friends were Catholic. I thought they were so lucky. They didn't have to think about what they believed and what it meant. They only had to go to church, take communion and go to confession. That was it! They were saved. I on the other hand needed to search. I needed to figure out what and why I believed. I searched for a church and never found one. Some of the loneliest times of my life were in a church surrounded by people.


I'm sorry, Nebraska. That does sound rough. Still, it does sound like you eventually did find your path to God, and that must be a comfort.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> Catholics and Protestants have a very different approach the reading and studying the Bible. In fact, being able to read the Bible for one's self and interpret it freely is a cornerstone of Protestantism. Catholics leave interpretation of the Bible to priests who are supposed to have some expertise. It's far more important for individual Catholics to adhere to the teachings of the Church which are the same for all Catholics. I prefer this. I see it is as a unifying influence on Church members. Individual interpretation of the Bible seems all to divisive to me.


In Judaism, study is regarded highly. Sometimes one passage is read and discussed for a prolonged period of time, with each participant expressing an opinion on the deeper meaning.

There are learned writings quoting different rabbis from different eras in history giving their thoughts on the same passage, sometimes the same word.

The different nuances of a single word over the passage of time can be fascinating. When it is in a religious context, it can lead to lively discussion.

This sort of discourse also leads to critical thinking and learning to respect differences of opinion.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> As a child and into my teens, most of my friends were Catholic. I thought they were so lucky. They didn't have to think about what they believed and what it meant. They only had to go to church, take communion and go to confession. That was it! They were saved. I on the other hand needed to search. I needed to figure out what and why I believed. I searched for a church and never found one. Some of the loneliest times of my life were in a church surrounded by people.


KN,
I was raised in the Catholic Church. My life was the opposite of what you describe. As girls, we were guilty of sins we had not yet committed. That's the way the made us feel. Most of the masses were in Latin, and as a child, it may as well have been Greek. The missals were not translated at the time. You said the words, but had no idea what they meant. We were forced to go to confession once a week to confess our souls and any sins we may have committed. If you didn't have a sin to confess, the priest would pull us out of the confessional and scold us for being pompous and arrogant. so, we made up lies of sins we did not commit to save our hides. Then we could go to confession next week and confess that we lied.
I left the Catholic Church because of all of the sex scandals and the way the church protected the perverts and not the children to whom they sinned against.
I still have my faith, but feel that I don't need to profess it in a communal manner.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

maysmom said:


> I am in 100% agreement with you on nearly everything (I don't think Catholics are particularly lucky.)


I agree with you, Maysmom. From some angles Catholicism looks like a pretty good deal--celebrate Mass on Sundays and Holy Days of Obligation, confess at least once a year, receive Communion at least once during the Easter season, and boom--everything's square between you and God.

In practice, though, it's not quite that easy. Committing a mortal sin completely severs your relationship with God (heaven help you if you die in such a state) and, unfortunately, it's not all that difficult to do. Hating someone or something is a mortal sin--so too is skipping Mass, having your palm read, envying your neighbor his new car, following the astrology column in the newspaper, and painting the house on Sunday.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

MaidInBedlam said:


> I'm not inclined to be told what to think, but really prefer Catholicism because I feel like a part of a worldwide Church. I even wish the universal language of the Church was still Latin.


We do have breakaway groups here in Australia that still practice the old Latin mass. The bishops call them a breakaway group. I agree with you regarding the universality of Latin. We studied the Latin responses to the mass, the part said by the altar boys, and would say these with the altar boys at school masses. Both my sisters, one of my brothers and I no longer call ourselves Catholics but we have nostalgic feelings for the old Latin mass celebrated in the old fashion. My favourite was the Benediction service, I think we children would get high on the incense being burnt as well as all the Gregorian chant.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> KN,
> I was raised in the Catholic Church. My life was the opposite of what you describe. As girls, we were guilty of sins we had not yet committed. That's the way the made us feel. Most of the masses were in Latin, and as a child, it may as well have been Greek. The missals were not translated at the time. You said the words, but had no idea what they meant. We were forced to go to confession once a week to confess our souls and any sins we may have committed. If you didn't have a sin to confess, the priest would pull us out of the confessional and scold us for being pompous and arrogant. so, we made up lies of sins we did not commit to save our hides. Then we could go to confession next week and confess that we lied.
> I left the Catholic Church because of all of the sex scandals and the way the church protected the perverts and not the children to whom they sinned against.
> I still have my faith, but feel that I don't need to profess it in a communal manner.


You poor thing! I've always been a post-Vatican 2 Catholic and have never heard a Latin Mass, never knelt before the altar railing, and not once felt a paten jammed against my neck.

Some things don't change, though--priests can still be pretty darned scary. I had a biggie to confess this last Saturday, was nervous, and apparently hurt the Father's sensitive ears. I got a sharp rebuke for speaking in such a loud voice and, after I said my Act of Contrition, I slunk out of there like a whipped puppy. :-(


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> I agree with you, Maysmom. From some angles Catholicism looks like a pretty good deal--celebrate Mass on Sundays and Holy Days of Obligation, confess at least once a year, receive Communion at least once during the Easter season, and boom--everything's square between you and God.
> 
> In practice, though, it's not quite that easy. Committing a mortal sin completely severs your relationship with God (heaven help you if you die in such a state) and, unfortunately, it's not all that difficult to do. Hating someone or something is a mortal sin--so too is skipping Mass, having your palm read, envying your neighbor his new car, following the astrology column in the newspaper, and painting the house on Sunday.


What a dull list of sins. If you're going to be damned, it ought to be for something that was at least interesting, if not fun.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Some questions if you are so inclined to answer:
> 1) What is your definition of rich? (i.e. $ amount net worth)
> 2) Are you a registered voter, and if, so, which party? Do you vote?
> 3) Do you think Reagan and Clinton each bankrupted "us?"
> ...


Wow! Takes a lot of gall to ask these questions, that's for sure!


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

alcameron said:


> Wow! Takes a lot of gall to ask these questions, that's for sure!


Sure does. I think Nebraska was very gracious to fill that thing out, but really--who gives a flying fig what someone else's definition of "rich" is or if they've ever known a lobbyist? And what kind of person has the nerve to ask?


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> Yes, those poor things--and you too. I can't imagine trying to fire up the oven until this heat wave is over. I was planning to make chicken with rice for dinner, but no way I'm going near my stove before tomorrow. Looks like it'll be a rotisserie bird from the grocery plus a nice cool salad.


Where is the heat wave? It is chilly and dank in NYC. We could use some summer-like weather.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

SQM said:


> Where is the heat wave? It is chilly and dank in NYC. We could use some summer-like weather.


The California girls are hot!


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> As a child and into my teens, most of my friends were Catholic. I thought they were so lucky. They didn't have to think about what they believed and what it meant. They only had to go to church, take communion and go to confession. That was it! They were saved. I on the other hand needed to search. I needed to figure out what and why I believed. I searched for a church and never found one. Some of the loneliest times of my life were in a church surrounded by people.


Strange comments. I thought you would be a regular Christian church-goer. What gives?


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

SQM said:


> Where is the heat wave? It is chilly and dank in NYC. We could use some summer-like weather.


Out here in California. It was 92 yesterday, and that's on the coast. Inland, it was even hotter.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

MarilynKnits said:


> In Judaism, study is regarded highly. Sometimes one passage is read and discussed for a prolonged period of time, with each participant expressing an opinion on the deeper meaning.
> 
> There are learned writings quoting different rabbis from different eras in history giving their thoughts on the same passage, sometimes the same word.
> 
> ...


I'm really not trying to advocate blissful ignorance. However, I like to have some sort of steady base to stand on while doing critical thinking.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

MarilynKnits said:


> In Judaism, study is regarded highly. Sometimes one passage is read and discussed for a prolonged period of time, with each participant expressing an opinion on the deeper meaning.
> 
> There are learned writings quoting different rabbis from different eras in history giving their thoughts on the same passage, sometimes the same word.
> 
> ...


But I always felt it was such a waste of time parsing every word on one piece of literature/history. But I assume Jews were limited in what they could study.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

maysmom said:


> And this was all due to having god (or lack of god) drummed into their heads?
> :roll:


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

You are so out of line and you don't have a clue. No further comment.



joeysomma said:


> It had to do with having a solid education. None of this, time wasting, homosexual, transvestite, transgender stuff, or sex education. Moral education was taken care of in the home. I will agree, there were homes then. And then there were morals. Very few single mothers or unwed parents.
> 
> When God was removed from the schools, so was morality.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Let's start a group list:

Selling drugs.



Poor Purl said:


> There are way more immoral activities than having sex outside of marriage.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

It's not just OZ Eve. I remember the exact experience growing up Catholic in USA.



EveMCooke said:


> The primary school topic was not 'the Bible AS HISTORY' but 'Bible History', mainly a brief history of the Jewish tribes that existed at the time the Old Testament was written. We did not study Psalms as poetry or proverbs as a way to live a good life. As for a good class having several versions of the Bible, I do not think this would be so in a Catholic School. The Douay version may be VERY SIMILAR to the King James with a few extra chapters, but VERY SIMILAR is not the same. You are very similar to me in that you have one head, two arms attached to the top of your body with two legs attached to the bottom of your body, but you are not the same  you are different.
> 
> The three convents I attended were not in the same building as the church, they were separate buildings. One school was very tiny, only three classrooms teaching primary school, year 1 through to year 7, with less than 100 pupils in all, but it was a separate building.
> 
> Catholic schools in Australia were not established to teach or encourage the reading of the Bible, they were established by the Irish nuns to ensure the Catholic children were taught the Catechism and about the Catholic Church. In fact the Bible was not read in any of my schools, nor were we encouraged to read it. My grandmother had the family bible but we did not have one in our house. I inherited the bible from grandma and gave it to my daughter. None of my siblings have ever had a bible in their house. The Bible History lessons we had were more stories than Bible reading. I guess that is peculiar to Australia. Not a lot of Australian households own bibles and fewer read them, apart from the very religious, who generally do now belong to what we Aussies term 'main stream religions". C of E, Catholic, Uniting Church, Salvos, to name a few. We do not have many of the Religious bodies in Australia that you have in America, or should I say USA.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Why is today different from any other day?


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: It's not, of course. So aptly put.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

sumpleby said:


> Codswallop.
> 
> Kids are only in school about 30 hours per week. Laying aside hours for sleep, their families have roughly 82 hours each week to instill religion into their children. If that isn't enough, there is something wrong with either the parents or the religion.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: Another winner!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

alcameron said:


> Don't you think morality is still taught in public schools? Certainly teachers have moral compasses and conduct classrooms "morally." Honesty, kindness, tolerance, respect, being truthful, and doing what's right are just a few "morality lessons" being taught in our schools everyday. It seems to me that some adults in Congress, on the Supreme Court, and on TV/radio could benefit from spending a week in a classroom. Even civility is all but gone from how our president is treated. And some of those people who profess a strong committment to God throw their morals out the window when dealing with others. Is it moral to "buy" politicians? Is it moral for Congressmen/women to accept lavish gifts from donors? The list of immoral behavior goes on, and I think it has little to do with removing God or prayer from the classroom.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: A homerun !


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> .
> _Religion needs morality to survive, but morals are not dependent upon religion_.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> You said it. And now that corporations are deemed to be people, they could use a little morality as well. Is it moral to destroy the drinking water for a whole town and not pay to have it restored? Is it moral to create oil spills and not clean up after yourself? Is it moral to lie about important situations like global climate change so that you can continue to make obscene profits? Is it moral to pay your employees so little that they have to apply for Medicaid and other governmental supports, while you are making billions?


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: Bravo!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I'm scratching my head trying to figure it out. Help!



Poor Purl said:


> That's something only you, I, and MarilynKnits will get.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Very, very clever SQM. Thanks for the lesson dear Purl.



Poor Purl said:


> At the Passover seder, some people traditionally sit leaning to the left. It has to do with being able to sit comfortably, as a free person, but leaving your right hand available to eat with.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> I agree with you, Maysmom. From some angles Catholicism looks like a pretty good deal--celebrate Mass on Sundays and Holy Days of Obligation, confess at least once a year, receive Communion at least once during the Easter season, and boom--everything's square between you and God.
> 
> In practice, though, it's not quite that easy. Committing a mortal sin completely severs your relationship with God (heaven help you if you die in such a state) and, unfortunately, it's not all that difficult to do. Hating someone or something is a mortal sin--so too is skipping Mass, having your palm read, envying your neighbor his new car, following the astrology column in the newspaper, and painting the house on Sunday.


I hope slothfulness is on the list too!


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> You poor thing! I've always been a post-Vatican 2 Catholic and have never heard a Latin Mass, never knelt before the altar railing, and not once felt a paten jammed against my neck.
> 
> Some things don't change, though--priests can still be pretty darned scary. I had a biggie to confess this last Saturday, was nervous, and apparently hurt the Father's sensitive ears. I got a sharp rebuke for speaking in such a loud voice and, after I said my Act of Contrition, I slunk out of there like a whipped puppy. :-(


How old are you?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

We're coming up on 5 consecutive days over 100 degrees. Remind me of this when I go on about the beauty of the desert next time.

A couple reminders. It's the high temperature you're speaking of. Most of the day is cooler. Adjust your schedule and adopt the siesta.



susanmos2000 said:


> Leave some space for me, Al. It hit 92 yesterday, and today is supposed to be even worse.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> Out here in California. It was 92 yesterday, and that's on the coast. Inland, it was even hotter.


Are you and Al in Calif? How interesting.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Throw cream cheese.



alcameron said:


> And I'm supposed to be making treats for knitting tomorrow. I have "stuff" in my freezer but it's all chocolate, and there are a few odd ones in my group who don't eat chocolate. Quel dommage!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Al got one.



Poor Purl said:


> Is it that hot already?
> 
> I googled. All I got were pictures of food, fitting for a Jewish occasion but not especially helpful.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I agree, (unusual because I've fought with Church teachings so frequently.) I've seen too many justifications for things Jesus would never say. Too many people wasting time on things they don't understand and which will only lead to cruelty.



MaidInBedlam said:


> Catholics and Protestants have a very different approach the reading and studying the Bible. In fact, being able to read the Bible for one's self and interpret it freely is a cornerstone of Protestantism. Catholics leave interpretation of the Bible to priests who are supposed to have some expertise. It's far more important for individual Catholics to adhere to the teachings of the Church which are the same for all Catholics. I prefer this. I see it is as a unifying influence on Church members. Individual interpretation of the Bible seems all to divisive to me.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I agree, (unusual because I've fought with Church teachings so frequently.) I've seen too many justifications for things Jesus would never say. Too many people wasting time on things they don't understand and which will only lead to cruelty.

Oh great. Now it'll be the Catholics vs Protestants.



MaidInBedlam said:


> Catholics and Protestants have a very different approach the reading and studying the Bible. In fact, being able to read the Bible for one's self and interpret it freely is a cornerstone of Protestantism. Catholics leave interpretation of the Bible to priests who are supposed to have some expertise. It's far more important for individual Catholics to adhere to the teachings of the Church which are the same for all Catholics. I prefer this. I see it is as a unifying influence on Church members. Individual interpretation of the Bible seems all to divisive to me.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Not here, dame! I am married to a Protestant. His church is not so different from the Catholic church. :-D 

As for joeysomma's comments on religion in school, it's called progress and gives the people who are not bible beaters the right to practice their own religion or lack of and not have it shoved down their children's throats at school.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

And look who asked it.



alcameron said:


> Wow! Takes a lot of gall to ask these questions, that's for sure!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Absolutely....and ridiculous....like asking a bird not to fly.



SQM said:


> I hope slothfulness is on the list too!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Younger than me.



SQM said:


> How old are you?


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

damemary said:


> Younger than me.


And they're both much younger than I! I think I could be Susan's grandmother and Dame's mother! Maybe not quite.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

alcameron said:


> And they're both much younger than I! I think I could be Susan's grandmother and Dame's mother! Maybe not quite.


It's amazing how I imagine you guys. Dame is Grace Kelly and if I ever get a chance to meet her, that is who I would be looking for. SusanM - sort of the Berkeley type. The Brat - a prepubescent with braids, stripped tee shirts, bandaged knee and blowing bubble gum. PP - I know but I still picture her wearing a cap and gown, or a Roman toga. Al - flannel shirts and jeans or occasionally tunic tops, leggings and stilettos. So you cannot be that old!


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

SQM said:


> It's amazing how I imagine you guys. Dame is Grace Kelly and if I ever get a chance to meet her, that is who I would be looking for. SusanM - sort of the Berkeley type. The Brat - a prepubescent with braids, stripped tee shirts, bandaged knee and blowing bubble gum. PP - I know but I still picture her wearing a cap and gown, or a Roman toga. Al - flannel shirts and jeans or occasionally tunic tops, leggings and stilettos. So you cannot be that old!


I will be running around in my jeans and T-shirts until I'm 100!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

alcameron said:


> The California girls are hot!


Wish we all could be California girls.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

alcameron said:


> I will be running around in my jeans and T-shirts until I'm 100!


You and me both. Spent too many years in business suits and heels to ever want to wear them again. But I go to the gym faithfully so I can still wear shorts in hot weather.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

alcameron said:


> The California girls are hot!


At least some of us are past the hot flashes. Could have used them last winter.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> It's amazing how I imagine you guys. Dame is Grace Kelly and if I ever get a chance to meet her, that is who I would be looking for. SusanM - sort of the Berkeley type. The Brat - a prepubescent with braids, stripped tee shirts, bandaged knee and blowing bubble gum. PP - I know but I still picture her wearing a cap and gown, or a Roman toga. Al - flannel shirts and jeans or occasionally tunic tops, leggings and stilettos. So you cannot be that old!


Cap and gown or Roman toga? How glamorous. Thanks a lot!

I picture you in white fur, hanging by your toes from a tree.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> Dear K from N - look at what you are saying. Step back and ask yourself just what is going on when you have to ask people if you are still welcome to converse among them. Are you being coerced to go against your freedom of association?
> 
> You have every right in the world to speak where you are drawn to speak to express your opinions. My opinions differ from yours but we can maintain a civil dialog. You probably reject my perspective on many issues. That probably goes both ways. But if you and I don't hear each other out and try to understand one another what does that say about either of us as thoughtful people?
> 
> ...


Thank you! My dilemma is that I don't fit anywhere. I like to talk about gardening and recipes. But I also like to talk about politics and current events. I like having the opportunity to hear things I've never heard or consider things I've never thought of. And I like to share things that others may not have heard or thought of. But KP is very divided and adversarial. The hatred shocks me! I understand that everyone comes from a different background and thinks differently, but never have I seen two sides so vehemently opposed. As an outsider, I see both sides acting the same way. Before you judge D&P, know that I was asked to leave LOLL. I left! I know that I have a right to post wherever I wish but I don't want to be like some who just come to antagonize. I come to engage others in discussion. I even like spirited discussion. However, some do not. Last week, I let my frustration get away with me and resorted to rudeness. I dont want to be that person. Sometimes I'm accused of being rude when I'm not. It is not my intent to antagonize. And finally, I will do as I choose. I don't think that anyone can tell me what to do, but why would I be where I'm not wanted?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> What is "normal"? It sounds as if you had a loving father who shared in the responsibility of caring for his family. That is a beautiful kind of normal.


Thank you! My Dad was a really great guy! I loved him very much! Thanks for bringing that to my mind.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

SQM said:


> It's amazing how I imagine you guys. Dame is Grace Kelly and if I ever get a chance to meet her, that is who I would be looking for. SusanM - sort of the Berkeley type. The Brat - a prepubescent with braids, stripped tee shirts, bandaged knee and blowing bubble gum. PP - I know but I still picture her wearing a cap and gown, or a Roman toga. Al - flannel shirts and jeans or occasionally tunic tops, leggings and stilettos. So you cannot be that old!


How funny! I honestly can report I've never had any visual images of you ladies. And it's not from lack of regard,either--rather, because I tend to think in words instead of pictures. Even my dreams carry with them no visual images. I know who's there, can hear them speaking in full and complete sentences, know exactly what they're doing at all times--but there isn't a single visual image to go along with it all.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> You and me both. Spent too many years in business suits and heels to ever want to wear them again. But I go to the gym faithfully so I can still wear shorts in hot weather.


I have been going to the gym 3-4 times a week for over 20 years, and walk my dogs at least 3-4 times a week. I walk on the treadmill and use the weight machines. I joined a gym after feeling as though I had been put through the mill after 6 months of chemo and have been going ever since. In my mind I look at this as keeping my head and body healthy and keeping cancer cells away. It's working so far!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> That is a broad comment. Did he personally institute racial discrimination, sex discrimination, religious discrimination, age discrimination? Was there no discrimination in the world (the country? Washington DC?) before Mr. Wilson became President?
> 
> When you find documentation in neutral sources like the Christian Science Monitor, the Wall Street Journal, or the International Herald Tribune, I would like my horizons expanded by reading about it.
> 
> ...


I have no idea! I've never heard of that before and haven't looked it up yet???

In my opinion, freedom OF religion and freedom FROM religion cannot take place at the same time. In order for one to live their religion wholly, they cannot avoid exposing others. But on the other hand, no one can or should try to force another to believe what they believe. It would be nearly impossible for me to not talk about my GOD. But I would never tell you or anyone that they must think as I do. Freedom of religion allows us to say and worship as we please. But it also gives others the right to do the same. I've personally attended quite a few Bar Mitzvahs and Bat Mitzvahs. While I'm not Jewish, I understand the importance of the occasion. I can attend and be respectful even if I'm not Jewish.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

alcameron said:


> I have been going to the gym 3-4 times a week for over 20 years, and walk my dogs at least 3-4 times a week. I walk on the treadmill and use the weight machines. I joined a gym after feeling as though I had been put through the mill after 6 months of chemo and have been going ever since. In my mind I look at this as keeping my head and body healthy and keeping cancer cells away. It's working so far!


Well needlesstosay, stay well. We need ya here. I marvel at your workout routine. Smart.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> How funny! I honestly can report I've never had any visual images of you ladies. And it's not from lack of regard,either--rather, because I tend to think in words instead of pictures. Even my dreams carry with them no visual images. I know who's there, can hear them speaking in full and complete sentences, know exactly what they're doing at all times--but there isn't a single visual image to go along with it all.


I had a dream once about CB. It was so real that I had to send her a PM about it. In my dream she was CB and we called her CB, but she really looked like a former colleague of mine. She was in church playing the organ.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> The other Wilsons are Wendy and Carney of Wilson Philips, whose Dad's music many of us love.


Yup! Brian Wilson of The Beach Boys!


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

alcameron said:


> I had a dream once about CB. It was so real that I had to send her a PM about it. In my dream she was CB and we called her CB, but she really looked like a former colleague of mine. She was in church playing the organ.


"Did CB verify any of your dream?", asked Psychic SQM.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> Same here in the Northeastern US. The cost of living is so high that many families need two two job members just to afford rent, food, and clothing. Perhaps this is why numerous immigrant families share housing, so there are enough adults bringing in income that people can have some level of comfort.


We sacrificed a LOT to make it work for us.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Yup! Brian Wilson of The Beach Boys!


met them all when I was 17. Brian was a very sweet unpretentious talent. He had just finished writing 'In My Room".


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

SQM said:


> "Did CB verify any of your dream?", asked Psychic SQM.


She doesn't play the organ.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> I'm sorry, Nebraska. That does sound rough. Still, it does sound like you eventually did find your path to God, and that must be a comfort.


Thank you, Susan!


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

alcameron said:


> I had a dream once about CB. It was so real that I had to send her a PM about it. In my dream she was CB and we called her CB, but she really looked like a former colleague of mine. She was in church playing the organ.


I wonder what triggered that?


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> I wonder what triggered that? Does she really play organ in her church?


Nope. I asked.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> KN,
> I was raised in the Catholic Church. My life was the opposite of what you describe. As girls, we were guilty of sins we had not yet committed. That's the way the made us feel. Most of the masses were in Latin, and as a child, it may as well have been Greek. The missals were not translated at the time. You said the words, but had no idea what they meant. We were forced to go to confession once a week to confess our souls and any sins we may have committed. If you didn't have a sin to confess, the priest would pull us out of the confessional and scold us for being pompous and arrogant. so, we made up lies of sins we did not commit to save our hides. Then we could go to confession next week and confess that we lied.
> I left the Catholic Church because of all of the sex scandals and the way the church protected the perverts and not the children to whom they sinned against.
> I still have my faith, but feel that I don't need to profess it in a communal manner.


My friends would always confess about silly things like rolling up their skirts or not obeying a nun. They were never worried, just knew that they had to come up with something. I could never understand it. They didn't believe in it, but did it anyway. I remember going to Latin masses with my best friend. I always thought, what's the point if you can't understand it. My friend left the church because her husband had an affair and divorced her while she was pregnant with his child. The church would not allow her son to be baptized in the church because they were divorced. I've never found a church that I believe is a real church. I think that people should put aside their pettiness, nastiness and hypocrisy before they enter GOD'S house. All are equal in GOD'S eyes. I understand that people are sinners but they should be able to do GOD'S work in HIS house and leave their crap at the door!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> I agree with you, Maysmom. From some angles Catholicism looks like a pretty good deal--celebrate Mass on Sundays and Holy Days of Obligation, confess at least once a year, receive Communion at least once during the Easter season, and boom--everything's square between you and God.
> 
> In practice, though, it's not quite that easy. Committing a mortal sin completely severs your relationship with God (heaven help you if you die in such a state) and, unfortunately, it's not all that difficult to do. Hating someone or something is a mortal sin--so too is skipping Mass, having your palm read, envying your neighbor his new car, following the astrology column in the newspaper, and painting the house on Sunday.


Is a mortal sin unforgivable? Even with true repentance?


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> My friends would always confess about silly things like rolling up their skirts or not obeying a nun. They were never worried, just knew that they had to come up with something. I could never understand it. They didn't believe in it, but did it anyway. I remember going to Latin masses with my best friend. I always thought, what's the point if you can't understand it. My friend left the church because her husband had an affair and divorced her while she was pregnant with his child. The church would not allow her son to be baptized in the church because they were divorced. I've never found a church that I believe is a real church. I think that people should put aside their pettiness, nastiness and hypocrisy before they enter GOD'S house. All are equal in GOD'S eyes. I understand that people are sinners but they should be able to do GOD'S work in HIS house and leave their crap at the door!


They should be able to demonstrate doing God's work OUTSIDE of church, in how they act and how they talk.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

SQM said:


> Well needlesstosay, stay well. We need ya here. I marvel at your workout routine. Smart.


Thank you. I choose to stick around.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> You poor thing! I've always been a post-Vatican 2 Catholic and have never heard a Latin Mass, never knelt before the altar railing, and not once felt a paten jammed against my neck.
> 
> Some things don't change, though--priests can still be pretty darned scary. I had a biggie to confess this last Saturday, was nervous, and apparently hurt the Father's sensitive ears. I got a sharp rebuke for speaking in such a loud voice and, after I said my Act of Contrition, I slunk out of there like a whipped puppy. :-(


What is a paten?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> Strange comments. I thought you would be a regular Christian church-goer. What gives?


I haven't been a regular church goer for years. But that doesn't change my relationship with GOD. I've always done much studying on my own. The first time I read the bible (front to back), I understood little. I have since studied it in parts. I also look at different bible studies for different perspectives. I read a LOT! And I pray for understanding. In my opinion, most (NOT ALL) churches have been taken over by satan.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> But I always felt it was such a waste of time parsing every word on one piece of literature/history. But I assume Jews were limited in what they could study.


Not a waste of time. Especially with Hebrew, where words can have more than one meaning!


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Is a mortal sin unforgivable? Even with true repentance?


No--you can be as sorry as you like (in fact, you have to be), but you aren't forgiven until you confess to a priest, say an Act of Contrition, and say or do whatever penance he gives you.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> What is a paten?


That's a metal plate on a pole that the alter boy used to put under your chin when you received Communion. Its point was to catch any crumbs of the Host (that's the consecrated wafer) before they landed on the carpet.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

https://www.google.com/search?q=paten+images&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&client=safari


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> met them all when I was 17. Brian was a very sweet unpretentious talent. He had just finished writing 'In My Room".


Cool! I only ever saw them a few years ago at a concert in the park.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I haven't been a regular church goer for years. But that doesn't change my relationship with GOD. I've always done much studying on my own. The first time I read the bible (front to back), I understood little. I have since studied it in parts. I also look at different bible studies for different perspectives. I read a LOT! And I pray for understanding. In my opinion, most (NOT ALL) churches have been taken over by satan.


Not trying to be argumentative, Nebraska, I'm really just curious. How do you know you're interpreting the Bible correctly if you read and study it by yourself? Do you ever worry that you might not be understanding some passage?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

alcameron said:


> They should be able to demonstrate doing God's work OUTSIDE of church, in how they act and how they talk.


I agree!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> No--you can be as sorry as you like (in fact, you have to be), but you aren't forgiven until you confess to a priest, say an Act of Contrition, and say or do whatever penance he gives you.


Ooooooh!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> That's a metal plate on a pole that the alter boy used to put under your chin when you received Communion. Its point was to catch any crumbs of the Host (that's the consecrated wafer) before they landed on the carpet.


Oh,OK! I've seen that. Just didn't know what it was called. Thanks!
What I always thought was funny was the collection plate on a stick. No one ever put anything in but I thought it was because they jerked it away so fast, you'd lose your hand if you tried. Haha!


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I agree!


But that's the problematic area for me. I just don't get how someone can run around professing to be a real, true Christian and then be seriously opposed to government assistance to the poor or stand in Front of a TV camera and invent bold-faced lies about people they hate. Or how do they hold such hatred in their hearts if there's supposed to be God in there, too?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

We are. Always hot California Girls.



Poor Purl said:


> Wish we all could be California girls.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Not trying to be argumentative, Nebraska, I'm really just curious. How do you know you're interpreting the Bible correctly if you read and study it by yourself? Do you ever worry that you might not be understanding some passage?


I felt that way for years. And with years of study comes more understanding. Sometimes I'm led to something that explains better. While I can't promise that I interpret things perfectly I'm always confident that I will learn more and understand more. I believe its a process, something I'll never complete. I have participated in a small group bible study and I've looked at many bible study programs to see where they lead me. Sometimes I know immediately that something is wrong. I just try to go where I'm led.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Avatars are so useful.



Poor Purl said:


> Cap and gown or Roman toga? How glamorous. Thanks a lot!
> 
> I picture you in white fur, hanging by your toes from a tree.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Cool! I only ever saw them a few years ago at a concert in the park.


They are a bit long in the tooth. How was the concert? Who was left from the original band?


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

damemary said:


> We are. Always hot California Girls.


Ja, ja, but I'm really a Minnesota girl at heart.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I think that's unusual because I dream in movies, moving pictures and dialog.



susanmos2000 said:


> How funny! I honestly can report I've never had any visual images of you ladies. And it's not from lack of regard,either--rather, because I tend to think in words instead of pictures. Even my dreams carry with them no visual images. I know who's there, can hear them speaking in full and complete sentences, know exactly what they're doing at all times--but there isn't a single visual image to go along with it all.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

You're on top of the world, singing a song.



alcameron said:


> I have been going to the gym 3-4 times a week for over 20 years, and walk my dogs at least 3-4 times a week. I walk on the treadmill and use the weight machines. I joined a gym after feeling as though I had been put through the mill after 6 months of chemo and have been going ever since. In my mind I look at this as keeping my head and body healthy and keeping cancer cells away. It's working so far!


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Oh,OK! I've seen that. Just didn't know what it was called. Thanks!
> What I always thought was funny was the collection plate on a stick. No one ever put anything in but I thought it was because they jerked it away so fast, you'd lose your hand if you tried. Haha!


Heehee! 

The collection plate still IS on a stick (actually, in my parish it's a basket on a stick). It never occurred me to wonder why they do it that way instead of passing a container hand to hand. I suppose it goes faster that way and also prevents the basket of money from (God forbid) "disappearing" somehow.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

A mortal sin can be forgiven in confession with an 'Act of Contrition' (prayer) and promise to sin no more. (?) If you die before confession, you go to hell.....exceptions abound.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Is a mortal sin unforgivable? Even with true repentance?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Little gold 'dish' held under chin at communion to catch any crumbs pre-Vatican II.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> What is a paten?


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

damemary said:


> I think that's unusual because I dream in movies, moving pictures and dialog.


It is strange, isn't it? My sister also doesn't visualize either and, like me, has a terrible time remembering faces. We've always figured it an inherited quirk.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Hebrew is not the only language with multiple meanings, of course.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Not a waste of time. Especially with Hebrew, where words can have more than one meaning!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

alcameron said:


> But that's the problematic area for me. I just don't get how someone can run around professing to be a real, true Christian and then be seriously opposed to government assistance to the poor or stand in Front of a TV camera and invent bold-faced lies about people they hate. Or how do they hold such hatred in their hearts if there's supposed to be God in there, too?


Not everyone who professes to be a Christian is! Remember that! I truly believe in helping the poor and needy! I believe that individuals are called to do just that! While I believe that people should be helping people, I don't object to government assistance. What I object to is causing someone to be dependent and beholden. I believe in helping people become everything they can be! I believe that too many people just assume that they can't do or have more. I would rather that we gave people opportunities than a hand out! I am NOT talking about people who CAN'T! We are required to take care of those who can't take care of themselves. What kind of people would we be, if we didn't? Everyone deserves a chance to succeed. It makes people feel good to succeed. That's what I think we should be giving them. Even though its trite, "a hand up instead of a hand out".


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> They are a bit long in the tooth. How was the concert? Who was left from the original band?


Oh, I don't remember. I guess its been more than a few years. :lol:


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Heehee!
> 
> The collection plate still IS on a stick (actually, in my parish it's a basket on a stick). It never occurred me to wonder why they do it that way instead of passing a container hand to hand. I suppose it goes faster that way and also prevents the basket of money from (God forbid) "disappearing" somehow.


I grew up Lutheran. We passed the plate and everybody put their little envelope in.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> A mortal sin can be forgiven in confession with an 'Act of Contrition' (prayer) and promise to sin no more. (?) If you die before confession, you go to hell.....exceptions abound.


Well, I believe that except that I confess my sins to GOD and forgiveness comes from HIM.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Not everyone who professes to be a Christian is! Remember that! I truly believe in helping the poor and needy! I believe that individuals are called to do just that! While I believe that people should be helping people, I don't object to government assistance. What I object to is causing someone to be dependent and beholden. I believe in helping people become everything they can be! I believe that too many people just assume that they can't do or have more. I would rather that we gave people opportunities than a hand out! I am NOT talking about people who CAN'T! We are required to take care of those who can't take care of themselves. What kind of people would we be, if we didn't? Everyone deserves a chance to succeed. It makes people feel good to succeed. That's what I think we should be giving them. Even though its trite, "a hand up instead of a hand out".


Hmmm...I think some of the trouble is many of the good solid values that have, in the past, kept people out of financial straits (scrimping, saving, doing without) just don't jibe with the way the modern economy works.

I'll never forget how stunned I was when, during that last recession, the government was telling people to SPEND money (and sending out checks to help them do so). I recall some economic expert on CNN or somewhere urging viewers to show their patriotism by pledging to spend one night each week "on the town" (babysitter for the kids, dinner out, and then a pricey show or movie).

I admit I don't know a lot about economics, but stuff like this makes no sense to me.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Well, I believe that except that I confess my sins to GOD and forgiveness comes from HIM.


Well, but a Catholic believes the priest is God's representative here on Earth (my old catechism showed a priest in the booth with JC standing right behind him).


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Not a waste of time. Especially with Hebrew, where words can have more than one meaning!


In any language, words can have more than one meaning.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

The individual is to spend all they have and can borrow in order to give it to business in order to make money for them. Government economic policy. Ta da.



susanmos2000 said:


> Hmmm...I think some of the trouble is many of the good solid values that have, in the past, kept people out of financial straits (scrimping, saving, doing without) just don't jibe with the way the modern economy works.
> 
> I'll never forget how stunned I was when, during that last recession, the government was telling people to SPEND money (and sending out checks to help them do so). I recall some economic expert on CNN or somewhere urging viewers to show their patriotism by pledging to spend one night each week "on the town" (babysitter for the kids, dinner out, and then a pricey show or movie).
> 
> I admit I don't know a lot about economics, but stuff like this makes no sense to me.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> The individual is to spend all they have and can borrow in order to give it to business in order to make money for them. Government economic policy. Ta da.


You have the right answer! I agree!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Hmmm...I think some of the trouble is many of the good solid values that have, in the past, kept people out of financial straits (scrimping, saving, doing without) just don't jibe with the way the modern economy works.
> 
> I'll never forget how stunned I was when, during that last recession, the government was telling people to SPEND money (and sending out checks to help them do so). I recall some economic expert on CNN or somewhere urging viewers to show their patriotism by pledging to spend one night each week "on the town" (babysitter for the kids, dinner out, and then a pricey show or movie).
> 
> I admit I don't know a lot about economics, but stuff like this makes no sense to me.


Spending, borrowing and spending more was never anything but a means of postponing the collapse of the dollar. They weren't through robbing us yet. When it finally collapses, it will be complete. They will have everything and we will have nothing.


----------



## sumpleby (Aug 3, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Out here in California. It was 92 yesterday, and that's on the coast. Inland, it was even hotter.


Here in the Inland Empire it was 98° yesterday and today it was 99°. Right now, at 8:50pm, it is 87°. Tomorrow we are supposed to hit 102° where I live, in Ontario....


----------



## sumpleby (Aug 3, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> At least some of us are past the hot flashes. Could have used them last winter.


Those aren't hot flashes--they're power surges.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

sumpleby said:


> Those aren't hot flashes--they're power surges.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

sumpleby said:


> Here in the Inland Empire it was 98° yesterday and today it was 99°. Right now, at 8:50pm, it is 87°. Tomorrow we are supposed to hit 102° where I live, in Ontario....


The Ontario in Southern California, right? We passed by there last summer. No time to stop, but I was curious to see Euclid Avenue and Ontario Junior College, where Beverly Cleary lived and spent her first year of college.

P.S. Just saw on Yahoo that multiple wildfires are raging throughout So CA. Stay safe!


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> Hmmm...I think some of the trouble is many of the good solid values that have, in the past, kept people out of financial straits (scrimping, saving, doing without) just don't jibe with the way the modern economy works.
> 
> I'll never forget how stunned I was when, during that last recession, the government was telling people to SPEND money (and sending out checks to help them do so). I recall some economic expert on CNN or somewhere urging viewers to show their patriotism by pledging to spend one night each week "on the town" (babysitter for the kids, dinner out, and then a pricey show or movie).
> 
> I admit I don't know a lot about economics, but stuff like this makes no sense to me.


We are a consumer society and if in bad times, people stop buying and spending, the economic situation only worsens. Thus the pundits encourage us to spend to rev up the economy again.


----------



## sumpleby (Aug 3, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> The Ontario in Southern California, right? We passed by there last summer. No time to stop, but I was curious to see Euclid Avenue and Ontario Junior College, where Beverly Cleary lived and spent her first year of college.
> 
> P.S. Just saw on Yahoo that multiple wildfires are raging throughout So CA. Stay safe!


Yes, in Southern California. Fortunately, the current fires aren't near me.

Beverly Cleary is one of Ontario's most famous people. A year or so before I retired from the main library (I was head of Children's Services) I made a push to have the Children's Room named after her. The powers that be in the city nixed it--they said if we named it, it had to be after a local bigwig. :-( We ended up not naming the room but city hall went on to name the entire building after a bigwig so the main library became the Ovitt Family Community Library. Yech.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

damemary said:


> We're coming up on 5 consecutive days over 100 degrees. Remind me of this when I go on about the beauty of the desert next time.
> 
> A couple reminders. It's the high temperature you're speaking of. Most of the day is cooler. Adjust your schedule and adopt the siesta.


I see you are now getting our summer heatwave. Cool but not cold here yet, but a few early morning have been a bit nippy.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

alcameron said:


> And they're both much younger than I! I think I could be Susan's grandmother and Dame's mother! Maybe not quite.


My eldest grandchild is 32 years, eldest great grandchild is 5 years. I am a real mouldie-oldie.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

alcameron said:


> I will be running around in my jeans and T-shirts until I'm 100!


These days I prefer T shirt, trackies and joggers. My hair is not down past my waist any more, I had a good 6 inches chopped off in March, so it is just above waist length now.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> My friends would always confess about silly things like rolling up their skirts or not obeying a nun. They were never worried, just knew that they had to come up with something. I could never understand it. They didn't believe in it, but did it anyway. I remember going to Latin masses with my best friend. I always thought, what's the point if you can't understand it. My friend left the church because her husband had an affair and divorced her while she was pregnant with his child. The church would not allow her son to be baptized in the church because they were divorced. I've never found a church that I believe is a real church. I think that people should put aside their pettiness, nastiness and hypocrisy before they enter GOD'S house. All are equal in GOD'S eyes. I understand that people are sinners but they should be able to do GOD'S work in HIS house and leave their crap at the door!


One church where I found everyone was welcome and everyone was friendly was the Society of Friends in Tasmania. Unfortunately my ex husband did not like them. It was too far away to go there regularly by public transport and he always seemed to need the kombi when I wanted to go to a meeting. They were a great group of friendly people, tolerant and understanding.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

sumpleby said:


> Those aren't hot flashes--they're power surges.


That is why I am always feeling so tired these days, I had so many hot flashes during the 'change' that I completely drained my batteries and they have not fully recharged yet.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

It's always good to remind each other that we bond all over the earth. So glad to know you.



EveMCooke said:


> I see you are now getting our summer heatwave. Cool but not cold here yet, but a few early morning have been a bit nippy.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Age is just a number for all of us. It's our minds that bind us.



EveMCooke said:


> My eldest grandchild is 32 years, eldest great grandchild is 5 years. I am a real mouldie-oldie.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

My long hair is long gone. I think it would be too thin now. I have mine short and colored. I don't feel like I'm fooling anyone...just feel comfortable this way.



EveMCooke said:


> These days I prefer T shirt, trackies and joggers. My hair is not down past my waist any more, I had a good 6 inches chopped off in March, so it is just above waist length now.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I haven't been a regular church goer for years. But that doesn't change my relationship with GOD. I've always done much studying on my own. The first time I read the bible (front to back), I understood little. I have since studied it in parts. I also look at different bible studies for different perspectives. I read a LOT! And I pray for understanding. In my opinion, most (NOT ALL) churches have been taken over by satan.


KfromNeb; your post saddens me. Please hear me out and consider a different point of view (mine). IMO, you do not know or recognize the Church of Christ. Christ is *the only* head over His Church. (Ephs 1:22) and *only* the saved _ and_ baptized, are of the Lord's Church. Church *is* its members. The Church must and worships God and Christ. See about believers Mark 16:16 and Eph 5:17.

Since you say most churches have been taken over by satan - you do not understand the Church of Christ and en Christo.

A Church is not an overseer of men or a Biblical authority for an earthly headquarters ruled by man-made rules, or something man has come up with. Yet, each congregation is autonomous and results in difference factions and representations of Christ's Church.

Acts 14:23 tells us every Church is to be overseen by a group (pularity of elders) = overseers. Satan has *zero* power or place in a Church! That is the will and words the Lord set up for His Church. If you or your church is overseen by a preacher, a head, or anything of man, it is not the Lord's Church. Perhaps that is what you referred to as "most" being taken over by Satan.

Yet, again, that is NOT the Church of God and Christ.

I believe the Bible tells us a Christian is: one who has professed his sins, and believes in God the Father, Jesus the Son and the Holy Spirit, accepts them (the Trinity) as his Savior, and is Baptized. You must also accept the Bible in its entirety and as the word of God and _the_ only authority.

As a Christian you are to (and should want to!) worship God only as He specified. Coloss 2:8 (beware of traditions of men, that are not according to Christ.)

A Church is not just some group of people or a building for reading or using a Bible to talk about or study and discuss.

The Bible tell us what the church is:
a) made of believers in Jesus
b) organized under qualified leadership
c) gathers to hear the teachings and preachings and to be nurtured and to respond in worship and praise and service to and from others
d) administers the sacraments (Baptism and Communion)
e) is spiritually unified (Trinity) ; is the unity of those together en Christo
f) is Holy. Not without sin/mistakes/or perfect, but the Church repents their sins
g) is devoted to fellowship
h) committed to Jesus' mission of spreading the Gospel and making Disciples of people who are empowered by the Spirit and a life of love (Acts 2:47)

If you are not worshipping God and Christ as specified in the Bible, your worship is in vain. (Mark 7:7)

Matthew 28:20 (observe *all* things I commanded you.)
My translation: be en Christo and a Church member and part of the body of Christ.

If you are en Christo - Christ will propel you to be involved with the Christian Community. (together in international and local communities with the intentionally well being of one another in every way in mind.)

The Bible tells us to meet together as believers and encourage one another. Hebrews 10:25

The Bible instructs us to come together as believers and members of Christ's body, we are individuals, yet part of the same body, and we belong to each other. Romans 12:5

We need each other to grow up in the Faith, to learn to serve, to love one another and to practice forgiveness of one another. If you are not in a Church of Christ, you're disconnected from the body of Christ. Only Christ makes us one. 1 Corth 12:27

I wrote none of this to demean, scare or condemn you. I am not a Bible thumper. I am a born again Christian, who loves God/Christ and am on the journey to love and serve as my Father commanded me to do.

I do not have all the answers, but the Bible does. If you are a believer and a Christian (as the Bible described and I pointed out above), you must be a member en Christo.

I write this to bring you the gospel and so that you may seek the Truth. You have posted many times recently, you like to hear other's point of view, beliefs and opinions, to grow and learn.

As you can see, your and my POVs are very different.

I pray and hope you'll consider the words found in the Bible and learn something of a different viewpoint from me.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

alcameron said:


> I have been going to the gym 3-4 times a week for over 20 years, and walk my dogs at least 3-4 times a week. I walk on the treadmill and use the weight machines. I joined a gym after feeling as though I had been put through the mill after 6 months of chemo and have been going ever since. In my mind I look at this as keeping my head and body healthy and keeping cancer cells away. It's working so far!


Good for you. Hope you continue to fight the good fight into ancient old age and continue to enjoy optimum health.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I have no idea! I've never heard of that before and haven't looked it up yet???
> 
> In my opinion, freedom OF religion and freedom FROM religion cannot take place at the same time. In order for one to live their religion wholly, they cannot avoid exposing others. But on the other hand, no one can or should try to force another to believe what they believe. It would be nearly impossible for me to not talk about my GOD. But I would never tell you or anyone that they must think as I do. Freedom of religion allows us to say and worship as we please. But it also gives others the right to do the same. I've personally attended quite a few Bar Mitzvahs and Bat Mitzvahs. While I'm not Jewish, I understand the importance of the occasion. I can attend and be respectful even if I'm not Jewish.


You sound like such a complete person. I have attended Christian weddings and funerals and hope I showed appropriate respect on each occasion.

The only time I was aghast was at the tragic funeral of the granddaughter of a co worker. The girl was not wearing a seat belt and was thrown from a car and died upon impact. The services were held in a Protestant church not of one of the traditional established denominations. The girl's paternal uncle had converted to Catholicism upon marriage and her cousins were being raised as Catholics. The preacher went beyond the eulogy and started to proselytize against other faiths. He assaulted the beliefs of the grieving aunt, uncle and cousins. It was so inappropriate that there were gasps from those of us who came to pay our respects. The grandmother retired shortly afterward and cut communication with those of us who were her work friends and "lunch bunch".

I guess we all have to keep our heads together to continue to recognize the humanity of one another.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

alcameron said:


> Ja, ja, but I'm really a Minnesota girl at heart.


And I will always be a New York girl even with growing up in a farm town in the Midwest and living in the sticks now.

The New York City of my teens into my 30's was Wonderland without the evil Red Queen.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Love our EvieM. How can we not? Progressive ideas coming from a ggm???? The Best! But what are trackies and joggers? I assume one is sneakers (trainers). It is so much fun to talk to friends from Up Side Down Oz.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Oh, I don't remember. I guess its been more than a few years. :lol:


It was years ago that they performed at the local Community College. We had some glory days there when we got a nice performance of "Ain't Misbehavin'", saw the Beach Boys and Kingston Trio, had a good amateur performance of "Lost in Yonkers", all sorts of worthwhile ways to enjoy an evening. They haven't offered anything of interest to me in a while, sad to say, and I rather miss it.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I grew up Lutheran. We passed the plate and everybody put their little envelope in.


At synagogue, we are not supposed to handle money or conduct business on the Sabbath. But there are occasions such as at Yom Kippur when there are envelopes on the seats for us to take home, fill with checks, and mail back. We have fund raisers, with the big ones honoring some big shot in the congregation with a fancy dinner. People solicit "Journal ads" from local businesses and professional people. I guess all religions are hurting for voluntary funds because of the economy these days. A friend just told me our congregation lost 20% of the paid up membership, much due to financial stress.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> You sound like such a complete person. I have attended Christian weddings and funerals and hope I showed appropriate respect on each occasion.
> 
> The only time I was aghast was at the tragic funeral of the granddaughter of a co worker. The girl was not wearing a seat belt and was thrown from a car and died upon impact. The services were held in a Protestant church not of one of the traditional established denominations. The girl's paternal uncle had converted to Catholicism upon marriage and her cousins were being raised as Catholics. The preacher went beyond the eulogy and started to proselytize against other faiths. He assaulted the beliefs of the grieving aunt, uncle and cousins. It was so inappropriate that there were gasps from those of us who came to pay our respects. The grandmother retired shortly afterward and cut communication with those of us who were her work friends and "lunch bunch".
> 
> I guess we all have to keep our heads together to continue to recognize the humanity of one another.


I'm truly appalled, Marilyn--that minister should be drummed out of the ministerial body (or fellowship, or however it's termed) for such remarks!

Still, some churches are extreme--I can almost see where Nebraska's coming from with her remark that some have been taken over by the forces of evil. "Christians" holding protests outside Sandy Hook, assaulting grieving families at military funerals (any funerals) with their chants and their hate signs--Satan must be rubbing his hands together in glee at such spectacles.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

sumpleby said:


> Here in the Inland Empire it was 98° yesterday and today it was 99°. Right now, at 8:50pm, it is 87°. Tomorrow we are supposed to hit 102° where I live, in Ontario....


How I wish we could share some of our excess of rain with you. Hope there are scientists working on ways to manipulate climate so rainfall would be more sensibly distributed. So far, we can't control Mother Nature, and sometimes she is too wicked.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> At synagogue, we are not supposed to handle money or conduct business on the Sabbath. But there are occasions such as at Yom Kippur when there are envelopes on the seats for us to take home, fill with checks, and mail back. We have fund raisers, with the big ones honoring some big shot in the congregation with a fancy dinner. People solicit "Journal ads" from local businesses and professional people. I guess all religions are hurting for voluntary funds because of the economy these days. A friend just told me our congregation lost 20% of the paid up membership, much due to financial stress.


I guess all churches/synagogues/mosques need funds to operate, but I agree that the methods of obtaining them can be less than subtle--and often downright grotesque. I read on Yahoo that some churches now have ATMs in their lobbies--unbelievable!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> I guess all churches/synagogues/mosques need funds to operate, but I agree that the methods of obtaining them can be less than subtle--and often downright grotesque. I read on Yahoo that some churches now have ATMs in their lobbies--unbelievable!


Bingo is so much more civil.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Bingo is so much more civil.


Hmmm...not always--some people take their bingo very seriously indeed. A friend once urged to try it--I took one card, played one round, and of course won--much to the dismay of everyone around me. You could have cut the atmosphere in the room with a knife as I went up to collect my prize. It was penny-anti stuff, but people played as if the Hope diamond was up for grabs.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> KfromNeb; your post saddens me. Please hear me out and consider a different point of view (mine). IMO, you do not know or recognize the Church of Christ. Christ is *the only* head over His Church. (Ephs 1:22) and *only* the saved _ and_ baptized, are of the Lord's Church. Church *is* its members. The Church must and worships God and Christ. See about believers Mark 16:16 and Eph 5:17.
> 
> Since you say most churches have been taken over by satan - you do not understand the Church of Christ and en Christo.
> 
> ...


Yes, we differ in some things. I was baptized as an infant and again as an adult when I CHOSE it for myself! I was baptized in the name of JESUS CHRIST! Not in the name of a church. For many years I sought a church. Here's what I found. The church is only interested in money! Upon your second or third visit, they're trying to get you to pledge your fair share. Most churches are not biblical! They teach a feel good message to get you to come back. I seek the truth that is in the bible. I don't pick and choose what I want to hear. When you're new to a church, everyone falls all over you at the door, to welcome you. Five minutes later, they're back with their cliques and you are all alone. They judge people by what they ate wearing. People are hypocrites! I understand that! We are all sinners. I understand that! But I want a church where people will leave that crap at the door. I haven't found it. I may have made it sound like I NEVER worship and study with others. Not entirely the case. My daughter in law, her mother and I do bible study together. We often talk about scripture as I do with everyone in my life. The bible says whenever two or more of you are gathered in his name... I'm sorry that you believe the only way to CHRIST is through the church. I don't believe that. I would rather be alone in my journey with CHRIST than be with people who pretend to be Christians. I've seen a lot of hate in churches and I don't want to be that kind of Christian. If you've found a church that teaches scripture and encourages people to LIVE it, you are very lucky!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> You sound like such a complete person. I have attended Christian weddings and funerals and hope I showed appropriate respect on each occasion.
> 
> The only time I was aghast was at the tragic funeral of the granddaughter of a co worker. The girl was not wearing a seat belt and was thrown from a car and died upon impact. The services were held in a Protestant church not of one of the traditional established denominations. The girl's paternal uncle had converted to Catholicism upon marriage and her cousins were being raised as Catholics. The preacher went beyond the eulogy and started to proselytize against other faiths. He assaulted the beliefs of the grieving aunt, uncle and cousins. It was so inappropriate that there were gasps from those of us who came to pay our respects. The grandmother retired shortly afterward and cut communication with those of us who were her work friends and "lunch bunch".
> 
> I guess we all have to keep our heads together to continue to recognize the humanity of one another.


Thank you. Your story reminds me of my friend's Dad's funeral last fall. He had lots and lots of friends from all walks of life. He was a fireman and owned a lot of businesses. He always hired the needy and ex cons. He believed in second chances, even though he'd been stolen from many times. He often brought the homeless home for dinner. He fed them, clothed them and gave them a job. His was a Catholic funeral. His grandson, whom he helped raise, wanted to give a eulogy. So did two very close friends. Because they weren't Catholics, they weren't allowed to speak at his funeral. Phil had moved away six years earlier so the priest did not know him. It was the most impersonal service ever. Very disappointing for a man who spent his life doing for others.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> At synagogue, we are not supposed to handle money or conduct business on the Sabbath. But there are occasions such as at Yom Kippur when there are envelopes on the seats for us to take home, fill with checks, and mail back. We have fund raisers, with the big ones honoring some big shot in the congregation with a fancy dinner. People solicit "Journal ads" from local businesses and professional people. I guess all religions are hurting for voluntary funds because of the economy these days. A friend just told me our congregation lost 20% of the paid up membership, much due to financial stress.


It is sad that with inflation being what it is, some must choose between giving and putting food on the table. Times are tough, but I believe they're going to get a lot tougher.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> I'm truly appalled, Marilyn--that minister should be drummed out of the ministerial body (or fellowship, or however it's termed) for such remarks!
> 
> Still, some churches are extreme--I can almost see where Nebraska's coming from with her remark that some have been taken over by the forces of evil. "Christians" holding protests outside Sandy Hook, assaulting grieving families at military funerals (any funerals) with their chants and their hate signs--Satan must be rubbing his hands together in glee at such spectacles.


Those are NOT Christians!!!


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Yes, we differ in some things. I was baptized as an infant and again as an adult when I CHOSE it for myself! I was baptized in the name of JESUS CHRIST! Not in the name of a church. For many years I sought a church. Here's what I found. The church is only interested in money! Upon your second or third visit, they're trying to get you to pledge your fair share. Most churches are not biblical! They teach a feel good message to get you to come back. I seek the truth that is in the bible. I don't pick and choose what I want to hear. When you're new to a church, everyone falls all over you at the door, to welcome you. Five minutes later, they're back with their cliques and you are all alone. They judge people by what they ate wearing. People are hypocrites! I understand that! We are all sinners. I understand that! But I want a church where people will leave that crap at the door. I haven't found it. I may have made it sound like I NEVER worship and study with others. Not entirely the case. My daughter in law, her mother and I do bible study together. We often talk about scripture as I do with everyone in my life. The bible says whenever two or more of you are gathered in his name... I'm sorry that you believe the only way to CHRIST is through the church. I don't believe that. I would rather be alone in my journey with CHRIST than be with people who pretend to be Christians. I've seen a lot of hate in churches and I don't want to be that kind of Christian. If you've found a church that teaches scripture and encourages people to LIVE it, you are very lucky!


I don't believe you are a Christian just because you go to a church. The building or the people are not the church. The body of Christ is the Church. I am the same person outside the church as I am in the inside. The Church or gathering of saints is for the hurting and. As the saying goes hospital for sinners. The church can not be perfect because man is not perfect. Man gets in the way and makes mistakes. Be to be technical the body of Christ is the Church. I don't know anyone that hasn't been hurt by a Christian or church member. I know I have but that doesn't stop me from going. I go for the Praise and Worship of my Lord. My needs are met spiritually there but the same can be done at home while I am praying and praising my Savior. 
I have been blessed with 3 churches in my life that everyone was loving and truly cared for myself and my family. While my dh was in the hospital for 6 weeks out of town we had hundreds of visitors from our church. We had to put a note on the door to not call or come anymore because the hospital was getting mad at us. I had to call collect to the church everyday to update them so they could pray for us. At the pastors request. It was a church of 2000 but we were a close body. We had many to come and pray for us. After we got home it was Christmas . The ladies of the church had our meals for 2 months and I told them to stop. They cleaned my home and even decorated my house for Christmas for my kids. They have been there for me many times and I for them. It is the most wonderful thing in the world to have people that you can trust and that truly love you to do all those things for you and cry and pray with you. I would search for a church you are comfortable in. There are some that are there to love and accept you. The best part of my life to have a church with many prayers for my family and that loves us for who we are sinners saved by Grace. I would love for everyone to find a place to worship as I have.Life is tough but easier with someone that loves you like my church family has loved me.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Those are NOT Christians!!!


No, of course not--that's why I put the word "Christians" in quotes. They make a mockery of all Christ stands for.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Religions are good for forming communities which seems to be what CB is describing. People join houses of worship for that necessary feeling of belonging to a larger group.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Country Bumpkins said:


> I don't believe you are a Christian just because you go to a church. The building or the people are not the church. The body of Christ is the Church. I am the same person outside the church as I am in the inside. The Church or gathering of saints is for the hurting and. As the saying goes hospital for sinners. The church can not be perfect because man is not perfect. Man gets in the way and makes mistakes. Be to be technical the body of Christ is the Church. I don't know anyone that hasn't been hurt by a Christian or church member. I know I have but that doesn't stop me from going. I go for the Praise and Worship of my Lord. My needs are met spiritually there but the same can be done at home while I am praying and praising my Savior.
> I have been blessed with 3 churches in my life that everyone was loving and truly cared for myself and my family. While my dh was in the hospital for 6 weeks out of town we had hundreds of visitors from our church. We had to put a note on the door to not call or come anymore because the hospital was getting mad at us. I had to call collect to the church everyday to update them so they could pray for us. At the pastors request. It was a church of 2000 but we were a close body. We had many to come and pray for us. After we got home it was Christmas . The ladies of the church had our meals for 2 months and I told them to stop. They cleaned my home and even decorated my house for Christmas for my kids. They have been there for me many times and I for them. It is the most wonderful thing in the world to have people that you can trust and that truly love you to do all those things for you and cry and pray with you. I would search for a church you are comfortable in. There are some that are there to love and accept you. The best part of my life to have a church with many prayers for my family and that loves us for who we are sinners saved by Grace. I would love for everyone to find a place to worship as I have.Life is tough but easier with someone that loves you like my church family has loved me.


I agree with your statement. And you are lucky to have found that! As we have had to relocate five times, due to my husband's work, I've not found it. Perhaps if we'd stayed long enough to become one of the "in crowd", who knows?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Gotta go clean. Bye!


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Yes, we differ in some things. I was baptized as an infant and again as an adult when I CHOSE it for myself! I was baptized in the name of JESUS CHRIST! Not in the name of a church. For many years I sought a church. Here's what I found. The church is only interested in money! Upon your second or third visit, they're trying to get you to pledge your fair share. Most churches are not biblical! They teach a feel good message to get you to come back. I seek the truth that is in the bible. I don't pick and choose what I want to hear. When you're new to a church, everyone falls all over you at the door, to welcome you. Five minutes later, they're back with their cliques and you are all alone. They judge people by what they ate wearing. People are hypocrites! I understand that! We are all sinners. I understand that! But I want a church where people will leave that crap at the door. I haven't found it. I may have made it sound like I NEVER worship and study with others. Not entirely the case. My daughter in law, her mother and I do bible study together. We often talk about scripture as I do with everyone in my life. The bible says whenever two or more of you are gathered in his name... I'm sorry that you believe the only way to CHRIST is through the church. I don't believe that. I would rather be alone in my journey with CHRIST than be with people who pretend to be Christians. I've seen a lot of hate in churches and I don't want to be that kind of Christian. If you've found a church that teaches scripture and encourages people to LIVE it, you are very lucky!


Right on the money, KFN.:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:And CB, too.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I agree with your statement. And you are lucky to have found that! As we have had to relocate five times, due to my husband's work, I've not found it. Perhaps if we'd stayed long enough to become one of the "in crowd", who knows?


I would not give up. At one time we traveled an hour to find a church. Now our church is 10 minutes from us. I hope you find one you like. It means the world to us to have a church family.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

And fun?



Poor Purl said:


> Bingo is so much more civil.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> I guess all churches/synagogues/mosques need funds to operate, but I agree that the methods of obtaining them can be less than subtle--and often downright grotesque. I read on Yahoo that some churches now have ATMs in their lobbies--unbelievable!


susanmos2000
sad when people need to go to church on credit. Since Religion is a big business, they just want to join the regular business community and not lose out. I hear you, you bet I am cynical. Experience whom the Churches cater to first, it isn't the very poor or we would have none, and you join us who are critical.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Hmmm...not always--some people take their bingo very seriously indeed. A friend once urged to try it--I took one card, played one round, and of course won--much to the dismay of everyone around me. You could have cut the atmosphere in the room with a knife as I went up to collect my prize. It was penny-anti stuff, but people played as if the Hope diamond was up for grabs.


I've seen them like that, too. I was joking when I implied that Bingo was more dignified than ATMs or passing the plate.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> And fun?


That, too.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

SQM said:


> Love our EvieM. How can we not? Progressive ideas coming from a ggm???? The Best! But what are trackies and joggers? I assume one is sneakers (trainers). It is so much fun to talk to friends from Up Side Down Oz.


Trackies are the old track suit. It was once only worn by dedicated athletes, usually donned after finishing a race or training. Trackies usually refers to the track suit pants. They are so comfortable. I have been wearing trackies now for over 40 years. Fleecy lined trackies for the winter and lighter material for summer. Some 20 years ago we could get trackies made in material that looked like parachute silk, perfect for summer, but I have not seen these for a while now. You still have to be wary where the trackies are made, some made in some of the third world countries loose their shape very quickly. Mind you, you can also pay through the nose for some too.

Yes, joggers are sneakers or trainers. People wear them when jogging, running, going to the gym, but they are so comfortable, and so expensive for a good pair. So many types today, some of them are multi coloured but some are either all black or all white. I am almost due for a new pair, but the ones I am wearing cost me $250 and that was with a hefty discount. I find you can walk, comfortably, for long distances in them. I hate high heels. I have a very comfortable pair of long, black suede boots I wear, with my long skirts, when I go 'dressed up to the nines'.

I guess we owe it to the young ladies of today for the trackies and joggers fashions. They are more liberated than we were at their age, and so much more comfortable in their clothes.

You can tell the newbies at the gym. The old hands wear clothes that have definitely seen better days, with the exception of joggers and we do not scrimp on good shoes. Some of the tops some of the old hand guys wear have seen better days more than a decade ago. The newbies wear new and chick trackie bottoms or shorts with chic tops. The main thing is we are a mixed group, all great friends, all willing to help each other. We cover all ages from 16 years to almost 90 years and from a variety of backgrounds and cultures. A few do not speak fluent English yet but we all communicate.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> I've seen them like that, too. I was joking when I implied that Bingo was more dignified than ATMs or passing the plate.


Of course!


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Hmmm...not always--some people take their bingo very seriously indeed. A friend once urged to try it--I took one card, played one round, and of course won--much to the dismay of everyone around me. You could have cut the atmosphere in the room with a knife as I went up to collect my prize. It was penny-anti stuff, but people played as if the Hope diamond was up for grabs.


but people played as if the Hope diamond was up for grabs...I see you have met my former mother in law. Boy did she take her bingo seriously. We had Bingo halls here, large halls where people played several times a week. Parking at a premium, some almost had to take a bus from where they parked their car. Mother had her own cards, four of them, she considered she was luckier using her own cards. Head down, no talking, no noises, no coughing, no rustling of sweet papers, you know the drill. She tried to get me interested but I could not see myself sitting down listening to some clown reading off numbers, "legs eleven" etc.
Bingo was once illegal here, then we had pressure from migrants from the old country who were used to playing it at home. They started legalising it for churches and religious institutions to raise funds, then legalised it and large bingo halls were built. The main one is now a factory and I am not sure of the others, if they still exist.

Many people enjoy the outing and the companionship of a night out at the bingo. Not a game or pastime I could see myself following though.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> Trackies are the old track suit. It was once only worn by dedicated athletes, usually donned after finishing a race or training. Trackies usually refers to the track suit pants. They are so comfortable. I have been wearing trackies now for over 40 years. Fleecy lined trackies for the winter and lighter material for summer. Some 20 years ago we could get trackies made in material that looked like parachute silk, perfect for summer, but I have not seen these for a while now. You still have to be wary where the trackies are made, some made in some of the third world countries loose their shape very quickly. Mind you, you can also pay through the nose for some too.
> 
> Yes, joggers are sneakers or trainers. People wear them when jogging, running, going to the gym, but they are so comfortable, and so expensive for a good pair. So many types today, some of them are multi coloured but some are either all black or all white. I am almost due for a new pair, but the ones I am wearing cost me $250 and that was with a hefty discount. I find you can walk, comfortably, for long distances in them. I hate high heels. I have a very comfortable pair of long, black suede boots I wear, with my long skirts, when I go 'dressed up to the nines'.
> 
> ...


You're lucky, Evie, to have such a pleasant and supportive place in which to exercise. There's a workout room attached to the place where my son takes swimming lessons, and you couldn't pay me to go in there. It's not just the odor (rancid deodorant and stale sweat) but the look on people's faces as they switch on the StairMasters and start to climb to the moon--like Sisyphus' pushing his boulder up for the millionth time.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> You're lucky, Evie, to have such a pleasant and supportive place in which to exercise. There's a workout room attached to the place where my son takes swimming lessons, and you couldn't pay me to go in there. It's not just the odor (rancid deodorant and stale sweat) but the look on people's faces as they switch on the StairMasters and start to climb to the moon--like Sisyphus' pushing his boulder up for the millionth time.


The staff are constantly wiping down the equipment and vacuuming the floor. Windows are always open, even in winter and we air conditioning and fans. Sweat towels must be used at all times. We have hand wash dispensers on the wall and boxes of tissues in a couple of places. So it is a pleasant environment. We also have the wet area, pool - both deep pool for swimming and the swallower pool for therapy and water walking, as well as the spa and sauna.

It is run by the shire so prices are reasonable. I pay $720 a year, monthly by direct debit, and I can go as often as I like. Unfortunately it is run by the City of Swan and I live in the Mundaring Shire. Age pensioners who live in the City of Swan locality receive a 50% discount on their membership fees, but living in Mundaring Shire I am not entitled to this. With the State Government hell bent on slashing the number of local shires from 40 to 7, the Mundaring Shire it set to be amalgamated, or absorbed into, the Swan Shire, so I may get my discount in a few years. No I am not in favour of loosing our Mundaring identity. Besides this forced amalgamation is going to cost over $60million and will have to be borne by the ratepayers not the State Government.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Hmmm...not always--some people take their bingo very seriously indeed. A friend once urged to try it--I took one card, played one round, and of course won--much to the dismay of everyone around me. You could have cut the atmosphere in the room with a knife as I went up to collect my prize. It was penny-anti stuff, but people played as if the Hope diamond was up for grabs.


Years ago when we owned a two family, we rented to an older couple for a few years (until their daughter thought it was time to move them to Boston where she could keep a closer eye on them). They had a different bingo game every evening either at a church, VFW, American Legion hall, or the Elks. She kept a journal of what they spent and what they won. In the course of a year she usually came out close to even. Some of the places had cash prizes. It was their entertainment, and they had friends who went to the same places regularly. Sometimes there were even refreshments. Meanwhile, they were supporting the charities. It was a win win situation.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Thank you. Your story reminds me of my friend's Dad's funeral last fall. He had lots and lots of friends from all walks of life. He was a fireman and owned a lot of businesses. He always hired the needy and ex cons. He believed in second chances, even though he'd been stolen from many times. He often brought the homeless home for dinner. He fed them, clothed them and gave them a job. His was a Catholic funeral. His grandson, whom he helped raise, wanted to give a eulogy. So did two very close friends. Because they weren't Catholics, they weren't allowed to speak at his funeral. Phil had moved away six years earlier so the priest did not know him. It was the most impersonal service ever. Very disappointing for a man who spent his life doing for others.


If there is a world hereafter, and the departed have the privilege of knowing what goes on in this world after they have left, I am sure his soul found comfort in knowing the loving thoughts of his grandson and friends. I have been to uncomfortable funerals where the clergy were "hired guns" who did not know the departed. We have one local funeral director who does not insist upon anything formal or religious, and there have been lovely rites of passage with kind words spoken by friends and family that truly honored the person who passed.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> I would not give up. At one time we traveled an hour to find a church. Now our church is 10 minutes from us. I hope you find one you like. It means the world to us to have a church family.


You are fortunate to have such a church family. From the heartfelt way you write about your beliefs, they are even more fortunate to have you as part of the community. The kind of loving spirit you have shown in your last two postings is a blessing to all the people who are involved with you.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> - - - -
> You can tell the newbies at the gym. The old hands wear clothes that have definitely seen better days, with the exception of joggers and we do not scrimp on good shoes. Some of the tops some of the old hand guys wear have seen better days more than a decade ago. The newbies wear new and chick trackie bottoms or shorts with chic tops. The main thing is we are a mixed group, all great friends, all willing to help each other. We cover all ages from 16 years to almost 90 years and from a variety of backgrounds and cultures. A few do not speak fluent English yet but we all communicate.


I go to a women only gym. We almost all wear tee shirts and summer or winter weight sweat pants or shorts. There is so much commerce in our part of the country that stores are competing wildly with one another, and I am able to get cross trainer shoes for under $50 on sale, and in one store get another 15% off on Senior Citizen Wednesdays. Considering how high our property taxes and the cost of gasoline (petrol) is, it is nice to find ways to save.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> I've seen them like that, too. I was joking when I implied that Bingo was more dignified than ATMs or passing the plate.


There are a few churches in Las Vegas that accept casino chips. There is a sign stating so as you enter the church.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> I go to a women only gym. We almost all wear tee shirts and summer or winter weight sweat pants or shorts. There is so much commerce in our part of the country that stores are competing wildly with one another, and I am able to get cross trainer shoes for under $50 on sale, and in one store get another 15% off on Senior Citizen Wednesdays. Considering how high our property taxes and the cost of gasoline (petrol) is, it is nice to find ways to save.


I miss going to the gym. When the fibromyalgia hit, I had to stop. The gym I went to had a seperate ladies gym, but the men still go in and use the equipment. It was almost comical to see them grunting while lifting 10 lbs or less. I guess they thought we women would be impressed.
I go to the Y and use the pool 2 or 3 times a week. Swimming and walking are all I can do now.


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

KFN and CB, I applaud your wisdom. You've said it all.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> KfromNeb; your post saddens me. Please hear me out and consider a different point of view (mine). IMO, you do not know or recognize the Church of Christ. Christ is *the only* head over His Church. (Ephs 1:22) and *only* the saved _ and_ baptized, are of the Lord's Church. Church *is* its members. The Church must and worships God and Christ. See about believers Mark 16:16 and Eph 5:17.
> 
> Since you say most churches have been taken over by satan - you do not understand the Church of Christ and en Christo.
> 
> ...


Please answer a few questions for me.
Is there a significance for using "en Cristo?"
Does this church consider itself the one true church established by Jesus when he walked on this earth or did it branch off from another church?


----------



## Jokim (Nov 22, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> KfromNeb; your post saddens me. Please hear me out and consider a different point of view (mine). IMO, you do not know or recognize the Church of Christ. Christ is *the only* head over His Church. (Ephs 1:22) and *only* the saved _ and_ baptized, are of the Lord's Church. Church *is* its members. The Church must and worships God and Christ. See about believers Mark 16:16 and Eph 5:17.
> 
> Since you say most churches have been taken over by satan - you do not understand the Church of Christ and en Christo.
> 
> ...


Well put, KPG. You have the gift. ♥♥♥☻


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> My friends would always confess about silly things like rolling up their skirts or not obeying a nun. They were never worried, just knew that they had to come up with something. I could never understand it. They didn't believe in it, but did it anyway. I remember going to Latin masses with my best friend. I always thought, what's the point if you can't understand it. My friend left the church because her husband had an affair and divorced her while she was pregnant with his child. The church would not allow her son to be baptized in the church because they were divorced. I've never found a church that I believe is a real church. I think that people should put aside their pettiness, nastiness and hypocrisy before they enter GOD'S house. All are equal in GOD'S eyes. I understand that people are sinners but they should be able to do GOD'S work in HIS house and leave their crap at the door!


At a local church several friends and some in-laws attend, a parisioner and his wife separated. They had been married for almost 20 years. On the day the divorce decree was to be finalized, the parishioner brought a gun to the courtroom and shot his s00n-to-be ex and her attorney, killing them both. His words afterwards were, "Now I can sleep tonight." The church rallied round the parishioner because women were created to be men's helpmeets, serve them faithfully, and never divorce. The parishioner served a sentence, don't remember how long. He's out now and the church welcomed him back with open arms.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> You are fortunate to have such a church family. From the heartfelt way you write about your beliefs, they are even more fortunate to have you as part of the community. The kind of loving spirit you have shown in your last two postings is a blessing to all the people who are involved with you.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I love the 'dress code' in Southwest. Even in the business district you seldom see a suit. That's a liar from out of town. No jackets or ties required in restaurants. Comfy rules. I haven't worn heels in years and my feet feel so much better. Salespeople have learned not to judge by how people look. That guy in jeans is probably a millionaire plus.



EveMCooke said:


> Trackies are the old track suit. It was once only worn by dedicated athletes, usually donned after finishing a race or training. Trackies usually refers to the track suit pants. They are so comfortable. I have been wearing trackies now for over 40 years. Fleecy lined trackies for the winter and lighter material for summer. Some 20 years ago we could get trackies made in material that looked like parachute silk, perfect for summer, but I have not seen these for a while now. You still have to be wary where the trackies are made, some made in some of the third world countries loose their shape very quickly. Mind you, you can also pay through the nose for some too.
> 
> Yes, joggers are sneakers or trainers. People wear them when jogging, running, going to the gym, but they are so comfortable, and so expensive for a good pair. So many types today, some of them are multi coloured but some are either all black or all white. I am almost due for a new pair, but the ones I am wearing cost me $250 and that was with a hefty discount. I find you can walk, comfortably, for long distances in them. I hate high heels. I have a very comfortable pair of long, black suede boots I wear, with my long skirts, when I go 'dressed up to the nines'.
> 
> ...


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

alcameron said:


> Please answer a few questions for me.
> Is there a significance for using "en Cristo?"


That's Spanish, isn't it? Maybe she's simply Latina.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

That's a hoot. Very enterprising idea.



BrattyPatty said:


> There are a few churches in Las Vegas that accept casino chips. There is a sign stating so as you enter the church.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

For once, I'm speechless.



maysmom said:


> At a local church several friends and some in-laws attend, a parisioner and his wife separated. They had been married for almost 20 years. On the day the divorce decree was to be finalized, the parishioner brought a gun to the courtroom and shot his s00n-to-be ex and her attorney, killing them both. His words afterwards were, "Now I can sleep tonight." The church rallied round the parishioner because women were created to be men's helpmeets, serve them faithfully, and never divorce. The parishioner served a sentence, don't remember how long. He's out now and the church welcomed him back with open arms.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> There are a few churches in Las Vegas that accept casino chips. There is a sign stating so as you enter the church.


When in Rome...


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

damemary said:


> For once, I'm speechless.


It was that case that started metal detectors being utilized in CT courtrooms.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

damemary said:


> For once, I'm speechless.


So am I. I just typed a few responses and deleted them all.


----------



## sumpleby (Aug 3, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> I miss going to the gym. When the fibromyalgia hit, I had to stop. The gym I went to had a seperate ladies gym, but the men still go in and use the equipment. It was almost comical to see them grunting while lifting 10 lbs or less. I guess they thought we women would be impressed.


Maybe a '0' was missing and you guys had actually been lifting 100 lbs...? :-D They coulda been impressed by _you_ guys. ;-)


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> You are fortunate to have such a church family. From the heartfelt way you write about your beliefs, they are even more fortunate to have you as part of the community. The kind of loving spirit you have shown in your last two postings is a blessing to all the people who are involved with you.


Thank you so much . That means a lot to me.Bless you!


----------



## Jokim (Nov 22, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> I don't believe you are a Christian just because you go to a church. The building or the people are not the church. The body of Christ is the Church. I am the same person outside the church as I am in the inside. The Church or gathering of saints is for the hurting and. As the saying goes hospital for sinners. The church can not be perfect because man is not perfect. Man gets in the way and makes mistakes. Be to be technical the body of Christ is the Church. I don't know anyone that hasn't been hurt by a Christian or church member. I know I have but that doesn't stop me from going. I go for the Praise and Worship of my Lord. My needs are met spiritually there but the same can be done at home while I am praying and praising my Savior.
> I have been blessed with 3 churches in my life that everyone was loving and truly cared for myself and my family. While my dh was in the hospital for 6 weeks out of town we had hundreds of visitors from our church. We had to put a note on the door to not call or come anymore because the hospital was getting mad at us. I had to call collect to the church everyday to update them so they could pray for us. At the pastors request. It was a church of 2000 but we were a close body. We had many to come and pray for us. After we got home it was Christmas . The ladies of the church had our meals for 2 months and I told them to stop. They cleaned my home and even decorated my house for Christmas for my kids. They have been there for me many times and I for them. It is the most wonderful thing in the world to have people that you can trust and that truly love you to do all those things for you and cry and pray with you. I would search for a church you are comfortable in. There are some that are there to love and accept you. The best part of my life to have a church with many prayers for my family and that loves us for who we are sinners saved by Grace. I would love for everyone to find a place to worship as I have.Life is tough but easier with someone that loves you like my church family has loved me.


An awesome testimony and witness, CB. The Church is a community of Christ, His family. What we do for the least of us, we do for Him.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

maysmom said:


> At a local church several friends and some in-laws attend, a parisioner and his wife separated. They had been married for almost 20 years. On the day the divorce decree was to be finalized, the parishioner brought a gun to the courtroom and shot his s00n-to-be ex and her attorney, killing them both. His words afterwards were, "Now I can sleep tonight." The church rallied round the parishioner because women were created to be men's helpmeets, serve them faithfully, and never divorce. The parishioner served a sentence, don't remember how long. He's out now and the church welcomed him back with open arms.


This could never happen in an atheist church!


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

SQM said:


> This could never happen in an atheist church!


Atheist church? You are so droll to bring us a new oxymoron. Thanks.


----------



## sumpleby (Aug 3, 2013)

Pearl of Death (old Sherlock Homes film starring Basil Rathbone. Love those films  )


Q or #


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

maysmom said:


> At a local church several friends and some in-laws attend, a parisioner and his wife separated. They had been married for almost 20 years. On the day the divorce decree was to be finalized, the parishioner brought a gun to the courtroom and shot his s00n-to-be ex and her attorney, killing them both. His words afterwards were, "Now I can sleep tonight." The church rallied round the parishioner because women were created to be men's helpmeets, serve them faithfully, and never divorce. The parishioner served a sentence, don't remember how long. He's out now and the church welcomed him back with open arms.


I can understand why he killed the lawyer, but why the wife? :roll:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

sumpleby said:


> Pearl of Death (old Sherlock Homes film starring Basil Rathbone. Love those films  )
> 
> Q or #


Sumpleby, this is your best message ever.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

maysmom said:


> At a local church several friends and some in-laws attend, a parisioner and his wife separated. They had been married for almost 20 years. On the day the divorce decree was to be finalized, the parishioner brought a gun to the courtroom and shot his s00n-to-be ex and her attorney, killing them both. His words afterwards were, "Now I can sleep tonight." The church rallied round the parishioner because women were created to be men's helpmeets, serve them faithfully, and never divorce. The parishioner served a sentence, don't remember how long. He's out now and the church welcomed him back with open arms.


maysmom
have we not known about the Male Hierarchy all along? Perhaps time has come to start a Church of Mary Magdalene instead, make it equal to the one of Jesus Christ... or even replace it.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> I can understand why he killed the lawyer, but why the wife? :roll:


Poor Purl
he no longer was her Master and envied her freedom.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

sumpleby said:


> Maybe a '0' was missing and you guys had actually been lifting 100 lbs...? :-D They coulda been impressed by _you_ guys. ;-)


Some of the guys grunt, groan and strain. They sound as if they are giving birth to a 12 pound baby and need an epidural, urgently.

Some of them go brick red in the face, their eyes bulge and their neck muscles and blood vessels stand out. Surely it cannot be good for them to be under such pressure to lift the weights.

Some pump up on protein supplements, they are more cheese cake than beef cake. Some of them just develop the top half of the body, resulting in well developed arms, chest and neck but skinny legs with no muscle tone. You can see some of them running to fat when they stop the exercise regime. . But we girls do have a quiet giggle at times, listening to their groans and straining.


----------



## sumpleby (Aug 3, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Sumpleby, this is your best message ever.


Oh crud--posted on the wrong thread!! Sorry about that...


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> This could never happen in an atheist church!


I've been wondering... What is the point of an atheist church? Whom do they worship?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I've been wondering... What is the point of an atheist church? Whom do they worship?


Mammon?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> I miss going to the gym. When the fibromyalgia hit, I had to stop. The gym I went to had a seperate ladies gym, but the men still go in and use the equipment. It was almost comical to see them grunting while lifting 10 lbs or less. I guess they thought we women would be impressed.
> I go to the Y and use the pool 2 or 3 times a week. Swimming and walking are all I can do now.


It interested me to read that you have fibromyalgia. Have you had your thyroid checked? Fibromyalgia didn't even exist until somewhat recently. Doctors used to diagnose and treat thyroid problems based upon symptoms. Now they use a one size fits all (not) test. Many are going undiagnosed. I had a doctor tell me that I had fibromyalgia. I said that I thought fibromyagia was something they just made up when they didn't know what was wrong with you. She laughed and agreed. Finally I found a doctor who was willing to do further thyroid tests. I was diagnosed with hypothyroidism. After going on medication, I felt like my old self, no more pain. Its worth a try or take a iodine supplement. That's supposed to help.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Janeway, I certainly did PM you, wanting to disprove your accusation that I knew nothing about hard work. Being friends was certainly easier once we knew something about each other.
> 
> The thing is, whatever Maid did or said that you hate so much, it happened a long time ago. She's not at all the same person she was then. I know what she says now, and it's consistent with how she thinks. You seem to think that if we disagree, we can't be friends. What you do that bothers me isn't to vote Republican or to speak out against abortion. Those are worthy things to do. But choosing over and over and over to repeat what Maid once said in all honesty is just plain not nice.
> 
> BTW, you never told us how your granddaughter's robot came out in the competition. Whether she won or not, that she got in at all is something to be very proud of. I hope she won, or at least came out high on the list, but however she did, she deserves real praise.


Yes, Maid & do have a long history that is not worth the effort to mention.

I found you to be a very interesting person, but some of the things you write are just as hurtful/hateful as others you claim as friends. Some of your friends that you defend have been horrible to me & others on KP.

I did not mention how well the GD did at the competition because I did not think anyone on this thread was interested. She was 20th out of 60 in her class which I felt was great for her first time. The Chinese & Japanese took the other 19 top spots, but GD said they deserved top honors as they were very good. 47 countries were competing.

She made lots of friends & had a Wonderful time & the family went through the Queen Mary ship & a Japanese submarine ship.

Thanks for asking about GD as I'm so proud of her.

I really don't enjoy being mean, but some people do rub me wrong. We can disagree & still be friends.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Mammon?


Question--who or what is this?


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Janeway said:


> Question--who or what is this?


Janeway
and you have read the Bible? Did you, really?


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> I miss going to the gym. When the fibromyalgia hit, I had to stop. The gym I went to had a seperate ladies gym, but the men still go in and use the equipment. It was almost comical to see them grunting while lifting 10 lbs or less. I guess they thought we women would be impressed.
> I go to the Y and use the pool 2 or 3 times a week. Swimming and walking are all I can do now.


Sorry you have fibro as my friend has it but she swims daily so please do continue to swim as it does not hurt the sore muscles.

I swim but sometimes too tired to even swim. I float like a balloon!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Had a gastro something test today & still groggy as dr took biopsy of irritation at beginning & ending of stomach. Don't know results yet.

Chat later!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Send a PM and maybe you'll feel better.



aw9358 said:


> So am I. I just typed a few responses and deleted them all.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

This wouldn't happen with a bunch of 2nd graders. Common sense? Oxymoron indeed.



SQM said:


> This could never happen in an atheist church!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

He was aiming for the judge?



Poor Purl said:


> I can understand why he killed the lawyer, but why the wife? :roll:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I love old Vincent Price movies.



Poor Purl said:


> Sumpleby, this is your best message ever.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Question--who or what is this?


I'm sorry; I meant it as a joke. Mammon was the god of wealth or money in pre-biblical times.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Glad to hear about your granddaughter. You have every reason to be proud of her. Let her know we're rooting for her always.



Janeway said:


> Yes, Maid & do have a long history that is not worth the effort to mention.
> 
> I found you to be a very interesting person, but some of the things you write are just as hurtful/hateful as others you claim as friends. Some of your friends that you defend have been horrible to me & others on KP.
> 
> ...


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

damemary said:


> He was aiming for the judge?


He played the creepy parts so well!


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> susanmos2000
> sad when people need to go to church on credit. Since Religion is a big business, they just want to join the regular business community and not lose out. I hear you, you bet I am cynical. Experience whom the Churches cater to first, it isn't the very poor or we would have none, and you join us who are critical.


That explains all of the beggars outside of Vatican City.
All good points, Huck!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Yes, Maid & do have a long history that is not worth the effort to mention.
> 
> I found you to be a very interesting person, but some of the things you write are just as hurtful/hateful as others you claim as friends. Some of your friends that you defend have been horrible to me & others on KP.
> 
> ...


I'm glad about this. I've been interested in you GD since you were in Florida. It sounds as though she did wonderfully. To come in right behind the Chinese and Japanese, who are probably pushed to do well on technical things, is truly amazing.

As for the rest, I'll continue to be critical if I see something that deserves criticism. But I'll also be happy to hear about the good things, like your GD, and sad about the bad things, like the biopsy you say you had earlier. I hope it turns out to be nothing.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Had a gastro something test today & still groggy as dr took biopsy of irritation at beginning & ending of stomach. Don't know results yet.
> 
> Chat later!


As I said, I hope it turns out to be insignificant. But I know that even the tests can be painful. Get well quick.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> He was aiming for the judge?


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> I love old Vincent Price movies.


So do I. He supposedly was one of the nicest people around, but the parts he played were the creepiest.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> It interested me to read that you have fibromyalgia. Have you had your thyroid checked? Fibromyalgia didn't even exist until somewhat recently. Doctors used to diagnose and treat thyroid problems based upon symptoms. Now they use a one size fits all (not) test. Many are going undiagnosed. I had a doctor tell me that I had fibromyalgia. I said that I thought fibromyagia was something they just made up when they didn't know what was wrong with you. She laughed and agreed. Finally I found a doctor who was willing to do further thyroid tests. I was diagnosed with hypothyroidism. After going on medication, I felt like my old self, no more pain. Its worth a try or take a iodine supplement. That's supposed to help.


Yes, KFN, I have had my thyroid checked several times. I went through a battery of tests. Most were sent by my doctor to the Mayo Clinic here in Minnesota. We know that it will not show up in an xray or blood test. I was sent to a rheumatologist and she diagnosed me.
Most doctors didn't believe in fibromyalgia because it was a mystery for them. Many have come around to agree and acknowledge the syndrome. It was found mostly in women, but many men are affected by it, too.
You wouldn't believe some of the advice I have been given, from removing metal fillings in the teeth to putting Frankensense under the tongue, sacrifice a live chicken on the patio, etc. Yours was the most sound I have received so far.
In the beginning I thought it was Lyme's Disease. I was bitten by a wood tic. All the symptoms fit, but the blood test proved otherwise. It took 3 years to get diagnosed. The Mayo Clinic has since provided many interesting books on the subject. :-D


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Sorry you have fibro as my friend has it but she swims daily so please do continue to swim as it does not hurt the sore muscles.
> 
> I swim but sometimes too tired to even swim. I float like a balloon!


I know what you mean. I used to swim underwater for the entire lenght of the pool. Now I just keep floating to the surface. Look at it this way, Jane. We'll never drown!!


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> Janeway
> and you have read the Bible? Did you, really?


Yes, but cannot remember is why I don't do verses from the Bible. My memory is sometimes very short then things pop back.

Guess this gives you some info to criticize me.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Had a gastro something test today & still groggy as dr took biopsy of irritation at beginning & ending of stomach. Don't know results yet.
> 
> Chat later!


Hope all turns out good for you!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> Yes, KFN, I have had my thyroid checked several times. I went through a battery of tests. Most were sent by my doctor to the Mayo Clinic here in Minnesota. We know that it will not show up in an xray or blood test. I was sent to a rheumatologist and she diagnosed me.
> Most doctors didn't believe in fibromyalgia because it was a mystery for them. Many have come around to agree and acknowledge the syndrome. It was found mostly in women, but many men are affected by it, too.
> You wouldn't believe some of the advice I have been given, from removing metal fillings in the teeth to putting Frankensense under the tongue, sacrifice a live chicken on the patio, etc. Yours was the most sound I have received so far.
> In the beginning I thought it was Lyme's Disease. I was bitten by a wood tic. All the symptoms fit, but the blood test proved otherwise. It took 3 years to get diagnosed. The Mayo Clinic has since provided many interesting books on the subject. :-D


OK, just thought it was worth a shot. Oh, by the way did you try the frankensence or chicken? Hahahahaha!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> Yes, KFN, I have had my thyroid checked several times. I went through a battery of tests. Most were sent by my doctor to the Mayo Clinic here in Minnesota. We know that it will not show up in an xray or blood test. I was sent to a rheumatologist and she diagnosed me.
> Most doctors didn't believe in fibromyalgia because it was a mystery for them. Many have come around to agree and acknowledge the syndrome. It was found mostly in women, but many men are affected by it, too.
> You wouldn't believe some of the advice I have been given, from removing metal fillings in the teeth to putting Frankensense under the tongue, sacrifice a live chicken on the patio, etc. Yours was the most sound I have received so far.
> In the beginning I thought it was Lyme's Disease. I was bitten by a wood tic. All the symptoms fit, but the blood test proved otherwise. It took 3 years to get diagnosed. The Mayo Clinic has since provided many interesting books on the subject. :-D


I have a tube of toothpaste from Trader Joe's that contains myrrh. Maybe they carry some with frankincense, too.

The sacrificed live chicken might work, too.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> OK, just thought it was worth a shot. Oh, by the way did you try the frankensence or chicken? Hahahahaha!


Nuts. You beat me to it.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> OK, just thought it was worth a shot. Oh, by the way did you try the frankensence or chicken? Hahahahaha!


LOL! No frankensence! I thought about the chicken and settled for a barbecued one instead.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

I am going to say good night. I have a great thriller waiting for me to read. See you all tomorrow.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> LOL! No frankensence! I thought about the chicken and settled for a barbecued one instead.


Ahahahaha! Good idea!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> I am going to say good night. I have a great thriller waiting for me to read. See you all tomorrow.


Night, night!


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> I can understand why he killed the lawyer, but why the wife? :roll:


Because the wife had the gall to leave him. It would have been okay if he left her but not the other way around. I felt really bad for the 3 daughters in the family.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

maysmom said:


> Because the wife had the gall to leave him. It would have been okay if he left her but not the other way around. I felt really bad for the 3 daughters in the family.


I think Our Purl was pulling your leg.


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

SQM said:


> I think Our Purl was pulling your leg.


Oh, duh, okay. I'm not fully awake, I guess!! Although I know lots of people would aim for the lawyer...

:twisted: :twisted:


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

maysmom said:


> Oh, duh, okay. I'm not fully awake, I guess!! Although I know lots of people would aim for the lawyer...
> 
> :twisted: :twisted:


Someone else fell in Purl's web, too. She is very subtle but hilarious. Beware of The Pearl. (I hate Steinbeck.... but not Our Purl.)


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

And I bet he had fun being creepy and making money at it.



Poor Purl said:


> So do I. He supposedly was one of the nicest people around, but the parts he played were the creepiest.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

My DH was a Field Service Engineer traveling to diagnose and fix computer manufacturing systems. I threatened to make him wear a Superman T-shirt. He had an antique wooden mallet and a rubber chicken on his desk and occasionally in his briefcase. Sometimes a rubber chicken and a few magic words make all the difference. What's a little dab of frankincense?



Poor Purl said:


> I have a tube of toothpaste from Trader Joe's that contains myrrh. Maybe they carry some with frankincense, too.
> 
> The sacrificed live chicken might work, too.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Had a gastro something test today & still groggy as dr took biopsy of irritation at beginning & ending of stomach. Don't know results yet.
> 
> Chat later!


Hope the diagnosis is something that leads to an easy treatment, like diet modification. Good luck.

By the by, congratulations on your granddaughter's success. It is just the beginning!


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> In the beginning I thought it was Lyme's Disease. I was bitten by a wood tic. All the symptoms fit, but the blood test proved otherwise.


Don't always trust the Lyme disease blood test results.

My husband does all the yard work. In 1990 he started displaying symptoms of Lyme, and had the blood test, which was negative. His health declined to the degree that he had to retire from work in 1992.

Then one day about a year later he was resting with his arms above his head and I saw the target shaped mark under his arm. Got him to the doctor immediately and this time he was positive. It was a new tick bite. Two weeks of intensive antibiotic treatment and he almost returned to himself.

The doctor told us the original test could only diagnose if it were done within a short time after the tick bite. The newer test was more sensitive to the antibodies for the disease.

He still has muscle weakness and some memory impairment from the infection, but is doing very well for a 79 year old guy.

My friend also had a long undiagnosed Lyme infection and ended up having to go to the hospital daily for a month for antibiotic infusions. She is only about 65, but is frail and tires easily as an aftereffect.

It is so important to be a "noodge" until you get a true diagnosis of what ails you. Don't let a doctor just brush you off.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Yes, but cannot remember is why I don't do verses from the Bible. My memory is sometimes very short then things pop back.
> 
> Guess this gives you some info to criticize me.


Nah, just to see you as a normal person with things in common with all the rest of us.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> I have a tube of toothpaste from Trader Joe's that contains myrrh. Maybe they carry some with frankincense, too.
> 
> The sacrificed live chicken might work, too.


Just have to watch out for salmonella!


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Take a gander at this, ladies. Can you believe it?


Agency apologizes for mattress ad depicting shooting of Malala Yousafzai
'We deeply regret this incident and want to personally apologize to Malala and her family, Ogilvy & Mather says

The agency behind an Indian mattress company's print ad that depicts the shooting of Malala Yousafzai has apologized for the controversial spot.

"The recent Kurl-On ads from our India office are contrary to the beliefs and professional standards of Ogilvy & Mather and our clients," Ogilvy & Mather said in a statement released Thursday. "We are investigating how our standards were compromised in this case and will take whatever corrective action is necessary. In addition, we have launched a thorough review of our approval and oversight processes across our global network to help ensure that our standards are never compromised again."

The ad, created for Kurl-on by Ogilvy & Mathers Asia Pacific branch, shows a cartoon image of Yousafzai being shot in the face by a gun and falling backward through the air with blood dripping from her head before landing on one of the company's spring mattresses and bouncing back as an inspirational survivor.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Take a gander at this, ladies. Can you believe it?
> 
> Agency apologizes for mattress ad depicting shooting of Malala Yousafzai
> 'We deeply regret this incident and want to personally apologize to Malala and her family, Ogilvy & Mather says
> ...


Gross! How cruel to family!


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Yes, we differ in some things.


From my perspective, we differ in most things.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I was baptized as an infant and again as an adult when I CHOSE it for myself! I was baptized in the name of JESUS CHRIST! Not in the name of a church.


This statement and those you made they follow, tell me you didn't understand most of that which made up my post to you. That's OK; we are all on our own path and journey. However, 
no one I've ever known is baptized in the name of a church. Yet, you do not believe in the same ways that I do, so I understand why you make this comment.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> For many years I sought a church. Here's what I found. The church is only interested in money! Upon your second or third visit, they're trying to get you to pledge your fair share.


I don't know where you "visited" such a church, but this statement is so incredibly offensive to me, a Christian and lover of Christ, I will not even respond to it other than to say Jesus gave *His life* for me, everything I have is NOT my own, but His. The Bible tells us to support God's works, and to give freely and with an open heart.

Luke 12
New International Version (NIV)

*Warnings and Encouragements*

1 Meanwhile, when a crowd of many thousands had gathered, so that they were trampling on one another, Jesus began to speak first to his disciples, saying: Be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy. 2 There is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known. 3 What you have said in the dark will be heard in the daylight, and what you have whispered in the ear in the inner rooms will be proclaimed from the roofs.

4 I tell you, my friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body and after that can do no more. 5 But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after your body has been killed, has authority to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him. 6 Are not five sparrows sold for two pennies? Yet not one of them is forgotten by God. 7 Indeed, the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Dont be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows.

8 I tell you, whoever publicly acknowledges me before others, the Son of Man will also acknowledge before the angels of God. 9 But whoever disowns me before others will be disowned before the angels of God. 10 And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven.

11 When you are brought before synagogues, rulers and authorities, do not worry about how you will defend yourselves or what you will say, 12 for the Holy Spirit will teach you at that time what you should say.

*The Parable of the Rich Fool*

13 Someone in the crowd said to him, Teacher, tell my brother to divide the inheritance with me.

14 Jesus replied, Man, who appointed me a judge or an arbiter between you? 15 Then he said to them, Watch out! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; life does not consist in an abundance of possessions.

16 And he told them this parable: The ground of a certain rich man yielded an abundant harvest. 17 He thought to himself, What shall I do? I have no place to store my crops.

18 Then he said, This is what Ill do. I will tear down my barns and build bigger ones, and there I will store my surplus grain. 19 And Ill say to myself, You have plenty of grain laid up for many years. Take life easy; eat, drink and be merry.

20 But God said to him, You fool! This very night your life will be demanded from you. Then who will get what you have prepared for yourself?

21 _This is how it will be with whoever stores up things for themselves but is not rich toward God._

*Do Not Worry*

22 Then Jesus said to his disciples: Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat; or about your body, what you will wear. 23 For life is more than food, and the body more than clothes. 24 Consider the ravens: They do not sow or reap, they have no storeroom or barn; yet God feeds them. And how much more valuable you are than birds! 25 Who of you by worrying can add a single hour to your life? 26 Since you cannot do this very little thing, why do you worry about the rest?

27 Consider how the wild flowers grow. They do not labor or spin. Yet I tell you, not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. 28 If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today, and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, how much more will he clothe you*you of little faith! 29 And do not set your heart on what you will eat or drink; do not worry about it. 30 For the pagan world runs after all such things, and your Father knows that you need them. 31 But seek his kingdom, and these things will be given to you as well.*

32 Do not be afraid, little flock, for your Father has been pleased to give you the kingdom. 33 Sell your possessions and give to the poor. Provide purses for yourselves that will not wear out, a treasure in heaven that will never fail, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys. 34 *For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.*



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Most churches are not biblical! They teach a feel good message to get you to come back. I seek the truth that is in the bible. I don't pick and choose what I want to hear. When you're new to a church, everyone falls all over you at the door, to welcome you. Five minutes later, they're back with their cliques and you are all alone. They judge people by what they ate wearing. People are hypocrites! I understand that! We are all sinners. I understand that! But I want a church where people will leave that crap at the door. I haven't found it.


Again, so incredibly offensive, and not of Christ or the Bible. I've been personally part of the fellowship of six Christian Churches within the USA and the world to date. Not one, is as you described.

You seem to be very cynical and have no faith or the support of true Christians to support you. Please do not stop seeking a Church where you can find Biblical teachings and the word of God and fellowship with other Christians. Perhaps you are storing your treasures on earth rather than following what the Bible teaches us. I don't know.

Simply, you and I do not understand the Bible and Christianity in the same and, therefore, we think and live our lives very differently.

However, *we and anyone* has the same opportunity to accept our Saviour and to live for and be loved by Him.

_His Eye Is on the Sparrow_





 (Larnelle Harris)





 (Jennifer Holliday)





 (Anja Nissen)





 (Whitney Houston)





 (Mississippi Childrens Choir)


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Take a gander at this, ladies. Can you believe it?
> 
> Agency apologizes for mattress ad depicting shooting of Malala Yousafzai
> 'We deeply regret this incident and want to personally apologize to Malala and her family, Ogilvy & Mather says
> ...


I have to wonder how long it'll be until we have commercials like this. There seems to be no limit to the depravity. Sad!


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Jokim said:


> Well put, KPG. You have the gift. ♥♥♥☻


Hi Jokim and thank you. I cannot send any hearts back to you on my own merits, so I'll copy yours. 

♥♥♥


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Janeway said:


> Gross! How cruel to family!


I agree...the ad agency should apologize in person to the girl and her family, if it hasn't already done so. Their handiwork was not only outrageously insulting but dangerous.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Joeysomma,

Congrats! Yesterday, the uber Liberal New York Times (employer in this case) who regularly used its influence to suggest and support the phony "War-on-Woman" was appropriately exposed for their hypocrisy of their actions like those we have also seen by the present WH Admin. (actions that are also breaking the laws, too)

You were so ahead of your time introducing this thread to show the ridiculousness of the Lib and Dem claims about something that doesn't exist!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Knittingpresentsgifts,how could you possibly know that we differ in most things? We have not even touched on most things. Why do you feel the need to attack and challenge my faith? You know nothing about me or my faith. You seem to think that the things I said couldn't happen, because you've been involved in six churches. Six? Really? Read the book of Revelations! JESUS told John what would happen to the churches! And while your at it, read the parable of the lost sheep and here, I'll type this one out for you. 

Matthew 18:21 Then Peter came to him and said, "Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? Up to seven times?" JESUS said to him, "I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven".

My LORD is a forgiving lord! He doesn't want to lose any of his sheep! I can't see how you think this is bringing his sheep to HIM.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Knittingpresentsgifts,how could you possibly know that we differ in most things? We have not even touched on most things. Why do you feel the need to attack and challenge my faith? You know nothing about me or my faith. You seem to think that the things I said couldn't happen, because you've been involved in six churches. Six? Really? Read the book of Revelations! JESUS told John what would happen to the churches! And while your at it, read the parable of the lost sheep and here, I'll type this one out for you.
> 
> Matthew 18:21 Then Peter came to him and said, "Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? Up to seven times?" JESUS said to him, "I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven".
> 
> My LORD is a forgiving lord! He doesn't want to lose any of his sheep! I can't see how you think this is bringing his sheep to HIM.


I have explained to you how my thoughts and experiences differ in only those things we have discussed to date. As, I said, I do not agree with you on most of the things I've read from you.

You told ME, we differ in "some" things. I responded, from MY perspective, we differ in "most" because I have disagreed with most of your posts I've read on KP to date. (I'm not referring solely to the topic of Christianity. Those posts are the least.)

You are the person to quantify and consequently insult Christians who read your words. Not me.

I did not attack or challenge your faith, in fact, I encouraged it! I explained how you and I have different understandings and the differences of how we choose to live our lives.

I also refused to criticize you for your beliefs, have asked you what you believe and why. Yet, here you are judging me again.

I do not respond to such.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> I have explained to you how my thoughts and experiences differ in only those things we have discussed to date. As, I said, I do not agree with you on most of the things I've read from you to date.
> 
> I do not believe I attacked or challenge your faith. You did, however, insult mine several times.
> 
> ...


I think you'd better read your posts again! You've done more than explain! And you did NOT specify that you were only commenting on things we had discussed so far. You made blanket statements about my beliefs. And I don't appreciate it! You want to talk about judgments?!? Read what you wrote! You started this by trying to "correct" me. I didn't ask for your correction. First you attack me asking for my curriculum vitae and when I give it to you, nothing! Did you find nothing to criticize? I think that you should worry about the plank in your own eye before you worry about the speck in mine.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Knittingpresentsgifts,how could you possibly know that we differ in most things? We have not even touched on most things. Why do you feel the need to attack and challenge my faith? You know nothing about me or my faith. You seem to think that the things I said couldn't happen, because you've been involved in six churches. Six? Really? Read the book of Revelations! JESUS told John what would happen to the churches! And while your at it, read the parable of the lost sheep and here, I'll type this one out for you.
> 
> Matthew 18:21 Then Peter came to him and said, "Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? Up to seven times?" JESUS said to him, "I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven".
> 
> My LORD is a forgiving lord! He doesn't want to lose any of his sheep! I can't see how you think this is bringing his sheep to HIM.


Neb. Darling - please don't fret over that most unpleasant post. She really is the KBG and demands you follow HER party line. Very thoughtless and ridiculous of her, of course.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Knitter,

I'll not argue with you. 

I "started" nothing. Your words say, MOST churches have been invaded by satan.

You "started" by insulting ALL Christians and churches by saying they only want your money, are hypocrites, the congregants are different within their Church than out, MOST are not Biblical (ly based), "most" followers are pretend Christians, "they" judge people and other "crap," etc.

I refused to respond to your comments as I found them extremely offensive and said so prior.

Although your words were only on the topic of Christianity, your comments were widely inappropriate and yes, IMO, incredibly ignorant, ill informed and wrong.

Dare I say from one who admittedly finds no encouragement nor support from a Church and does not fellowship with other Christians.

End of my input. Thank you.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Kniiter,
> 
> I'll not argue with you.
> 
> ...


I never spoke of "all" churches! Those were your words, not mine! You say you refuse to respond and yet, you do! I don't see how you think you're doing GOD'S work. And if this is an example of what they teach in your church, you've made my point for me!


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I never spoke of "all" churches! Those were your words, not mine! You say you refuse to respond and yet, you do! I don't see how you think you're doing GOD'S work. And if this is an example of what they teach in your church, you've made my point for me!


brava to Neb. and an early morning point to her for this post, especially the last line.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> brava to Neb. and an early morning point to her for this post, especially the last line.


Don't rub it in.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Don't rub it in.


Don't be upset. Not worth it one bit. Consider the source. KGB does not have the answers and she probably does not have the questions either. The main tenant of any religion is not to do what is hateful to you to others. If you are doing that, which I feel you are, than you are a good person and a good christian. Feel secure in what you believe and do not let a whipper snapper tell you otherwise.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)




----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> First you attack me asking for my curriculum vitae and when I give it to you, nothing! Did you find nothing to criticize?


I did not attack you, I asked you questions within our conversation, you willingly answered, and I sent you this PM (shown below) on May 14th explaining why I did not respond. It was never my intention to ask for answers so that I could then criticize you. We were having a conversation, and I was interested to hear from you and get to know you a little bit.

(the font is small and difficult to read and dated May 14 08:43:17)
It says - in a PM to Knitter from Nebraska:

_ Good Morning: I enjoyed talking with you yesterday, and I appreciate your willingness to take your time to answer my questions - all of them! :-D

I have family emergencies that surfaced last night, so I won't be on KP other than to read while I sit in waiting rooms, so please don't think I intended to end our conversation.

Be Blessed!
KPG_


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> I did not attack you, I asked you questions within our conversation, you willingly answered, and I sent you this PM on May 14th explaining why I did not respond. It was never my intention to ask for answers so that I could then criticize you.
> 
> (the message is small and difficult to read and dated May 14 08:43:17)
> It says:
> ...


Yes, I understand. But I'd expected that after your family emergency had passed, you'd respond. Now I'm just left wondering why you wanted the information.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> My DH was a Field Service Engineer traveling to diagnose and fix computer manufacturing systems. I threatened to make him wear a Superman T-shirt. He had an antique wooden mallet and a rubber chicken on his desk and occasionally in his briefcase. Sometimes a rubber chicken and a few magic words make all the difference. What's a little dab of frankincense?


Your DH sounds like a lot of fun. A rubber chicken in his briefcase?


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

SQM said:


> Don't be upset. Not worth it one bit. Consider the source. KGB does not have the answers and she probably does not have the questions either. The main tenant of any religion is not to do what is hateful to you to others. If you are doing that, which I feel you are, than you are a good person and a good christian. Feel secure in what you believe and do not let a whipper snapper tell you otherwise.


I agree with you, SQM. Religion is a personal matter--everyone has his or her own path to follow.


----------



## Gerslay (Oct 4, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Yes, we differ in some things. I was baptized as an infant and again as an adult when I CHOSE it for myself! I was baptized in the name of JESUS CHRIST! Not in the name of a church. For many years I sought a church. Here's what I found. The church is only interested in money! Upon your second or third visit, they're trying to get you to pledge your fair share. Most churches are not biblical! They teach a feel good message to get you to come back. I seek the truth that is in the bible. I don't pick and choose what I want to hear. When you're new to a church, everyone falls all over you at the door, to welcome you. Five minutes later, they're back with their cliques and you are all alone. They judge people by what they ate wearing. People are hypocrites! I understand that! We are all sinners. I understand that! But I want a church where people will leave that crap at the door. I haven't found it. I may have made it sound like I NEVER worship and study with others. Not entirely the case. My daughter in law, her mother and I do bible study together. We often talk about scripture as I do with everyone in my life. The bible says whenever two or more of you are gathered in his name... I'm sorry that you believe the only way to CHRIST is through the church. I don't believe that. I would rather be alone in my journey with CHRIST than be with people who pretend to be Christians. I've seen a lot of hate in churches and I don't want to be that kind of Christian. If you've found a church that teaches scripture and encourages people to LIVE it, you are very lucky!


KFN: I, too, found your post disturbing in that it seemed as if you were making blanket statements about Christian churches in general. However, mostly it made me sad; sad for you that youve not found a church where you can sit under the pastors biblical teachings, sad that youve not found a church where you can joyfully support its missions, sad that after being welcomed in a church you didnt feel that you could find a place where you could serve, sad that all you did find was hateful hypocrites that only seemed to care about how people were dressed, sad that youd rather be alone on your journey than sharing yourself with others. All that you have experienced is very sad to me as my experiences have been quite the opposite.

Im glad though that you are able to do bible study with family members; I hope also that you continue to look for a church that works for you and I hope that you find it.


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

SQM said:


> Someone else fell in Purl's web, too. She is very subtle but hilarious. Beware of The Pearl. (I hate Steinbeck.... but not Our Purl.)


I'm showing my age when I say that Steinbeck's books were most of my high school reading list. (Ugh, too, except for Grapes of Wrath.)

Our Purl is one of great price for sure!! ;-) ;-)


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Your DH sounds like a lot of fun. A rubber chicken in his briefcase?


Well, he would have looked a little off wearing it on his head!!


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

maysmom said:


> I'm showing my age when I say that Steinbeck's books were most of my high school reading list. (Ugh, too, except for Grapes of Wrath.)
> 
> Our Purl is one of great price for sure!! ;-) ;-)


Sure is--she's one of the Crown Jewels!


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

SQM said:


> brava to Neb. and an early morning point to her for this post, especially the last line.


Way to go, KFN. I'm sorry that your experiences have been such as they were, but I can't say I'm surprised. Hope you find peace and fellowship.

 :-D


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

maysmom said:


> I'm showing my age when I say that Steinbeck's books were most of my high school reading list. (Ugh, too, except for Grapes of Wrath.)
> 
> Our Purl is one of great price for sure!! ;-) ;-)


Devoured Steinbeck as a teenager in the 1950s.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Please don't fret. We are all familiar with her tactics and abhor them. Ignoring is the only answer. Letting her rants stand alone is more effective than any response we may craft.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I think you'd better read your posts again! You've done more than explain! And you did NOT specify that you were only commenting on things we had discussed so far. You made blanket statements about my beliefs. And I don't appreciate it! You want to talk about judgments?!? Read what you wrote! You started this by trying to "correct" me. I didn't ask for your correction. First you attack me asking for my curriculum vitae and when I give it to you, nothing! Did you find nothing to criticize? I think that you should worry about the plank in your own eye before you worry about the speck in mine.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

maysmom said:


> Well, he would have looked a little off wearing it on his head!!


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

maysmom said:


> I'm showing my age when I say that Steinbeck's books were most of my high school reading list. (Ugh, too, except for Grapes of Wrath.)
> 
> Our Purl is one of great price for sure!! ;-) ;-)


and has definitely not been cast before swine.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

It's on top of my computer now. Working pretty well. If you see one in a magic shop, stock up.



Poor Purl said:


> Your DH sounds like a lot of fun. A rubber chicken in his briefcase?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Sure is--she's one of the Crown Jewels!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

He probably just didn't think of it.



maysmom said:


> Well, he would have looked a little off wearing it on his head!!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

There's a new thread 'The Real War on Women' you may find interesting.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Take a gander at this, ladies. Can you believe it?
> 
> Agency apologizes for mattress ad depicting shooting of Malala Yousafzai
> 'We deeply regret this incident and want to personally apologize to Malala and her family, Ogilvy & Mather says
> ...


And we thought we had seen tacky before? What a horrible exploitative ad.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Knittingpresentsgifts,how could you possibly know that we differ in most things? We have not even touched on most things. Why do you feel the need to attack and challenge my faith? You know nothing about me or my faith. You seem to think that the things I said couldn't happen, because you've been involved in six churches. Six? Really? Read the book of Revelations! JESUS told John what would happen to the churches! And while your at it, read the parable of the lost sheep and here, I'll type this one out for you.
> 
> Matthew 18:21 Then Peter came to him and said, "Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? Up to seven times?" JESUS said to him, "I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven".
> 
> My LORD is a forgiving lord! He doesn't want to lose any of his sheep! I can't see how you think this is bringing his sheep to HIM.


K from N, you do seem to understand the pure essence of practicing your faith. It is not based on an edifice or people you do not really know. It is in your heart and your deeds. My respect for you continues to grow.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

SQM said:


> brava to Neb. and an early morning point to her for this post, especially the last line.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I never spoke of "all" churches! Those were your words, not mine! You say you refuse to respond and yet, you do! I don't see how you think you're doing GOD'S work. And if this is an example of what they teach in your church, you've made my point for me!


I agree with you.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Here we go...I knew Florida's Stand Your Ground Law would get a real workout when it figured in a domestic abuse case. Any takers on this one?

Florida woman seeks self-defense hearing after shooting at husband

_

By Susan Cooper Eastman

JACKSONVILLE, Florida (Reuters) - Attorneys for a north Florida woman facing trial for allegedly firing a gun at her estranged husband went to court on Friday seeking to have charges dropped against her on self-defense grounds.

Marissa Alexander, 33, was initially convicted in 2012 after firing what the mother of three described as a warning shot into the kitchen wall of her home in Jacksonville, and was sentenced to 20 years in jail.

Her conviction was overturned on appeal but prosecutors are seeking a retrial in July.

Alexander said she fired her gun in self defense during a dispute with her husband Rico Gray. Under the state's so-called "Stand Your Ground" self-defense law, a person can use deadly force if they have a reasonable fear of death or serious injury.

The case garnered national attention following the acquittal last year on self-defense grounds of former neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman in the shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin.

Women's groups rallied around Alexander, arguing she was a battered woman who had defended herself against an abusive husband.

Civil rights leader Jesse Jackson visited her in jail and more than 300 demonstrators marched through downtown Jacksonville asking that she be released from jail.

Prosecutors argued on Friday that Alexander's request for a Stand Your Ground hearing should be rejected because she already lost a similar claim before her first trial in 2012. Alexander's attorney Faith Gay said a second Stand Your Ground hearing was merited to present new evidence, including testimony about alleged prior abusive relationships involving Gray.

Judge James Daniel did not issue a ruling at Friday's hearing.

A bill passed by the state legislature last month expands the stand your ground defense to include warning shots, dubbed "Marissa's Law" by her supporters.

Florida Governor Rick Scott hasn't signed the bill yet.

Alexander faces three counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon in the 2010 incident because her husband and his two young sons were in the home when she fired the gun.

After the confrontation began, Alexander fled into the garage to retrieve a gun and returned to the house, pointing it at Gray.

At the prior Stand Your Ground hearing, a judge ruled that if she had truly feared for her life, she would not have returned to the house. _


----------



## soloweygirl (Jun 9, 2012)

I have to agree with the judge on this. She left the room where she was able to cleave the house, go to a neighbors and call the police. The confrontation ended when she left the room. Instead, she chose to get a gun and return to confront her ex. 
.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

soloweygirl said:


> I have to agree with the judge on this. She left the room where she was able to cleave the house, go to a neighbors and call the police. The confrontation ended when she left the room. Instead, she chose to get a gun and return to confront her ex.
> .


Yes, but she had no choice to leave for a moment as the gun was in the garage, leaving her two boys alone with the abuser. Guys like that often assault their children--if she'd taken the time to call the police from a neighbor's house and then waited goodness knows how long for them to arrive it might have been too late. I just don't see that she had any option but leave and return to the house as quickly as she could.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> K from N, you do seem to understand the pure essence of practicing your faith. It is not based on an edifice or people you do not really know. It is in your heart and your deeds. My respect for you continues to grow.


Mine too - we have had our disagreements but the more I know you the more I respect you.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Yes, but she had no choice to leave for a moment as the gun was in the garage, leaving her two boys alone with the abuser. Guys like that often assault their children--if she'd taken the time to call the police from a neighbor's house and then waited goodness knows how long for them to arrive it might have been too late. I just don't see that she had any option but leave and return to the house as quickly as she could.


 :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Yes, but she had no choice to leave for a moment as the gun was in the garage, leaving her two boys alone with the abuser. Guys like that often assault their children--if she'd taken the time to call the police from a neighbor's house and then waited goodness knows how long for them to arrive it might have been too late. I just don't see that she had any option but leave and return to the house as quickly as she could.


That puts a whole different light on the issue. She was a hero to protect her kids from whatever the abuser might have done. Read too many cases of the husband or boy friend killing the child or children to punish the mother. There was a dreadful incident recently in NJ where the father dumped the baby girl into a river buckled into her car seat and left her to drown. That poor baby didn't have a chance.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

MarilynKnits said:


> That puts a whole different light on the issue. She was a hero to protect her kids from whatever the abuser might have done. Read too many cases of the husband or boy friend killing the child or children to punish the mother. There was a dreadful incident recently in NJ where the father dumped the baby girl into a river buckled into her car seat and left her to drown. That poor baby didn't have a chance.


Humans are my least favorite animal. Feh!


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

How's this for hate crime? People are nuts!
From the San Jose Mercury-News

SAN JOSE -- A 20-year-old transient woman suspected of bludgeoning a 4-year-old girl and her father with a tire iron at an East San Jose Wal-Mart targeted them because they are of Asian descent, the Santa Clara County District Attorney's Office said.

Maria Garate, of San Jose, faces one charge each of attempted murder and one count of assault with a deadly weapon, both with hate-crime enhancements because of the racial motive alleged to be behind the Tuesday morning attack. She faces up to life in prison if convicted.

During her brief arraignment Thursday afternoon at the Hall of Justice in San Jose, Garate appeared to be nervously scanning the courtroom before she was sent back to the Santa Clara County jail, where she is being held without bail. Her next court date is May 23.

"Every parent's worst nightmare" was how Deputy District Attorney Kalila Spain described the attack. She said Garate entered the store, off Story Road in the Little Saigon district, with a specific racial intent.

"Based on evidence we do have, the victims were targeted because they are Asian," Spain said. "This is a premeditated, willful and deliberate act on her part."

The episode was reported just before 11 a.m. Tuesday as the young girl and her parents were shopping when police say Garate approached the child and hit her over the head with a blunt metal object that was initially described as a crowbar but is now listed by prosecutors as a lug nut wrench or tire iron. Garate allegedly tried to hit the girl a second time but her father got in the way and was hit instead.

Garate was soon detained by Wal-Mart security personnel until San Jose police arrived to arrest her. The girl was taken to the hospital and is now at home recovering, Spain said.

Authorities said Garate, who was initially said to be 18 but is actually 20, has a criminal record in Santa Clara County, but nothing that foreshadowed what happened Tuesday. The attack took place just over a half mile from a well-known homeless encampment known as "the Jungle." Police said they had contacted Garate there before, but they could not confirm Garate was a resident of the encampment.

A source told this newspaper that the defendant expressed disappointment to interrogators that she did not injure the girl more severely.

When asked if mental-health issues might have played a role in Garate actions, Spain declined to speculate.

"We don't always know why people commit the crimes they do. Sometimes we do, sometimes we don't," she said. "We feel we can prove she went into there to target a family that was Asian."

Video surveillance was given to authorities but is not expected to be made public.

This was the second high-profile attack at the Wal-Mart in just over a year. Haamid Ade Zaid, 34, was arrested in April 2013 after an Easter Sunday melee in which he crashed his car through the front of the store and then started attacking patrons with a blunt object. He was charged with attempted murder, four counts of assault with a deadly weapon, two counts of felony vandalism, three counts of misdemeanor hit and run and one count of reckless driving.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Where were her kids?



soloweygirl said:


> I have to agree with the judge on this. She left the room where she was able to cleave the house, go to a neighbors and call the police. The confrontation ended when she left the room. Instead, she chose to get a gun and return to confront her ex.
> .


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> Yes, but she had no choice to leave for a moment as the gun was in the garage, leaving her two boys alone with the abuser. Guys like that often assault their children--if she'd taken the time to call the police from a neighbor's house and then waited goodness knows how long for them to arrive it might have been too late. I just don't see that she had any option but leave and return to the house as quickly as she could.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

damemary said:


> Where were her kids?


Actually they were his kids, not hers. This is a really interesting case. Here's some more about it from MSNBC:

According to court documents, on July 31, 2010, Alexander left her newborn child in the hospital days after giving birth to visit the home of Rico Gray, her husband. Although Gray and Alexander had just been married in May of 2010, Alexander had not lived in Grays home for the two months prior to the shooting. When Alexander arrived at the home, Gray was not there. She parked her car in the garage, spent the night in the home, but did not see Gray until he returned home the next morning with his two sons.

When Gray returned, the family ate breakfast together without incident. The trouble began when Alexander gave her phone to Gray so he could see pictures of their newborn, who was still in the hospital. After giving the phone to Gray, Alexander went to use the bathroom in the homes master bedroom. While looking at the pictures, Gray noticed text messages between Alexander and her ex-husband, Lincoln Alexander, which prompted Gray to confront Alexander about whether the baby was his or Lincoln Alexanders.

An argument then ensued between Gray and Alexander, and Gray initially prevented Alexander from leaving the bathroom during the altercation. Alexander eventually managed to get around Gray to exit the bathroom.

Alexanders actions following that moment are what differentiate her case from that of George Zimmerman.

After Alexander exited the bathroom and re-entered the master bedroom, Gray left the bedroom and headed to the living room where his sons were located. At that point, Alexander left the master bedroom, passing Gray, his two children, and the unobstructed front and back doors of the house on her way to the garage. Once in the garage, she retrieved a handgun from her vehicles glove box and then went back into the kitchen, where she pointed it in the direction of all three [v]ictims. Although Gray put his hands in the air, Alexander fired the gun, nearly missing [Gray's] head and sending a bullet through the kitchen wall and into the ceiling in the living room.

Gray and his sons fled the home and immediately called 911. Alexander stayed in the home and never called 911.

Many of Alexanders defenders correctly note that Gray had a long history of abusing Alexander and multiple other women. He had previously been charged with domestic battery on at least three separate occasions, including charges in 1994, 2006, and 2009. The 2009 incident against Alexander sent her to the hospital with head injuries after he shoved her into a bathtub.

Alexanders defenders also point to Grays eventual deposition as proof of Alexanders claim of self defense. In that deposition, Gray said he had all but threatened to kill Alexander, that he knew she could not leave the home through the garage because it was broken, and that she never pointed the gun at him or his children.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Sorry SusanM - they all sound like loo -loos.


----------



## Janeway (Nov 22, 2011)

SQM said:


> Humans are my least favorite animal. Feh!


Thought you were a minister or Rabi?


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

SQM said:


> Sorry SusanM - they all sound like loo -loos.


In fact, I agree with you. But if Stand Your Ground permits people to put out purses and wallets to lure potential burglars into their homes, to set traps and lie in wait for hours, to shoot them in the back as they try to flee and then finish the job execution-style, then I don't see why it wouldn't be a reasonable defense in this case.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Janeway said:


> Thought you were a minister or Rabi?


Well yeah but a very jaded one, I guess. I just don't like a lot of human behavior - the human male predator is my least favorite Earthling.

How have you been? I see you all over the place - your recipes sound so yummy. Your daughter looked great on that tractor. She has great hair.

See ya!


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> In fact, I agree with you. But if Stand Your Ground permits people to put out purses and wallets to lure potential burglars into their homes, to set traps and lie in wait for hours, to shoot them in the back as they try to flee and then finish the job execution-style, then I don't see why it wouldn't be a reasonable defense in this case.


How many people are really fishing like that for people to kill? Sounds a tad extreme!


----------



## Jokim (Nov 22, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Again, so incredibly offensive, and not of Christ or the Bible. I've been personally part of the fellowship of six Christian Churches within the USA and the world to date. Not one, is as you described.
> 
> You seem to be very cynical and have no faith or the support of true Christians to support you. Please do not stop seeking a Church where you can find Biblical teachings and the word of God and fellowship with other Christians. Perhaps you are storing your treasures on earth rather than following what the Bible teaches us. I don't know.
> 
> ...


Very well put, again, KPG. A truly inspired post. Thank you.
'Our life on earth is but a shadow.....'
Eternity with God is what awaits us.


----------



## Jokim (Nov 22, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Joeysomma,
> 
> Congrats! Yesterday, the uber Liberal New York Times (employer in this case) who regularly used its influence to suggest and support the phony "War-on-Woman" was appropriately exposed for their hypocrisy of their actions like those we have also seen by the present WH Admin. (actions that are also breaking the laws, too)
> 
> You were so ahead of your time introducing this thread to show the ridiculousness of the Lib and Dem claims about something that doesn't exist!


 :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Thought you were a minister or Rabi?



SQM said:


> Well yeah but a very jaded one, I guess. I just don't like a lot of human behavior - the human male predator is my least favorite Earthling.
> 
> How have you been? I see you all over the place - your recipes sound so yummy. Your daughter looked great on that tractor. She has great hair.
> 
> See ya!


Could you be a minister with rabies?


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Thought you were a minister or Rabi?
> 
> Could you be a minister with rabies?


At the very least. Another ha ha for SQM thanks to PP.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Thought you were a minister or Rabi?
> 
> Could you be a minister with rabies?


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

jeoysomma
I see you are having a bad day again. So sorry. I am enjoying a most pleasant day.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> My day is wonderful!
> 
> This is the day which the Lord hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it. Psalm 118:24 (NKJV)


I thought tomorrow was the day the lord hath made for you. An hour time difference cannot make Saturday, Sunday.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Me too. What do they say about 'the things I can change and knowing the difference?'



Huckleberry said:


> jeoysomma
> I see you are having a bad day again. So sorry. I am enjoying a most pleasant day.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

damemary said:


> Me too. What do they say about 'the things I can change and knowing the difference?'


is My Grace hitting the bottle? What group uses that as a motto?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

AAA?



SQM said:


> is My Grace hitting the bottle? What group uses that as a motto?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> AAA?


Sure. When you're driving you have to know when to change (lanes) and how to tell the difference.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Sure. When you're driving you have to know when to change (lanes) and how to tell the difference.


Our Grace should not be mocked. She is our friend. Our Grace, drink some strong black coffee.


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Thought you were a minister or Rabi?
> 
> Could you be a minister with rabies?


Oh no, I'm sure she's been vaccinated properly--

:twisted:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> Our Grace should not be mocked. She is our friend. Our Grace, drink some strong black coffee.


I didn't mock. She offered AAA as the source, which has nothing to do with drinking, other than drunk driving. (In the UK they call it "drink driving," which sounds so odd.)


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> I didn't mock. She offered AAA as the source, which has nothing to do with drinking, other than drunk driving. (In the UK they call it "drink driving," which sounds so odd.)


Yes, "drink driving" does sound strange.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Maybe it depends upon temporal aspects of the situation. If you are caught while actually drinking - The British way makes sense. If you are arrested after having drunk too much, then the American way is okay.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> Maybe it depends upon temporal aspects of the situation. If you are caught while actually drinking - The British way makes sense. If you are arrested after having drunk too much, then the American way is okay.


Sure.


----------



## Jokim (Nov 22, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> My day is wonderful!
> 
> This is the day which the Lord hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it. Psalm 118:24 (NKJV)


Thank you for posting the info on the true face of abortion, Joeysomma. Consciences are being awakened to the travesty that this is.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

SQM said:


> Maybe it depends upon temporal aspects of the situation. If you are caught while actually drinking - The British way makes sense. If you are arrested after having drunk too much, then the American way is okay.


What about both? What if you've obviously been plastered for hours but they still catch you with a bottle in your hand?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Sure. When you're driving you have to know when to change (lanes) and how to tell the difference.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

maysmom said:


> Oh no, I'm sure she's been vaccinated properly--
> 
> :twisted:


 :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

Jokim said:


> Thank you for posting the info on the true face of abortion, Joeysomma. Consciences are being awakened to the travesty that this is.


For goodness' sake, don't encourage her.

:twisted:


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

maysmom said:


> For goodness' sake, don't encourage her.
> 
> :twisted:


I'm afraid she needs no encouragement to keep going, maysmom. It's bad enough when American conservatives try to decide the abortion issue for their own people--outrageous when they preach to women living in countries torn apart by war and famine that "every pregnancy is a blessing". :hunf:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Some questions if you are so inclined to answer:
> 
> Since you've chosen to ask questions of all of us, I've been thinking about this. Here are my answers in *....*:
> 
> ...


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> I'm afraid she needs no encouragement to keep going, maysmom. It's bad enough when American conservatives try to decide the abortion issue for their own people--outrageous when they preach to women living in countries torn apart by war and famine that "every pregnancy is a blessing". :hunf:


Until it's one of their daughters, huh?


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Today is a beautiful day, the sun is shining and the birds are singing.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Dear little Princess Henriette Poop Chookie has just laid an egg, she is so good. Now only three eggs a week, but that is enough for the two of us.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Had brekky at Pa's this morning, boy was it crowded. Soccer carnival at the oval next door.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

It really was lovely to see all those lively lads playing soccer. And their proud parents there on the sideline.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Some of the lads playing soccer were only little lads, about 8 years of age, some possibly even younger.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Black cockatoos circling and flying so I think we are in for some more rain.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Lots of air traffic this morning, one of Virgin Blue's red coloured planes has just taken off. I bet they are off to Bali. Lucky blighters.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Talking about Bali, have you seen the latest photos of Schapelle Corby. She is not the blonde bombshell she was when she was sent to gaol ten years ago. Now her natural brunette hair colour and weighing in a more than a few kg. heavier.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Also talking about Bali, did you see the news item about Air Asia refusing to carry the motorised wheelchair for the disabled passenger. It was a fold up wheel chair and was to be carried in the cargo hold. They initially denied carriage because of the batteries. He tood the batteries out and said he would buy more batteries in Balia, but they refused to carry the wheelchair.

Air Asia then refused to loan him a chair to get from the airport to his hotel so he had to hire a chair in Bali.

His wife waited in the airport in Australia from 12 midnight to 7 am and caught another flight with Garuda Airlines, it cost her $700. 

Air Asia flights are half that price. I have travelled to Bali on Air Asia but I would not do so again. Whilst it is only a three hour flight I would prefer to pay the extra and fly with a better airline.

The couple who Air Asia refused to carry the wheelchair for are taking the matter further, claiming discrimination against a handicapped person. I hope they win their case.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Oh dear me, not I have forgotten what I was going to say. I am getting old.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

I do hope I have not been too verbose, as I can assure you that this was not my intention.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

EveMCooke said:


> I do hope I have not been too verbose in answering your questions, as I can assure you that this was not my intention.


Brava MCooke. Cut and paste and post this on D and D. Brilliant!


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

SQM said:


> Brava MCooke. Cut and paste and post this on D and D. Brilliant!


 :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

SQM said:


> Brava MCooke. Cut and paste and post this on D and D. Brilliant!


Already done.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Eve, I love your tales. They give us an understanding of Australia that we wouldn't have otherwise. Thanks.



EveMCooke said:


> I do hope I have not been too verbose, as I can assure you that this was not my intention.


----------



## Gerslay (Oct 4, 2011)

.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> My day is wonderful!
> 
> This is the day which the Lord hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it. Psalm 118:24 (NKJV)


joeysomma
and who made the others?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> Already done.


Where do you get the energy to do all that? It can't just be from the gym.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

damemary said:


> knitpresentgifts said:
> 
> 
> > Some questions if you are so inclined to answer:
> ...


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> joeysomma
> and who made the others?


 :XD: :XD:


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Gerslay said:


> .


Gerslay
you pilfered my friends picture.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Why not? She posed for it.



Huckleberry said:


> Gerslay
> you pilfered my friends picture.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Where do you get the energy to do all that? It can't just be from the gym.


shhh, I think my next door neighbour cooks up speed in his garage, so I just go outside and take very deep breaths.

Honestly, I think he does have a drug lab there as the computer room is near his garage and late at night, or early morning, I can often whiff l an ammonia smell in the air. At times it smells as if he is spray painting, at that time of the early morning.

I just ignore it, better safe than sorry. I do not want to mess with anyone doing drugs.


----------



## Gerslay (Oct 4, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> Gerslay
> you pilfered my friends picture.


So sorry Huck, I didn't know you had a friend. You can take it back!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

You know better than that.



Gerslay said:


> So sorry Huck, I didn't know you had a friend. You can take it back!


----------



## Gerslay (Oct 4, 2011)

Ooooooh, I think I'm being scolded by the dame of one-liners!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> Why not? She posed for it.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

They think they are insulting me as the dame of the one-liners. I say it's funny and we need a laugh now and then. What say you all?



Poor Purl said:


> :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

They think they are insulting me as the dame of the one-liners. I say it's funny and we need a laugh now and then. What say you all?



Poor Purl said:


> :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> shhh, I think my next door neighbour cooks up speed in his garage, so I just go outside and take very deep breaths.
> 
> Honestly, I think he does have a drug lab there as the computer room is near his garage and late at night, or early morning, I can often whiff l an ammonia smell in the air. At times it smells as if he is spray painting, at that time of the early morning.
> 
> I just ignore it, better safe than sorry. I do not want to mess with anyone doing drugs.


When I smell ammonia, I assume my DH has seen a bit of dirt on the floor.

If your neighbor's not on drugs, he's probably bipolar. Manic people do things like that. I once met a woman who painted her entire 2-bedroom apartment in one 24-hour period. Now that she's on meds, she doesn't do anything remotely interesting.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> They think they are insulting me as the dame of the one-liners. I say it's funny and we need a laugh now and then. What say you all?


I love them. I wouldn't change a thing. They just have no sense of humor. Or sense, period.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I hear they enjoy the manic stage. I can see why.



Poor Purl said:


> When I smell ammonia, I assume my DH has seen a bit of dirt on the floor.
> 
> If your neighbor's not on drugs, he's probably bipolar. Manic people do things like that. I once met a woman who painted her entire 2-bedroom apartment in one 24-hour period. Now that she's on meds, she doesn't do anything remotely interesting.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thanks for the reality check.



Poor Purl said:


> I love them. I wouldn't change a thing. They just have no sense of humor. Or sense, period.


----------



## mmorris (Sep 5, 2013)

A book about FDR and Eleanor was written by the family author,
Joseph Lash. Both came out very well. A movie that gives an accurate story is "Sunrise at Campobello."


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> knitpresentgifts said:
> 
> 
> > Some questions if you are so inclined to answer:
> ...


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

maysmom said:


> Until it's one of their daughters, huh?


If you're speaking of all conservatives are pro life, you're wrong. We would NEVER want our daughters to have an abortion!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> They think they are insulting me as the dame of the one-liners. I say it's funny and we need a laugh now and then. What say you all?


Hahaha! I think she stole my line!


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> If you're speaking of all conservatives are pro life, you're wrong. We would NEVER want our daughters to have an abortion!


I'm sure no one (anti-abortion, pro-choice, or whatever) WANTS his/her daughter or DIL to have an abortion, but sometimes there's no other rational choice. Rick Santorum is a good example of that--for a long time he attempted to make it law that women be compelled to carry to term no matter what. No exceptions even if the mother-to-be's life was in jeopardy. All that changed when his wife became pregnant with their last child and massive infection set in. His wife took labor-inducing drugs to bring the pregnancy to an end--no choice as she would have died had it be allowed to continue. An absolutely gut-wrenching decision, of course--but the couple really had no other option.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Gerslay said:


> Ooooooh, I think I'm being scolded by the dame of one-liners!


Lovely new avatar Gerslay.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> When I smell ammonia, I assume my DH has seen a bit of dirt on the floor.
> 
> If your neighbor's not on drugs, he's probably bipolar. Manic people do things like that. I once met a woman who painted her entire 2-bedroom apartment in one 24-hour period. Now that she's on meds, she doesn't do anything remotely interesting.


"I pray for manic periods", says The Sloth.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Gerslay said:


> So sorry Huck, I didn't know you had a friend. You can take it back!


Gerslay
my friends informed me that the picture is of you. So you are entitled to post it.


----------



## rocky1991 (May 8, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> If you're speaking of all conservatives are pro life, you're wrong. We would NEVER want our daughters to have an abortion!


You speak for ALL Conservatives? I happen to know a few that have opted for abortion. To each his own world.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

rocky1991 said:


> You speak for ALL Conservatives? I happen to know a few that have opted for abortion. To each his own world.


Well, of course you're right. But I was referring to Susan's comment where she spoke of American conservatives in general. Therefore I responded in general.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> I wonder why he is sentenced to life in prison without parole when he killed his child, when a few days before the child could have been aborted (murdered) and he would have been free as a bird! Double standard! The difference of a few days, means life in prison.


Interesting thought Joey. The manner which he killed his baby is also not much different is it from an abortion. I read the mother is also facing a charge. What a family; who don't deserve one.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> What about both? What if you've obviously been plastered for hours but they still catch you with a bottle in your hand?


Then they should take you and have someone take your car to the cop shop and hold you until your lawyer shows up. The impaired driver is so dangerous that they forfeit their rights to continue driving. Once they sober up they need to be evaluated to see whether it was a single act of stupidity or an ongoing problem that needs treatment.

Getting into a large powerful vehicle capable of moving very fast needs to be seen as a serious responsibility. How many more people have to die at the hands of drunk, drugged up, texting, or otherwise impaired or distracted drivers before feasible reactions can be put in place?

Enough people drive "stupid" sober without the added enhancements of drunkenness or drug influence.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Gerslay said:


> Ooooooh, I think I'm being scolded by the dame of one-liners!


Aren't you one of the people who complains about being disrespected? About people who make snide one liners? And there you go being as rude if not more so. Shame on you for practicing sanctimonious hypocrisy.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

damemary said:


> They think they are insulting me as the dame of the one-liners. I say it's funny and we need a laugh now and then. What say you all?


I say you are the Dame of finding clever repartee and shining light into the tunnels of ignorance and intolerance. Thank you for bringing wit into play when others of us are stunned into silence.


----------



## Gerslay (Oct 4, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> Gerslay
> my friends informed me that the picture is of you. So you are entitled to post it.


Too late the phalarope!

Snappy retorts are only effective when they're SNAPPY!

:thumbdown:


----------



## Gerslay (Oct 4, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> Aren't you one of the people who complains about being disrespected? About people who make snide one liners? And there you go being as rude if not more so. Shame on you for practicing sanctimonious hypocrisy.


Marilyn...after the circus you all put on last night you're really trying to shame _me_? Nice try!


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Gerslay said:


> Marilyn...after the circus you all put on last night you're really trying to shame _me_? Nice try!


Don't worry about it, Marilyn. CINO's have no shame. They feel they can quote the bible until your ears are bleeding and then turn around and behave like a lecherous pig. They think they are free from sin because they have been "reborn". One has to wonder how many times they have been reborn or how many times they will be reborn in the future.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Gerslay said:


> Marilyn...after the circus you all put on last night you're really trying to shame _me_? Nice try!


Gerslay
if you could only match such a performance. No effort being made to shame you, you are doing a splendid job on yourself.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Gerslay said:


> Marilyn...after the circus you all put on last night you're really trying to shame _me_? Nice try!


Guess you are so smug in your little world you are shameless. I still think you are a hypocrite for condemning others for what you yourself do. Feel free to ignore me.

I am nevertheless happy for you that you are past your health scare. I hope you have a long and cancer free life. And I am not being anything other than honest and sincere. My mother was a breast cancer survivor. My 11 years younger than myself cousin was not. I pray for everyone, woman or man, who has this unfortunate illness to have the happy result of successful treatment.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> Don't worry about it, Marilyn. CINO's have no shame. They feel they can quote the bible until your ears are bleeding and then turn around and behave like a lecherous pig. They think they are free from sin because they have been "reborn". One has to wonder how many times they have been reborn or how many times they will be reborn in the future.


BrattyPatty
this reborn stuff helps to keep the Registers full. Have to always find ways to keep the flock in place and donating regularly.


----------



## Gerslay (Oct 4, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> Guess you are so smug in your little world you are shameless. I still think you are a hypocrite for condemning others for what you yourself do. Feel free to ignore me.
> 
> I am nevertheless happy for you that you are past your health scare. I hope you have a long and cancer free life. And I am not being anything other than honest and sincere. My mother was a breast cancer survivor. My 11 years younger than myself cousin was not. I pray for everyone, woman or man, who has this unfortunate illness to have the happy result of successful treatment.


Marilyn, I think you are mistaken, I have condemned no one. If you would show me where I have, I would own it. Matter of fact, I have only been following your advice:

_"Aw, c'mon post. We need a laugh a day. Anyway, some of the love fest gets to be boring, even cloying."_

I do thank you, again, for your good wishes for my 5-year survivor anniversary.

Peace!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> Gerslay
> my friends informed me that the picture is of you. So you are entitled to post it.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> Then they should take you and have someone take your car to the cop shop and hold you until your lawyer shows up. The impaired driver is so dangerous that they forfeit their rights to continue driving. Once they sober up they need to be evaluated to see whether it was a single act of stupidity or an ongoing problem that needs treatment.
> 
> Getting into a large powerful vehicle capable of moving very fast needs to be seen as a serious responsibility. How many more people have to die at the hands of drunk, drugged up, texting, or otherwise impaired or distracted drivers before feasible reactions can be put in place?
> 
> Enough people drive "stupid" sober without the added enhancements of drunkenness or drug influence.


But Marilyn, you haven't answered the important question: Do we call it "drunk driving" (US) or "drink driving" (UK)?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Gerslay said:


> Too late the phalarope!
> 
> Snappy retorts are only effective when they're SNAPPY!
> 
> :thumbdown:


Why would you choose the title of such a serious book to make the point that she's too late with her retort? Have you no respect at all for literature?


----------



## Gerslay (Oct 4, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Why would you choose the title of such a serious book to make the point that she's too late with her retort? Have you no respect at all for literature?


Why? Because the story is meaningful to my family, and because Pieter is a Christ type, and because we have used the line for decades in a private language of sorts that contains no disrespect whatsoever, that's why.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

we have used the line for decades in a private language of sorts that contains no disrespect whatsoever,"

Why do these lines above strike a chill to my very core?


----------



## Gerslay (Oct 4, 2011)

SQM said:


> we have used the line for decades in a private language of sorts that contains no disrespect whatsoever,"
> 
> Why do these lines above strike a chill to my very core?


I don't know SQM...why?


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

I just posted on Denim and Pearls the following in answer to the Post which is included.
-------------------------------
After some hard slogging, you seem to have found a way to communicate - I really do hope it lasts for you. A few times in the past there have been brief periods of discussion but it has never lasted long. 

I only participate in some of those threads once in a while, but in my experience many of those failures came about because some on the left enjoy mocking the right and resorting to stereotypes of Christians, conservatives and southerners rather than engaging in discussion. Last year it was Cheeky (backed up by her buddies) and a few months ago it was Purl (backed up by her buddies) who said these topics weren't really meant for discussions and it was fun to mock. 

The situation isn't going to change as long as that attitude persists. Almost from the day KPG joined KP there have been obnoxious and down right crude comments made to and about her and they continued even when she didn't post on political threads. 

I'm sorry that you choose to excuse their rudeness and hypocrisy on this thread because of posts made on another thread.
---------------------
WCK- 
I am one of THOSE on the left-- I would ask you to read the posts that KPG has made over the past months - I would ask that you read some of the other posts -- it is 6 of 1 and half a dozen of the other. 

I think that if I defend KIN she will be treated even worse here than she already has been. But be honest -- she has come onto our thread and treated us like people, not attacked us -- over the past week we have felt she really does want to find a place where discussion can take place. I feel the same way -- She has actually respected our position, even though she hasn't moved from hers.I now think she feels just as strongly about hers and your beliefs as you all do. I know we don't agree at all about lots of things. However I do agree that trying to discuss instead of attacking is the only possible way there can be a possible way of working together for the future of this wonderful country. 

WCK - are you really trying to say that the nastiness is one sided? 

read the posts -- from KPG, Janeway, and some ( not all )of the others. It works both ways. 

There are basic differences that will never change, however, is there not any place in the scheme of things when discussion can take place, and where we can listen, and at least understand that the person on the other side really believes what they are saying, even if we don't? I have many strong beliefs that are different than those on the Right -- but does that make me evil? I have been on here off and on since these threads opened before the first election. they are getting nastier and nastier and dreadful things are being said on both sides. Personal insults which are repeated , and which cause a reaction and on and on- What does anyone gain?

You and I are from a place where there is very little real hate in our Political situation in Canada.. 
We are fortunate - I never have in any way condemned anyone because he is a conservative, or a liberal. I don't think you have either . We have always - as has the States found a way to somehow keep our country whole, even with different opinions. People believe different things. I don't imply that anyone is going to hell because they don't agree with me. I don't believe that all Conservatives are evil -- I know they aren't. I know there are Conservatives who have liberals and vise versa, in their families. 


For some reason the threads here have gotten so overwhelmingly nasty that there is little chance of anyone ever being able to have a conversation, and yet there is still kindness shown once in awhile. I have friends through the workshops who are very 'Conservative " and they know I am a liberal some even from these threads- never once has there been any unkind or even hinted nastiness. I think KIB and now I, are trying to at least stop the nastiness and are trying to accept that we will never agree , but all but you and me and one or two others at the most -are Americans and legitimately want what is good for their country.

That is why I wonder why KIB is being attacked for at least trying to find a way to discuss rather than fight. 

I for one applaud her.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thank you. I'm beginning to understand how we work together. Let's keep working at it.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Awesome responses! Thanks for sharing! Even though we disagree on the details, I think most of us agree on the big picture. None of us want to dismantle and destroy our country but have different visions on how to fix it. We have more in common than we think.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I agree. Rational medical decisions should not be completely discarded for philosophical reasons IMHO.



susanmos2000 said:


> I'm sure no one (anti-abortion, pro-choice, or whatever) WANTS his/her daughter or DIL to have an abortion, but sometimes there's no other rational choice. Rick Santorum is a good example of that--for a long time he attempted to make it law that women be compelled to carry to term no matter what. No exceptions even if the mother-to-be's life was in jeopardy. All that changed when his wife became pregnant with their last child and massive infection set in. His wife took labor-inducing drugs to bring the pregnancy to an end--no choice as she would have died had it be allowed to continue. An absolutely gut-wrenching decision, of course--but the couple really had no other option.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

MarilynKnits said:


> Then they should take you and have someone take your car to the cop shop and hold you until your lawyer shows up. The impaired driver is so dangerous that they forfeit their rights to continue driving. Once they sober up they need to be evaluated to see whether it was a single act of stupidity or an ongoing problem that needs treatment.
> 
> Getting into a large powerful vehicle capable of moving very fast needs to be seen as a serious responsibility. How many more people have to die at the hands of drunk, drugged up, texting, or otherwise impaired or distracted drivers before feasible reactions can be put in place?
> 
> Enough people drive "stupid" sober without the added enhancements of drunkenness or drug influence.


 :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thank you so much for the understanding words. That's what I try to do.



MarilynKnits said:


> I say you are the Dame of finding clever repartee and shining light into the tunnels of ignorance and intolerance. Thank you for bringing wit into play when others of us are stunned into silence.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Huckleberry said:


> Gerslay
> if you could only match such a performance. No effort being made to shame you, you are doing a splendid job on yourself.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

No. No understanding at all.



Poor Purl said:


> Why would you choose the title of such a serious book to make the point that she's too late with her retort? Have you no respect at all for literature?


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

damemary said:


> Thank you. I'm beginning to understand how we work together. Let's keep working at it.


I hope I haven't made things worse by my post on both threads.

I fear from the reaction I have. I had to try.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Plebeian0463 said:


> .... at least this woman had a choice.
> 
> Good for her for CHOOSING what was best for her, and her family and what she THINKS was best for the fetus.
> 
> ...


Excellent point, Plebian. Yes, it wasn't all that long ago that forced sterilization--of the mentally disabled, of those with epilepsy, and anyone else considered to be a "genetic weakling"--was the order of the day. Control over one aspect of women's fertility will inevitably lead to control over all. It's a frightening thought.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Plebeian0463 said:


> KfN. KPG asked you those questions because she's trying to determine if you are a "fake" or not.
> 
> If you're not a "purist" RWer then you must be a sneaky liar.
> 
> She's also doing it to use against you in the future.


Plebeian0463
you are partially on her trail, but in addition she was hoping she could top us $wise. I am quite sure that most of us have surpassed her in every which way. I have met some of my Knit-mates personally and am impressed by what they have accomplished. Let's face it KPG is a very lonely creature and has a dire need to look important.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> I hope I haven't made things worse by my post on both threads.
> 
> I fear from the reaction I have. I had to try.


Don't worry about it!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Gerslay said:


> Why? Because the story is meaningful to my family, and because Pieter is a Christ type, and because we have used the line for decades in a private language of sorts that contains no disrespect whatsoever, that's why.


Ah. Thank you. I thought you were using the words without the context. Apologies.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Plebeian0463 said:


> Well, that's why we can tell the anti-choice people are not actually anti-abortion because if they were, there are MUCH more effective ways to lessen the # of abortions than trying to make it illegal.
> 
> The most effective way to end abortions is to prevent unwanted pregnancies in the first place and that can only be done by respecting women's choices.
> 
> ...


I agree with this; The most effective way to end abortions is to prevent unwanted pregnancies in the first place and that can only be done by respecting women's choices.


----------



## Gerslay (Oct 4, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Ah. Thank you. I thought you were using the words without the context. Apologies.


Thank you. On second thought, I can see where it does appear inappropriate and I probably should not have used the line.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> No. No understanding at all.


Actually, I was wrong. Gerslay was nice enough to give me an answer, when she could have told me MYOB.


----------



## Phyllis Stein (May 18, 2014)

Hello! This looks like an interesting group here! I am looking forward to getting to know all of you and hopefully you will let me join in with this thread.
Phyll


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Phyllis Stein said:


> Hello! This looks like an interesting group here! I am looking forward to getting to know all of you and hopefully you will let me join in with this thread.
> Phyll


Definitely interesting!!!


----------



## Phyllis Stein (May 18, 2014)

I have been reading the different forums today when I came across these threads regarding the War On Women. I am very interested in politics and history. There are some very informed women here.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Phyllis Stein said:


> Hello! This looks like an interesting group here! I am looking forward to getting to know all of you and hopefully you will let me join in with this thread.
> Phyll


Welcome, Phyllis. Yes, we're a lively group.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Phyllis Stein said:


> I have been reading the different forums today when I came across these threads regarding the War On Women. I am very interested in politics and history. There are some very informed women here.


How do you do? It is very nice to meet you. I hope you find your experience with us both educational and fun. Do you have a crash helmet?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Phyllis Stein said:


> I have been reading the different forums today when I came across these threads regarding the War On Women. I am very interested in politics and history. There are some very informed women here.


You seem very nice!


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

SQM said:


> How do you do? It is very nice to meet you. I hope you find your experience with us both educational and fun. Do you have a crash helmet?


Yes...and a flak jacket.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Yes...and a flak jacket.


I have neither. Whatever will I do?


----------



## Phyllis Stein (May 18, 2014)

I have seen a few very bizarre postings about Sharia Law in Michigan. I did waste a few minutes reading the link provided and can only say "RUBBISH!"


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Phyllis Stein said:


> I have been reading the different forums today when I came across these threads regarding the War On Women. I am very interested in politics and history. There are some very informed women here.


What other threads have you visited? The ladies on denim and pearls are very friendly.


----------



## Phyllis Stein (May 18, 2014)

Yes, SQM I do have a crash helmet. I use it while I skateboard every single day. (NOT) Hmm, a flak jacket?
After backreading I guess one would be necessary to deflect the bullets.


----------



## Phyllis Stein (May 18, 2014)

Really? I don't see how abortion is related to the War on Women unless the Supreme Court was to ban it.


----------



## Phyllis Stein (May 18, 2014)

It seems to me that abortion is the lesser topic discussed on this thread. 
My thoughts on abortion go like this:
"If you need one get one. If you do not need one, do not have one." Every woman has a different circumstance and I believe it is her right to choose what is best for her.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Go back to the original post on this thread.
> 
> http://www.knittingparadise.com/t-233288-1.html


I'm just curious, Joey--we certainly know your stand on abortion regarding American women. But does your view hold true as far as women in other countries/societies are concerned?


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Ms. Stein, You sound too good to be true. The ball is still in your court. Swing away!


----------



## Phyllis Stein (May 18, 2014)

I can see the reason for the helmet now. 

I do not believe that abortion is murder. I do not believe that Sharia law has taken over Michigan.
I do believe that if abortion was murder, then it would never have passed the Supreme Court in this great country.
If abortion was murder, there would be no instructions in the bible telling how to cause one.

Phyll


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Gerslay said:


> Ooooooh, I think I'm being scolded by the dame of one-liners!


She's good, ain't she?


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Phyllis Stein said:


> I can see the reason for the helmet now.
> 
> I do not believe that abortion is murder. I do not believe that Sharia law has taken over Michigan.
> I do believe that if abortion was murder, then it would never have passed the Supreme Court in this great country.
> ...


Very, very interesting about the bible having instructions for inducing abortions. Please cite chapter and verse so we can discuss it further.


----------



## Phyllis Stein (May 18, 2014)

I have read all of the posts on this thread. I still do not believe that abortion has anything to do with the War on Women. I have stated my beliefs on this subject.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Murder is murder, any place in the world. And abortion is murder.


It seems pretty amazing that I don't yet know this after hundreds and hundreds of pages on the topic--but would you be able to consider abortion in any circumstances, such as rape, incest, or if the mother's life was seriously at risk?


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> If you're speaking of all conservatives are pro life, you're wrong. We would NEVER want our daughters to have an abortion!


You might not WANT your daughter to have an abortion, but what if your daughter wanted to?


----------



## Phyllis Stein (May 18, 2014)

This is for you SQM.
The Bible's guide to abortion 
I don't know how I missed this before, but I did. There is a biblical way of having an abortion. A method that is not only approved by God, it was invented by him. He describes it himself in the book of Numbers (5:11-31). 
It's a bit long and complicated, so I'll break it up for you. 

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying ... If any man's wife go aside, and commit a trespass against him, And a man lie with her carnally, and it be hid from the eyes of her husband, and be kept close, and she be defiled, and there be no witness against her, neither she be taken with the manner; Numbers 5:11-13
The first thing to notice is the context. This procedure is only intended for married couples, specifically for any man that suspects that his wife has been messing around. No proof is necessary; suspicion alone is sufficient to God. 

Then shall the man bring his wife unto the priest, and he shall bring her offering for her, the tenth part of an ephah of barley meal; he shall pour no oil upon it, nor put frankincense thereon ... And the priest shall take holy water in an earthen vessel; and of the dust that is in the floor of the tabernacle the priest shall take, and put it into the water ... And the priest shall set the woman before the LORD ... and the priest shall have in his hand the bitter water that causeth the curse.... (5:15-18)
OK, I am leaving some of the details out here, so if you're going to try this at home, make sure to follow God's instructions exactly. There's no guarantee any of this will work otherwise. 

And the priest shall charge her by an oath, and say unto the woman, If no man have lain with thee, and if thou hast not gone aside to uncleanness with another instead of thy husband, be thou free from this bitter water that causeth the curse: But if thou hast gone aside to another instead of thy husband, and if thou be defiled, and some man have lain with thee beside thine husband: Then the priest shall charge the woman with an oath of cursing, and the priest shall say unto the woman, The LORD make thee a curse and an oath among thy people, when the LORD doth make thy thigh to rot, and thy belly to swell; And this water that causeth the curse shall go into thy bowels, to make thy belly to swell, and thy thigh to rot: And the woman shall say, Amen, amen. 5:19-22
This is the part that fooled me. I get the idea that if the woman has been unfaithful, then the magic bitter water will do something awful to her. But I wasn't sure just what. What does it mean to have your belly swell and your thigh rot? But then I saw the footnote in the NIV that said it meant this: "cause you to be barren and have a miscarrying womb." 

So if the woman is guilty (had sex with someone besides her husband), then the bitter water will make her unable to have children in the future. And if she is pregnant at the time, it will abort the pregnancy. 

And when he hath made her to drink the water, then it shall come to pass, that, if she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman shall be a curse among her people. And if the woman be not defiled, but be clean; then she shall be free, and shall conceive seed. This is the law of jealousies, when a wife goeth aside to another instead of her husband, and is defiled; Or when the spirit of jealousy cometh upon him, and he be jealous over his wife, and shall set the woman before the LORD, and the priest shall execute upon her all this law. Then shall the man be guiltless from iniquity, and this woman shall bear her iniquity.5:27-31
It's all part of God's wondrous Law of Jealousies. God's magical abortion procedure. A priest, some bitter water, and a wife that you think might have been unfaithful. Priceless. So if God has his own abortion procedure, abortion can't be wrong, right?


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I have neither. Whatever will I do?


Just hang in and get ready to duck! grin


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Phyllis Stein said:


> This is for you SQM.
> The Bible's guide to abortion
> I don't know how I missed this before, but I did. There is a biblical way of having an abortion. A method that is not only approved by God, it was invented by him. He describes it himself in the book of Numbers (5:11-31).
> It's a bit long and complicated, so I'll break it up for you.
> ...


Whoa! I bet fear of that little ceremony kept any number of wives in line.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Excellent Job Stein. What was the scariest part was when it says 'or when the spirit of jealousy cometh upon him" So the wife can be totally faithful and yet would have to endure that torment for a crazy husband. What bible version are you using? I never remember reading this.


----------



## Phyllis Stein (May 18, 2014)

susanmos2000 said:


> Whoa! I bet fear of that little ceremony kept any number of wives in line.


Ah, so that's how you get the quotes up!

It's funny (not really) that no mention of the man being unfaithful should have his tallywhacker fall off.


----------



## Phyllis Stein (May 18, 2014)

Oh, enough with the sob stories already, joeysomma.
Are you that desperate to hang on to to a thread that has escaped you? From what I have read so far, all of your posts are the same. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

SQM said:


> Excellent Job Stein. What was the scariest part was when it says 'or when the spirit of jealousy cometh upon him" So the wife can be totally faithful and yet would have to endure that torment for a crazy husband. What bible version are you using? I never remember reading this.


Actually I could imagine a smart woman using this icky little ceremony to her advantage. What better way for a virtuous woman to get an insanely jealous husband off her back than to volunteer for this? It would be like taking a lie-detector test and, as it was sanctioned by God, the guy would have to abide by the results.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> Actually I could imagine a smart woman using this icky little ceremony to her advantage. What better way for a virtuous woman to get an insanely jealous husband off her back than to volunteer for this? It would be like taking a lie-detector test and, as it was sanctioned by God, the guy would have to abide by the results.


since we do not know the ingredients of the drink, we can also suppose that anyone who drank it would be poisoned just to prove the husband right.


----------



## Phyllis Stein (May 18, 2014)

SQM said:


> Excellent Job Stein. What was the scariest part was when it says 'or when the spirit of jealousy cometh upon him" So the wife can be totally faithful and yet would have to endure that torment for a crazy husband. What bible version are you using? I never remember reading this.


I am using "The New International Version," SQM.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> A woman who has an abortion because it is inconvenient is very selfish. A baby is a gift from God. Why are so many willing to destroy God's gift?
> 
> Mother With Cancer Sacrifices Her Life for Her Unborn Baby


The mother-to-be made a very noble gesture--but it was _her_ gesture. Completely voluntary. Do you feel that women should be compelled by law to carry their pregnancies to term in cases like these?


----------



## Phyllis Stein (May 18, 2014)

SQM said:


> since we do not know the ingredients of the drink, we can also suppose that anyone who drank it would be poisoned just to prove the husband right.


There were many herbs used as abortifacients in biblical times. The ancient Greeks had a few of their own recipes.


----------



## Phyllis Stein (May 18, 2014)

You are all over the board on this subject, joeysomma.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Oh, jeebus, now it's about Hillary Clinton. I do believe that you have totally lost your marbles, joey. That is someone else's opinion as usual.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> A Response To The Hillary Clinton Abortion Video
> 
> Posted By Frank Camp on May 17, 2014


This is so annoying, Joey. Why all the cut-and-paste jobs--can't you voice your opinions in your own words?


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> This is so annoying, Joey. Why all the cut-and-paste jobs--can't you voice your opinions in your own words?


Obviously not, Susan. Phyllis had it right. "ZZZZZZZ"


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Don't worry. Your heart is always in the right place.



Designer1234 said:


> I hope I haven't made things worse by my post on both threads.
> 
> I fear from the reaction I have. I had to try.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Misunderstanding resolved. Sorry if I added to the confusion.



Poor Purl said:


> Actually, I was wrong. Gerslay was nice enough to give me an answer, when she could have told me MYOB.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Welcome. No invitation necessary. Ask questions, voice oppinions, join in.



Phyllis Stein said:


> Hello! This looks like an interesting group here! I am looking forward to getting to know all of you and hopefully you will let me join in with this thread.
> Phyll


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Some might say 'wild & crazy.'



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Definitely interesting!!!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> Don't worry. Your heart is always in the right place.


I agree!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Stand behind someone and duck low.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I have neither. Whatever will I do?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

You'll quickly learn whose links to ignore. Some are crazy rumors designed to upset the naive.....rather than to generate a reasonable discussion.



Phyllis Stein said:


> I have seen a few very bizarre postings about Sharia Law in Michigan. I did waste a few minutes reading the link provided and can only say "RUBBISH!"


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> Stand behind someone and duck low.


What if I've no one to stand behind? Its lonely over here, on the right. :lol:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Phyllis Stein said:


> Really? I don't see how abortion is related to the War on Women unless the Supreme Court was to ban it.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

My sentiments exactly. I believe it is a legal decision best left to a woman and her physician. The rest is just inflammatory talk.

Joeysomma believes this thread is hers to control (untrue) because she opened it long ago.



Phyllis Stein said:


> It seems to me that abortion is the lesser topic discussed on this thread.
> My thoughts on abortion go like this:
> "If you need one get one. If you do not need one, do not have one." Every woman has a different circumstance and I believe it is her right to choose what is best for her.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thank you.



alcameron said:


> She's good, ain't she?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

You've reminded me why I avoid reading the Bible.This seems slanted against women. Maybe I'm too much a feminista.



Phyllis Stein said:


> This is for you SQM.
> The Bible's guide to abortion
> I don't know how I missed this before, but I did. There is a biblical way of having an abortion. A method that is not only approved by God, it was invented by him. He describes it himself in the book of Numbers (5:11-31).
> It's a bit long and complicated, so I'll break it up for you.
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Would never work now.



susanmos2000 said:


> Whoa! I bet fear of that little ceremony kept any number of wives in line.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Phyllis Stein said:


> Ah, so that's how you get the quotes up!
> 
> It's funny (not really) that no mention of the man being unfaithful should have his tallywhacker fall off.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: Where's Lorena when you need her?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

You catch on fast.



Phyllis Stein said:


> Oh, enough with the sob stories already, joeysomma.
> Are you that desperate to hang on to to a thread that has escaped you? From what I have read so far, all of your posts are the same. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

To what end? I say, rid yourself of the insanely jealous husband and get a cat.



susanmos2000 said:


> Actually I could imagine a smart woman using this icky little ceremony to her advantage. What better way for a virtuous woman to get an insanely jealous husband off her back than to volunteer for this? It would be like taking a lie-detector test and, as it was sanctioned by God, the guy would have to abide by the results.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

She is also an expert at cut & paste, as you'll notice.



Phyllis Stein said:


> You are all over the board on this subject, joeysomma.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

We'll protect you. Lefties don't agree on everything....except 'that's what friends are for.'



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> What if I've no one to stand behind? Its lonely over here, on the right. :lol:


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

damemary said:


> We'll protect you. Lefties don't agree on everything....except 'that's what friends are for.'


You are safe behind me if you are under 5'3". or can climb to the top of the canopy with me.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

damemary said:


> To what end? I say, rid yourself of the insanely jealous husband and get a cat.


Well, that's the modern solution--in Biblical times, though, I don't imagine it was quite that easy.

It's interesting--I think I'm interpreting this passage a bit differently than the rest of you ladies. The general consensus seems to be that this little ceremony was carried out for the purpose of completing a women's subjugation to her spouse. Probably true--but I also see it as proof that irrational jealousy in men was recognized as a problem as long long time ago, and that the priests of the day realized that logic and reason were absolutely useless in dealing with it.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

SQM said:


> You are safe behind me if you are under 5'3". or can climb to the top of the canopy with me.


No good--that poor little branch would surely crack under the weight of the dozen or so of us.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Murder is murder, any place in the world. And abortion is murder.


In your mind, and possibly in your faith, but not in everyone's faith or everyone's mind. Why should your faith take precedence over mine?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> Oh, jeebus, now it's about Hillary Clinton. I do believe that you have totally lost your marbles, joey. That is someone else's opinion as usual.


Shall we vote on this?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> This is so annoying, Joey. Why all the cut-and-paste jobs--can't you voice your opinions in your own words?


She has. "Abortion is murder." No extenuating circumstances. No choice. No thought, either.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> Misunderstanding resolved. Sorry if I added to the confusion.


Then later she admitted that maybe she was being too flip.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> What if I've no one to stand behind? Its lonely over here, on the right. :lol:


Bob and weave. Or knit and spin.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Well, that's the modern solution--in Biblical times, though, I don't imagine it was quite that easy.
> 
> It's interesting--I think I'm interpreting this passage a bit differently than the rest of you ladies. The general consensus seems to be that this little ceremony was carried out for the purpose of completing a women's subjugation to her spouse. Probably true--but I also see it as proof that irrational jealousy in men was recognized as a problem as long long time ago, and that the priests of the day realized that logic and reason were absolutely useless in dealing with it.


I think you're right. Doesn't it say that the man may wrongly think his wife was "defiled"? So here's the test: if the man is just jealous, the wife comes through unscathed, though she had to drink the dust from the floor; if she cheated on him, her belly swells up and something disgusting happens to her thigh. In no case does anything happen to the man (except for looking like a fool when nothing happens).


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Folks, joeysomma is tuity fruity. Someone is driving her. Wonder what sins she confessed to to have to post all this stuff. I thought, money would do away with sins but times are a changing I guess.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> In your mind, and possibly in your faith, but not in everyone's faith or everyone's mind. Why should your faith take precedence over mine?


It doesn't, of course, except in her mind. I just don't understand why she keeps flailing at it. She's certainly persistent. But WHY this ONE topic?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Hillary Clinton makes more sense to me than joey does.



Poor Purl said:


> Shall we vote on this?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Bob and weave. Or knit and spin.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

And all because of jealousy and lack of trust. I'm glad I don't have to live that way. Wish no one did.



Poor Purl said:


> I think you're right. Doesn't it say that the man may wrongly think his wife was "defiled"? So here's the test: if the man is just jealous, the wife comes through unscathed, though she had to drink the dust from the floor; if she cheated on him, her belly swells up and something disgusting happens to her thigh. In no case does anything happen to the man (except for looking like a fool when nothing happens).


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Very interesting thought I hadn't considered. Is this some kind of penance directed by a 'church?'



Huckleberry said:


> Folks, joeysomma is tuity fruity. Someone is driving her. Wonder what sins she confessed to to have to post all this stuff. I thought, money would do away with sins but times are a changing I guess.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> She has. "Abortion is murder." No extenuating circumstances. No choice. No thought, either.


Yes, she did say that--which is exactly what's wrong. No issue is that cut and dried. Even the big one "Thou shall not kill" is subject (quite reasonably, of course) to a little interpretation, such as in cases of self-defense and (for those who believe in it) the death penalty.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> But Marilyn, you haven't answered the important question: Do we call it "drunk driving" (US) or "drink driving" (UK)?


Whatever the local custom calls for is correct in the local milieu. Thus "drunk driving" sounds silly in the UK and "drink driving" sounds silly in the US. And either one is stupid driving.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Yes, she did say that--which is exactly what's wrong. No issue is that cut and dried. Even the big one "Thou shall not kill" is subject (quite reasonably, of course) to a little interpretation, such as in cases of self-defense and (for those who believe in it) the death penalty.


And war. Even if it's unjustified, I guess.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Designer1234 said:


> I hope I haven't made things worse by my post on both threads.
> 
> I fear from the reaction I have. I had to try.


Stay strong. Your gentle voice of reason is so sensible and honorable that it is sure to penetrate some hitherto closed minds.

When I was studying to become a teacher, one of the professors told us to persevere with quiet passion. If we influenced one student a year toward a happier more productive life that school year was a success.

Every goal is reached one small step at a time.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> Stay strong. Your gentle voice of reason is so sensible and honorable that it is sure to penetrate some hitherto closed minds.
> 
> When I was studying to become a teacher, one of the professors told us to persevere with quiet passion. If we influenced one student a year toward a happier more productive life that school year was a success.
> 
> Every goal is reached one small step at a time.


=======
Thanks --- I believe there are people on the other thread who wish the same as I do. It is hard to go against the others and 
just say what you feel, sometimes.

You are one of the voices of reason --


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

BTW does anyone know how the Hobby Lobby case now before the Supreme Court is shaping up? I believe a ruling was expected in June, and that's just a couple of weeks off.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I agree with this; The most effective way to end abortions is to prevent unwanted pregnancies in the first place and that can only be done by respecting women's choices.


And to educate women about the scope of choices. And to provide the means to avoid unwanted pregnancies. Let us face it. Human nature and hormones will always trump over abstinence. Women need viable and healthy means to manage their lives including their bodies.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Phyllis Stein said:


> Hello! This looks like an interesting group here! I am looking forward to getting to know all of you and hopefully you will let me join in with this thread.
> Phyll


Phyllis, always feel welcome to join any thread to which your interest leads you. One of the lovely benefits of KP is that we can watch or unwatch, participate or just audit, any topic that tickles our fancy.

Most people welcome different perspectives and viewpoints. It all adds to our knowledge of the world outside our personal space.

Some people feel a proprietary ownership of threads they have started. But some kids took home the ball when their team was behind in a game, too. You will see all manner of personalities.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

I would like to explain my point of view of calling Christians "unchristian" when it comes to their opposition to the government "taking care of the poor." They say they have compassion for the poor but that the government isn't the way to go about it. There is so much poverty in the US that we as individuals can't and aren't making a dent in the problem. We can feed the homeless one meal a week or make hats for them in the winter or support shelters for them, but individuals can't possibly take care of the problem through individual support, and it's naive to think we can. There are just too many poor people and too much need, and however good a Christian tries to be through individual works and/or the effort of a church, it's NOT ENOUGH. The government must have programs to address poverty because charity does too little. And that's why I think a Christian is not very Christian when s/he opposes government programs for the poor. So they can stop with the rationalizing!
This is in response to something written "over there" from someone who doesn't want to post "over there."


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Phyllis Stein said:


> Ah, so that's how you get the quotes up!
> 
> It's funny (not really) that no mention of the man being unfaithful should have his tallywhacker fall off.


We have to remember that religion was created by males and the narratives were written by males. Their dangling participles are and were precious to them. Think of all the show offs in tight jeans.

It is the same self serving perspective that has mammography machines mashing our assets. If the test for testicular cancer were using the same sort of machinery, how soon do you think they would switch to sonograms or 3D imaging?


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Well, that's the modern solution--in Biblical times, though, I don't imagine it was quite that easy.
> 
> It's interesting--I think I'm interpreting this passage a bit differently than the rest of you ladies. The general consensus seems to be that this little ceremony was carried out for the purpose of completing a women's subjugation to her spouse. Probably true--but I also see it as proof that irrational jealousy in men was recognized as a problem as long long time ago, and that the priests of the day realized that logic and reason were absolutely useless in dealing with it.


If you were in the position of Dinah with 12 tough brothers, you might be safe. But then, the story leaves us to wonder whether she really wanted the brothers to intervene.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Designer1234 said:


> =======
> Thanks --- I believe there are people on the other thread who wish the same as I do. It is hard to go against the others and
> just say what you feel, sometimes.
> 
> You are one of the voices of reason --


I so respect you that your comment touches me deeply. Thank you.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> And to educate women about the scope of choices. And to provide the means to avoid unwanted pregnancies. Let us face it. Human nature and hormones will always trump over abstinence. Women need viable and healthy means to manage their lives including their bodies.


Agreed with both of you -


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> We have to remember that religion was created by males and the narratives were written by males. Their dangling participles are and were precious to them. Think of all the show offs in tight jeans.
> 
> It is the same self serving perspective that has mammography machines mashing our assets. If the test for testicular cancer were using the same sort of machinery, how soon do you think they would switch to sonograms or 3D imaging?


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Well, that's the modern solution--in Biblical times, though, I don't imagine it was quite that easy.
> 
> It's interesting--I think I'm interpreting this passage a bit differently than the rest of you ladies. The general consensus seems to be that this little ceremony was carried out for the purpose of completing a women's subjugation to her spouse. Probably true--but I also see it as proof that irrational jealousy in men was recognized as a problem as long long time ago, and that the priests of the day realized that logic and reason were absolutely useless in dealing with it.


You have something there Susan.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Murder is deliberately killing someone, just because you want to end their life.


My Catholic Bible says nothing about murder. It simply reads "You shall not kill". Most feel that there can be extenuating circumstances, and that being forced to kill in self-defense or in war is regrettable but necessary. How then can the question of abortion have one answer that's applicable to all women worldwide in every conceivable circumstance?


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> This baby was miscarried at 13 weeks. Definitely not a blob of cells. How can anyone say this is not a baby.


How can anyone claim that every pregnancy is a blessing from God?


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> This baby was miscarried at 13 weeks. Definitely not a blob of cells. How can anyone say this is not a baby.


Because such people deny the truth especially when it doesn't suit their purposes or isn't convenient.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

alcameron said:


> I would like to explain my point of view of calling Christians "unchristian" when it comes to their opposition to the government "taking care of the poor." They say they have compassion for the poor but that the government isn't the way to go about it. There is so much poverty in the US that we as individuals can't and aren't making a dent in the problem. We can feed the homeless one meal a week or make hats for them in the winter or support shelters for them, but individuals can't possibly take care of the problem through individual support, and it's naive to think we can. There are just too many poor people and too much need, and however good a Christian tries to be through individual works and/or the effort of a church, it's NOT ENOUGH. The government must have programs to address poverty because charity does too little. And that's why I think a Christian is not very Christian when s/he opposes government programs for the poor. So they can stop with the rationalizing!
> This is in response to something written "over there" from someone who doesn't want to post "over there."


Al- you express it so well. It seems that compassion is slowly disappearing among those who so strongly believe that those who are unable for so many different reasons to find work and who are starving -- and in need, deliberately chose to go hungry, and deliberately choose to avoid work. I don't believe that the majority of Americans who need help, choose those things. Certainly, there are some -- but to make flat statements and to put everyone in the same 'box' is so uncaring in my opinion.

To me if 1 or 2 out of l00 take advantage - what about the 98% who don't take advantage and are legitimate? They are all tarred with the same brush by the far right - who are supposedly true Christians -- It is hard for me to understand. 'Do unto others as ye would have them do unto you' - what if something happens in their lives which leaves them debilitated, would they have more compassion for others then? What if the house they worked for all their lives catches fire or is flooded or is hit by a tornado, what if illness causes a job loss, what if a large company is closed down or goes out of business, what if a man who has worked for l0 years and has a family is laid off and there is no work there?? There has to be programs to help those -- in my opinion. The more we all help personally the better but it has to be something that is acknowledged by your Government - new training, help for those who are really poor. Programs to help them get back on their feet -- how can a compassionate person say it is not their business?

YOu are correct -- individuals can't help that much -- it has to be programs set up by the government to help in these situations.

Some of the very rich do care, a lot don't. How can a millionaire not help those in need? something I always wonder.

What about those who were in Hurricane Sandy and lost everything including jobs? are they dead beats? Some are still trying to re build their lives. They didn't choose to suddenly be without a home and a job and an income. It seems to be a blind spot in their eyes -- because the Government is liberal? Thank God there are liberals who do care. I am not saying all those on the right don't care - but certainly a lot of them don't if what we read and hear when they speak is the case.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> Folks, joeysomma is tuity fruity. Someone is driving her. Wonder what sins she confessed to to have to post all this stuff. I thought, money would do away with sins but times are a changing I guess.


Some*one* or some*thing*? It's like OCD - she obsesses and then feels compelled to post, with no outcome.

But, Huck, please tell me, how money does away with sins. This is info that everyone could use.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> Hillary Clinton makes more sense to me than joey does.


Michelle Bachmann makes more sense than joey. What am I saying? No she doesn't.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> Whatever the local custom calls for is correct in the local milieu. Thus "drunk driving" sounds silly in the UK and "drink driving" sounds silly in the US. And either one is stupid driving.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## peacegoddess (Jan 28, 2013)

Designer 1234 I eagerly await a response by the anti government folks to your reasoned post regarding homeless ness and poverty.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> We have to remember that religion was created by males and the narratives were written by males. Their dangling participles are and were precious to them. Think of all the show offs in tight jeans.
> 
> It is the same self serving perspective that has mammography machines mashing our assets. If the test for testicular cancer were using the same sort of machinery, how soon do you think they would switch to sonograms or 3D imaging?


Marilyn, how early do you wake up in the morning? Your mind is sharp as a stiletto. "Dangling participles," indeed.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Designer1234 said:


> =======
> Thanks --- I believe there are people on the other thread who wish the same as I do. It is hard to go against the others and
> just say what you feel, sometimes.
> 
> You are one of the voices of reason --


Off topic: What is that gorgeous thing you're wearing in your avatar?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Murder is deliberately killing someone, just because you want to end their life.


So the death penalty gives rise to murder.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> This baby was miscarried at 13 weeks. Definitely not a blob of cells. How can anyone say this is not a baby.


Has it occurred to you that somebody reading this may have had a miscarriage and has had to relive the experience by seeing your picture? Do you ever think before you post? Or is your purpose so important that it overrides all compassion and common sense?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> My Catholic Bible says nothing about murder. It simply reads "You shall not kill". Most feel that there can be extenuating circumstances, and that being forced to kill in self-defense or in war is regrettable but necessary. How then can the question of abortion have one answer that's applicable to all women worldwide in every conceivable circumstance?


It can't, and it doesn't.

The Hebrew Bible uses the word for "murder," not "kill," in the commandments, so that killing that is necessary and justifiable is not a sin. Jewish law also distinguishes clearly between abortion and murder. Murder applies only to living, out-of-the-womb people.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> How can anyone claim that every pregnancy is a blessing from God?


What a sad picture.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Has it occurred to you that somebody reading this may have had a miscarriage and has had to relive the experience by seeing your picture? Do you ever think before you post? Or is your purpose so important that it overrides all compassion and common sense?


Yes, I'd like to thank her for that. I had two miscarriages at that gestation. Really made my day.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Excellent point Susan. Well put.



susanmos2000 said:


> Yes, she did say that--which is exactly what's wrong. No issue is that cut and dried. Even the big one "Thou shall not kill" is subject (quite reasonably, of course) to a little interpretation, such as in cases of self-defense and (for those who believe in it) the death penalty.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

MarilynKnits said:


> Whatever the local custom calls for is correct in the local milieu. Thus "drunk driving" sounds silly in the UK and "drink driving" sounds silly in the US. And either one is stupid driving.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: Bravo! Excellent interpretation.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

alcameron said:


> And war. Even if it's unjustified, I guess.


 :thumbup: Another good point.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

MarilynKnits said:


> Stay strong. Your gentle voice of reason is so sensible and honorable that it is sure to penetrate some hitherto closed minds.
> 
> When I was studying to become a teacher, one of the professors told us to persevere with quiet passion. If we influenced one student a year toward a happier more productive life that school year was a success.
> 
> Every goal is reached one small step at a time.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: Onward! Fight the good fight, and persevere with quiet passion. ( I like that.)


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

And you both influence many others. Our temperaments are different but our goals similar.



Designer1234 said:


> =======
> Thanks --- I believe there are people on the other thread who wish the same as I do. It is hard to go against the others and
> just say what you feel, sometimes.
> 
> You are one of the voices of reason --


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

MarilynKnits said:


> Phyllis, always feel welcome to join any thread to which your interest leads you. One of the lovely benefits of KP is that we can watch or unwatch, participate or just audit, any topic that tickles our fancy.
> 
> Most people welcome different perspectives and viewpoints. It all adds to our knowledge of the world outside our personal space.
> 
> Some people feel a proprietary ownership of threads they have started. But some kids took home the ball when their team was behind in a game, too. You will see all manner of personalities.


 :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Absolutely true. Well put, as always Al.



alcameron said:


> I would like to explain my point of view of calling Christians "unchristian" when it comes to their opposition to the government "taking care of the poor." They say they have compassion for the poor but that the government isn't the way to go about it. There is so much poverty in the US that we as individuals can't and aren't making a dent in the problem. We can feed the homeless one meal a week or make hats for them in the winter or support shelters for them, but individuals can't possibly take care of the problem through individual support, and it's naive to think we can. There are just too many poor people and too much need, and however good a Christian tries to be through individual works and/or the effort of a church, it's NOT ENOUGH. The government must have programs to address poverty because charity does too little. And that's why I think a Christian is not very Christian when s/he opposes government programs for the poor. So they can stop with the rationalizing!
> This is in response to something written "over there" from someone who doesn't want to post "over there."


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

MarilynKnits said:


> We have to remember that religion was created by males and the narratives were written by males. Their dangling participles are and were precious to them. Think of all the show offs in tight jeans.
> 
> It is the same self serving perspective that has mammography machines mashing our assets. If the test for testicular cancer were using the same sort of machinery, how soon do you think they would switch to sonograms or 3D imaging?


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: Not really smiling though. Ouch.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

My heart breaks.



susanmos2000 said:


> How can anyone claim that every pregnancy is a blessing from God?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I appreciate Bill & Melinda Gates, Warren Buffet et al who are joining forces with immense capital to make the world a better place.

It is a shame it is so rare.

Buy multimillion $ houses? Drive $M car? I feel pity these people are so shallow.



Designer1234 said:


> Al- you express it so well. It seems that compassion is slowly disappearing among those who so strongly believe that those who are unable for so many different reasons to find work and who are starving -- and in need, deliberately chose to go hungry, and deliberately choose to avoid work. I don't believe that the majority of Americans who need help, choose those things. Certainly, there are some -- but to make flat statements and to put everyone in the same 'box' is so uncaring in my opinion.
> 
> To me if 1 or 2 out of l00 take advantage - what about the 98% who don't take advantage and are legitimate? They are all tarred with the same brush by the far right - who are supposedly true Christians -- It is hard for me to understand. 'Do unto others as ye would have them do unto you' - what if something happens in their lives which leaves them debilitated, would they have more compassion for others then? What if the house they worked for all their lives catches fire or is flooded or is hit by a tornado, what if illness causes a job loss, what if a large company is closed down or goes out of business, what if a man who has worked for l0 years and has a family is laid off and there is no work there?? There has to be programs to help those -- in my opinion. The more we all help personally the better but it has to be something that is acknowledged by your Government - new training, help for those who are really poor. Programs to help them get back on their feet -- how can a compassionate person say it is not their business?
> 
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Catholic Church allowed for buying indulgences. Not sure now.



Poor Purl said:


> Some*one* or some*thing*? It's like OCD - she obsesses and then feels compelled to post, with no outcome.
> 
> But, Huck, please tell me, how money does away with sins. This is info that everyone could use.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Close but no cigar. Nice try.



Poor Purl said:


> Michelle Bachmann makes more sense than joey. What am I saying? No she doesn't.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Her smile.



Poor Purl said:


> Off topic: What is that gorgeous thing you're wearing in your avatar?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> So the death penalty gives rise to murder.


 :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I thought the same. Shame. Condolences.



Poor Purl said:


> Has it occurred to you that somebody reading this may have had a miscarriage and has had to relive the experience by seeing your picture? Do you ever think before you post? Or is your purpose so important that it overrides all compassion and common sense?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Condolences for your loss and the thoughtless reminder.



aw9358 said:


> Yes, I'd like to thank her for that. I had two miscarriages at that gestation. Really made my day.


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

alcameron said:


> I would like to explain my point of view of calling Christians "unchristian" when it comes to their opposition to the government "taking care of the poor." They say they have compassion for the poor but that the government isn't the way to go about it. There is so much poverty in the US that we as individuals can't and aren't making a dent in the problem. We can feed the homeless one meal a week or make hats for them in the winter or support shelters for them, but individuals can't possibly take care of the problem through individual support, and it's naive to think we can. There are just too many poor people and too much need, and however good a Christian tries to be through individual works and/or the effort of a church, it's NOT ENOUGH. The government must have programs to address poverty because charity does too little. And that's why I think a Christian is not very Christian when s/he opposes government programs for the poor. So they can stop with the rationalizing!
> This is in response to something written "over there" from someone who doesn't want to post "over there."


So true. There was an article in our local paper about how the ppoor and homeless people among us are hated and feared. I
daresay that most churches don't have an abundance of resources (wasn't faith-based aid pushed by Bush at one time?)


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

peacegoddess said:


> Designer 1234 I eagerly await a response by the anti government folks to your reasoned post regarding homeless ness and poverty.


I have posted my feelings before but no one has ever acknowledged my questions. It seems so clear to me. I will keep on - they do not want to accept even the possibility that they might possibly be being led down the garden path - or be actually wrong -- that way they would have to say something good about the Liberals - rarely is that possible - because we suggest the possibility that there are the majority who are NOT dead beats - they ignore mine and other questions. sad indeed.


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

damemary said:


> :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: Where's Lorena when you need her?


Sharpening her knives??

:twisted: :twisted:


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> This is so annoying, Joey. Why all the cut-and-paste jobs--can't you voice your opinions in your own words?


Maybe there are none to be found.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

aw9358 said:


> Yes, I'd like to thank her for that. I had two miscarriages at that gestation. Really made my day.


I had 3 - and the picture made me sick to my stomach. I spent 45 days lying on my back in the hospital trying to save one of my babies when I was 24 years old - I miscarried anyway and I saw my little girl -- It is something that haunts me and always will. - I am insulted and hurt by some of Joey's posts but this one took the cake.

Once again -- absolutely no compassion -- just putting everyone in one box -- no greys - she is right and no one else knows anything. I also had a SIDs death and lost a 53 year old son - so her holier than thou attitude sickens me. I still believe with every bit of my beliefs that a woman has the right to decide for herself - men do - men never have to pay -- I am married to a wonderful, kind, loving man -- and even he agrees with me -- he shared my grief- I am sure you and others know what it is like - It affects how you look at life. I don't blame anyone for my miscarriages but to have the uncaring posting of pictures like that is 
despicable. I resent her insulting us by posting anything or everything she can find without any regards to the truth. She never 'discusses' she preaches - She never talks -- she preaches -- she has taken it upon herself (or himself) I don't care which, to insist that she alone knows Gods Plan.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Just another way of passing the buck....or lack of it. The government's $$$ goes to fund illegitimate wars....and into Halliburton's deep pockets.



maysmom said:


> So true. There was an article in our local paper about how the ppoor and homeless people among us are hated and feared. I
> daresay that most churches don't have an abundance of resources (wasn't faith-based aid pushed by Bush at one time?)


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

Phyllis Stein said:


> Yes, SQM I do have a crash helmet. I use it while I skateboard every single day. (NOT) Hmm, a flak jacket?
> After backreading I guess one would be necessary to deflect the bullets.


A flame suit would be handy, too--welcome, Ms. Stein, peace and blessings to you!!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

maysmom said:


> Sharpening her knives??
> 
> :twisted: :twisted:


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: Hopefully.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I'm so sorry you are reminded in such a thoughtless way.



Designer1234 said:


> I had 3 - and the picture made me sick to my stomach. I spent 45 days lying on my back in the hospital trying to save one of my babies - I miscarried anyway and I saw my little girl -- It is something that haunts me and always will. - I am insulted and hurt by some of Joey's posts but this one took the cake.
> 
> Once again -- absolutely no compassion -- just putting everyone in one box -- no greys - she is right and no one else knows anything. I also had a SIDs death and lost a 53 year old son - so her holier than thou attitude sickens me. I still believe with every bit of my beliefs that a woman has the right to decide for herself - men do - men never have to pay -- I am married to a wonderful, kind, loving man -- and even he agrees with me -- he shared my grief- I am sure you and others know what it is like - It affects how you look at life. I don't blame anyone for my miscarriages but to have the uncaring posting of pictures like that is
> despicable. I resent her insulting us by posting anything or everything she can find without any regards to the truth. She never 'discusses' she preaches - She never talks -- she preaches -- she has taken it upon herself (or himself) I don't care which, to insist that she alone knows Gods Plan.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

aw9358 said:


> Yes, I'd like to thank her for that. I had two miscarriages at that gestation. Really made my day.


So sorry. But you did have at least one heckuva live birth. How is your stunning dancing daughter?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> Catholic Church allowed for buying indulgences. Not sure now.


I knew about those, but I think the Church ended them a couple of centuries ago.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

What's a few centuries out of 2100 years?



Poor Purl said:


> I knew about those, but I think the Church ended them a couple of centuries ago.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> Her smile.


Absolutely right. But let me rephrase my question: What is that gorgeous knitted thing in the avatar?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Designer1234 said:


> I had 3 - and the picture made me sick to my stomach. I spent 45 days lying on my back in the hospital trying to save one of my babies - I miscarried anyway and I saw my little girl -- It is something that haunts me and always will. - I am insulted and hurt by some of Joey's posts but this one took the cake.
> 
> Once again -- absolutely no compassion -- just putting everyone in one box -- no greys - she is right and no one else knows anything. I also had a SIDs death and lost a 53 year old son - so her holier than thou attitude sickens me. I still believe with every bit of my beliefs that a woman has the right to decide for herself - men do - men never have to pay -- I am married to a wonderful, kind, loving man -- and even he agrees with me -- he shared my grief- I am sure you and others know what it is like - It affects how you look at life. I don't blame anyone for my miscarriages but to have the uncaring posting of pictures like that is
> despicable. I resent her insulting us by posting anything or everything she can find without any regards to the truth. She never 'discusses' she preaches - She never talks -- she preaches -- she has taken it upon herself (or himself) I don't care which, to insist that she alone knows Gods Plan.


Shirley, you've suffered so many tragedies that you could have turned into a sour, antisocial loner. Yet you manage to remain a functioning, relatively cheerful adult. We all have a lot to learn from you.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> So sorry. But you did have at least one heckuva live birth. How is your stunning dancing daughter?


Actually, I had two live ones after the misery. Thank you for asking. They're both wonderful (of course, I would say that). My daughter has at last been offered a dance job with a Manchester-based "movement theatre". It helps disadvantaged young people locally. I don't know too much about it yet, but it looks right up her street. The opportunity came from someone she knows, who recommended her for an audition. It's often whom you know that matters, not what you know.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

aw9358 said:


> Actually, I had two live ones after the misery. Thank you for asking. They're both wonderful (of course, I would say that). My daughter has at last been offered a dance job with a Manchester-based "movement theatre". It helps disadvantaged young people locally. I don't know too much about it yet, but it looks right up her street. The opportunity came from someone she knows, who recommended her for an audition. It's often whom you know that matters, not what you know.


I know exactly how you feel. I have two wonderful children and Grand children now and I am thankful every day for them. I feel you are a kindred spirit - Congratulations to your daughter!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Your daughter knows dance and knows people. She's bound to find a job she enjoys.



aw9358 said:


> Actually, I had two live ones after the misery. Thank you for asking. They're both wonderful (of course, I would say that). My daughter has at last been offered a dance job with a Manchester-based "movement theatre". It helps disadvantaged young people locally. I don't know too much about it yet, but it looks right up her street. The opportunity came from someone she knows, who recommended her for an audition. It's often whom you know that matters, not what you know.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

KPG, on page 109 on this thread you listed questions, presumably to get to know us better. I answered your list of questions, in good faith, devoting time and thought to my answers. I also posted them on Denim & Pearls, assuming you spend more time there. Have you read them? I will read your feedback. Thank you.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> Murder is deliberately killing someone, just because you want to end their life.


If this is your viewpoint then :-

What is your stand on capital punishment?

Where do you stand on war?

What are your views on conscription, with particular reference to sending conscripts into a war zone?

Am I psychic as I seem to be receiving your answers, and the answers of your pals on the right, to my questions as I type them...........Stony silence is their overwhelming response.

And NO I am not in favour of killing, maiming, harming or murdering another human being


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> I have posted my feelings before but no one has ever acknowledged my questions. It seems so clear to me. I will keep on - they do not want to accept even the possibility that they might possibly be being led down the garden path - or be actually wrong -- that way they would have to say something good about the Liberals - rarely is that possible - because we suggest the possibility that there are the majority who are NOT dead beats - they ignore mine and other questions. sad indeed.


I agree that the majority are not deadbeats. But could we not TRY to eliminate the deadbeats? Could anyone explain to me why people are allowed to use ebt cards at liquor stores, strip clubs and casinos? If we care so much about the needy, why is this allowed? If mommy or daddy is using their "food" funds for things such as this, children are still going hungry. Why can't we at least try? In the past, people were only allowed to buy real food with their food stamps! Can someone explain to me why we should buy them beer, cigarettes, soda etc? Why is someone, even ONE person allowed to buy lobster with their ebt card? The taxpayers footing the bill, likely can't afford lobster. The whole system has been changed to encourage cheating. Why can't we fix it, so that those who need help get it and those who cheat, don't?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Plebian0462 said:


> This is what I mean about Joey being sexually turned on by the idea of abortion.
> 
> She really doesn't care at all about the issue, other than it may give her the opportunity to post "abortion porn".
> 
> These people truly are sickos.


Abortion porn. A new entry in my lexicon. Thank you.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

aw9358 said:


> Actually, I had two live ones after the misery. Thank you for asking. They're both wonderful (of course, I would say that). My daughter has at last been offered a dance job with a Manchester-based "movement theatre". It helps disadvantaged young people locally. I don't know too much about it yet, but it looks right up her street. The opportunity came from someone she knows, who recommended her for an audition. It's often whom you know that matters, not what you know.


I think it almost always depends on whom you know, though you have to have the ability as well. It's wonderful that she finally has a dance job. I hope she enjoys it and continues to do what she loves.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> Just another way of passing the buck....or lack of it. The government's $$$ goes to fund illegitimate wars....and into Halliburton's deep pockets.


THIS is what we should focus on! The outright robbing of the people! The bankrupting of our nations!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

maysmom said:


> A flame suit would be handy, too--welcome, Ms. Stein, peace and blessings to you!!


Peace and blessings?!? Really?!?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Plebian0462 said:


> KfN. KPG asked you those questions because she's trying to determine if you are a "fake" or not.
> 
> If you're not a "purist" RWer then you must be a sneaky liar.
> 
> She's also doing it to use against you in the future.


I know!


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I agree that the majority are not deadbeats. But could we not TRY to eliminate the deadbeats? Could anyone explain to me why people are allowed to use ebt cards at liquor stores, strip clubs and casinos? If we care so much about the needy, why is this allowed? If mommy or daddy is using their "food" funds for things such as this, children are still going hungry. Why can't we at least try? In the past, people were only allowed to buy real food with their food stamps! Can someone explain to me why we should buy them beer, cigarettes, soda etc? Why is someone, even ONE person allowed to buy lobster with their ebt card? The taxpayers footing the bill, likely can't afford lobster. The whole system has been changed to encourage cheating. Why can't we fix it, so that those who need help get it and those who cheat, don't?


Certainly -if it is proven that someone is misusing the system they should be held accountable -- but you are punishing everyone who is poor for those who are taking advantage. Doesn't that worry you? Personally, I feel that many more are NOT abusing the system than are -- but those on the Right are once again willing to ignore those who are legitimate and keep them from assistance because of those who are not legitimate.

All in one box -- again. I can't see a problem of trying to find ways to find out who is in legitimate need, and give them assistance but you have to be SURE that a person is not using the system properly -- it still doesn't make it right to refuse to help those who legitimately need help. From the sounds of things more and more people, including veterans are falling through the cracks and the Conservatives seem quite content with that as long as 
the Government does nothing to help. That is where they draw the line about assistance -- it is an excuse for avoiding reality. It seems to me that the way things are going , more and more will really need assistance as the feeling that all don't deserve help will add to the problem in the future as the children and dependents grow up poor, hungry and without hope.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

Thanks to Dame, Purl and Designer for your good wishes for my daughter. I know she'll make the most of her opportunity - she is a very hard-working young woman, with talent to go with it. I do feel we are kindred spirits, so thank you for including me.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

EveMCooke said:


> If this is your viewpoint then :-
> 
> What is your stand on capital punishment?
> 
> ...


I guess I'd be considered one of "pals on the right". I'd like to answer!

Capital punishment? I'm all for it! But for those who have committed first degree murder. What is the point in locking them up and supporting them? I understand compassion for those who have committed a crime of passion or those who committed involuntary manslaughter. But those who commit first degree murder have no redemptive value in a society. Before you accuse me of not being Christian like, there is biblical precedence for capital punishment.

War? Real war where people are defending their country and their loved ones is honorable. We should defend ourselves. The problem lies with the fake wars our country has involved itself in. All of our wars have been conquests for money, oil and power! They SAY we're fighting for democracy but that's crap! The globalists who own the military industrial complex (and the politicians) make billions, even trillions off of war. They own the companies that make the war machines and they own the banks who loan the money to both sides! War is big business!

Conscription? Absolutely not! No one should be forced to fight in a war that is used for evil purposes! If our country were attacked, I would like to think that every person who was able, would come to defend her! And likewise with our allies. But most wars are not honorable and no one should have to give up their life so that others may gain wealth and power!

No stony silence from me!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Plebian0462 said:


> .... she has always, along with some of her other pals resembled one of those mentally disturbed homeless people who ramble and spout bible verses and conspiracy theories etc...
> 
> Something seriously demented.


Gee, now you're commenting on your own posts?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> Certainly -if it is proven that someone is misusing the system they should be held accountable -- but you are punishing everyone who is poor for those who are taking advantage. Doesn't that worry you? Personally, I feel that many more are NOT abusing the system than are -- but those on the Right are once again willing to ignore those who are legitimate and keep them from assistance because of those who are not legitimate.
> 
> All in one box -- again. I can't see a problem of trying to find ways to find out who is in legitimate need, and give them assistance but you have to be SURE that a person is not using the system properly -- it still doesn't make it right to refuse to help those who legitimately need help. From the sounds of things more and more people, including veterans are falling through the cracks and the Conservatives seem quite content with that as long as
> the Government does nothing to help. That is where they draw the line about assistance -- it is an excuse for avoiding reality. It seems to me that the way things are going , more and more will really need assistance as the feeling that all don't deserve help will add to the problem in the future as the children and dependents grow up poor, hungry and without hope.


How does it punish people to only allow them to buy food with their food stamps? How can anyone justify the use of food stamps at liquor stores, strip clubs and casinos? What possible good can come from this? Dont try to tell me they're just going to buy a loaf of bread at the liquor store! Explain to me why taxpayers should pay for this! If we're truly trying to help people, why is this allowed?


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

peacegoddess said:


> Designer 1234 I eagerly await a response by the anti government folks to your reasoned post regarding homeless ness and poverty.


Goddess, you will probably get responses, but don't expect rational ones.

If we do not have compassion for the least among us and act upon that compassion do what we can to help make their lot less of a burden, what does that say about us as human beings?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> Goddess, you will probably get responses, but don't expect rational ones.
> 
> If we do not have compassion for the least among us and act upon that compassion do what we can to help make their lot less of a burden, what does that say about us as human beings?


Are you saying my response isn't rational?


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> How does it punish people to only allow them to buy food with their food stamps? How can anyone justify the use of food stamps at liquor stores, strip clubs and casinos? What possible good can come from this? Dont try to tell me they're just going to buy a loaf of bread at the liquor store! Explain to me why taxpayers should pay for this! If we're truly trying to help people, why is this allowed?


Well, of course SNAP benefits should only be spent on food--and in fact the law prohibits using those cards on purchases of alcohol, liquor, tobacco products, or hot food items.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Well, of course SNAP benefits should only be spent on food--and in fact the law prohibits using those cards on purchases of alcohol, liquor, tobacco products, or hot food items.


And yet, they are allowed! Criminals rarely obey the laws. Again,why should hard working taxpayers pay for this? Why is it even allowed? Why are ebt cards accepted anywhere? Seems like that could be fixed. Why don't they fix it?


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> How does it punish people to only allow them to buy food with their food stamps? How can anyone justify the use of food stamps at liquor stores, strip clubs and casinos? What possible good can come from this? Dont try to tell me they're just going to buy a loaf of bread at the liquor store! Explain to me why taxpayers should pay for this! If we're truly trying to help people, why is this allowed?


You are putting words in my mouth. I believe there has to be something set up where those who are not using the system properly and agree that there has to be some guidelines and some ways to control those who don't follow the rules. I would rather err on the side of making a mistake than stop people who really need it from getting help. YOu tell me how they can be stopped. My point is still that there are the majority of those in that situation who are NOT taking advantage of the system. What about them - you are looking at it from the negative side and I am looking at Government help from a positive side. There are people who take advantage, in business, in all life experiences. I just cannot accept that it is right to treat people who are suffering legitimatley as if they were dead beats and therefore refuse to accept setting up Govt. agencies .

HOWEVER, until that is done I don't believe that those who are not taking advantage but who are legitimately poor and who are down trodden for whatever reason, should be told they are useless and be kept from getting help from Government agencies. Yes, I am a liberal and it is because of that type of attitude that I have become a liberal. I believe we must have compassion for those who are suffering and poor. They should be taught to go to school - they should be helped to find jobs, they should know that if they are hungry there is a net for them. The should know that their fellow citizens should have compassion and feel "There but for the Grace of God go I" -

The day that I begrudge my help (taxes included) to my fellow citizens who need it - is the day I give up everything I am and believe.

It has been stated often by those on the other thread that all those on welfare are deadbeats and they refuse to vote for the Government to do anything to help them and that they do not want to pay their hard earned taxes to support all the deadbeats, they never talk about those who legitimately need help. At least I have not seen any of them admit that they are willing to pay taxes for those who are not deadbeats. They talk about the abuses, but they are not willing to work towards having a fair number agencies to help those who need it.

I see nothing positive in their outlook and I see selfishness.

YOu are the only one who had discussed this with me or with others. That is why I accept your opinions and until my dying breath will try to show you mine. I am happy someone finally is willing to talk instead of stonewall everything we try to say and accomplish.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> We'll protect you. Lefties don't agree on everything....except 'that's what friends are for.'


I know this is out of order, but I forgot to comment on it earlier. THANK YOU damemary!!! There is hope for the world! People can disagree and still be friends! I can't begin to explain what this means to me.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> This baby was miscarried at 13 weeks. Definitely not a blob of cells. How can anyone say this is not a baby.


joeysomma
so who had HIS HANDS in this happening? Not a compassionate
God, is he.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

maysmom said:


> So true. There was an article in our local paper about how the ppoor and homeless people among us are hated and feared. I
> daresay that most churches don't have an abundance of resources (wasn't faith-based aid pushed by Bush at one time?)


I feel blessed to live in my small part of the world:

We have a county food bank for which the library collects and delivers weekly (the program is called BOBO buy one bring one)

The Post Office has a yearly bag distribution for customers to fill and leave for the delivery person to bring to the food bank

The Boy Scouts have the same sort of program once of twice a year

The County recycling program leaves a bag to be filled and left for the next time recycling is picked up

Most of the churches and synagogues solicit food donations from members and make monthly deliveries to the food bank

A gentleman who is a recovering alcoholic, sober for over 20 years, has created a haven for the unemployed and underemployed that provides meals, shelter, job training, health care, and clean used clothing. The community supports him with donations of cash and clothing, doctors come to provide health care. I belong to two organizations that knit hats, scarves, gloves and blankets for his clients. I attend a synagogue with volunteers who drive the soup kitchen truck to the needy who cannot come to the soup kitchen located in a local church. This gentleman does not live any more luxuriously than his clients. He lives in the shelter house, eats at the soup kitchen, and dresses in donated clothes. His wings are hidden under flannel shirts.

Jewish Family Services provides job training and family counseling at affordable rates, free if unaffordable, to anyone in the community, no race or religion is denied needed help.

These are just the ones I know enough about to discuss them.

We are a very affluent county, one of the richest in the country, but we still have the needy among us. At least we are trying to make a dent and help as many as possible.

What is needed? Jobs. Training for real jobs that are available. Affordable housing that is safe and secure. That is for a start.

Whenever I donate time, goods, or money, I say a little prayer, thankful that I can be on the giving end, not the receiving one.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> You are putting words in my mouth. I believe there has to be something set up where those who are not using the system properly and agree that there has to be some guidelines and some ways to control those who don't follow the rules. I would rather err on the side of making a mistake than stop people who really need it from getting help. YOu tell me how they can be stopped. My point is still that there are the majority of those in that situation who are NOT taking advantage of the system. What about them - you are looking at it from the negative side and I am looking at Government help from a positive side. There are people who take advantage, in business, in all life experiences. I just cannot accept that it is right to treat people who are suffering legitimatley as if they were dead beats and therefore refuse to accept setting up Govt. agencies .
> 
> HOWEVER, until that is done I don't believe that those who are not taking advantage but who are legitimately poor and who are down trodden for whatever reason, should be told they are useless and be kept from getting help from Government agencies. Yes, I am a liberal and it is because of that type of attitude that I have become a liberal. I believe we must have compassion for those who are suffering and poor. They should be taught to go to school - they should be helped to find jobs, they should know that if they are hungry there is a net for them. The should know that their fellow citizens should have compassion and feel "There but for the Grace of God go I" -
> 
> The day that I begrudge my help (taxes included) to my fellow citizens who need it - is the day I give up everything I am and believe.


Oh PLEASE, don't misunderstand me. It was not my intention to put words in your mouth! The point that I was trying to make is that if we would eliminate most opportunities for theft, you would not see objection and criticism of the program. I don't believe that anyone wants to let the poor, starve. Most are compassionate. But it should bother everyone when even one person buys alcohol etc...instead of feeding their kids. The only place we differ is on the gravity of the problem. You think it is negligible. I think its larger. How large? I don't know! But I do know that we should be trying to eliminate the theft and corruption. Theft and corruption on any level, drives me crazy!


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> And yet, they are allowed! Criminals rarely obey the laws. Again,why should hard working taxpayers pay for this? Why is it even allowed? Why are ebt cards accepted anywhere? Seems like that could be fixed. Why don't they fix it?


Knitter from Nebraska
ever tried to find out how many people are here because of the Wars Bush created? Lots of them and many of those people have been here and on Welfare for years now, speak little or no English and make no effort to change that. Their children get all sorts of assistance for College while ours are in debt for often a decade and more. They also make no effort to integrate into our culture.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Oh PLEASE, don't misunderstand me. It was not my intention to put words in your mouth! The point that I was trying to make is that if we would eliminate most opportunities for theft, you would not see objection and criticism of the program. I don't believe that anyone wants to let the poor, starve. Most are compassionate. But it should bother everyone when even one person buys alcohol etc...instead of feeding their kids. The only place we differ is on the gravity of the problem. You think it is negligible. I think its larger. How large? I don't know! But I do know that we should be trying to eliminate the theft and corruption. Theft and corruption on any level, drives me crazy!


I reread this and want to clarify. I did not mean the "please" sarcastically. I wanted to make it clear that I wasn't criticizing you.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> I feel blessed to live in my small part of the world:
> 
> We have a county food bank for which the library collects and delivers weekly (the program is called BOBO buy one bring one)
> 
> ...


Marilyn, my country is the same -- I am proud of the number of people who care and understand that there ARE needy people - most, through no fault of their own need help. actually I don't really care if some of those who take advantage do so if they are still in the same situation, no jobs, illness, addictions which are just about impossible to recover from, I don't try to use them as an excuse to turn people away. you are a very kind person and I am glad to know you. we are on the same page.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> And yet, they are allowed! Criminals rarely obey the laws. Again,why should hard working taxpayers pay for this? Why is it even allowed? Why are ebt cards accepted anywhere? Seems like that could be fixed. Why don't they fix it?


Yes, people often do try to break the laws--but the penalties for doing so with SNAP benefits (both those who buy non-food items and the storekeepers who sell the goods) are pretty substantial. As for folks buying an overpriced loaf of bread with SNAP benefits at a gas station or liquor store--well, that liquor store and its rival across the street may be the only two stores in a poor neighborhood that remain open for business. A woman with no car and three or four young children may simply not be able to get to the Safeway ten miles away in an emergency.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

aw9358 said:


> It's often whom you know that matters, not what you know.


I am so sorry that your and Designer's sorrows were so callously exploited. I had a 12 week miscarriage between having my son and my daughter. We are the three of us blessed with good children now.

Your daughter may have gotten the chance because of whom she knows, but it is her talent and determination that will have her grow with her opportunity. I wish her success in reaching her goals.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Huckleberry said:


> Knitter from Nebraska
> ever tried to find out how many people are here because of the Wars Bush created? Lots of them and many of those people have been here and on Welfare for years now, speak little or no English and make no effort to change that. Their children get all sorts of assistance for College while ours are in debt for often a deade and more. They also make no effort to integrate into our culture.


I absolutely agree! You are right! But the problem is bigger! We allow and encourage illegal aliens from everywhere to do the same. Even so-called terrorists. Our borders are not secure. Everyone is welcome and the taxpayers pay! You want to talk about college? We've lived in Nebraska and paid taxes for most of our adult lives. Because of my husband's employment, we landed in St. Louis, MO for a while. It had always been my oldest son's dream to attend the University of Nebraska. But because we'd been forced to relocate, he couldn't get in state tuition. We'd paid into that system for years! Here's the kicker, Nebraska gives in state tuition to illegal aliens who have never paid a dime into the system! The difference in price was too large and he wasn't able to go there. He was forced to attend a MO university.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> I am so sorry that your and Designer's sorrows were so callously exploited. I had a 12 week miscarriage between having my son and my daughter. We are the three of us blessed with good children now.
> 
> Your daughter may have gotten the chance because of whom she knows, but it is her talent and determination that will have her grow with her opportunity. I wish her success in reaching her goals.


Thank you for your good wishes, Marilyn. I don't post often on here any more, but I read your contributions with interest and a great deal of agreement.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> I have told you before. He is a very loving God. Everything that happens is for a reason. We will know in the right time. For many people the things that happen are because they, the person, have turned their backs on God and his Son, Jesus Christ.
> 
> As long as we, as a country, keep killing our babies we will not be blessed as a nation. But there are many other things our country needs to do to regain God's blessing.


I know you believe that Bible readings should be reintroduced in public schools, but what else? I can't imagine forcing all citizens to attend church on Sundays and things like that, as the Puritans did.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> I am so sorry that your and Designer's sorrows were so callously exploited. I had a 12 week miscarriage between having my son and my daughter. We are the three of us blessed with good children now.
> 
> Your daughter may have gotten the chance because of whom she knows, but it is her talent and determination that will have her grow with her opportunity. I wish her success in reaching her goals.


Thankfully I've never had a miscarriage, but my sister did at the time I was carrying my own child. She doesn't talk about it much, but I know she sometimes looks at my growing son and imagines what her own would have been like at 2 or 6 or 10 years old.

My condolences to Marilyn and Designer and Aw on their losses...words can't express how sorry I am.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> War? Real war where people are defending their country and their loved ones is honorable. We should defend ourselves. The problem lies with the fake wars our country has involved itself in. All of our wars have been conquests for money, oil and power! They SAY we're fighting for democracy but that's crap! The globalists who own the military industrial complex (and the politicians) make billions, even trillions off of war. They own the companies that make the war machines and they own the banks who loan the money to both sides! War is big business!


Oh, wow, I certainly agree with you here. Doubt whether anyone could say it better.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> How does it punish people to only allow them to buy food with their food stamps? How can anyone justify the use of food stamps at liquor stores, strip clubs and casinos? What possible good can come from this? Dont try to tell me they're just going to buy a loaf of bread at the liquor store! Explain to me why taxpayers should pay for this! If we're truly trying to help people, why is this allowed?


Where is this allowed? In my state, there are signs in super markets reminding people that food stamps will not be honored for items like cigarettes, candy, and soda. When I go to a liquor store buy a bottle of wine, there are signs saying that food stamps are not accepted.

It is certainly outrageous when public assistance is misused.

It is also disgusting when child support money is misused to get the custodial parent luxuries, then have that custodial parent run to the judge and whine for more child support money because Susie needs shoes.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Are you saying my response isn't rational?


Which response to which comments?

You are among the people who take the time to write considered responses in keeping with your beliefs and on point to the issues.

I am surprised that you would make this sort of comment.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Support Israel, not Palestine. Repeal Homosexual marriages. Repeal abortion. Remove many of the Government mandates so people really have free choice in what they can do on their own property (woman was told she has to remove a sign with the 10 commandments on it - it was her sign and her property). Let parents raise their own Children and get government involvement out of it unless the Child is in real danger, like abuse or malnutrition. Repeal Obamacare, it is only a redistribution of wealth anyway. There is very little actual health care in Obamacare.
> 
> _We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other._ -- John Adams
> 
> Many more, this is a start.


Well, that's interesting. I don't happen to agree (of course  ), but I do appreciate you letting me know what you think. Thanks.

:thumbup:


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> And yet, they are allowed! Criminals rarely obey the laws. Again,why should hard working taxpayers pay for this? Why is it even allowed? Why are ebt cards accepted anywhere? Seems like that could be fixed. Why don't they fix it?


What should be done? An EBT police force and subsequent jail term for owner of the stamps and the business owner who accepted them?
There are also other forms of assistance, some of it cash, to be used for rent, aid for children, transitional assistance. I don't know much about welfare aid, but I think we all can agree that it shouldn't be used for cigarettes and alcohol!


----------



## Gramma Bunny (Dec 21, 2013)

I truly believe that there is much too much testosterone in this world. It's so much easier to tell someone else what they should do than to look at themselves .


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> Where is this allowed? In my state, there are signs in super markets reminding people that food stamps will not be honored for items like cigarettes, candy, and soda. When I go to a liquor store buy a bottle of wine, there are signs saying that food stamps are not accepted.
> 
> It is certainly outrageous when public assistance is misused.
> 
> It is also disgusting when child support money is misused to get the custodial parent luxuries, then have that custodial parent run to the judge and whine for more child support money because Susie needs shoes.


Well, it isn't allowed but its "allowed". What this means is that its illegal but happens anyway. If a store gets caught selling the forbidden items, they lose the privilege of accepting ebts or food stamps, as many know them. The reality is that they are usually able to get around it and can continue. Here are a few links with interesting information. While the vast majority don't cheat, it is still a problem that should be remedied.

http://nypost.com/2013/01/06/welfare-recipients-take-out-cash-at-strip-clubs-liquor-stores-and-x-rated-shops/
http://consumer-law.lawyers.com/consumer-fraud/food-stamp-fraud.html
http://www.unionleader.com/article/20120628/NEWHAMPSHIRE09/706289985&template=mobileart

It doesn't matter how small or large the problem is. Its the perception that raises issues.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

alcameron said:


> What should be done? An EBT police force and subsequent jail term for owner of the stamps and the business owner who accepted them?


How about abolishing the stamps and the cards and requiring all SNAP recipients to gather three times a day in government mess halls if they want to eat? (Kidding, of course--but I'm amazed that some ultra-conservative politicians haven't yet suggested it. Or have they? )


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Well, it isn't allowed but its "allowed". What this means is that its illegal but happens anyway. If a store gets caught selling the forbidden items, they lose the privilege of accepting ebts or food stamps, as many know them. The reality is that they are usually able to get around it and can continue. Here are a few links with interesting information. While the vast majority don't cheat, it is still a problem that should be remedied.
> 
> http://nypost.com/2013/01/06/welfare-recipients-take-out-cash-at-strip-clubs-liquor-stores-and-x-rated-shops/
> http://consumer-law.lawyers.com/consumer-fraud/food-stamp-fraud.html
> ...


There will always be people trying to cheat one way or another. The other day I heard a short piece on the radio about doctors who "up code" their services to get more from Medicare than they're entitled to for the actual service they performed. It's very difficult to "catch" all the abuse and misuse unless the government programs are set up with adequate fraud divisions.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> Which response to which comments?
> 
> You are among the people who take the time to write considered responses in keeping with your beliefs and on point to the issues.
> 
> I am surprised that you would make this sort of comment.


Peacegoddess said, she awaited a response from the anti government folks. You said, you'll probably get responses but don't expect rational ones. I commented because I lean toward being anti government. Don't judge a book by its cover. :-D


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

alcameron said:


> What should be done? An EBT police force and subsequent jail term for owner of the stamps and the business owner who accepted them?
> There are also other forms of assistance, some of it cash, to be used for rent, aid for children, transitional assistance. I don't know much about welfare aid, but I think we all can agree that it shouldn't be used for cigarettes and alcohol!


The laws are already in place, just not enforced.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> The laws are already in place, just not enforced.


Don't you think they aren't enforced because of the difficulty in doing so? And the lack of funding necessary to do it?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> How about abolishing the stamps and the cards and requiring all SNAP recipients to gather three times a day in government mess halls if they want to eat? (Kidding, of course--but I'm amazed that some ultra-conservative politicians haven't yet suggested it. Or have they? )


How about, we give the money to the food banks. They expand, purchase in bulk, distribute and everybody gets good healthy food?


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Gramma Bunny said:


> I truly believe that there is much too much testosterone in this world. It's so much easier to tell someone else what they should do than to look at themselves .


My Heavens! I say the same thing. I believe that testosterone is the curse of the world. That is where the human male goes awry. Too small a brain for so many predator hormones. Gramma Bunny - you are as sweet as one and probably much smarter!


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Well, it isn't allowed but its "allowed". What this means is that its illegal but happens anyway. If a store gets caught selling the forbidden items, they lose the privilege of accepting ebts or food stamps, as many know them. The reality is that they are usually able to get around it and can continue. Here are a few links with interesting information. While the vast majority don't cheat, it is still a problem that should be remedied.
> 
> http://nypost.com/2013/01/06/welfare-recipients-take-out-cash-at-strip-clubs-liquor-stores-and-x-rated-shops/
> http://consumer-law.lawyers.com/consumer-fraud/food-stamp-fraud.html
> ...


Read your links, Nebraska. I thought #2 was very sound--a legally-worded explanation on how SNAP works and what the consequences of attempting to defraud the program are (not pretty).

#3 didn't quite ring true. Why would a cashier be fired for following the law regarding what items may be purchased with EBT cards? Something doesn't seem right--it the woman's story is on the up-and-up she should sue the company for wrongful termination.

#1 I disagree with--I really have no problem with what kind of venue the ATM is located in when SNAP recipients draw out their cash. When I lived in SF there were multiple liquor stores, bars, and porno shops on pretty much every block in the downtown area. It seems silly to expect SNAP recipients to avoid using the ATM closest to them just because it's located in a bar and "doesn't seem right".


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> How about, we give the money to the food banks. They expand, purchase in bulk, distribute and everybody gets good healthy food?


Actually, I really don't have a problem with that if the places were numerous, open on a 24-hour basis to accommodate folks working multiple jobs and/or strange hours, and offered a wide selection of goods. Non-food items like soap and toilet paper could be available that way too--not sure, but I believe SNAP presently doesn't cover stuff like that.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> How about, we give the money to the food banks. They expand, purchase in bulk, distribute and everybody gets good healthy food?[
> 
> Food banks already get both food and money for the needy, but there's never enough. Many of the people find it difficult to even get to the food bank. Some have no way of refrigerating or cooking food. I belong to a group that provides bag lunches for the homeless five days a week. We keep a small pantry and besides the daily lunches, we provide bags of groceries, sleeping bags, socks, toiletries, used clothing and shoes, rent money, etc. We solicit donations from the church membership, but when times are tough for everyone, our pantry and treasury go down, too. Other churches and agencies also provide breakfasts, dinners, even hot showers. Once a week a medical van comes to our church parking lot with a nurse practitioner on board. S/he can provide basic checkups and/or referrals to no cost or pro bono doctors. I see and interact with many of these people on a regular basis and know how tough it is for them. Yes, there are one or two who try to scam us by selling their lunch down the street, but there's no way to stop that kind of thing. Our job is to provide what we can, and we can't wonder what happens to the shoes or sleeping bag, but most who come are really in dire straits. Poverty and homelessness is a huge problem in the US, and volunteerism can't begin to solve the problem.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Read your links, Nebraska. I thought #2 was very sound--a legally-worded explanation on how SNAP works and what the consequences of attempting to defraud the program are (not pretty).
> 
> #3 didn't quite ring true. Why would a cashier be fired for following the law regarding what items may be purchased with EBT cards? Something doesn't seem right--it the woman's story is on the up-and-up she should sue the company for wrongful termination.
> 
> #1 I disagree with--I really have no problem with what kind of venue the ATM is located in when SNAP recipients draw out their cash. When I lived in SF there were multiple liquor stores, bars, and porno shops on pretty much every block in the downtown area. It seems silly to expect SNAP recipients to avoid using the ATM closest to them just because it's located in a bar and "doesn't seem right".


I tried to find links that would be accepted. I read many articles. I think that #3 goes to show the lengths that greedy store owners (not all are greedy) will go to to get government money. I accept that you don't believe it. While the consequences of fraud CAN be great, they aren't if no one prosecutes. I think that everyone can agree that there is fraud. Where we differ is whether it is substantial enough to be an issue. If fraud or even the recurring fraud were dealt with, people would not be so upset. Even if you just consider the surfer boy who used his snap to buy lobster. While its only one case, most of the middle class who are footing the bill, can't afford to buy lobster for themselves. They have a right to be angry that ANY of their money is being used this way.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Actually, I really don't have a problem with that if the places were numerous, open on a 24-hour basis to accommodate folks working multiple jobs and/or strange hours, and offered a wide selection of goods. Non-food items like soap and toilet paper could be available that way too--not sure, but I believe SNAP presently doesn't cover stuff like that.


I agree with you! Non food items are necessities too. I think that if we eliminated fraud and bought in bulk, and combined with food that is already donated there would be enough money to do this. Wide selection would be debatable. To get as much as we could and to feed as many as possible, I think the focus should be on getting the best deals while still providing a balanced diet. I would definitely offer fresh foods and veggies too, but selection would vary as to what's in season. Just think of all the gardeners who would donate lots of fresh fruits and veggies.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Why do I feel that food fraud is so much smaller than the other types of fraud the pols indulge in?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

alcameron said:


> Knitter from Nebraska said:
> 
> 
> > How about, we give the money to the food banks. They expand, purchase in bulk, distribute and everybody gets good healthy food?[
> ...


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

See you all later-- I have some stuff to do on the workshops - I also need to get away. Take care and try to stay out of trouble! Be back after awhile.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

DIL and grandsons are here. Gotta go. Talk to you later.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Services for the homeless are admirable and necessary. I commend you for your efforts. But what I'm talking about is turning the food banks into something new. The food banks would still receive donations from grocery stores and individuals etc... But now add in all of the money that the govt spends on food stamps. Create food bank "stores" wherever they are needed. They would need refrigeration but would not be cooking the food, just distributing it. Instead of receiving money, their needs would be met. Children would not go without food because mommy sold the food stamps for drugs. (Don't accuse me of being judgmental. I KNOW that this happens!). By buying in bulk and buying what there was an excess of, costs could be kept down to reach those in need.
> 
> I didn't think this out ahead. I'm just running with ideas as they come to me. I just know there gotta be a better way.


The suggestion of serving the needy through food banks is well-meaning. Once you start thinking about the numbers of people, their lack of transportation, lack of cooking facilities or not having even a roof over their heads, you suddenly realize that helping those unable to help themselves is a gigantic task. Some have no place to clean up. Some have no family. Some have physical and/or mental disabilities. Even those with a roof over their heads who have a roommate or caregiver can't always find their way back home even if it's two blocks away. Most are lacking medical and dental care. Some have addictions. Some are malnourished. Some sleep outside in encampments. One client told me of being roused by the police while he was all snug in his underground "rabbit hole" he had settled into with his sleeping bag and candle. They didn't see anyone and decided to fill the hole with him in it. He ended up in the hospital with a collapsed lung and aspiration pneumonia. Sometimes they bring their children along to get a free lunch. Some of them get work from time to time loading boxes or doing garden work. We have people with serious problems, and I have been moved to tears more than once. Taking care of those less fortunate is a huge problem, and government programs HAVE to continue to exist--in several forms.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Peacegoddess said, she awaited a response from the anti government folks. You said, you'll probably get responses but don't expect rational ones. I commented because I lean toward being anti government. Don't judge a book by its cover. :-D


Here is an issue where we quibble over nuance.

I lean toward being anti bureaucracy. I do believe it is necessary to have some sort of organized governance to counter anarchy.

Unfortunately we have not achieved a process wherein government works the way it should, for the benefit of the people. Laws are made by the ones operating the government, and too often they enact laws designed to benefit themselves. We have seen too many instances where "benefactors" with deep pockets influence the representatives.

But where would we be with no laws or social organization? If we cannot depend upon elected representatives who are accountable at every subsequent election, how can we depend upon the general public at large to behave in a manner to protect the rest of us? Consider the crimes against people and property with government structure. Government provides police protection among other activities.

Being anti government, what social structure would you propose that would serve to protect those who need protection as well as inhibit the anti social activities of the predators among us? How would it be instituted? How would it be funded? What would the checks and balances be?

I am sure there are many among us on KP who could share their insights in considering this issue. It is a provocative one, given the inequities in our present system.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

And how long before this 15-year-old and her child become deadbeat drags on good, hardworking taxpayers?


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> How about, we give the money to the food banks. They expand, purchase in bulk, distribute and everybody gets good healthy food?


That is an interesting concept. Are there food banks in all the areas where there is need? Are they accessible to the needy people? For people in need in remote areas, would food be moved to them, or would they be moved to the food? In either alternative, how? And how would it be funded?

I believe strongly that there should be nutrition classes for the people receiving assistance. Actually, I think dismantling home economics classes in the public schools has had a part in the obesity crisis. When I was in middle school and high school, we studied how to create healthy meals, learned how to shop intelligently, learned food safety, all those skills that have helped me throughout the years to run a good family kitchen and have a healthy properly fed family. Children who are properly nourished have a better chance to do well in school which can lead to a break in the poverty spiral.

Thought provoking. Thanks.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I tried to find links that would be accepted. I read many articles. I think that #3 goes to show the lengths that greedy store owners (not all are greedy) will go to to get government money. I accept that you don't believe it. While the consequences of fraud CAN be great, they aren't if no one prosecutes. I think that everyone can agree that there is fraud. Where we differ is whether it is substantial enough to be an issue. If fraud or even the recurring fraud were dealt with, people would not be so upset. Even if you just consider the surfer boy who used his snap to buy lobster. While its only one case, most of the middle class who are footing the bill, can't afford to buy lobster for themselves. They have a right to be angry that ANY of their money is being used this way.


Oh yes, the Surfer Boy (forget his real name) from Fox. He's quite a character--where on earth did they dig _him_ up? I've seen the interviews and he comes across as a good-natured lunkhead--like someone's nephew or cousin who's sleeping rent-free in the guest house until he gets his act together.

Of course SNAP recipients like Surfer Boy do exist, but to be honest I think they're few and far between. And does it really matter how these folks choose to spend their food money? People who make unwise choices are going to pay a pretty high price in the end--I imagine Surfer Boy gets pretty hungry by the end of the month after blowing his $200 on lobsters.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> That is an interesting concept. Are there food banks in all the areas where there is need? Are they accessible to the needy people? For people in need in remote areas, would food be moved to them, or would they be moved to the food? In either alternative, how? And how would it be funded?


Very good questions, Marilyn. Upon reflection I don't believe even a major cash infusion from the government would allow existing food banks to take care of the 45M SNAP recipients in our country today. It would be nice if all Americans (not just the folks with the EBT cards) made wiser choices as far as food goes. Limiting SNAPers to special stores that sold only good healthy food would be one way, but besides stigmatizing them it would force the government to go into the wholesale grocery business--and we already know how much red tape, waste, and inefficiency goes along with all government ventures.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Earlier someone was asking about forced abortions. I wonder what would have happened if she did not have a cell phone.
> 
> 15-Year-Old Pregnant Girl Held in Abortion Clinic Against Her Will Rescued by Police


Obviously no woman should be force to abort against her will--but I suspect the clinic tried to hold her because legally they couldn't release a minor into the custody of an obviously unstable woman. Sad story, though--I can't foresee any happy ending here.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Very good questions, Marilyn. Upon reflection I don't believe even a major cash infusion from the government would allow existing food banks to take care of the 45M SNAP recipients in our country today. It would be nice if all Americans (not just the folks with the EBT cards) made wiser choices as far as food goes. Limiting SNAPers to special stores that sold only good healthy food would be one way, but besides stigmatizing them it would force the government to go into the wholesale grocery business--and we already know how much red tape, waste, and inefficiency goes along with all government ventures.


Susan, I agree with you here. We all know that whole foods are the best for us. A mother with one child, working part time would probably get $150.00 per month on her EBT card.
Take that and divide it by 4 and it comes out to $37.50 per week to feed 2 people on. I have watched people in the grocery line ahead of me. What I see are generic boxes of cereal, milk, boxes of macaroni & cheese dinners, cans of spaghettios, and maybe a few apples. 
I don't think good nutrition at that meager amount is feasible. The least expensive of foods are what they can afford and it keeps the child from going hungry.
We know that SNAP and EBT do not cover anything but food. No toilet paper or Kleenex. No diapers. No cleaning supplies. 
I don't know about other states, but Minnesota is very strict with it's laws. One can not purchase cigarettes or alcohol. I have heard of people selling their EBT cards for cash. One has to wonder if it is because they need diapers, feminine hygiene products, shampoo etc. People do forget that EBT and SNAP do not pay for these necessities and are too quick to judge or offer an opinion on what they should have and have not. I may be mixed up about SNAP, but I am sure about the EBT cards.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Read your links, Nebraska. I thought #2 was very sound--a legally-worded explanation on how SNAP works and what the consequences of attempting to defraud the program are (not pretty).
> 
> #3 didn't quite ring true. Why would a cashier be fired for following the law regarding what items may be purchased with EBT cards? Something doesn't seem right--it the woman's story is on the up-and-up she should sue the company for wrongful termination.
> 
> #1 I disagree with--I really have no problem with what kind of venue the ATM is located in when SNAP recipients draw out their cash. When I lived in SF there were multiple liquor stores, bars, and porno shops on pretty much every block in the downtown area. It seems silly to expect SNAP recipients to avoid using the ATM closest to them just because it's located in a bar and "doesn't seem right".


A piece of information, #1 came from the New York Post, a Rupert Murdoch-owned newspaper.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> Why do I feel that food fraud is so much smaller than the other types of fraud the pols indulge in?


Because it probably is. I wonder whether there are statistics on the amount lost to food fraud annually. It's probably only slightly more prevalent than voter fraud.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Because it probably is. I wonder whether there are statistics on the amount lost to food fraud annually. It's probably only slightly more prevalent than voter fraud.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> Susan, I agree with you here. We all know that whole foods are the best for us. A mother with one child, working part time would probably get $150.00 per month on her EBT card.
> Take that and divide it by 4 and it comes out to $37.50 per week to feed 2 people on. I have watched people in the grocery line ahead of me. What I see are generic boxes of cereal, milk, boxes of macaroni & cheese dinners, cans of spaghettios, and maybe a few apples.
> I don't think good nutrition at that meager amount is feasible. The least expensive of foods are what they can afford and it keeps the child from going hungry.
> We know that SNAP and EBT do not cover anything but food. No toilet paper or Kleenex. No diapers. No cleaning supplies.
> I don't know about other states, but Minnesota is very strict with it's laws. One can not purchase cigarettes or alcohol. I have heard of people selling their EBT cards for cash. One has to wonder if it is because they need diapers, feminine hygiene products, shampoo etc. People do forget that EBT and SNAP do not pay for these necessities and are too quick to judge or offer an opinion on what they should have and have not.


No, I don't know how people manage on so little either. I know food prices vary around the nation, but in our area a pound of apples is $2.79--a gallon of milk $3.79--a pound of 80/20 hamburger $4.29. Toss in a box of cereal ($3.29), a can of tuna fish ($1.29), and a loaf of inexpensive bread ($2.29) and come away with less than two days' worth of food for a 6'2" man, a petite woman, and a kid going into a growth spurt who seems ready to eat the table.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

alcameron said:


> There will always be people trying to cheat one way or another. The other day I heard a short piece on the radio about doctors who "up code" their services to get more from Medicare than they're entitled to for the actual service they performed. It's very difficult to "catch" all the abuse and misuse unless the government programs are set up with adequate fraud divisions.


alcameron
"up code" has been in use for as long as Medicare has been available. Sure hope that in the Computer age that too will find a remedy. I check the charges for a friend and found such billing and reported it. People get print out of charges with explanations and if we read them carefully, we find "detours". regularly. Lots of people seem to be "on the take".


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> Why do I feel that food fraud is so much smaller than the other types of fraud the pols indulge in?


I agree but shouldn't we at least attempt to eliminate fraud wherever it lies?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> How about, we give the money to the food banks. They expand, purchase in bulk, distribute and everybody gets good healthy food?





alcameron said:


> Food banks already get both food and money for the needy, but there's never enough. Many of the people find it difficult to even get to the food bank. Some have no way of refrigerating or cooking food. I belong to a group that provides bag lunches for the homeless five days a week. We keep a small pantry and besides the daily lunches, we provide bags of groceries, sleeping bags, socks, toiletries, used clothing and shoes, rent money, etc. We solicit donations from the church membership, but when times are tough for everyone, our pantry and treasury go down, too. Other churches and agencies also provide breakfasts, dinners, even hot showers. Once a week a medical van comes to our church parking lot with a nurse practitioner on board. S/he can provide basic checkups and/or referrals to no cost or pro bono doctors. I see and interact with many of these people on a regular basis and know how tough it is for them. Yes, there are one or two who try to scam us by selling their lunch down the street, but there's no way to stop that kind of thing. Our job is to provide what we can, and we can't wonder what happens to the shoes or sleeping bag, but most who come are really in dire straits. Poverty and homelessness is a huge problem in the US, and volunteerism can't begin to solve the problem.


What truly good people you and your fellow church members are. Thank you.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> What truly good people you and your fellow church members are. Thank you.


A Hip Hip Hooray for Our Church Lady. Very impressive-sounding community.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I guess I'd be considered one of "pals on the right". I'd like to answer!
> 
> Capital punishment? I'm all for it! But for those who have committed first degree murder. What is the point in locking them up and supporting them? I understand compassion for those who have committed a crime of passion or those who committed involuntary manslaughter. But those who commit first degree murder have no redemptive value in a society. Before you accuse me of not being Christian like, there is biblical precedence for capital punishment.
> 
> ...


Thank you for your reply. These three circumstances I mentioned all invovle the taking of human lives.

In Australia we have not had the death penalty since the mid 1960. Yes we have had some very nasty murders since then, the Port Arthur massacre springs to mind. But we have also had several miscarriages of justices when an innocent person was wrongly found guilty. The murder of the jeweller in Mosman Park for one, the Pamela Lawrence murder. A man served 12 years in prison for that murder. He was innocent. People fought for a retrial and it was denied. People fought for 12 years before a retrial was ordered. He was released and the evidence was re examined and he was found innocent. The real murder was found and jailed. The innocent party received a huge compensation payment. With capital punishment an innocent man would have been hanged. Do you remember baby Azaria Chamberlain, "a dingo has taken my baby". Another innocent person who would have been hanged. I also remember the case of an innocent man in UK being exonerated, over his grave. He had been hanged for a crime he did not commit. Even in USA they have released innocent people from Death Row. These are just an example. The death penalty does not stop crime.

My point was, all the three circumstances I gave involved taking a human life. The original posted stated they were against abortion because it involved taking a human life. I was asking if they were also against taking human lives in those circumstances. But, thank you for your input, it is a pity that the person to whom I directed my post will not answer.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

alcameron said:


> The suggestion of serving the needy through food banks is well-meaning. Once you start thinking about the numbers of people, their lack of transportation, lack of cooking facilities or not having even a roof over their heads, you suddenly realize that helping those unable to help themselves is a gigantic task. Some have no place to clean up. Some have no family. Some have physical and/or mental disabilities. Even those with a roof over their heads who have a roommate or caregiver can't always find their way back home even if it's two blocks away. Most are lacking medical and dental care. Some have addictions. Some are malnourished. Some sleep outside in encampments. One client told me of being roused by the police while he was all snug in his underground "rabbit hole" he had settled into with his sleeping bag and candle. They didn't see anyone and decided to fill the hole with him in it. He ended up in the hospital with a collapsed lung and aspiration pneumonia. Sometimes they bring their children along to get a free lunch. Some of them get work from time to time loading boxes or doing garden work. We have people with serious problems, and I have been moved to tears more than once. Taking care of those less fortunate is a huge problem, and government programs HAVE to continue to exist--in several forms.


I wasn't suggesting a solution to meeting the needs of everyone. Not all needs can be met in the same way. Just throwing out ideas for replacing the current snap program. I'm not saying it needs to be replaced, just throwing out ideas on how to feed the people, while eliminating fraud. An exercise in imagination. The current snap program doesn't meet the needs of many that you mentioned either. While some people can be given money and make the right choices, some cannot. I would like to know that our money is truly going to feed people. Another thing to consider is that we often duplicate services. Between services offered by the govt, churches, food banks etc, how do we know if some are getting enough or others are getting too much? I think that issues dealing with the homeless or mentally I'll will each have to be developed individually. If you look at the homeless issue alone, not all can be dealt with the same way. Some of the homeless exist due to circumstances, ie they lost their job. Some are homeless because they prefer to be, ie mental illness. Each has different needs and should be helped differently.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> Thank you for your reply. These three circumstances I mentioned all invovle the taking of human lives.
> 
> In Australia we have not had the death penalty since the mid 1960. Yes we have had some very nasty murders since then, the Port Arthur massacre springs to mind. But we have also had several miscarriages of justices when an innocent person was wrongly found guilty. The murder of the jeweller in Mosman Park for one, the Pamela Lawrence murder. A man served 12 years in prison for that murder. He was innocent. People fought for a retrial and it was denied. People fought for 12 years before a retrial was ordered. He was released and the evidence was re examined and he was found innocent. The real murder was found and jailed. The innocent party received a huge compensation payment. With capital punishment an innocent man would have been hanged. Do you remember baby Azaria Chamberlain, "a dingo has taken my baby". Another innocent person who would have been hanged. I also remember the case of an innocent man in UK being exonerated, over his grave. He had been hanged for a crime he did not commit. Even in USA they have released innocent people from Death Row.


And not just a couple...142 since 1973! A lot of conservatives believe that American will be judged by God as a nation...I wonder what His punishment is for a country that allows the innocent be executed alongside the guilty?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> Here is an issue where we quibble over nuance.
> 
> I lean toward being anti bureaucracy. I do believe it is necessary to have some sort of organized governance to counter anarchy.
> 
> ...


I guess I'm not "anti" government. I just think we have too much government! Too many laws! But neither do I think that our government acts in our best interest any more.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> That is an interesting concept. Are there food banks in all the areas where there is need? Are they accessible to the needy people? For people in need in remote areas, would food be moved to them, or would they be moved to the food? In either alternative, how? And how would it be funded?
> 
> I believe strongly that there should be nutrition classes for the people receiving assistance. Actually, I think dismantling home economics classes in the public schools has had a part in the obesity crisis. When I was in middle school and high school, we studied how to create healthy meals, learned how to shop intelligently, learned food safety, all those skills that have helped me throughout the years to run a good family kitchen and have a healthy properly fed family. Children who are properly nourished have a better chance to do well in school which can lead to a break in the poverty spiral.
> 
> Thought provoking. Thanks.


Right now, we don't have enough food banks nor are they accessible. But why couldn't they be? I agree that home economics had a valuable purpose. I wonder how young people ever learn to cook anymore. Most moms are working moms and we've gotten away from "scratch" cooking. I think that if you're hungry, you'll learn to cook. Nutrition classes would be advantageous to all. And home cooked food is healthier than fast food.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Oh yes, the Surfer Boy (forget his real name) from Fox. He's quite a character--where on earth did they dig _him_ up? I've seen the interviews and he comes across as a good-natured lunkhead--like someone's nephew or cousin who's sleeping rent-free in the guest house until he gets his act together.
> 
> Of course SNAP recipients like Surfer Boy do exist, but to be honest I think they're few and far between. And does it really matter how these folks choose to spend their food money? People who make unwise choices are going to pay a pretty high price in the end--I imagine Surfer Boy gets pretty hungry by the end of the month after blowing his $200 on lobsters.


But the problem is; it isn't "their" money. Someone worked hard to earn that money and that someone probably can't afford to eat lobster themselves. I believe that you can do what you want with money you've earned, but it is disrespectful to treat hard working taxpayers this way. People who care about the welfare of others are being taken advantage of. It shouldn't be allowed to happen.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Very good questions, Marilyn. Upon reflection I don't believe even a major cash infusion from the government would allow existing food banks to take care of the 45M SNAP recipients in our country today. It would be nice if all Americans (not just the folks with the EBT cards) made wiser choices as far as food goes. Limiting SNAPers to special stores that sold only good healthy food would be one way, but besides stigmatizing them it would force the government to go into the wholesale grocery business--and we already know how much red tape, waste, and inefficiency goes along with all government ventures.


I agree with some of what you say about practicality of this. But I disagree about the recipients being stigmatized. Why would it be different than visiting the current food banks? Besides, they're only going to run into each other. Another thing, I think that people should "want" to get off food stamps. It should be looked at as charity so that people are grateful for what they receive. I don't like the attitude that they're "entitled" to it. Someone worked hard for this money. Don't they deserve gratitude?


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Right now, we don't have enough food banks nor are they accessible. But why couldn't they be? I agree that home economics had a valuable purpose. I wonder how young people ever learn to cook anymore. Most moms are working moms and we've gotten away from "scratch" cooking. I think that if you're hungry, you'll learn to cook. Nutrition classes would be advantageous to all. And home cooked food is healthier than fast food.


I understand what you're saying, but I'm just trying to say that providing help for the people living in poverty is a huge task that requires a lot of money and a lot of work. Just pointing out that people can't cook if they don't even have access to stoves. We just don't realize the extent of the problem. We don't even scratch the surface, and I'm speaking from experience of working with a relatively small group of homeless people living in a largely middle class city.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> Susan, I agree with you here. We all know that whole foods are the best for us. A mother with one child, working part time would probably get $150.00 per month on her EBT card.
> Take that and divide it by 4 and it comes out to $37.50 per week to feed 2 people on. I have watched people in the grocery line ahead of me. What I see are generic boxes of cereal, milk, boxes of macaroni & cheese dinners, cans of spaghettios, and maybe a few apples.
> I don't think good nutrition at that meager amount is feasible. The least expensive of foods are what they can afford and it keeps the child from going hungry.
> We know that SNAP and EBT do not cover anything but food. No toilet paper or Kleenex. No diapers. No cleaning supplies.
> I don't know about other states, but Minnesota is very strict with it's laws. One can not purchase cigarettes or alcohol. I have heard of people selling their EBT cards for cash. One has to wonder if it is because they need diapers, feminine hygiene products, shampoo etc. People do forget that EBT and SNAP do not pay for these necessities and are too quick to judge or offer an opinion on what they should have and have not. I may be mixed up about SNAP, but I am sure about the EBT cards.


Think about this, food would be purchased at wholesale cost. There would be expenses in distribution. But wouldn't it still be cheaper and eliminate fraud? You mentioned hearing of those who sell their food stamps. I think that's why I'm so passionate about this issue. My daughter's biological mother lived in a shelter, had a private room, got three meals a day, all personal items for herself and her baby and still received cash payments and food stamps. She sold her food stamps to a guard at the shelter and bought drugs, and a DVD player when they were new and expensive, (we couldn't even afford one yet). Its always bothered me! Why should we be footing the bill for things like this?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> A piece of information, #1 came from the New York Post, a Rupert Murdoch-owned newspaper.


Is one REALLY better than another? Almost all of the newspapers, TV stations and radio stations are owned by just a few. I don't know if it makes a difference?


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> I have answered your question more than once on KP.
> 
> Adults: They have had a fair trial with a jury of their peers, found guilty, had several appeals, then years later execution.


That's true, Joey, but even with all the safeguards innocent people still get sent to Death Row. As I mentioned in an earlier post, 142 people facing execution have been exonerated since 1972. The death penalty ensures that a wrongful conviction will never be overturned.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Because it probably is. I wonder whether there are statistics on the amount lost to food fraud annually. It's probably only slightly more prevalent than voter fraud.


Don't BOTH things matter?!? They matter to me!


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Think about this, food would be purchased at wholesale cost. There would be expenses in distribution. But wouldn't it still be cheaper and eliminate fraud?


Hmmm...actually I don't know that it would. Yes, you could ensure that they made good choices by only stocking the center with healthy food and necessities, but I can't see anything that could prevent them from ultimately selling or trading that food for whatever they wanted.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> No, I don't know how people manage on so little either. I know food prices vary around the nation, but in our area a pound of apples is $2.79--a gallon of milk $3.79--a pound of 80/20 hamburger $4.29. Toss in a box of cereal ($3.29), a can of tuna fish ($1.29), and a loaf of inexpensive bread ($2.29) and come away with less than two days' worth of food for a 6'2" man, a petite woman, and a kid going into a growth spurt who seems ready to eat the table.


The reason the price of food has risen so much is inflation. Keep in mind every dollar the govt spends (because it is deficit spending and they're running the printing presses) causes our dollars to be worth less. Hence, we pay more for everything. So think about it this way, giving food stamp benefits actually contributes to the increase in the price of food. Just a fun fact. Not!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Huckleberry said:


> alcameron
> "up code" has been in use for as long as Medicare has been available. Sure hope that in the Computer age that too will find a remedy. I check the charges for a friend and found such billing and reported it. People get print out of charges with explanations and if we read them carefully, we find "detours". regularly. Lots of people seem to be "on the take".


My in laws have found those " mistakes" several times.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> What truly good people you and your fellow church members are. Thank you.


I agree!!!


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> That's true, Joey, but even with all the safeguards innocent people still get sent to Death Row. As I mentioned in an earlier post, 142 people facing execution have been exonerated since 1972. The death penalty ensures that a wrongful conviction will never be overturned.


I don't even think that we have the right to kill the guilty ones.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

SQM said:


> A Hip Hip Hooray for Our Church Lady. Very impressive-sounding community.


I'm really not a "church lady," I choose to do that particular activity because I think it's the right thing to do and it "speaks" to me.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> But every abortion ensures that they will never get a chance at life. What a difference of 50+ million that were aborted deliberately and 142 that night have been executed by mistake.
> 
> *NO COMPARISON!*


Well, that last is true enough...I really do see a difference between an eight-week old fetus and an eighteen-year old wrongfully convicted and now facing execution. Heck, I think there's a difference between that fetus and any person now walking, toddling, or crawling on this earth.

But you do see the difference, don't you? It's unpleasant to try to evaluate the worth of human life, to have to weigh this person's life against that one's. But occasionally (sadly) it does come down to that--a woman who becomes terribly ill when her pregnancy goes wrong, or who's developed an agressive cancer but can't have chemo treatments while expecting. Even most pro-lifers (including Rick Santorum and his wife) seem to understand in these cases that terminating the pregnancy is not the same as terminating a full-grown fully-developed human being.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Is one REALLY better than another? Almost all of the newspapers, TV stations and radio stations are owned by just a few. I don't know if it makes a difference?


I can't answer about any others, but Murdoch's Fox News has been caught in numerous falsehoods and distortions of the truth. Some of his British holdings have had to close because they engaged in criminal activity.

The others may be equally bad, but we happen to know a lot about Murdoch. See, for example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News_International_phone_hacking_scandal


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> That's true, Joey, but even with all the safeguards innocent people still get sent to Death Row. As I mentioned in an earlier post, 142 people facing execution have been exonerated since 1972. The death penalty ensures that a wrongful conviction will never be overturned.


But they're post-born. Who cares?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Don't BOTH things matter?!? They matter to me!


All statistics on voter fraud show that it's almost nonexistent. So no, it doesn't matter. As for food fraud, it shouldn't happen but as a practical matter, how do you stop it? Hire a few thousand inspectors to investigate in every town in the country? That would involve an increase in government size. From my pov, that could be a good source of jobs, but I don't know what you'd think about it.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

alcameron said:


> I don't even think that we have the right to kill the guilty ones.


I don't, either. And certainly that would fit Joey's definition of "murder."


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

EveMCooke said:


> Thank you for your reply. These three circumstances I mentioned all invovle the taking of human lives.
> 
> In Australia we have not had the death penalty since the mid 1960. Yes we have had some very nasty murders since then, the Port Arthur massacre springs to mind. But we have also had several miscarriages of justices when an innocent person was wrongly found guilty. The murder of the jeweller in Mosman Park for one, the Pamela Lawrence murder. A man served 12 years in prison for that murder. He was innocent. People fought for a retrial and it was denied. People fought for 12 years before a retrial was ordered. He was released and the evidence was re examined and he was found innocent. The real murder was found and jailed. The innocent party received a huge compensation payment. With capital punishment an innocent man would have been hanged. Do you remember baby Azaria Chamberlain, "a dingo has taken my baby". Another innocent person who would have been hanged. I also remember the case of an innocent man in UK being exonerated, over his grave. He had been hanged for a crime he did not commit. Even in USA they have released innocent people from Death Row. These are just an example. The death penalty does not stop crime.
> 
> My point was, all the three circumstances I gave involved taking a human life. The original posted stated they were against abortion because it involved taking a human life. I was asking if they were also against taking human lives in those circumstances. But, thank you for your input, it is a pity that the person to whom I directed my post will not answer.


I've given this post a lot of thought. I have no answer. It would be horrific to be wrong about a capital murder case. I just didn't want you to think I'd ignored your response to me.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> And not just a couple...142 since 1973! A lot of conservatives believe that American will be judged by God as a nation...I wonder what His punishment is for a country that allows the innocent be executed alongside the guilty?


Repentance and forgiveness!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Hmmm...actually I don't know that it would. Yes, you could ensure that they made good choices by only stocking the center with healthy food and necessities, but I can't see anything that could prevent them from ultimately selling or trading that food for whatever they wanted.


Just an exercise in thought. Maybe it wouldn't be possible. Doesn't hurt to look at alternatives.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Repentance and forgiveness!


Maybe...alas I don't see much repentance for all those wrongfully convicted--it's still going on, in fact. Glenn Ford of Louisiana was just released this year after spending more than 30 years on Death Row.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Just an exercise in thought. Maybe it wouldn't be possible. Doesn't hurt to look at alternatives.


No, not at all--I really enjoy this kind of conversation, in fact.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> I can't answer about any others, but Murdoch's Fox News has been caught in numerous falsehoods and distortions of the truth. Some of his British holdings have had to close because they engaged in criminal activity.
> 
> The others may be equally bad, but we happen to know a lot about Murdoch. See, for example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News_International_phone_hacking_scandal


Do we even want to LOOK at NBC and MSNBC? Blatent lies!


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Do we even want to LOOK at NBC and MSNBC? Blatent lies!


I disagree, of course.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> All statistics on voter fraud show that it's almost nonexistent. So no, it doesn't matter. As for food fraud, it shouldn't happen but as a practical matter, how do you stop it? Hire a few thousand inspectors to investigate in every town in the country? That would involve an increase in government size. From my pov, that could be a good source of jobs, but I don't know what you'd think about it.


Statistics from WHOM? I've read of too many cases of voter fraud to just ignore it. But you're probably right about the futility of trying to stop fraud. I was on a roll and just went with it.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Maybe...alas I don't see much repentance for all those wrongfully convicted--it's still going on, in fact. Glenn Ford of Louisiana was just released this year after spending more than 30 years on Death Row.


You don't necessarily see repentance. It is often personal.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> No, not at all--I really enjoy this kind of conversation, in fact.


Me too, KFN and Susan. Food costs are high now. Just wait for the outcome from the droughts in California and Texas.
While visiting there (Texas) I can't tell you how many trucks I saw loaded with dead cattle. The cotton crop is gone in the Texas panhandle.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> No, not at all--I really enjoy this kind of conversation, in fact.


Thanks! I've enjoyed it too.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Statistics from WHOM? I've read of too many cases of voter fraud to just ignore it. But you're probably right about the futility of trying to stop fraud. I was on a roll and just went with it.


I haven't read anything from a reputable news source that proves that voter fraud is much of a problem in this country.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

alcameron said:


> I disagree, of course.


Of course! ;-)


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> Me too, KFN and Susan. Food costs are high now. Just wait for the outcome from the droughts in California and Texas.
> While visiting there (Texas) I can't tell you how many trucks I saw loaded with dead cattle. The cotton crop is gone in the Texas panhandle.


Oh! I can't wait to talk about the drought.  Alas, it will have to wait for another day. I've got to find lots of info to show you. But I'm going out of town with hubby, tomorrow so I don't want to get started and have to stop. :-D


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> The reason the price of food has risen so much is inflation. Keep in mind every dollar the govt spends (because it is deficit spending and they're running the printing presses) causes our dollars to be worth less. Hence, we pay more for everything. So think about it this way, giving food stamp benefits actually contributes to the increase in the price of food. Just a fun fact. Not!


It's not as simple as that. Here's a few sentences from Dean Baker, an economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research; the article is deals with President Clinton's policy of keeping the dollar high.



Dean Baker said:


> A high dollar leads to a trade deficit in the same way that high meat prices lead to fewer hamburgers being sold. A high dollar makes our goods and services relatively more expensive in the world economy, therefore we sell less of them.
> 
> The resulting trade deficit creates a huge hole in demand. For arithmetic fans, demand is equal to consumption, investment, government spending, and net exports:
> 
> ...


I won't insist that you read the whole piece, but if you want to it's at http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/bill-clinton-and-the-trade-deficit-is-there-some-reason-we-cant-talk-about-it


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Do we even want to LOOK at NBC and MSNBC? Blatent lies!


We will have to disagree on this. I don't think any other news service comes close to Fox and its disinformation.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> Me too, KFN and Susan. Food costs are high now. Just wait for the outcome from the droughts in California and Texas.
> While visiting there (Texas) I can't tell you how many trucks I saw loaded with dead cattle. The cotton crop is gone in the Texas panhandle.


Argh, I know. We're pretty spoiled here in California as far as fresh produce goes--strawberries, lettuce, peaches, and nectarines are always very cheap, especially in the summer. Not this year, though, thanks to our third year of severe drought. I never thought I'd be purchasing the canned stuff, but three or four peaches cost about five dollars at the moment and are devoured the instant I return from the grocery.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Thanks! I've enjoyed it too.


You make a fine debating partner, Nebraska. It's fun to take an idea and just see where it goes. :thumbup:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Statistics from WHOM? I've read of too many cases of voter fraud to just ignore it. But you're probably right about the futility of trying to stop fraud. I was on a roll and just went with it.


I don't have time to do a real search, so I went to Snopes, which has a fun piece on the 2012 presidential election, showing how nearly all "evidence" of voter fraud was false. http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/2012fraud.asp


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Oh! I can't wait to talk about the drought.  Alas, it will have to wait for another day. I've got to find lots of info to show you. But I'm going out of town with hubby, tomorrow so I don't want to get started and have to stop. :-D


Have a good trip and get home safe.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

BrattyPatty said:


> Me too, KFN and Susan. Food costs are high now. Just wait for the outcome from the droughts in California and Texas.
> While visiting there (Texas) I can't tell you how many trucks I saw loaded with dead cattle. The cotton crop is gone in the Texas panhandle.


May I add the coffee fungus that will certainly make buying coffee astronomical. I will soon be forfeiting my seat at Starbuck's.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thanks for your viewpoint.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I guess I'd be considered one of "pals on the right". I'd like to answer!
> 
> Capital punishment? I'm all for it! But for those who have committed first degree murder. What is the point in locking them up and supporting them? I understand compassion for those who have committed a crime of passion or those who committed involuntary manslaughter. But those who commit first degree murder have no redemptive value in a society. Before you accuse me of not being Christian like, there is biblical precedence for capital punishment.
> 
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Designer1234 said:


> You are putting words in my mouth. I believe there has to be something set up where those who are not using the system properly and agree that there has to be some guidelines and some ways to control those who don't follow the rules. I would rather err on the side of making a mistake than stop people who really need it from getting help. YOu tell me how they can be stopped. My point is still that there are the majority of those in that situation who are NOT taking advantage of the system. What about them - you are looking at it from the negative side and I am looking at Government help from a positive side. There are people who take advantage, in business, in all life experiences. I just cannot accept that it is right to treat people who are suffering legitimatley as if they were dead beats and therefore refuse to accept setting up Govt. agencies .
> 
> HOWEVER, until that is done I don't believe that those who are not taking advantage but who are legitimately poor and who are down trodden for whatever reason, should be told they are useless and be kept from getting help from Government agencies. Yes, I am a liberal and it is because of that type of attitude that I have become a liberal. I believe we must have compassion for those who are suffering and poor. They should be taught to go to school - they should be helped to find jobs, they should know that if they are hungry there is a net for them. The should know that their fellow citizens should have compassion and feel "There but for the Grace of God go I" -
> 
> ...


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: You're one of the very best Shirley.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Just remember next time I sound nutty to you. We come from differing viewpoints, but I feel there is common ground too. I feel good about it too.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I know this is out of order, but I forgot to comment on it earlier. THANK YOU damemary!!! There is hope for the world! People can disagree and still be friends! I can't begin to explain what this means to me.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I too always think, 'there but for the grace of God go I' Thanks for sharing Marilyn.



MarilynKnits said:


> I feel blessed to live in my small part of the world:
> 
> We have a county food bank for which the library collects and delivers weekly (the program is called BOBO buy one bring one)
> 
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

It is simple in my mind. I only want to be sure the children are fed, clothed etc. I don't care how it came about.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Oh PLEASE, don't misunderstand me. It was not my intention to put words in your mouth! The point that I was trying to make is that if we would eliminate most opportunities for theft, you would not see objection and criticism of the program. I don't believe that anyone wants to let the poor, starve. Most are compassionate. But it should bother everyone when even one person buys alcohol etc...instead of feeding their kids. The only place we differ is on the gravity of the problem. You think it is negligible. I think its larger. How large? I don't know! But I do know that we should be trying to eliminate the theft and corruption. Theft and corruption on any level, drives me crazy!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Just one question, why are you so focused on abortion?



joeysomma said:


> I have told you before. He is a very loving God. Everything that happens is for a reason. We will know in the right time. For many people the things that happen are because they, the person, have turned their backs on God and his Son, Jesus Christ.
> 
> As long as we, as a country, keep killing our babies we will not be blessed as a nation. But there are many other things our country needs to do to regain God's blessing.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

alcameron said:


> Don't you think they aren't enforced because of the difficulty in doing so? And the lack of funding necessary to do it?


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Hmmm...actually I don't know that it would. Yes, you could ensure that they made good choices by only stocking the center with healthy food and necessities, but I can't see anything that could prevent them from ultimately selling or trading that food for whatever they wanted.


susanmos2000
as long as there are Merchants who do whatever it takes to get the stamps, nothing will change. IF the need for stamps remains as high as it is right now, perhaps we should have Government stores where also the rest of us can shop so that
we do not separate the Needy from the more fortunate ones. That way only nutritious foods will be purchased with stamps.
Just a thought since there were Government Stores in the past where for example all Government Employees could shop at a discount.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I think this is more difficult than you imagine. Can they get enough volunteers? Space? How long to ramp up? At some point I think we need government help. IMHO



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> How about, we give the money to the food banks. They expand, purchase in bulk, distribute and everybody gets good healthy food?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> I won't insist that you read the whole piece, but if you want to it's at http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/bill-clinton-and-the-trade-deficit-is-there-some-reason-we-cant-talk-about-it


I read the article. Typical Keynesian economics. They think that they can manipulate everything. The problem is that it creates bubbles. While economists aren't too concerned about bubbles, they are devastating to the masses. Just look at what the housing bubble of 2008 did to everyday people. Only a true currency backed by something of value like gold, protects the people. Keynesian economics is like a house of cards. Eventually it will fall.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I agree. The problem is overwhelming.



alcameron said:


> Knitter from Nebraska said:
> 
> 
> > How about, we give the money to the food banks. They expand, purchase in bulk, distribute and everybody gets good healthy food?[
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I believe the answer is in enforcement funding and compassion.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I tried to find links that would be accepted. I read many articles. I think that #3 goes to show the lengths that greedy store owners (not all are greedy) will go to to get government money. I accept that you don't believe it. While the consequences of fraud CAN be great, they aren't if no one prosecutes. I think that everyone can agree that there is fraud. Where we differ is whether it is substantial enough to be an issue. If fraud or even the recurring fraud were dealt with, people would not be so upset. Even if you just consider the surfer boy who used his snap to buy lobster. While its only one case, most of the middle class who are footing the bill, can't afford to buy lobster for themselves. They have a right to be angry that ANY of their money is being used this way.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> You make a fine debating partner, Nebraska. It's fun to take an idea and just see where it goes. :thumbup:


Thanks, I've had fun too! However, I'm NOT getting much knitting done! Not much of anything else either. I did however finish laundry, have my DIL and grandsons over to dinner and spent about an hour on the phone with my friend. I guess that's not too bad. Well, maybe it is.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

You've been hanging with us libbies.



SQM said:


> Why do I feel that food fraud is so much smaller than the other types of fraud the pols indulge in?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I read the article. Typical Keynesian economics. They think that they can manipulate everything. The problem is that it creates bubbles. While economists aren't too concerned about bubbles, they are devastating to the masses. Just look at what the housing bubble of 2008 did to everyday people. Only a true currency backed by something of value like gold, protects the people. Keynesian economics is like a house of cards. Eventually it will fall.


There are many economists who disagree with that opinion. And who dislike bubbles.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Good. That's what we're trying to accomplish here. Thanks.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Services for the homeless are admirable and necessary. I commend you for your efforts. But what I'm talking about is turning the food banks into something new. The food banks would still receive donations from grocery stores and individuals etc... But now add in all of the money that the govt spends on food stamps. Create food bank "stores" wherever they are needed. They would need refrigeration but would not be cooking the food, just distributing it. Instead of receiving money, their needs would be met. Children would not go without food because mommy sold the food stamps for drugs. (Don't accuse me of being judgmental. I KNOW that this happens!). By buying in bulk and buying what there was an excess of, costs could be kept down to reach those in need.
> 
> I didn't think this out ahead. I'm just running with ideas as they come to me. I just know there gotta be a better way.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

alcameron said:


> The suggestion of serving the needy through food banks is well-meaning. Once you start thinking about the numbers of people, their lack of transportation, lack of cooking facilities or not having even a roof over their heads, you suddenly realize that helping those unable to help themselves is a gigantic task. Some have no place to clean up. Some have no family. Some have physical and/or mental disabilities. Even those with a roof over their heads who have a roommate or caregiver can't always find their way back home even if it's two blocks away. Most are lacking medical and dental care. Some have addictions. Some are malnourished. Some sleep outside in encampments. One client told me of being roused by the police while he was all snug in his underground "rabbit hole" he had settled into with his sleeping bag and candle. They didn't see anyone and decided to fill the hole with him in it. He ended up in the hospital with a collapsed lung and aspiration pneumonia. Sometimes they bring their children along to get a free lunch. Some of them get work from time to time loading boxes or doing garden work. We have people with serious problems, and I have been moved to tears more than once. Taking care of those less fortunate is a huge problem, and government programs HAVE to continue to exist--in several forms.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: You are such a good woman.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> I don't have time to do a real search, so I went to Snopes, which has a fun piece on the 2012 presidential election, showing how nearly all "evidence" of voter fraud was false. http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/2012fraud.asp


I'm too tired to care. I'd heard of instances not covered by the snopes article, but for now, you can have it because I don't want to look for bookmarks or research.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Have a good trip and get home safe.


Thanks! I will!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I'm too tired to care. I'd heard of instances not covered by the snopes article, but for now, you can have it because I don't want to look for bookmarks or research.


Good. Saves me time. Now go to bed so you can take your trip tomorrow. Goodnight, Nebraska, and everyone else.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Excellent points Marilyn.

Present state of government is an issue. I feel we need REAL campaign reform. Until our representatives are working for us rather than lobbyists, we're doomed. Or a time of reckoning will come, and it will be bloody.



MarilynKnits said:


> Here is an issue where we quibble over nuance.
> 
> I lean toward being anti bureaucracy. I do believe it is necessary to have some sort of organized governance to counter anarchy.
> 
> ...


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

SQM said:


> May I add the coffee fungus that will certainly make buying coffee astronomical. I will soon be forfeiting my seat at Starbuck's.


Oh! Say it isn't so! I'm addicted to Starbuck's frappuccino! Its already too expensive!


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Peace and blessings?!? Really?!?


Yup, really. Ms. Stein has said nothing offensive to me.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I say choose your battles. Make sure you're using your resources well. IMHO



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I agree but shouldn't we at least attempt to eliminate fraud wherever it lies?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

SQM said:


> A Hip Hip Hooray for Our Church Lady. Very impressive-sounding community.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: That's our Al and her community.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> Thanks for your viewpoint.


You're welcome! I LOVE this back and forth. I want to thank everyone who's participated! I just knew that we didn't have to agree to converse. And I was right (about that, at least). :lol:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I think that the government acting against the best interest of the governed is the central problem. Then they can address the other issues.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I guess I'm not "anti" government. I just think we have too much government! Too many laws! But neither do I think that our government acts in our best interest any more.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> There are many economists who disagree with that opinion. And who dislike bubbles.


I know. That's why the Keynesians are running things. I didn't mean that they like them, just that they accept them as part of managing the economy.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Of course it makes a huge difference. Power and ego and control of information to the masses. Some of these guys (Rupert Murdoch) are bad news. (groan)



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Is one REALLY better than another? Almost all of the newspapers, TV stations and radio stations are owned by just a few. I don't know if it makes a difference?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

maysmom said:


> Yup, really. Ms. Stein has said nothing offensive to me.


I was only joking. There hadn't been much peace or blessings around here, lately. That's why I thought it was funny. Is MS Stein still with us?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Good. Saves me time. Now go to bed so you can take your trip tomorrow. Goodnight, Nebraska, and everyone else.


Good night, Purl. Talk to you later!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Of course they are important and should be addressed, but that does not eliminate the need to feed and help the majority. Sometimes I feel that fraud issues are publicized in an effort to divert attention from the real issue. Note, I'm not accusing you. Are others influencing you? Think about it.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Don't BOTH things matter?!? They matter to me!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> Of course it makes a huge difference. Power and ego and control of information to the masses. Some of these guys (Rupert Murdoch) are bad news. (groan)


My point was that they're all owned by the same few.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> No, not at all--I really enjoy this kind of conversation, in fact.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Once again, don't let yourself be diverted. Take it one at a time and research thoroughly.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Do we even want to LOOK at NBC and MSNBC? Blatent lies!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I agree Al.



alcameron said:


> I haven't read anything from a reputable news source that proves that voter fraud is much of a problem in this country.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Not 'of course.' I'd love to see you and Al engage in a true discussion.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Of course! ;-)


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I agree with Poor Purl on this one.



Poor Purl said:


> We will have to disagree on this. I don't think any other news service comes close to Fox and its disinformation.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> Of course they are important and should be addressed, but that does not eliminate the need to feed and help the majority. Sometimes I feel that fraud issues are publicized in an effort to divert attention from the real issue. Note, I'm not accusing you. Are others influencing you? Think about it.


The fraud issues aren't imaginary. They exist. Do they matter? I think so. I think we're all influenced to some degree but I'm not easily led. I form my own opinions based upon much reading. I don't think that anyone doesn't want to feed the truly needy. They just don't like being taken advantage of.

Wow, I can hardly put my sentences together anymore. Gotta go to bed. Talk to you later.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thanks Poor Purl. The link provides interesting information which has validity in other instances. I think it is safe to say that voter fraud is an invented issue.



Poor Purl said:


> I don't have time to do a real search, so I went to Snopes, which has a fun piece on the 2012 presidential election, showing how nearly all "evidence" of voter fraud was false. http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/2012fraud.asp


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Pardon me for saying so, but gold backing the dollar is an old battle cry right up there with conspiracy theories.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I read the article. Typical Keynesian economics. They think that they can manipulate everything. The problem is that it creates bubbles. While economists aren't too concerned about bubbles, they are devastating to the masses. Just look at what the housing bubble of 2008 did to everyday people. Only a true currency backed by something of value like gold, protects the people. Keynesian economics is like a house of cards. Eventually it will fall.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

And you're right on that. It's a huge problem that has been changed 'since the olden days' allowing a single owner to have multiple media outlets in the same markets.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> My point was that they're all owned by the same few.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> I have answered your question more than once on KP.
> 
> Adults: They have had a fair trial with a jury of their peers, found guilty, had several appeals, then years later execution.
> 
> ...


I did not mention self defence. As far as 'a fair trial, found guilty by a jury of their peers, and several appeals', well all this applied to Lindy Chamberlain and the man found guilty of the Mosman Park jeweller murders. Both were innocent and in both cases it took many years for their innocence to be proven. Both spent many years in prison. Lindy was convicted on faulty DNA evidence. What the prosecution said was blood in her car was later proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to be anti rust paint. Lindy spent years in gaol and she was innocent. They already had the Mosman Park jewellery in custody and he had confessed to the killing, but the prosecutors chose to ignore it. The young man who was wrongly charged with the murder spent 12 years of his life in gaol for a crime he did not commit. Both did receive monetary compensation from the government but does this really compensate for the years they spent locked behind prison walls. It cost Lindy her marriage. I could also mention the John Button and Darryl Beamish cases. Both men spent time in gaol for murders committed by Eric Cook. Eric Cook confessed to the murders but his confessions were ignored. They had their murderers in gaol. End of story. We still had the death penalty at the time so both men were lucky not to be executed. Eric Cook then went on to commit several other murders and it was not until the book Broken Chains by Estelle Blackburn was published and it was revealed that Eric Cook had attacked other people that their stories were believed. Eric Cook was the last man to be executed in Western Australia in 1964. The death penalty is not a deterrent to crime and innocent people have been wrongly incarcerated, even executed. A trial with a jury of ones peers and several appeals, even a retrial, does not mean that the person is always guilty. And as I said, I have not made any mention of self defence.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

damemary said:


> Of course it makes a huge difference. Power and ego and control of information to the masses. Some of these guys (Rupert Murdoch) are bad news. (groan)


In Australia we did have laws to stop cross media ownership residing in the hands of the few. You could not own and control the printed news media outlets, tv and radio outlets in the same city. This was to ensure that a variety of viewpoints were represented. Unfortunately these laws were abolished with the result that a few very rich and hence powerful people now control all media, print, tv and radio, not only in one city but worldwide.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> That's true, Joey, but even with all the safeguards innocent people still get sent to Death Row. As I mentioned in an earlier post, 142 people facing execution have been exonerated since 1972. The death penalty ensures that a wrongful conviction will never be overturned.


Isn't the death penalty more about revenge than justice?


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

aw9358 said:


> Isn't the death penalty more about revenge than justice?


Wow. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I'm stunned by your depiction and cynical view.

I have faith in the human justice system in my country. No system is perfect, but I believe we get it correct, a very high majority of the time in death penalty convictions.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Wow. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I'm stunned by your depiction and cynical view.
> 
> I have faith in the human justice system in my country. No system is perfect, but I believe we get it correct, a very high majority of the time in death penalty convictions.


When it comes to meting out a punishment that can't be undone then getting it correct "a very high majority of the time" simply isn't good enough. One wrongful conviction and execution is too much.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> When it comes to meting out a punishment that can't be undone then getting it correct "a very high majority of the time" simply isn't good enough. One wrongful conviction and execution is too much.


That's the state committing murder in our names.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

aw9358 said:


> Isn't the death penalty more about revenge than justice?


Of course. It's been known since the days of public hangings that seeing someone killed for a crime was no deterrent to committing crime. But there seems to be a blood lust in this country that separates it from other civilized countries.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Of course. It's been known since the days of public hangings that seeing someone killed for a crime was no deterrent to committing crime. But there seems to be a blood lust in this country that separates it from other civilized countries.


So true, Purl--and I have no doubt that they're increasingly disgusted with us. Now we're considering a return to methods that involve torture and/or mutilation (electrocution, hanging, the firing squad) because Europe will not longer sell us the key ingredients for the "death cocktail". It's very telling that we're the only death penalty country experiencing this little dilemma--all the others simply whack the condemned's head off via sword or guillotine.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> No mention of the 50+ million killed in abortions. What crime were they accused of, found guilty, then executed?


Perhaps in an ideal world there would be no capital punishment and no need for abortion--a happy home could be found for every unwanted newborn, and mother who chose to keep their infants wouldn't be subjected to financial hardship and societal discrimination. It's definitely worth working toward as a long-term goal. In the short-term America's adherence to the death penalty is making us look like savages in the eyes of the world, and it's getting worse. Europe won't sell us the drugs anymore for the "death cocktail", so now we have a choice--use less-effective drugs that leave the condemned withering in agony before a roomful of witnesses, or return to guns, ropes, and electrocution. What about all those guillotines the Feds are alleging stocking? Maybe they could be rolled out of storage and put to good use.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Wow. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I'm stunned by your depiction and cynical view.
> 
> I have faith in the human justice system in my country. No system is perfect, but I believe we get it correct, a very high majority of the time in death penalty convictions.


I'm sorry, but a "high majority" just isn't good enough for me. And yes, I am entitled to my opinion.

Sorry, I wrote the above before I saw Susan's post. I really don't think my sentence merited a "wow", either.


----------



## maysmom (Sep 22, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I was only joking. There hadn't been much peace or blessings around here, lately. That's why I thought it was funny. Is MS Stein still with us?


Oh, I see! Peace and blessings to you too(and I'm not joking!!)Thanks for your informative posts!


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> But it is OK to kill an unborn child? What have they done to anyone other than being inconvenient?


An unwanted pregnancy may be an "inconvenience" in the relatively pampered West--in other parts of the world, though, adding one more child to a family or a community can mean the difference between life and death for them all. That's why all hard-and-fast rules about abortion ALWAYS being wrong--no matter where in the world, no matter what the circumstances--strikes a false note.
I know you've traveled extensively, Joey, although I don't recall what countries. If you've been through Asia, Africa, or even parts of Eastern Europe, you've surely seen some sights that have left you wondering if every conception is indeed a blessing.


----------



## rocky1991 (May 8, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Earlier someone was asking about forced abortions. I wonder what would have happened if she did not have a cell phone.
> 
> 15-Year-Old Pregnant Girl Held in Abortion Clinic Against Her Will Rescued by Police
> 
> ...


I am not trusting this website. Just because it is"written" doesn't make it true. I am try to find corroberation.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> But it is OK to kill an unborn child? What have they done to anyone other than being inconvenient?


They are not comparable.


----------



## rocky1991 (May 8, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Obviously no woman should be force to abort against her will--but I suspect the clinic tried to hold her because legally they couldn't release a minor into the custody of an obviously unstable woman. Sad story, though--I can't foresee any happy ending here.


Was anyone charged for kidnapping?


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

aw9358 said:


> I'm sorry, but a "high majority" just isn't good enough for me. And yes, I am entitled to my opinion.
> 
> Sorry, I wrote the above before I saw Susan's post. I really don't think my sentence merited a "wow", either.


Your cynical statement wasn't about the erroneous convictions. You didn't even make mention of them, I did.

Your stunning cynicism, that you seem to be trying to now run from is that you believe "revenge" is the reason behind a death sentence.

My entitled opinion remains at "WOW."


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

IF this thread were truly all about abortion, do you seriously think it would be on #9 now? PLEASE do not answer. That was a rhetorical question. That means an answer is unnecessary.



joeysomma said:


> This thread is about abortion! Do you want discussion on abortion on the real war on women or POV or LLOL?
> 
> If you want it there, I can post my articles there.
> 
> As long as someone is posting on this thread, I will continue to remind you that this thread is about abortion.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Maybe in some people's psyche. Others feel deeply that there are some crimes so heinous that a life is forfeit in the name of justice.



aw9358 said:


> Isn't the death penalty more about revenge than justice?


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> But it is OK to kill an unborn child? What have they done to anyone other than being inconvenient?


Sure, according to her, it's justified 'revenge.'


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Agreed. Also common sense tells us that something unjust is going on when many more minorities and poor are executed than the rich able to work the system.



susanmos2000 said:


> When it comes to meting out a punishment that can't be undone then getting it correct "a very high majority of the time" simply isn't good enough. One wrongful conviction and execution is too much.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

rocky1991 said:


> I am not trusting this website. Just because it is"written" doesn't make it true. I am try to find corroberation.


Good luck with that. Let us know what you find.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Sure, according to her, it's justified 'revenge.'


What on earth are you talking about? Utterly pathetic.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Your cynical statement wasn't about the erroneous convictions. You didn't even make mention of them, I did.
> 
> Your stunning cynicism, that you seem to be trying to now run from is that you believe "revenge" is the reason behind a death sentence.
> 
> My entitled opinion remains at "WOW."


I am absolutely not running away from anything I said. I do not believe in the death penalty. I was merely trying to say that it seems to me that it is more about a desire for revenge than for justice. Please do not put words in my mouth.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

joeysomma
I remember your children looking for a 2nd or full-time job, other children are looking for just one meal a day no matter how meager. Compassion would be in order if you want to be a true Christian. Time to learn.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Plebian0464 said:


> The only "revenge" going on in relation to the pro-choice issue is the revenge men and self-loathing women put on other women for being "sluts". Sluts don't deserve to control their own bodies, and women in general don't "need" to have sex even though it's medically documented that needing/wanting to have sex is a HEALTHFUL choice and abstaining is not in any, way shape or form natural or necessary.
> 
> Frigid women who don't LIKE sex and are generally unloving individuals, are the very ones that argue that women should put an "asprin between their legs" as a form of birth control and tell other women that they are 'wrong' for having/wanting sex.
> 
> ...


Plebian0464
So eloquently stated. Thank you.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> Perhaps in an ideal world there would be no capital punishment and no need for abortion--a happy home could be found for every unwanted newborn, and mother who chose to keep their infants wouldn't be subjected to financial hardship and societal discrimination. It's definitely worth working toward as a long-term goal. In the short-term America's adherence to the death penalty is making us look like savages in the eyes of the world, and it's getting worse. Europe won't sell us the drugs anymore for the "death cocktail", so now we have a choice--use less-effective drugs that leave the condemned withering in agony before a roomful of witnesses, or return to guns, ropes, and electrocution. What about all those guillotines the Feds are alleging stocking? Maybe they could be rolled out of storage and put to good use.


I am in such a quandary about the death penalty. Of course, I was against it as soon as I grew up. But then one day I read an account of what an executed man did to a very young girl - in awful, graphic details. Since then, when I hear of some guy being executed for some horrendous crime, I say - Get rid of the bum. Of course I worry about innocent people and the severely mentally ill being executed and that is why I am in a quandary. But then again, when I saw Richard Speck, prancing around prison like every man's best Friday night date, and remembered his slaying of the Chicago nursing students when I lived there, again I say - Get rid of the bum. And I am the least blood-thirsty person you know. Not true - I am a carnivore at heart but rarely eat meat now that I am an old-age pensioner.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

damemary said:


> I think that the government acting against the best interest of the governed is the central problem. Then they can address the other issues.


damemary
time for change. Throw the Rascals out and keep a close eye on the Newcomers.
KFN speaks often about too much Government. That is really not the case or we would be overflowing with all sorts of luxuries like renewable energy, rapid system trains, modern Bridges etc. 
The size of government is not the problem, the Slackers we voted into office are. Actually they are Welfare Recipients. They have neglected us for all too long. Time for change.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Huckleberry said:


> damemary
> time for change. Throw the Rascals out and keep a close eye on the Newcomers.
> KFN speaks often about too much Government. That is really not the case or we would be overflowing with all sorts of luxuries like renewable energy, rapid system trains, modern Bridges etc.
> The size of government is not the problem, the Slackers we voted into office are. Actually they are Welfare Recipients. They have neglected us for all too long. Time for change.


Actually building rapid system trains is a good idea. Wouldn't it be great to travel much faster? I hope I live to experience it. And the project would hire oodles of people. All good.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> I am in such a quandary about the death penalty. Of course, I was against it as soon as I grew up. But then one day I read an account of what an executed man did to a very young girl - in awful, graphic details. Since then, when I hear of some guy being executed for some horrendous crime, I say - Get rid of the bum. Of course I worry about innocent people and the severely mentally ill being executed and that is why I am in a quandary. But then again, when I saw Richard Speck, prancing around prison like every man's best Friday night date, and remembered his slaying of the Chicago nursing students when I lived there, again I say - Get rid of the bum. And I am the least blood-thirsty person you know. Not true - I am a carnivore at heart but rarely eat meat now that I am an old-age pensioner.


Does it bother you that Charles Manson is still alive?


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

aw9358 said:


> I am absolutely not running away from anything I said. I do not believe in the death penalty. I was merely trying to say that it seems to me that it is more about a desire for revenge than for justice. Please do not put words in my mouth.


I understood your words, and I didn't change them or attempt to put them in your mouth. I didn't have to, you said them.

I simply stated my shock at your expressed belief. I have no idea why you are so bothered by me repeating my stunned disbelief of your belief. If you don't like what you believe, change.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

SQM said:


> Actually building rapid system trains is a good idea. Wouldn't it be great to travel much faster? I hope I live to experience it. And the project would hire oodles of people. All good.


Ride the Shinkansen (Bullet Trains) in Japan. They already exist and are fantastic, clean and comfortable. You can set your wristwatch to them as they are nearly never delayed as they move massive amounts of people efficiently.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> I understood your words, and I didn't change them or attempt to put them in your mouth. I didn't have to, you said them.
> 
> I simply stated my shock at your expressed belief. I have no idea why you are so bothered by me repeating my stunned disbelief of your belief. If you don't like what you believe, change.


So what was that rubbish about my taking "revenge" on a foetus?

I do not know what to make of your final sentence. I have rarely seen such idiotic rambling.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

I just saw this on the main forum. I thought It spoke volumes. I thought I would post it as I felt like yesterday was a rough day.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Designer1234 said:


> I just saw this on the main forum. I thought It spoke volumes. I thought I would post it as I felt like yesterday was a rough day.


Thank you. It looks like a useful thing to repeat. I hope today is a better one for you.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

SQM said:


> I am in such a quandary about the death penalty. Of course, I was against it as soon as I grew up. But then one day I read an account of what an executed man did to a very young girl - in awful, graphic details. Since then, when I hear of some guy being executed for some horrendous crime, I say - Get rid of the bum. Of course I worry about innocent people and the severely mentally ill being executed and that is why I am in a quandary. But then again, when I saw Richard Speck, prancing around prison like every man's best Friday night date, and remembered his slaying of the Chicago nursing students when I lived there, again I say - Get rid of the bum. And I am the least blood-thirsty person you know. Not true - I am a carnivore at heart but rarely eat meat now that I am an old-age pensioner.


Richard Speck's murder spree was a few years before my time, but I did see the video and know what he got up to in prison. To me it seems that justice was served in that he lived out the remainder of his life in absolute and total degradation. Even after death his family refused to claim the body--he was cremated, and the ashes were scattered in some undisclosed location by complete strangers. What could be a more fitting end than that for such a man?

But I believe everyone who's against the death penalty comes nose-to-nose at some point with a case so heinous that they find themselves wavering a bit. For me the acid test came a few months ago, when my brother's cancer was definitively linked to 9/11 and his treatment costs suddenly covered by funds set aside for those now suffering from cancer and serious respiratory ills. When I heard that an image of the horrible smirking Mohamed Atta instantly surfaced in my mind, and....well, I had to Confess the following Saturday to committing murder in my heart--I wanted that man alive and in front of me so I could tear him limb from limb.

I think a desire for justice and yes, even for revenge is natural enough, particularly for those personally affected by horrible criminal acts. If justice could be served instantaneously and with no possibility of error then I might be able to see it. But the Death Penalty as practiced in the US is anything but. Every execution becomes a circus with dozens and dozens of appeals, last-minute stays of execution, major bungling by the medical staff that leads to headline-making horrors, and always always the possibility that the guy strapped to the gurney is in fact innocent.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> damemary
> time for change. Throw the Rascals out and keep a close eye on the Newcomers.
> 
> The size of government is not the problem, the Slackers we voted into office are. Actually they are Welfare Recipients. They have neglected us for all too long. Time for change.


I would think that everyone on both threads would agree to your statement. We are finding the same thing up north - and it is not getting better. Changing from caring about the people you represent to taking advantage in every way you can. Looking after your own interests instead of the interests of the people who elected you. There are still a few good ones but more and more I am disillusioned with the people who run for offices and are elected. It is getting so expensive to run for office that you have to be rich to put your name forward.

More and more people are opting out of even voting because they are disillusioned and feel that nothing will change.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

aw9358 said:


> So what was that rubbish about my taking "revenge" on a foetus?
> 
> I do not know what to make of your final sentence. I have rarely seen such idiotic rambling.


Just ignore me, the rambling idiot, then.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Just ignore me, the rambling idiot, then.


It will be a pleasure.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Does it bother you that Charles Manson is still alive?


yeah it certainly seems that he has adapted to prison life quite well. But again, the guy is a super-duper bleeped up sociopath. I think more useful would be to get some research money into that area. His state murder would do nothing only sparing me the very occasional glimpse I see of him on the media. I do feel terrible pain for his victims and am unable to watch any dramatizations and am actually against making theatre out of such an unspeakable act.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

aw9358 said:


> What on earth are you talking about? Utterly pathetic.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Plebian0464 said:


> The VERY FIRST post was an example of how conservatives engage in a war on women. So THAT'S what the topic is about.
> 
> No, it's about the war on women and how anti-choicers use abortion rights to terrorize women.
> 
> ...


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: Bravo. Well-reasoned.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Huckleberry said:


> joeysomma
> I remember your children looking for a 2nd or full-time job, other children are looking for just one meal a day no matter how meager. Compassion would be in order if you want to be a true Christian. Time to learn.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I understand your feelings perfectly. If we as a society have the death penalty in our lexicon, some heinous crimes demand it.



SQM said:


> I am in such a quandary about the death penalty. Of course, I was against it as soon as I grew up. But then one day I read an account of what an executed man did to a very young girl - in awful, graphic details. Since then, when I hear of some guy being executed for some horrendous crime, I say - Get rid of the bum. Of course I worry about innocent people and the severely mentally ill being executed and that is why I am in a quandary. But then again, when I saw Richard Speck, prancing around prison like every man's best Friday night date, and remembered his slaying of the Chicago nursing students when I lived there, again I say - Get rid of the bum. And I am the least blood-thirsty person you know. Not true - I am a carnivore at heart but rarely eat meat now that I am an old-age pensioner.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Huckleberry said:


> damemary
> time for change. Throw the Rascals out and keep a close eye on the Newcomers.
> KFN speaks often about too much Government. That is really not the case or we would be overflowing with all sorts of luxuries like renewable energy, rapid system trains, modern Bridges etc.
> The size of government is not the problem, the Slackers we voted into office are. Actually they are Welfare Recipients. They have neglected us for all too long. Time for change.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: Eloquent as usual Huck.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> No, I don't know how people manage on so little either. I know food prices vary around the nation, but in our area a pound of apples is $2.79--a gallon of milk $3.79--a pound of 80/20 hamburger $4.29. Toss in a box of cereal ($3.29), a can of tuna fish ($1.29), and a loaf of inexpensive bread ($2.29) and come away with less than two days' worth of food for a 6'2" man, a petite woman, and a kid going into a growth spurt who seems ready to eat the table.


Probably the markets with lower prices and weekly specials are not where the poorest live. With coupons, watching the day old shelf and watching for sales, we can get apples for about $1.50 to $2.00 a pound, store brand cereal for about $2.00 a box, tuna (frequently on sale) for .90 to $1.00 and day old bread for about $1.00. Milk and ground beef are high all over. But chicken is often on sale, as are stewable cuts of beef and some cuts of pork. The county provides vouchers to people who qualify as low income to purchase from farmers markets that truck fresh produce to the low income housing developments periodically during the summer, enabling them to select fresh produce at affordable prices. Every little bit helps, but it feels like so little.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

It bothers me sometimes that Charles Manson is still in jail. Keep in mind he was never linked by any physical evidence to the crimes. On the other hand, I sleep better at night knowing he's locked up.

Devil's advocate time: Did the 'dirty hippy' attitude and graphic reporting play into this case? Just asking for opinion.



Poor Purl said:


> Does it bother you that Charles Manson is still alive?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

You get it.



aw9358 said:


> So what was that rubbish about my taking "revenge" on a foetus?
> 
> I do not know what to make of your final sentence. I have rarely seen such idiotic rambling.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Good inspiration, Shirley. Thanks.



Designer1234 said:


> I just saw this on the main forum. I thought It spoke volumes. I thought I would post it as I felt like yesterday was a rough day.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

You speak the truth.



knitpresentgifts said:


> Just ignore me, the rambling idiot, then.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

damemary said:


> It bothers me sometimes that Charles Manson is still in jail. Keep in mind he was never linked by any physical evidence to the crimes. On the other hand, I sleep better at night knowing he's locked up.
> 
> Devil's advocate time: Did the 'dirty hippy' attitude and graphic reporting play into this case? Just asking for opinion.


How did they get him if there were no evidence? The words of his females? If he was their mentor, it is guilt by association and he is where he belongs. Have any of them been released?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

And the transportation issue is difficult to surmount. Then there's the cooking facilities and equipment. Every time I think of the complications, my head spins.



MarilynKnits said:


> Probably the markets with lower prices and weekly specials are not where the poorest live. With coupons, watching the day old shelf and watching for sales, we can get apples for about $1.50 to $2.00 a pound, store brand cereal for about $2.00 a box, tuna (frequently on sale) for .90 to $1.00 and day old bread for about $1.00. Milk and ground beef are high all over. But chicken is often on sale, as are stewable cuts of beef and some cuts of pork. The county provides vouchers to people who qualify as low income to purchase from farmers markets that truck fresh produce to the low income housing developments periodically during the summer, enabling them to select fresh produce at affordable prices. Every little bit helps, but it feels like so little.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Squeaky Fromme, one of Charlie's most trusted associates had no proven association with the killings and wasn't charged with anything. She later ended up in jail for trying to kill President Ford.

Guilt by association has little to do in our legal system. Think Mafia, for instance.

To the best of my knowledge, none of the murderers have been paroled.



SQM said:


> How did they get him if there were no evidence? The words of his females? If he was their mentor, it is guilt by association and he is where he belongs. Have any of them been released?


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

damemary said:


> Squeaky Fromme, one of Charlie's most trusted associates had no proven association with the killings and wasn't charged with anything. She later ended up in jail for trying to kill President Ford.
> 
> Guilt by association has little to do in our legal system. Think Mafia, for instance.
> 
> To the best of my knowledge, none of the murderers have been paroled.


yeah Squeaky was a bit off. I forgot she was connected with Manson. I see you are on first-name basis with him. You still did not say how the feds were able to nail Manson. Does anyone remember?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> It bothers me sometimes that Charles Manson is still in jail. Keep in mind he was never linked by any physical evidence to the crimes. On the other hand, I sleep better at night knowing he's locked up.
> 
> Devil's advocate time: Did the 'dirty hippy' attitude and graphic reporting play into this case? Just asking for opinion.


Wikipedia: "In 1971 he <Manson> was found guilty of conspiracy to commit the murders of seven people, actress Sharon Tate and four other people at Tate's home, and the next day, a married couple, Leno and Rosemary LaBianca, all carried out by members of the group at his instruction. He was convicted of the murders through the joint-responsibility rule, which makes each member of a conspiracy guilty of crimes his fellow conspirators commit in furtherance of the conspiracy's objective." There couldn't possibly be physical evidence - the heads of Mafia families don't do their own killing; they send minions for that. I think it was clear that Manson was the head of his family.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Wikipedia: "In 1971 he <Manson> was found guilty of conspiracy to commit the murders of seven people, actress Sharon Tate and four other people at Tate's home, and the next day, a married couple, Leno and Rosemary LaBianca, all carried out by members of the group at his instruction. He was convicted of the murders through the joint-responsibility rule, which makes each member of a conspiracy guilty of crimes his fellow conspirators commit in furtherance of the conspiracy's objective." There couldn't possibly be physical evidence - the heads of Mafia families don't do their own killing; they send minions for that. I think it was clear that Manson was the head of his family.


Yeah that is what I remember. It is ghastly to hear about that crime again. I never can stand to watch the old clips. And as odd as he is, I always felt bad for Polansky. He had a horrible childhood but did make some stupid choices.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

I found this article interesting. I would have scaled it down, but I am typing with 1 finger. My rotary cutter attacked me!! So I am pulling a joey and will copy and paste.
For those that think that carrying the poor on federal welfare and foodstamps is a travesty, read this. You will be surprised where your tax dollars are going.


Republicans are outraged for all the wrong reasons.

This past Friday, $5 billion was automatically slashed from the federal food stamps program, affecting the lives of 47 million Americans.

The USDA estimates that because of these cuts, a family of four who receives food stamps benefits will lose about 20 meals per month.

But these enormous cuts to food stamps aren't enough for Republicans.

They still want to slash an additional $40 billion from the program in the name of reducing spending and federal debt.

Republicans love to argue that programs like SNAP - the federal food stamps program  and other social safety net programs put an unfair burden on American taxpayers, but if they just took a minute to crunch the numbers, they'd realize that's flat out wrong.

In 2012, the average American taxpayer making $50,000 per year paid just $36 towards the food stamps program.

That's just ten cents a day!

That's less than the cost of a gumball.

But Republicans think that's still too high a price to pay to help the neediest and most vulnerable Americans.

And when it comes to funding the rest of America's social safety net programs, the average American taxpayer making $50,000 a year pays just over six dollars a year.

Simply put, the American taxpayer isn't paying much for social safety net programs like food stamps and Medicare.

But we are paying a lot for the billions of dollars the U.S. government gives to corporate America each year.

The average American family pays a staggering $6,000 a year in subsidies to Republican-friendly big business.

And that's just the average family. A family making more than $50,000 a year - say $70,000 a year - pays even more to pad the wallets of corporate America.

So where does some of that $6,000 that you and I are paying every year actually go?

For starters, $870 of it goes to direct subsidies and grants for corporations.

This includes money for subsidies to Big Oil companies that are polluting our skies and fueling climate change and global warming. Compare that to the $36 you and I pay for food stamps a year.

An additional $870 goes to corporate tax subsidies.

The Tax Foundation has found that the "special tax provisions" of corporations cost taxpayers over $100 billion per year, or roughly $870 per family.

But in reality, that number is much higher.

Citizens for Tax Justice found that the U.S. Treasury lost $181 billion in corporate tax subsidies, which means the average American family could be out as much as $1,600 per year. 

Finally, of the $6,000 in corporate subsidies that the average American family pays each year, $1,231 of it goes to making up for revenue losses from corporate tax havens.

This money goes to recouping losses from giant transnational corporations like Apple and GE that hide their money overseas to boost profits and avoid paying taxes to help the American economy.

The bottom-line here is that American families are paying $6,000 or more per year to subsidize giant transnational corporations that are already making billions and billions of dollars in profit each year. In the past decade alone, corporations have doubled their profits.

Republicans on Capitol Hill keep suggesting that we can't afford to help the poor in this country, and they're wrong.

What we really can't afford is doling out $100 billion each year to corporations that don't need it.

That's where the real outrage and the real news coverage should be.

It's time to bring an end to corporate welfare, and to use those dollars to help those Americans who need it the most.



***This article was first published on Truthout and any reprint or reproduction on any other website must acknowledge Truthout as the original site of publication.
Written in 2013.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Wikipedia: "In 1971 he <Manson> was found guilty of conspiracy to commit the murders of seven people, actress Sharon Tate and four other people at Tate's home, and the next day, a married couple, Leno and Rosemary LaBianca, all carried out by members of the group at his instruction. He was convicted of the murders through the joint-responsibility rule, which makes each member of a conspiracy guilty of crimes his fellow conspirators commit in furtherance of the conspiracy's objective." There couldn't possibly be physical evidence - the heads of Mafia families don't do their own killing; they send minions for that. I think it was clear that Manson was the head of his family.


Squeaky (Fromme) has been out of prison for a few years.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> I found this article interesting. I would have scaled it down, but I am typing with 1 finger. My rotary cutter attacked me!! So I am pulling a joey and will copy and paste.
> For those that think that carrying the poor on federal welfare and foodstamps is a travesty, read this. You will be surprised where your tax dollars are going.
> 
> Republicans are outraged for all the wrong reasons.
> ...


"Interesting" doesn't do it justice. I'm glad you pasted the whole thing, Patty. This is the kind of information we rarely get, yet people are angry about exactly this kind of thing. It's like that guy on food stamps who buys lobster. When you break it down, each taxpayer may spend 2 cents on this guy's lobster, while subsidies to oil companies, *which don't need them*, cost us much more and nobody complains about them.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

alcameron said:


> Squeaky (Fromme) has been out of prison for a few years.


Didn't she blame her criminality on some kind of snack cake? I bet she never got that in prison.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> "Interesting" doesn't do it justice. I'm glad you pasted the whole thing, Patty. This is the kind of information we rarely get, yet people are angry about exactly this kind of thing. It's like that guy on food stamps who buys lobster. When you break it down, each taxpayer may spend 2 cents on this guy's lobster, while subsidies to oil companies, *which don't need them*, cost us much more and nobody complains about them.


"Those corporate CEO's worked hard for their money and they provide so many jobs that they're ENTITLED to all those perks and loopholes. We, the taxpayers, ought to be happy to support them this way. You ladies are just envious of their good fortune and money."

:XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Does it bother you that Charles Manson is still alive?


Poor Purl
YES and why? The money to keep him alive could be spend on children in the inner Cities so that they will not take a path to crime. 
When there is no question about who is guilty, I am for the death penalty. If ANY doubt, Life without Parole.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

alcameron said:


> "Those corporate CEO's worked hard for their money and they provide so many jobs that they're ENTITLED to all those perks and loopholes. We, the taxpayers, ought to be happy to support them this way. You ladies are just envious of their good fortune and money."
> 
> :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


Yeah, right.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> Poor Purl
> YES and why? The money to keep him alive could be spend on children in the inner Cities so that they will not take a path to crime.
> When there is no question about who is guilty, I am for the death penalty. If ANY doubt, Life without Parole.


*Report of the California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice (2008):*

The additional cost of confining an inmate to death row, as compared to the maximum security prisons where those sentenced to life without possibility of parole ordinarily serve their sentences, is $90,000 per year per inmate. With Californias current death row population of 670, that accounts for $63.3 million annually.

Using conservative rough projections, the Commission estimates the annual costs of the present (death penalty) system to be $137 million per year.
The cost of the present system with reforms recommended by the Commission to ensure a fair process would be $232.7 million per year.
The cost of a system in which the number of death-eligible crimes was significantly narrowed would be $130 million per year.
The cost of a system which imposes a maximum penalty of lifetime incarceration instead of the death penalty would be $11.5 million per year.
(Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice, June 30, 2008). See also http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/california-cost-study-2011


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I really don't remember all the details but he wasn't there during the murders. I'll try to look it up. Fortunately he doesn't know my name at all. Everybody 'knows' Charlie Manson.



SQM said:


> yeah Squeaky was a bit off. I forgot she was connected with Manson. I see you are on first-name basis with him. You still did not say how the feds were able to nail Manson. Does anyone remember?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

sokpuppet001 said:


> It actually costs more money to execute people than to keep them alive.
> 
> So actually the money SAVED by keeping someone alive could be spent on children everywhere.


Thank you, sokpuppet001.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Sharon Tate was the one who got me....8 months pregnant. (I'm really, really sorry if I set joey off again.)



SQM said:


> Yeah that is what I remember. It is ghastly to hear about that crime again. I never can stand to watch the old clips. And as odd as he is, I always felt bad for Polansky. He had a horrible childhood but did make some stupid choices.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Bratty Patty -- The numbers they are using for the average American family ($50,000) are totally unrealistic.
> 
> A married couple with no children making $50,000 a year only paid $3611 in Federal taxes. How can they pay $6000 for subsidies for big business?
> 
> ...


I very much doubt that that's the reason, esp. since it won't have the desired effect. Who has ever felt guilty about not paying more taxes?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thanks for typing disabled. This is a powerful article that I'm sure will be challenged. I say stuff it. Let's get our priorities and math straight. Good work Patty.



BrattyPatty said:


> I found this article interesting. I would have scaled it down, but I am typing with 1 finger. My rotary cutter attacked me!! So I am pulling a joey and will copy and paste.
> For those that think that carrying the poor on federal welfare and foodstamps is a travesty, read this. You will be surprised where your tax dollars are going.
> 
> Republicans are outraged for all the wrong reasons.
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I sense a load of sarcasm Al.



alcameron said:


> "Those corporate CEO's worked hard for their money and they provide so many jobs that they're ENTITLED to all those perks and loopholes. We, the taxpayers, ought to be happy to support them this way. You ladies are just envious of their good fortune and money."
> 
> :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Looks like the numbers say, 'keep them in prison.'



Poor Purl said:


> *Report of the California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice (2008):*
> 
> The additional cost of confining an inmate to death row, as compared to the maximum security prisons where those sentenced to life without possibility of parole ordinarily serve their sentences, is $90,000 per year per inmate. With Californias current death row population of 670, that accounts for $63.3 million annually.
> 
> ...


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Bratty Patty -- The numbers they are using for the average American family ($50,000) are totally unrealistic.
> 
> A married couple with no children making $50,000 a year only paid $3611 in Federal taxes. How can they pay $6000 for subsidies for big business?
> 
> ...


Using the tax tables, a married couple filing jointly on an income of $50,000 would pay $6592.50, not $3611:

10% on taxable income from $0 to $18,150, or $1,815 plus
15% on taxable income over $18,150 to $73,800, - that is, 15% of $50,000 -18,150=15% of $31,850=$4,777.50.

$1,815+4,777.50=$6,592.50. Approximately.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I've been looking but everything is sensationalized so far. Just looking for basic facts.



damemary said:


> I really don't remember all the details but he wasn't there during the murders. I'll try to look it up. Fortunately he doesn't know my name at all. Everybody 'knows' Charlie Manson.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thank you Purl.



Poor Purl said:


> Using the tax tables, a married couple filing jointly on an income of $50,000 would pay $6592.50, not $3611:
> 
> 10% on taxable income from $0 to $18,150, or $1,815 plus
> 15% on taxable income over $18,150 to $73,800, - that is, 15% of $50,000 -18,150=15% of $31,850=$4,777.50.
> ...


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> Sharon Tate was the one who got me....8 months pregnant. (I'm really, really sorry if I set joey off again.)


Sharon Tate got you 8 months pregnant?


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

sokpuppet001 said:


> It actually costs more money to execute people than to keep them alive.
> 
> So actually the money SAVED by keeping someone alive could be spent on children everywhere.


I also think of the person or persons responsible for the execution. It surely must take a toll on their lives. What I am against is convicted criminals being released on parole too early. Some of these then continue to commit horrific murders or rapes. The case of Jill Meagher springs to mind. Her murderer Adrian Bayley had an horrific history of rape. He was on parole, again, when he murdered Jill Meagher. He was now been sentenced to life, with a maximum of 35 years before he can apply for parole. We do have people incarcerated with their files marked 'never to be released' but this is rare. I know our system is different here, a life sentence for murder is usually 14 years, meaning they can be released on parole after 7 years. I also know that the relatives of a murder victim often call for the death penalty to be reintroduced, but passing the death sentence on the murderer will not bring their loved one back. I believe that their call for the reintroduction of the death penalty is more out of a desire for revenge than justice. Just my thoughts.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Why don't you find out how to calculate taxable income before you proclaim to know what the tax is?
> 
> What happened to personal exemptions and standard deduction? But then you must take yours to a tax professional.
> 
> irs.gov publ 17


Do you object to that? In fact, I'm well aware of taxable income, but the article didn't say whether the $50,000 was gross or adjusted income, or even whether it was talking about only federal or state as well (at least I don't recall).

And (this is a real question to you) don't the tax tables include all exemptions and the standard deductions? I've never been able to use them because of pretty complicated returns.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> Why don't you find out how to calculate taxable income before you proclaim to know what the tax is?
> 
> What happened to personal exemptions and standard deduction? But then you must take yours to a tax professional.
> 
> irs.gov publ 17


 :thumbup: Of course she must. She doesn't understand how taxes are calculated but is more than willing to tell us how they are regardless.

Good for you Joey for always pointing out the truth.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Do you object to that? In fact, I'm well aware of taxable income, but the article didn't say whether the $50,000 was gross or adjusted income, or even whether it was talking about only federal or state as well (at least I don't recall).
> 
> And (this is a real question to you) don't the tax tables include all exemptions and the standard deductions? I've never been able to use them because of pretty complicated returns.


If it wasn't pointed out gross vs. AGI, why then did you calculate on the $50K? When amounts re taxable income or salaries are discussed, no one ever speaks about AGI, it is always gross amounts. No one talks about state taxes either, when discussing taxes because each state can determine its own tax rate.

If you did know something about taxes, as you claim, none of this would have to be pointed out to you.

Your last two statements are the most ridiculous and prove to me you do not know about completing income tax returns. The Tax Tables you mention are used to calculate your tax liability *always after* all deductions, credits and exemptions have already been addressed.

The complexity of calculating your taxable income has *zero* to do with the tax tables! Your suggestion that you've never been able to use the tax tables because of the complexity of your return is laughable and shows once again your lack of understanding how an income tax return is prepared. You only use the tax tables AFTER you have done all the work on your tax return to calculate the amount of your tax liability for that particular taxable year.

Again, *zero* to do with the complexity of your return. You need to have a substantially higher than average AGI to NOT use the tax tables, btw.

My suggestion to you is leave preparing and discussing tax returns to the professionals.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> Since you don't know * if* the tax tables include standard deduction and exemptions, why are you commenting on something you know very little about?
> 
> Your first statement did not differentiate between income and taxable income. In fact, you used the same number for both.
> 
> Remember, I am a tax professional.


 :thumbup: I love how she is telling us how things work. I'm not a tax professional, but even I can recognize the errors in her statements and logic.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Since you don't know * if* the tax tables include standard deduction and exemptions, why are you commenting on something you know very little about?
> 
> Your first statement did not differentiate between income and taxable income. In fact, you used the same number for both.
> 
> Remember, I am a tax professional.


So then you know for certain that that $50,000 was gross income and got adjusted downward? I used the same number for both because it was the only number given.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> If it wasn't pointed out gross vs. AGI, why then did you calculate on the $50K? When amounts re taxable income or salaries are discussed, no one ever speaks about AGI, it is always gross amounts. No one talks about state taxes either, when discussing taxes because each state can determine its own tax rate.
> 
> If you did know something about taxes, as you claim, none of this would have to be pointed out to you.
> 
> ...


You certainly can go on and on about nothing. At least Joey is succinct. Okay, professional, I leave it all to you.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> So then you know for certain that that $50,000 was gross income and got adjusted downward? I used the same number for both because it was the only number given.


I really don't care whether the numbers are correct. While I am happy to pay taxes that go to a variety of social programs that help a certain segment of the population, I resent paying one penny to make up for another segment of the population not paying enough. I don't want to subsidize large corporations, CEO's, etc. I don't want to subsidize the workers of Walmart because Walmart doesn't pay their employees well. I dont want to pay more in taxes because corporations and CEO's hide their money in off-shore accounts. I don't want to pay more in taxes because large corporations are sending their jobs to third world countries and China. I don't want my tax dollars going to making up the deficit for a stupid war in Iraq.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

And all tax professionals are not created equal(ly).


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> You certainly can go on and on about nothing. At least Joey is succinct. Okay, professional, I leave it all to you.


The tax code has more than 73,000 pages. I'll be happy to use all of them to refute every lie and exaggerated statement you make trying to impress with your wealth, complexity and knowledge of your tax return which you do not possess.

I answered, explained and addressed only your erroneous claims.

Joey directed you to the proper publication for a quick assist, but you want everything handed to you, with sources, discussion and justification. Don't make so many erroneous statements so those who must correct you can be more concise.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

alcameron said:


> And all tax professionals are not created equal(ly).


Some - like the one in question - are birthers. We should ask for their birth certificates.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> The tax code has more than 73,000 pages. I'll be happy to use all of them to refute every lie and exaggerated statement you make trying to impress us with your wealth, complexity and knowledge of your tax return which you do not possess.
> 
> Joey directed you to the proper publication for a quick assist, but you want everything handed to you, with sources, discussion and justification. Don't make so many erroneous statements so those who must correct you can be more succinct.


Sure, sure.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

alcameron said:


> I really don't care whether the numbers are correct. While I am happy to pay taxes that go to a variety of social programs that help a certain segment of the population, I resent paying one penny to make up for another segment of the population not paying enough. I don't want to subsidize large corporations, CEO's, etc. I don't want to subsidize the workers of Walmart because Walmart doesn't pay their employees well. I dont want to pay more in taxes because corporations and CEO's hide their money in off-shore accounts. I don't want to pay more in taxes because large corporations are sending their jobs to third world countries and China. I don't want my tax dollars going to making up the deficit for a stupid war in Iraq.


In this case we wanted correct numbers because it was showing how little is spent on social programs compared to how much is spent (or lost) on corporate welfare. But Joey thinks it's to make us feel guilty about not paying enough taxes.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I agree that the majority are not deadbeats. But could we not TRY to eliminate the deadbeats? Could anyone explain to me why people are allowed to use ebt cards at liquor stores, strip clubs and casinos? If we care so much about the needy, why is this allowed? If mommy or daddy is using their "food" funds for things such as this, children are still going hungry. Why can't we at least try? In the past, people were only allowed to buy real food with their food stamps! Can someone explain to me why we should buy them beer, cigarettes, soda etc? Why is someone, even ONE person allowed to buy lobster with their ebt card? The taxpayers footing the bill, likely can't afford lobster. The whole systemhas been changed to encourage cheating. Why can't we fix it, so that those who need help get it and those who cheat, don't?


We do try to eliminate deadbeats from using food stamps for things they are not allowed to use them for. Some people also sell their food stamps for cash. *The rules about buying "real" food with food stamps are still firmly in place. When someone succeeds in using food stamps for anything else, they do so with the cooperation of the seller.*

To the best of my knowledge, the thing that's changed about food stamps is that plastic cards are used instead of the old paper style "stamps". I'm not sure what to say about lobster except maybe "into every life a little lobster must come." but that's pretty flippant. More accurately, there are all sorts of people, whether they use food stamps or not, who are spectacularly bad at grocery shopping, are majorly clueless about good nutrition, and get sucked into impulse buying.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

alcameron said:


> I really don't care whether the numbers are correct. While I am happy to pay taxes that go to a variety of social programs that help a certain segment of the population, I resent paying one penny to make up for another segment of the population not paying enough. I don't want to subsidize large corporations, CEO's, etc. I don't want to subsidize the workers of Walmart because Walmart doesn't pay their employees well. I dont want to pay more in taxes because corporations and CEO's hide their money in off-shore accounts. I don't want to pay more in taxes because large corporations are sending their jobs to third world countries and China. I don't want my tax dollars going to making up the deficit for a stupid war in Iraq.


Here Hear! (Not sure which is correct Al). I don't want my tax dollars subsidizing wars and corporations. Give it to the veterans who are suffering because of tax cuts to the military.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Sure, sure.


Definitely plead guilty to your wealth. Ups your cache.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> We do try to eliminate deadbeats from using food stamps for things they are not allowed to use them for. Some people also sell their food stamps for cash. *The rules about buying "real" food with food stamps are still firmly in place. When someone succeeds in using food stamps for anything else, they do so with the cooperation of the seller.*
> 
> To the best of my knowledge, the thing that's changed about food stamps is that plastic cards are used instead of the old paper style "stamps". I'm not sure what to say about lobster except maybe "into every life a little lobster must come." but that's pretty flippant. More accurately, there are all sorts of people, whether they use food stamps or not, who are spectacularly bad at grocery shopping, are majorly clueless about good nutrition, and get sucked into impulse buying.


I agree with you, Maid--and I'd hazard a guess that SNAP recipients are even more particular about stretching their food money than most. After all, unwise choices spell empty refrigerators by the second or third week of the month--and very possibly no cash, credit, or short-term loans available to refill them.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> I guess you didn't either since you used the same number for both.
> 
> The questions are different if the family has retirement income, Social Security, or disability income.
> 
> ...


Okay, I'm certain you know what you're doing. I was just trying to justify the numbers in the article. I guess I couldn't.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> Definitely plead guilty to your wealth. Ups your cache.


Are you kidding? That one went to the trouble of determining my name. What would stop her from going after my income? And why do I need "cache(t)" with people like her?


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> And yet, they are allowed! Criminals rarely obey the laws. Again,why should hard working taxpayers pay for this? Why is it even allowed? Why are ebt cards accepted anywhere? Seems like that could be fixed. Why don't they fix it?


You are asking for an impossible level of compliance for food stamp usage. There is no such thing as 100% compliance with ANY set of rules.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> I will change what I stated. It is just propaganda by the left!


Maybe. Or maybe with a little more info, it's correct. Do you honestly believe that more is paid into (nonmedical) social programs than into corporate welfare/tax avoidance?


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

SQM said:


> Why do I feel that food fraud is so much smaller than the other types of fraud the pols indulge in?


Probably because it's true.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> The reason the price of food has risen so much is inflation. Keep in mind every dollar the govt spends (because it is deficit spending and they're running the printing presses) causes our dollars to be worth less. Hence, we pay more for everything. So think about it this way, giving food stamp benefits actually contributes to the increase in the price of food. Just a fun fact. Not!


Just wait until you see the impact on food prices that the drought in California is having. You may not have been impacted by this yet, but you will be, all too soon.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

SQM said:


> Here Hear! (Not sure which is correct Al). I don't want my tax dollars subsidizing wars and corporations. Give it to the veterans who are suffering because of tax cuts to the military.


The funding to the Vets is not affected in any way by funding to the military. (Different appropriations)


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> I will change what I stated. It is just propaganda by the left!


 :thumbup:


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> Just wait until you see the impact on food prices that the drought in California is having. You may not have been impacted by this yet, but you will be, all too soon.


So true, Maid. I was stunned by the prices last time I went to grocery. Produce prices usually rise in the winter and start dropping in the spring--not this year. Even grapes are still more than three dollars a pound.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Wow. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I'm stunned by your depiction and cynical view.
> 
> I have faith in the human justice system in my country. No system is perfect, but I believe we get it correct, a very high majority of the time in death penalty convictions.


A "very high majority of the time in death penalty convictions" isn't good enough.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

SQM said:


> yeah it certainly seems that he has adapted to prison life quite well. But again, the guy is a super-duper bleeped up sociopath. I think more useful would be to get some research money into that area. His state murder would do nothing only sparing me the very occasional glimpse I see of him on the media. I do feel terrible pain for his victims and am unable to watch any dramatizations and am actually against making theatre out of such an unspeakable act.


I*I wholeheartedly believe that the death penalty does not deter anyone from committing capital crimes. What the death penalty does is remove specific criminals from society and I think that's a good thing.*


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

knitpresentgifts said:


> The funding to the Vets is not affected in any way by funding to the military. (Different appropriations)


Then why are they not being supported? It seems that both Bush and Obama overlooked them. And why are the vets not part of the military budget? What budget are they under?


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

SQM said:


> Then why are they not being supported? It seems that both Bush and Obama overlooked them. And why are the vets not part of the military budget? What budget are they under?


Read Knit Crazy's, Solowey's and my post on this thread: (pg 15)
http://www.knittingparadise.com/t-258458-15.html#5389567

The Vets = Dept of Veterans Affairs
The Military = Dept of Defense

Bush has never overlooked the Vets or Active Duty Military members.

Obama barely looks at either group and ignored them both until today (he was forced to speak on the VA scandal).

Ask Poor Purl how the numbers, fundings and budgets are created and funded; I bet she knows (well, is least she'll be eager to tell you she does.)


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Read Knit Crazy's, Solowey's and my post on this thread: (pg 15)
> http://www.knittingparadise.com/t-258458-15.html#5389567
> 
> The Vets = Dept of Veterans Affairs
> ...


Why don't you hack in somewhere to find out exactly what I know and what I'll be eager to tell her?

The fact that Bush sent them to a useless, unnecessary war in Iraq shows how much he cared for the military. And he sent tens of thousands without body armor, or even bulletproof vests.

When the soldiers complained that they had to make their own out of scraps they found, Bush's Def. Secy. Rumsfeld gave them one of his poetic nonanswers "you go to war with the army you have---not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time."

That's how much Bush cared about his military: he didn't care whether they lived or died.



> Below are only a few examples of veterans benefits and pay cuts.
> 
> Bush Administration underfunded veterans' health care by $2 billion. The Bush Administration's 2004 budget underfunded veterans' health care by nearly $2 billion. ("Vets Health Low on Bush's Priority List," The Hill, September 17, 2003; "Support for Troops Questioned," Washington Post, June 17, 2003; U.S. Department of Veterans' Affairs, September 2002)
> 
> ...


Do I need to go on?

The problems at the VA were known about long before Obama ever dreamed he'd be president. They are absolutely owing to the Bush administration.

So much for how Bush "never overlooked them." He never overlooked an opportunity to screw them or their families.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Brava to Purl for her wise words.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Do I need to go on?
> 
> The problems at the VA were known about long before Obama ever dreamed he'd be president. They are absolutely owing to the Bush administration.
> 
> So much for how Bush "never overlooked them." He never overlooked an opportunity to screw them or their families.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> And Obama made sure all of the problems from the bush administration were fixed and improved? Now they are worse. Obama knew before he took the first oath of office as President. The current problem is Obama's.


Mitch McConnell on the election of Barack Obama:
Our goal is to make Obama a one-term president.
Who enacts the laws, Joey?
Appropriation bills begin in the House, Joey.
Who rules the House, Joey?


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Why don't you hack in somewhere to find out exactly what I know and what I'll be eager to tell her?
> 
> The fact that Bush sent them to a useless, unnecessary war in Iraq shows how much he cared for the military. And he sent tens of thousands without body armor, or even bulletproof vests.
> 
> ...


What "hack" did you use for your lies this time?

FACT: NO PRESIDENT can declare an active of hostility (war) or send USA troops into harms way in places outside of the USA. The USA military cannot be used within the boundaries of the USA either for that purpose.

So, your second statement is no fact at all and just another expression of your hatred for Bush and lack of understanding of how the three branches of the USA Government works.

Only CONGRESS declares war. Hint: DEMS and REPS voted in a majority and declared the war you are blaming Bush for. Get a clue.

Of course, Obama, per usual, ignored that Constitutional law and did send both troops and drones overseas illegally (still ongoing). Then Obama regularly cut the Dept of Defense budget each and every year in an act of revenge while at the same time demanding more and more protection from the troops while disarming them. (which started with President Clinton). Our military under Obama has been ordered to shoot to kill with their looks, and Obama has no problem leaving any military member behind (Benghazi/Afght/Iraq) and those terrorists or war criminals already captured released.

As to the rest of your post; let's just say you are not known for understanding or providing factual info when it involves money, numbers or things of politics so I didn't bother reading any of it.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> What "hack" did you use for your lies this time?
> 
> FACT: NO PRESIDENT can declare an active of hostility or send USA troops into places outside of the USA. Of course, Obama, per usual, ignored that Constitutional law and did with both troops and drones.
> 
> As to the rest of your posts; let's just say you are not known of understanding or providing factual info when it involves money, numbers of things of politics.


The "fact' remains that young men were sent to war in Iraq on falsified information. 
The fact remains that because the Bush administration ignored warning signs an attack on our country was carried out and 3,000 citizens lost their lives.
Do you love and trust Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld so much that you can't admit to wrong-doing that occurred during their administration?


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Since you don't know * if* the tax tables include standard deduction and exemptions, why are you commenting on something you know very little about?
> 
> Your first statement did not differentiate between income and taxable income. In fact, you used the same number for both.
> 
> Remember, I am a tax professional.


I am not impressed. You behave as though you are the only one who knows anything about taxes. Do you prepare taxes out of your woodshed?


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> What "hack" did you use for your lies this time?
> 
> FACT: NO PRESIDENT can declare an active of hostility (war) or send USA troops into harms way in places outside of the USA. The USA military cannot be used within the boundaries of the USA either for that purpose.
> 
> ...


My goodness! You are always calling people with more knowledge than you liars. 
As for your post, you are not known for any knowledge at all. Just hot air and real whoppers and plenty of projection.
I see you haven't learned anything while you were kicked off the site.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> And Obama made sure all of the problems from the bush administration were fixed and improved? Now they are worse. Obama knew before he took the first oath of office as President. The current problem is Obama's.


The VA problems began before Bush. Bush went regularly to and began the process of resolution of problems at Walter Reed. Obama couldn't be bothered to even visit wounded soldiers there his first attempt because his Press team was turned away and not allowed in for PR pictures (rules for every visitor including Presidents). Obama chose to play a game of hoops instead of visiting with the troops sans cameras since O couldn't make the news which was the sole purpose of his visit. (PR stunt)

Joey, you're correct. Obama knew when he was serving as a Senator and part of the VA committee the problems within the VA. As in everything, he immediately put it out of his mind as soon as the words rolled off his teleprompter when he spoke about it as President (2008).


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

alcameron said:


> The "fact' remains that young men were sent to war in Iraq on falsified information.
> The fact remains that because the Bush administration ignored warning signs an attack on our country was carried out and 3,000 citizens lost their lives.
> Do you love and trust Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld so much that you can't admit to wrong-doing that occurred during their administration?


Evidently, she does, al.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> The VA problems began before Bush. Bush began the resolution of problems at Walter Reed. Obama couldn't be bothered to even visit wounded soldiers there because his Press team were not allowed in for PR pictures. Obama chose to play a game of hoops instead of visiting with the troops since O couldn't make the news which was the sole purpose of his visit. (PR stunt)
> 
> You're correct. Obama knew while a Senator and part of the VA committee. As in everything, he immediately put it out of his mind as soon as the words rolled off his teleprompter.


Oh Bull! Maybe you want to spread this manure over in FF where they will believe you. 
If the president isn't getting the funds he wants to fix the problem, then look no further than the Tea Party and RWN republicans to point the finger at.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> I guess not since Obamacare began in the Senate. Once Obama and the Supreme Court called it a tax, it became illegal since it did not start in the house. There are law suits in process for this very reason. It is not over yet.


Keep wishing, joey. It is law. They can keep looking stupid like they are to continue to try and appeal it. Funny how it has always failed the appeal process.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Sokpuppet002 said:


> This is what happens over and over again. The GOP leaves things trashed and then they complain that the Dem did'nt clean up THEIR messes fast enough.
> 
> An answer clearly is stop electing the GOP creeps that make the mess in the first place!


You are so right, sokpuppet. Dems have been cleaning up after Republicans for over 30 years.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> I guess not since Obamacare began in the Senate. Once Obama and the Supreme Court called it a tax, it became illegal since it did not start in the house. There are law suits in process for this very reason. It is not over yet.


If the Reps gain the Senate and/or the WH, Obamacare will be over.

After seeing the result of the primaries in several states yesterday, it is very likely. (the turn over)


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Keep dreaming. It will have to go through the Supreme Court again. The same JOSC's that approved the ACA are still in power. 
It really gets under your skin that it is working and that hundreds of thousands of people are benefitting from it.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Well, doh! Keeping the policies they have. Remember that not every citizen is/was *uninsured*
I didn't need to sign up for it, nor did millions of others.
Was that too hard an answer for you?


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> The only part that is a definite law, is that the penalty that will be charged if a person does not have health insurance is a tax. That is the * only* thing that the Supreme court has said is constitutional.


Hmmm, as one who claims to know everything about taxes, how do you think the IRS will go about collecting this?


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> More lost their insurance than signed up for Obamacare. Probably about 10 million, what happened to them?


That is just propaganda. Some had "scam insurance" where they were paying huge premiums and getting nothing back for their health care. 
Show me proof of that number.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

Correction: I meant Landstuhl Med Center in Ramstein, Germany, not Walter Reed.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> More lost their insurance than signed up for Obamacare. Probably about 10 million, what happened to them?


Don't forget the many more millions about to lose their insurance or face substantial increases when the employer mandate finally kicks in (this fall). Remember Obama illegally delayed that part of Obamacare too.

I want to know what happens to all those millions.

Ridiculous. Obamacare has been a failure since before it was illegally enacted, remains a farce and will be repealed once the Senate President is replaced along with an assist of a Repub President.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Don't forget the many more millions about to lose their insurance or face substantial increases when the employer mandate finally kicks in (this fall). Remember Obama illegally delayed that part of Obamacare too.
> 
> I want to know what happens to all those millions.
> 
> Ridiculous. Obamacare has been a failure since before it was illegally enacted, remains a farce and will be repealed once the Senate President is replaced along with an assist of a Repub President.


I think the word IF is more appropriate than "once."
The Right has no viable candidate at this point.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

BrattyPatty said:


> I think the word IF is more appropriate than "once."
> The Right has no viable candidate at this point.


You have no understanding of how Congress works.

The minority Senator is already seated; the "Right" doesn't need a viable candidate to replace the current Senate President after the mid-term elections.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> That is a good question as there is very little said, in the law, about collecting it. If the person has a refund, it will be subtracted from the refund. They can send a bill. but there is no other way of collecting it, in the law as it stands.
> 
> Then all the person has to do is sign a paper saying the cost of the insurance is prohibitive and they are exempt from paying the penalty. It will be driving the people into cash (under the table) work and nothing will be claimed on taxes.
> 
> It is supposed to be paid with the 2014 tax year, but don't plan on it. That date will be postponed along with all the other dates. There is another law suit in process to force Obama to enforce the law as originally written. If that person wins, everything in the law will be effective on the date the Judge rules. So either Obama will need to do everything then or appeal his own law.


I'm not worrying about any of the penalty collection. It will never happen even if the law is never repealed. As you said, there is not enforcement of the collection and everyone simply needs to claim hardship (without proving it), to be exempted.

I believe the entire law will be repealed, so no worries except for those who have suffered through all these years.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

alcameron said:


> "Those corporate CEO's worked hard for their money and they provide so many jobs that they're ENTITLED to all those perks and loopholes. We, the taxpayers, ought to be happy to support them this way. You ladies are just envious of their good fortune and money."
> 
> :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


Darling, the sarcasm is dripping down so heavily it blurred the words on the next two postings. You may have to dial it back a bit!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> Brava to Purl for her wise words.


Is there really an adult who doesn't remember that brave soldier getting up to face Rumsfeld to ask about the armor? And the dumb answer he got? There were also no helmet liners for the marines who needed them, and a lot of traumatic brain injury as a result.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> And Obama made sure all of the problems from the bush administration were fixed and improved? Now they are worse. Obama knew before he took the first oath of office as President. The current problem is Obama's.


Yes, he absolutely should do something about it. I've never praised him that I can recall, but to put all onus on him and none on Bush? To say Bush never overlooked the military or vets? Really!

And I like the way you give Obama all the responsibility the minute he takes office. Like a game of hot potato: it's in his hands, so Bush suddenly becomes blameless.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

alcameron said:


> Mitch McConnell on the election of Barack Obama:
> Our goal is to make Obama a one-term president.
> Who enacts the laws, Joey?
> Appropriation bills begin in the House, Joey.
> Who rules the House, Joey?


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Sokpuppet002 said:


> This is what happens over and over again. The GOP leaves things trashed and then they complain that the Dem did'nt clean up THEIR messes fast enough.
> 
> An answer clearly is stop electing the GOP creeps that make the mess in the first place!


Exactly.

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> But in abortions, it is 100% execution rate.


Amen


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Sokpuppet002 said:


> ... ironic that Ms anti-gumment has a job that wouldn't be there if it were'nt for the gummint.
> 
> Interesting how often these anti-gummint types teally are the ones who depend upon gummint more than most.


I don't think she's anti-government, just anti-THIS-government. Like all Repugs, she'll take government money.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> What "hack" did you use for your lies this time?


I don't hack. I've never looked for anyone's real name, as apparently you have more than once.

Everything else I wrote is public knowledge, and you can easily find it through a search.

Congress was told there were WMD in Iraq when the pres. knew there weren't. In any case, the impetus to send those soldiers to Iraq came from him, regardless of whether Congress allowed him to do it, and even you can't believe differently. I take that last clause back: just because it's true doesn't mean you'd believe it.

Most of all, I want to thank you for the compliment of saying you think I know nothing. Think of all the respect that will get me.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> You have no understanding of how Congress works.
> 
> The minority Senator is already seated; the "Right" doesn't need a viable candidate to replace the current Senate President after the mid-term elections.


Please stop telling everyone who disagrees with you on anything that they don't know anything. I have to admit, it's nicer than than calling them stupid, which is what you used to do.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> Keep wishing, joey. It is law. They can keep looking stupid like they are to continue to try and appeal it. Funny how it has always failed the appeal process.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Obamacare has been a failure since before it was illegally enacted, remains a farce and will be repealed once the Senate President is replaced along with an assist of a Repub President.


The person who believes "Bush has never overlooked the Vets or Active Duty Military members" will believe anything.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

alcameron said:


> Please stop telling everyone who disagrees with you on anything that they don't know anything. I have to admit, it's nicer than than calling them stupid, which is what you used to do.


That's the only way she protects herself from seeing what an ignoramus she is. Let her say it - God knows what she'd get up to if she ever realized the truth.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Bush did take care of the problems at Walter Reed, he also visited many of the wounded military,


Wow.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Is there really an adult who doesn't remember that brave soldier getting up to face Rumsfeld to ask about the armor? And the dumb answer he got? There were also no helmet liners for the marines who needed them, and a lot of traumatic brain injury as a result.


I cannot read bad news anymore. I am trying to be more zen and the news is ever so negative. I do read headlines so I know a bit about what some bureaucrat considers news.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> There were also no helmet liners for the marines who needed them, and a lot of traumatic brain injury as a result.


My local Seniors group spent a couple of winters knitting woolen helmet liners following the instructions on the Citizen Sam site. We shipped a carton full to the Citizen Sam group, then the local Marine VFW told us they would take care of shipping any more we made to the places where they were needed.

They had to be all wool, which does not support flame. The ones the military supplied were of man made fibers which were worse than useless. They didn't keep our troops warm in the mountains of Afghanistan and if they were in any sort of fire situation they suffered dreadful burns.

Right now we are making lap blankets for wheel chair bound patients at three nearby VA centers. There is a local group of veterans who collect them from us and drive them to where they are needed.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> You have no understanding of how Congress works.
> 
> The minority Senator is already seated; the "Right" doesn't need a viable candidate to replace the current Senate President after the mid-term elections.


Really?? I didn't know that Joe Biden was running in the mid term elections.He is "president" of the Senate. In his abscence the senate elects a president pro tempore. If Patrick Leahy, current President pro Tempore, loses the mid term, then the senate will elect a new one. No guarantee that the Senate minority will be elected. It has been a ususal vote, but in McConnell's case, the Senate would and should be much smarter than giving him anything of importance.

Keep posting. Your lack of knowledge about most things is very amusing. Especially when it comes to anything regarding politics.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Bush did take care of the problems at Walter Reed, he also visited many of the wounded military,


He had no choice but to take care of Walter Reed. The conditions were disgusting. The media had that out long before his visit there. I am not saying that he is not a compassionate man. I think he was dealing with a guilty conscience.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> He had no choice but to take care of Walter Reed. The conditions were disgusting. The media had that out long before his visit there. I am not saying that he is not a compassionate man. I think he was dealing with a guilty conscience.


And wasn't Walter Reed traditionally the one where the members of Congress went? Of course they would want to get that one in tip top condition.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

alcameron said:


> Please stop telling everyone who disagrees with you on anything that they don't know anything. I have to admit, it's nicer than than calling them stupid, which is what you used to do.


I think she is like a Chatty Cathy doll, Al. Pull the string and the same phrases run out of it's mouth. Over and over........


----------



## Phyllis Stein (May 18, 2014)

BrattyPatty said:


> Really?? I didn't know that Joe Biden was running in the mid term elections.He is "president" of the Senate. In his abscence the senate elects a president pro tempore. If Patrick Leahy, current President pro Tempore, loses the mid term, then the senate will elect a new one. No guarantee that the Senate minority will be elected. It has been a ususal vote, but in McConnell's case, the Senate would and should be much smarter than giving him anything of importance.
> 
> Keep posting. Your lack of knowledge about most things is very amusing. Especially when it comes to anything regarding politics.


We should only be so lucky!


----------



## rocky1991 (May 8, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> But in abortions, it is 100% execution rate.


Has Benghazi been replaced with abortion? Any and every conversation goes back to abortion. What is happening Joey? Is abortion your only talking point? Bring back Benghazi, I miss it.


----------



## rocky1991 (May 8, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> And Obama made sure all of the problems from the bush administration were fixed and improved? Now they are worse. Obama knew before he took the first oath of office as President. The current problem is Obama's.


Never let the facts disabuse you of your ideology.


----------



## rocky1991 (May 8, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> What "hack" did you use for your lies this time?
> 
> FACT: NO PRESIDENT can declare an active of hostility (war) or send USA troops into harms way in places outside of the USA. The USA military cannot be used within the boundaries of the USA either for that purpose.
> 
> ...


war in Iraq was never a declared war.


----------



## rocky1991 (May 8, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> If the Reps gain the Senate and/or the WH, Obamacare will be over.
> 
> After seeing the result of the primaries in several states yesterday, it is very likely. (the turn over)


How will they end the ACA?


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

rocky1991 said:


> How will they end the ACA?


Rocky, did you see how she mentioned the turnout in the primaries? Does that insure a republican victory in the general election? I think not. Does she not know that the Democrats have primaries, too? 
When she was suspended, she should have taken a civics class or 2 on how things work in America especially when it comes to elections and who the "president of the Senate is".


----------



## rocky1991 (May 8, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> Rocky, did you see how she mentioned the turnout in the primaries? Does that insure a republican victory in the general election? I think not. Does she not know that the Democrats have primaries, too?
> When she was suspended, she should have taken a class or 2 on how things work in America especially when it comes to elections and who the "president of the Senate is".


Bratty, they (the RWWN) took my beautiful day and turned it into brain mush. I now live in Washington state, left Florida behind, but I do keep up with the politics there and one state senator just said the Common Core is going to turn all our school children into homosexuals. Can politics get any funnier? I wish Joey and KPG were as funny as Charley Van Zandt. It would make reading this thread so much more enjoyable.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

rocky1991 said:


> Bratty, they (the RWWN) took my beautiful day and turned it into brain mush. I now live in Washington state, left Florida behind, but I do keep up with the politics there and one state senator just said the Common Core is going to turn all our school children into homosexuals. Can politics get any funnier? I wish Joey and KPG were as funny as Charley Van Zandt. It would make reading this thread so much more enjoyable.


I hear you there, rocky! I had to take a taxi the other day. The driver was rather gabby and kept talking about how we are all supposed to turn into homosexuals and therefore end the human race. I knew he was RWWN when he started talking about the"moochers on Gov't dole". They must be listening to the same radio station!


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> War on Women: Woman Cant Get Meds for Female Problem Because Obamacare Labeled Her a Man
> 
> by Steven Ertelt | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 5/21/14 1:18 PM
> 
> ...


Okay, have your husband ask his doctor for birth control pills and see what the outcome is.
You still don't understand that it is many different insurance companies providing insurance and not the government! The ACA is not a health care provider. The ACA will not tell anyone what they can and can't have. The doctors and insurance companies do that.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> Really?? I didn't know that Joe Biden was running in the mid term elections.He is "president" of the Senate. In his abscence the senate elects a president pro tempore. If Patrick Leahy, current President pro Tempore, loses the mid term, then the senate will elect a new one. No guarantee that the Senate minority will be elected. It has been a ususal vote, but in McConnell's case, the Senate would and should be much smarter than giving him anything of importance.
> 
> Keep posting. Your lack of knowledge about most things is very amusing. Especially when it comes to anything regarding politics.


What does "The minority Senator is already seated" mean in this context? Did you really understand what she said?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

rocky1991 said:


> Has Benghazi been replaced with abortion? Any and every conversation goes back to abortion. What is happening Joey? Is abortion your only talking point? Bring back Benghazi, I miss it.


After letting this thread run through 8 chapters, Joey is trying to get it back where she wants it, thus disproving the theory of evolution of conversation. So, yes, abortion is her only talking point - well, that and how bad Pres. Obama is. But Benghazi will be back, have no fear, as long as the ACA is doing well.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

rocky1991 said:


> How will they end the ACA?


Prayer and fasting?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> I hear you there, rocky! I had to take a taxi the other day. The driver was rather gabby and kept talking about how we are all supposed to turn into homosexuals and therefore end the human race. I knew he was RWWN when he started talking about the"moochers on Gov't dole". They must be listening to the same radio station!


Patty, it's broadcast over the air into their tooth fillings.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> Okay, have your husband ask his doctor for birth control pills and see what the outcome is.
> You still don't understand that it is many different insurance companies providing insurance and not the government! The ACA is not a health care provider. The ACA will not tell anyone what they can and can't have. The doctors and insurance companies do that.


Stop making sense. How can they keep blaming Obama if they understand?


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> What does "The minority Senator is already seated" mean in this context? Did you really understand what she said?


Yes I did and she is wrong.
This is from the Senate page:

A constitutionally recognized officer of the Senate who presides over the chamber in the absence of the vice president. The president pro tempore (or, "president for a time") is elected by the Senate and is, by custom, the senator of the *majority* party with the longest record of continuous service.

Who knows where she gets her info from? IF the Repubs (and I mean a really big IF) take control of the Senate, then Orin Hatch could be elected to the President pro Tempore position. He would only preside over the senate when Biden is absent. His vote will determine the turnout of a tied vote in an instance where Biden could not attend. I think if that was the case, Biden would be at every hearing and vote. But the minority leader senator is not already seated in this case. The majority leader does not get the job, The senator who would be up for it would be Orin Hatch from Utah who has more continued service than McConnell.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Patty, it's broadcast over the air into their tooth fillings.


Talk about subliminal brain washing. It is the job of Faux News. I was in a small shop some time ago, one where there are few customers and the elderly owner had to business to keep him out of the house as much as anything. He had F. N. blasting away and I took a moment to pay attention. They presented their program matter in a way that if you didn't pay attention and understand how to refute all the nonsense, you could get your brain clogged and "know" it was true because it was on the news.

It is so rare to find a news program that is real news. Mostly it is crimes perpetrated upon people in the city where the station resides, weather, traffic, and blather about celebretramps. Plus half the time a program airs you are battered down with advertisements.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> Yes I did and she is wrong.
> This is from the Senate page:
> 
> A constitutionally recognized officer of the Senate who presides over the chamber in the absence of the vice president. The president pro tempore (or, "president for a time") is elected by the Senate and is, by custom, the senator of the *majority* party with the longest record of continuous service.
> The senator who would be up for it would be Orin Hatch from Utah who has more continued service than McConnell.


We have another compelling reason for term limits.


----------



## peacegoddess (Jan 28, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> Talk about subliminal brain washing. It is the job of Faux News. I was in a small shop some time ago, one where there are few customers and the elderly owner had to business to keep him out of the house as much as anything. He had F. N. blasting away and I took a moment to pay attention. They presented their program matter in a way that if you didn't pay attention and understand how to refute all the nonsense, you could get your brain clogged and "know" it was true because it was on the news.
> 
> It is so rare to find a news program that is real news. Mostly it is crimes perpetrated upon people in the city where the station resides, weather, traffic, and blather about celebretramps. Plus half the time a program airs you are battered down with advertisements.


Try Democracy Now with Amy Goodman. She is both televised and on radio. I access her on KPFA from Berkeley. You can access the show at www.democracynow.org.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> Yes I did and she is wrong.
> This is from the Senate page:
> 
> A constitutionally recognized officer of the Senate who presides over the chamber in the absence of the vice president. The president pro tempore (or, "president for a time") is elected by the Senate and is, by custom, the senator of the *majority* party with the longest record of continuous service.
> ...


What!!! She's wrong??? Hmmm.

Anyway, you just reminded me:

*Dinner Party Politics*
MAY 21, 2014
Gail Collins

What do you think the election results mean?

The ones on Tuesday. They had primaries all over the place. Stop squirming. Sometime soon, youll be sitting at a dinner party and someone will say, So, whos going to take control of the Senate in November? And you will be so grateful that we had this conversation.

For instance, the Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell, won renomination by beating the Tea Party in Kentucky. He totally clobbered a wealthy businessman named Matt Bevin. This was either because of McConnells exceptional popularity or the fact that Bevin was the worst candidate anywhere in the current election season.

All right, possibly not as bad as the guy in Idaho who showed up for the gubernatorial debate in a leather biker jacket. But Bevin did campaign at a pro-cockfighting rally, which is something I dont think weve seen before. Then he defended himself by arguing that both cockfighting and dogfighting were pastimes in which the founding fathers were very actively involved.

Yeah, blame it all on John Adams.

So, a good day for McConnell. Except that his total share of the vote against Bevin and an assortment of even more pathetic Republican challengers was 60 percent. And, as Eric Ostermeier of the University of Minnesota pointed out, thats the lowest primary margin for an incumbent Kentucky senator since 1938 when Alben Barkley did not have the advantage of an opponent who was linked to fighting roosters.

McConnell now faces Democrat Alison Grimes. Its supposed to be one of the big contests this fall, and when it comes up at the dinner table you will be able to provide all of this colorful background.

The Tea Party had a terrible week! The Republican establishment is euphoric because it managed to beat back a raft of crazy right-wing candidates and nominate a raft of boring right-wing candidates all around the country.

For instance in Georgia, the guys who were supposed to be the Tea Party favorites for the Republican Senate nomination, Representatives Paul Broun and Phil Gingrey, were completely destroyed. Perhaps this was because Broun once called the theory of evolution lies straight from the pit of hell and Gingrey said that former Senate candidate Todd Akin was partly right about his theory that a woman cant get pregnant when shes raped.

Or, perhaps this was because the two top finishers, David Perdue and Representative Jack Kingston, spent a lot more money. After all, Kingston  who we first met when he made headlines by arguing that poor students should be required to do janitorial work to pay for their subsidized lunches  doesnt believe in evolution either.

Perdue is a wealthy businessman whose cousin used to be governor. You may remember him as the candidate who criticized one of his opponents for never having gone to college. (I mean, theres a high school graduate in this race, O.K.? Im sorry, but these issues are so much broader, so complex.) He frequently suggests that he has thoughts so deep, only another wealthy businessman could appreciate them. (There are five people in the U.S. Senate who understand what I just said.)

Perdue and Kingston are going to have nine more weeks to fight it out, so this is something you can bring up over a barbecue on the Fourth of July if conversation really starts to flag. (Remember, pompous business guy versus congressman who wants to make third-graders sweep the floors.) The winner will go up against Michelle Nunn, the daughter of former Senator Sam Nunn.

Georgia and Kentucky are the only Republican Senate seats the Democrats feel they have a chance of winning. If the tottering Tea Party was one theme this week, women were definitely another.

On the Senate side, youve got women in some really key races, said Debbie Walsh of the Center for American Women and Politics. On the gubernatorial side, however, things were a little dimmer. Representative Allyson Schwartz lost the Democratic nomination in Pennsylvania, which she was once favored to win. Schwartz even failed to get 20 percent of the vote, which would at least have made her the most successful Democratic female gubernatorial candidate in the history of her state. Also, Walsh pointed out, Pennsylvania will now be another state with no women in their congressional delegation.

Schwartz lost to a businessman named Tom Wolf, who ran some compelling ads featuring his family joking about Wolfs affection for his old stick-shift jeep. Do you remember the time Scott Brown beat Martha Coakley for the Senate in Massachusetts with an ad about his truck? Do you think lack of interest in banged-up motor vehicles is a problem for women in American politics?

Or could it just be that Wolf spent $10 million of his own money? So much to talk about over dinner. And only 167 more dinners until the election.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/22/opinion/collins-dinner-party-politics.html?_r=0


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

MarilynKnits said:


> Talk about subliminal brain washing. It is the job of Faux News. I was in a small shop some time ago, one where there are few customers and the elderly owner had to business to keep him out of the house as much as anything. He had F. N. blasting away and I took a moment to pay attention. They presented their program matter in a way that if you didn't pay attention and understand how to refute all the nonsense, you could get your brain clogged and "know" it was true because it was on the news.
> 
> It is so rare to find a news program that is real news. Mostly it is crimes perpetrated upon people in the city where the station resides, weather, traffic, and blather about celebretramps. Plus half the time a program airs you are battered down with advertisements.


Somebody recently made a documentary (I think, though she may have written a book) about how she lost her formerly reasonable father to Faux News and Lush Rimbaugh when his place of employment moved and he had a longer commute - and guess what was on the radio as he drove.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

peacegoddess said:


> Try Democracy Now with Amy Goodman. She is both televised and on radio. I access her on KPFA from Berkeley. You can access the show at www.democracynow.org.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: Plus if you're tired of getting your news chopped into 2-minute segments, she can spend an entire hour on one story.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

rocky1991 said:


> Has Benghazi been replaced with abortion? Any and evernote chary conversation goes back to abortion. What is happening Joey? Is abortion your only talking point? Bring back Benghazi, I miss it.


Since joeysomma started this thread as a topic where abortion could be discussed, I understand why she keeps going back to that subject instead of making considered remarks about any other subject raised here. However, just because I understand this doesn't mean I like it.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

rocky1991 said:


> war in Iraq was never a declared war.


That's been the case for many another so-called War. We since haven't formally declared war on anyone since WWII. Doesn't that just bring a smile to your face?, she asked facetiously...


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

rocky1991 said:


> war in Iraq was never a declared war.


My comments were that no President can declare a war, it can only be authorized by Congress. Bush received authorization from Congress before the USA went into Iraq.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d107:HJ00114@@L&summ2=m&

Iraq War Resolution (H.J. Res 114)

Joint Resolution

Passed by United States Congress Oct 2002

Public Law 107-243 Authorizing the use of military action against Iraq


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> What!!! She's wrong??? Hmmm.
> 
> Anyway, you just reminded me:
> 
> ...


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> What!!! She's wrong??? Hmmm.
> 
> Anyway, you just reminded me:
> 
> ...


Poor Purl
now that is posting with value. Thank you.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> My comment said a President doesn't declare a war, it is authorized by Congress. Bush received authorization from Congress before the USA went into Iraq.
> 
> http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d107:HJ00114@@L&summ2=m&
> 
> ...


knitpresentgifts
Iraq: WAR FOR OIL - just what we needed to add to the Patient load of Veteran's Medical Care while the GOP continues to slash the budgets. Talk about caring for those who are put into harms way for personal gains.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Huckleberry said:


> knitpresentgifts
> Iraq: WAR FOR OIL - just what we needed to add to the Patient load of Veteran's Medical Care while the GOP continues to slash the budgets. Talk about caring for those who are put into harms way for personal gains.


And not only for oil but to finish the war that Daddy could not manage.


----------



## knitpresentgifts (May 21, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> What happened to all that oil we gained from Iraq? Do you have proof we received *any *we did not pay for.
> 
> Web sites to back your statement.


Hilarious! America didn't take one tablespoon of oil from Iraq. We gave our blood and treasure for not one drop.

When the countrymen of the oil rich countries set fire to the oil fields, the AMERICANS helped defend against and control the fires.

She doesn't understand either, that the budget for the VA has *zero* to do with the Dept of Defense.

By their words, we know not one Liberal posting on this thread understands the USA budget and how it works.

Yeh, we went for the oil alright.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

knitpresentgifts said:


> My comments were that no President can declare a war, it can only be authorized by Congress. Bush received authorization from Congress before the USA went into Iraq. (Obama didn't for his actions).
> 
> http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d107:HJ00114@@L&summ2=m&
> 
> ...


This is an important point. FDR ended his "date which will live in infamy" thusly "I ask that the Congress declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on Sunday, December 7, 1941 a state of War has existed between the United States and the Japanese empire."

I wonder what would have happened if any subsequent President had made the same request of Congress before involving the US in any subsequent hostilities we entered into. Would we, for example, have become embroiled in the conflict known as the War in Viet Nam?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> What happened to all that oil we gained from Iraq? Do you have proof we received *any *we did not pay for.
> 
> Web sites to back your statement.


No, we didn't get the oil we went to war for, though that was the original plan, apparently. That only makes it worse because it was pointless.

In case you're not familiar with them, "Judicial Watch, Inc., <is> a conservative, non-partisan educational foundation, promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law. Through its educational endeavors, Judicial Watch advocates high standards of ethics and morality in our nations public life and seeks to ensure that political and judicial officials do not abuse the powers entrusted to them by the American people. Judicial Watch fulfills its educational mission through litigation, investigations, and public outreach."

Judicial Watch won a FOIA suit against Cheney's secret Energy Task Force and concluded the following:



Judicial Watch said:


> Documents turned over in the summer of 2003 by the Commerce Department as a result of the Sierra Clubs and Judicial Watchs Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, concerning the activities of the Cheney Energy Task Force, contain a map of Iraqi oilfields, pipelines, refineries and terminals, as well as two charts detailing Iraqi oil and gas projects, and Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts. The documents, dated March 2001, also feature maps of Saudi Arabian and United Arab Emirates oilfields, pipelines, refineries and tanker terminals. There are supporting charts with details of the major oil and gas development projects in each country that provide information on the projects costs, capacity, oil company and status or completion date.
> 
> Documented plans of occupation and exploitation predating September 11 confirm heightened suspicion that U.S. policy is driven by the dictates of the energy industry. According to Judicial Watch President, Tom Fitton, These documents show the importance of the Energy Task Force and why its operations should be open to the public.


You can see the rest at http://www.projectcensored.org/8-secrets-of-cheneys-energy-task-force-come-to-light/


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> You can see the rest at http://www.projectcensored.org/8-secrets-of-cheneys-energy-task-force-come-to-light/


Glad you cited a conservative group to prove this pathetic point. So we never even got oil for all our efforts. Glad Cheney is off the world stage or at least I hope he is.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

SQM said:


> Glad you cited a conservative group to prove this pathetic point. So we never even got oil for all our efforts. Glad Cheney is off the world stage or at least I hope he is.


I shouldn't have had to cite anyone. Surely Joey is old enough to remember 10-year-old (approx.) news.


----------



## peacegoddess (Jan 28, 2013)

SQM said:


> Glad you cited a conservative group to prove this pathetic point. So we never even got oil for all our efforts. Glad Cheney is off the world stage or at least I hope he is.


I bet he is behind the curtain pulling levers.


----------



## peacegoddess (Jan 28, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> Pro-Life Teen Assaulted After Standing for Life, His Reaction is Priceless
> 
> by Kristan Hawkins | Montgomery, AL | LifeNews.com | 5/22/14 1:05 PM
> 
> ...


I am sorry the young man was assaulted. No one advocating their opinion deserves such treatment. Neither does someone who chose to terminate a pregnancy deserve to be further advocated to by someone who disagrees with their choice.


----------



## painthoss (Jul 10, 2012)

His parents didn't notice he'd been beaten and had a broken nose?



peacegoddess said:


> I am sorry the young man was assaulted. No one advocating their opinion deserves such treatment. Neither does someone who chose to terminate a pregnancy deserve to be further advocated to by someone who disagrees with their choice.


----------



## SQM (Jun 22, 2012)

peacegoddess - I wonder if Cheney is still working for the Rebs. Or is he too sick? The tin man without a heart or one that was broken for sure.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> What happened to all that oil we gained from Iraq? Do you have proof we received *any *we did not pay for.
> 
> Web sites to back your statement.


joeysomma
you and knitpresentgifts sure have a problem with understanding what has been written. I never said we took Oil I said we went to War for Oil.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

SQM said:


> Glad you cited a conservative group to prove this pathetic point. So we never even got oil for all our efforts. Glad Cheney is off the world stage or at least I hope he is.


SQM
so sorry to report that the Cheney Clan is trying hard to stay in the News. Dick, his wife and their more loved daughter have a constant need for attention.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> joeysomma
> you and knitpresentgifts sure have a problem with understanding what has been written. I never said we took Oil I said we went to War for Oil.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Hilarious! America didn't take one tablespoon of oil from Iraq. We gave our blood and treasure for not one drop.
> 
> When the countrymen of the oil rich countries set fire to the oil fields, the AMERICANS helped defend against and control the fires.
> 
> ...


KGP
no remedy for dumb. Dumb is forever. Keep posting so we are entertained.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


Poor Purl
I am so glad that we never attracted such dense folks to our side. It always rains on their Parade, doesn't it!


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> What happened to all that oil we gained from Iraq? Do you have proof we received *any *we did not pay for.
> 
> Web sites to back your statement.


joeysomma
learn to comprehend. I know, English can be tricky, but give it a try to get to know it better - see, I don't even ask you to Master it. Try to be gentle with my requests.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

We didn't go to war with Iraq to get their oil. Yes, some wanted control of the oil but we went to war to protect the petrodollar. Sadaam Hussein had announced that he would no long accept dollars for oil, but would accept Euros. The petrodollar is a rigged system, rigged to only benefit the US. Other countries suffer because of the petrodollar. If Hussein dropped the dollar, other countries would follow suit and the dollar would collapse. Here's an article from "The New Left Project". Its a non biased article that explains how the same thing is happening with Iran, today. Toward the bottom of the article, the author discusses the reasons we went to war with Iraq.http://www.newleftproject.org/index.php/site/article_comments/iran_and_the_petrodollar_threat_to_u.s._empire

Here's another article. Update to this article, the BRICS are trading in currencies other than the dollar. This threatens the dollar.http://www.caseyresearch.com/cdd/demise-petrodollar

All of these wars are to maintain US hegemony. If the petrodollar collapses, the dollar collapses. If the dollar collapses, the US collapses. I'm asking you to read so you'll understand how the system works and understand the threat to everything we know. If you want to understand, read it. If not, be surprised when everything comes crashing down.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

peacegoddess said:


> I am sorry the young man was assaulted. No one advocating their opinion deserves such treatment. Neither does someone who chose to terminate a pregnancy deserve to be further advocated to by someone who disagrees with their choice.


Thank you for your intelligent and reasonable comment. It is exactly the civilized and mature attitude that, if practiced by more people, would lead to a more peaceful and civil society.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> Poor Purl
> I am so glad that we never attracted such dense folks to our side. It always rains on their Parade, doesn't it!


Dear Huck, Acid rain at that.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> Dear Huck, Acid rain at that.


MarilynKnits
got that right. Something is poisoning them. Unfortunate Souls.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> We didn't go to war with Iraq to get their oil. Yes, some wanted control of the oil but we went to war to protect the petrodollar. Sadaam Hussein had announced that he would no long accept dollars for oil, but would accept Euros. The petrodollar is a rigged system, rigged to only benefit the US. Other countries suffer because of the petrodollar. If Hussein dropped the dollar, other countries would follow suit and the dollar would collapse. Here's an article from "The New Left Project". Its a non biased article that explains how the same thing is happening with Iran, today. Toward the bottom of the article, the author discusses the reasons we went to war with Iraq.http://www.newleftproject.org/index.php/site/article_comments/iran_and_the_petrodollar_threat_to_u.s._empire
> 
> Here's another article. Update to this article, the BRICS are trading in currencies other than the dollar. This threatens the dollar.http://www.caseyresearch.com/cdd/demise-petrodollar
> 
> All of these wars are to maintain US hegemony. If the petrodollar collapses, the dollar collapses. If the dollar collapses, the US collapses. I'm asking you to read so you'll understand how the system works and understand the threat to everything we know. If you want to understand, read it. If not, be surprised when everything comes crashing down.


Knitter From Nebraska.
Nothing ever surprises me. I am always well informed and an eternal Optimist. My rich Fellow Americans have too much too protect to allow us to go down the drain and so do the very rich around the Globe. They all depend on each other to remain at the VERY top. Move in their circles and it all becomes very clear.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> They Had Only Dated for Weeks, But When She Became Pregnant He Devoted Himself to Their Baby


Thumbs up to this one, Joey. It's spot on--fathers do need to take responsibility for their children, whether they marry the moms or not. If more father-to-be were supportive and involved there would be far fewer abortions.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Thumbs up to this one, Joey. It's spot on--fathers do need to take responsibility for their children, whether they marry the moms or not. If more father-to-be were supportive and involved there would be far fewer abortions.


This was a very sweet story. Stories like this are more likely to have the effect Joey wants than the ones that creep you out.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Huckleberry said:


> joeysomma
> you and knitpresentgifts sure have a problem with understanding what has been written. I never said we took Oil I said we went to War for Oil.


Your comment reinforce my beliefs that 'oral history records' should always be very closely examined. In 100 years time there there will be oral history records of the 'what, where, how, when and why' regarding this war and the oil imports. With the misunderstanding that exists at the moment, can you imagine what the situation in 100 years time. "I have a letter from my great grandfather that we went to Iraq to steal their oil". "I have a letter from my great, great grand pappy that we did not pay for the oil that we took from Iraq." And so forth. People misunderstand and misconstrue the facts but their errors are contained in their personal histories and diaries to be hauled out years later and touted as 'factual evidence.' You can see this in action if you ask several members of your own family to write a brief outline of a family event that took place, say fifty years ago. Some will be correct, some will contain factual errors. Which account will people believe.


----------



## rocky1991 (May 8, 2011)

Sokpuppet004 said:


> How do we know how many of these "LifeNews" stories are true
> 
> I'm sure a number of them have grains of truth in them, but, why are they being taken as true?
> 
> It's just another RW blog site, nothing more.


I agree, I have been trying to find other sources for these "stories" and have yet to find one.


----------



## rocky1991 (May 8, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Yes we need to know there are some good ones. Just think how good it is for the children to have a mother and a father.


How about two mothers or two fathers?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

rocky1991 said:


> I agree, I have been trying to find other sources for these "stories" and have yet to find one.


This last one claims to have some connection with the NYTimes. I wonder.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Hilarious! America didn't take one tablespoon of oil from Iraq. We gave our blood and treasure for not one drop.
> 
> When the countrymen of the oil rich countries set fire to the oil fields, the AMERICANS helped defend against and control the fires.
> 
> ...


We also know that one KPG has no understanding of how the Congress is run. 
Huck said nothing about the US taking oil from Iraq. She was talking about all of the wounded soldiers that came home from that war. She said nothing about the Dept of Defense. You just have no comprehension skills whatsoever. Go take a civics class. *IF* you can learn, maybe you will stop making an arse out of yourself with false claims. "War for oil" does not state that we shipped it home. Nor did Huck. Everyone knows that we went into Iraq to control the oil. Obviously you missed those years.

Keep posting. You are hilariously uninformed.

Huck said


> "knitpresentgifts
> Iraq: WAR FOR OIL - just what we needed to add to the Patient load of Veteran's Medical Care while the GOP continues to slash the budgets. Talk about caring for those who are put into harms way for personal gains. [end quote]


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> Yes we need to know there are some good ones. Just think how good it is for the children to have a mother and a father.


joeysomma
no-one disputes that a Mother and Father IF they care about each other are best for the children. Unfortunately at least 50% of households are not peaceful and are not a good environment for children. The Courts are full of horror stories.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Sokpuppet004 said:


> It may but we know from the numerous fake Obamacare horror anecdotes this crowd does a lot of scamming and often there's no real check om these stories.
> 
> That being said.
> 
> ...


That's why it's the only story they've pasted that's readable.

The woman involved writes a blog for the NYTimes, mainly about being a mother (she has 3 kids, now). I don't know about the story Joey pasted, but there's no reason this one should be false. It really has nothing to do with abortion; it's a nice, romantic story.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

rocky1991 said:


> How about two mothers or two fathers?


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: Love is what we need.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

BrattyPatty said:


> We also know that one KPG has no understanding of how the Congress is run.
> Huck said nothing about the US taking oil from Iraq. She was talking about all of the wounded soldiers that came home from that war. She said nothing about the Dept of Defense. You just have no comprehension skills whatsoever. Go take a civics class. *IF* you can learn, maybe you will stop making an arse out of yourself with false claims. "War for oil" does not state that we shipped it home. Nor did Huck. Everyone knows that we went into Iraq to control the oil. Obviously you missed those years.
> 
> Keep posting. You are hilariously uninformed.
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Huckleberry said:


> joeysomma
> no-one disputes that a Mother and Father IF they care about each other are best for the children. Unfortunately at least 50% of households are not peaceful and are not a good environment for children. The Courts are full of horror stories.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Sokpuppet004 said:


> Actually as long as there's enough funds, support and caring i have serious doubts about whether it makes much difference if there,s two parents.
> 
> If there's essentially a well functioning family life, I don' t think it matters much what the makeup is.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Abortion is legal.



Sokpuppet004 said:


> It may but we know from the numerous fake Obamacare horror anecdotes this crowd does a lot of scamming and often there's no real check om these stories.
> 
> That being said.
> 
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Sokpuppet004 said:


> True.
> 
> And theres thousands of stories of women who are glad abortion was an option for them as well as millions of "non-traditional" families that are as happy and functional as anyone else.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> We didn't go to war with Iraq to get their oil. Yes, some wanted control of the oil but we went to war to protect the petrodollar. Sadaam Hussein had announced that he would no long accept dollars for oil, but would accept Euros. The petrodollar is a rigged system, rigged to only benefit the US. Other countries suffer because of the petrodollar. If Hussein dropped the dollar, other countries would follow suit and the dollar would collapse. Here's an article from "The New Left Project". Its a non biased article that explains how the same thing is happening with Iran, today. Toward the bottom of the article, the author discusses the reasons we went to war with Iraq.http://www.newleftproject.org/index.php/site/article_comments/iran_and_the_petrodollar_threat_to_u.s._empire
> 
> Here's another article. Update to this article, the BRICS are trading in currencies other than the dollar. This threatens the dollar.http://www.caseyresearch.com/cdd/demise-petrodollar
> 
> All of these wars are to maintain US hegemony. If the petrodollar collapses, the dollar collapses. If the dollar collapses, the US collapses. I'm asking you to read so you'll understand how the system works and understand the threat to everything we know. If you want to understand, read it. If not, be surprised when everything comes crashing down.


Thanks for pointing out the role and importance of the petrodollar and the extent to which we go to protect US hegemony. All that nonsense about the stockpile of WMDs in Iraq was a smokescreen and Americans bought it hook, line and sinker.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I'd add that it wasn't a smokescreen. It was a lie. IMHO



MaidInBedlam said:


> Thanks for pointing out the role and importance of the petrodollar and the extent to which we go to protect US hegemony. All that nonsense about the stockpile of WMDs in Iraq was a smokescreen and Americans bought it hook, line and sinker.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> I'd add that it wasn't a smokescreen. It was a lie. IMHO


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

knitpresentgifts said:


> Hilarious! America didn't take one tablespoon of oil from Iraq. We gave our blood and treasure for not one drop.
> 
> When the countrymen of the oil rich countries set fire to the oil fields, the AMERICANS helped defend against and control the fires.
> 
> ...


KPG
Hilarious is that you have no clue about what was said. Always trying to buffalo your Co-horts into making them believe you know SOMETHING about everything. You are clueless about MOST things and simply like to promote your stuff.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

MaidInBedlam said:


> Thanks for pointing out the role and importance of the petrodollar and the extent to which we go to protect US hegemony. All that nonsense about the stockpile of WMDs in Iraq was a smokescreen and Americans bought it hook, line and sinker.


MaidInBedlam
I call the War in Iraq a Scandal with hundreds of thousands of death, not 4. Any one death is terrible but hundreds of thousands for Greed is reprehensible. Let's open that Can of Worms over and over and over again. Not too late folks since we will be paying for that atrocity for many years to come.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> So did the Democrats, they were not so smart either.


joeysomma
the Liars had the upper hand.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

socpuppet02 said:


> No legislators chose not to believe their President would do.something as horrendous as lying about something like that.
> 
> However the ONLY group that was questioning the veracity were those on the left, including the French who were proven right, btw.


socpuppet02
Thank you.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> I'd add that it wasn't a smokescreen. It was a lie. IMHO


Agree!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

To change the subject:

Has anyone noticed how the kidnapped Nigerian girls haven't been in the news recently?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

socpuppet02 said:


> No legislators chose not to believe their President would do.something as horrendous as lying about something like that.
> 
> However the ONLY group that was questioning the veracity were those on the left, including the French who were proven right, btw.


IMO, key legislators knew the truth but understood that stopping Hussein was critical to the continuation of the US hegemony. They certainly are aware and understand the role of the petrodollar. Any one of us who is not familiar with the workings of the petrodollar, should do some reading on it. It certainly clears up some misperceptions of why the US has remained on top for so long. It also goes a long way to understanding how our economy works and the real reason why people in other countries hate us so much.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> To change the subject:
> 
> Has anyone noticed how the kidnapped Nigerian girls haven't been in the news recently?


I have...not a good sign, is it?


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> So did the Democrats, they were not so smart either.


Please note that I said "Americans". This means I was talking about all of our citizens no matter their political affiliations, or any other demographic details.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

socpuppet02 said:


> The problem is they should have made that argument to the American people.


The real problem is that the American people aren't ready to hear the truth. We see ourselves as saviors to the world. If we really knew all that our government had done in our names, we would throw them out! Maintaining power and control is most important to them.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

damemary said:


> I'd add that it wasn't a smokescreen. It was a lie. IMHO


Indeed. Smokesceens are used to obscure the truth.


----------



## cookiequeen (Jun 15, 2011)

socpuppet02 said:


> No legislators chose not to believe their President would do.something as horrendous as lying about something like that.
> 
> However the ONLY group that was questioning the veracity were those on the left, including the French who were proven right, btw.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> To change the subject:
> 
> Has anyone noticed how the kidnapped Nigerian girls haven't been in the news recently?


They were mentioned on the CBS evening news yesterday, but the story concentrated on the aid the US is giving the Nigerian government. It seems that the search and the technology provided to improve the search for those girls who are living as captives in God knows what condition is more important than the girls themselves.

The picture of a group of the girls who Boko Haram said had willingly converted to Islam chills me. This statement is incredibly absurd, and deeply offensive. No captive ever does anything willingly.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

socpuppet02 said:


> The problem is they should have made that argument to the American people.


Yes, but that would have been a good way to keep us out of Iraq.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> They were mentioned on the CBS evening news yesterday, but the story concentrated on the aid the US is giving the Nigerian government. It seems that the search and the technology provided to improve the search for those girls who are living as captives in God knows what condition is more important than the girls themselves.
> 
> The picture of a group of the girls who Boko Haram said had willingly converted to Islam chills me. This statement is incredibly absurd, and deeply offensive. No captive ever does anything willingly.


That's certainly true.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> They were mentioned on the CBS evening news yesterday, but the story concentrated on the aid the US is giving the Nigerian government. It seems that the search and the technology provided to improve the search for those girls who are living as captives in God knows what condition is more important than the girls themselves.
> 
> The picture of a group of the girls who Boko Haram said had willingly converted to Islam chills me. This statement is incredibly absurd, and deeply offensive. No captive ever does anything willingly.


What I really wonder is whether the physical location of the girls has in fact been determined. Nigeria's not that large--it would seem impossible to me that they could stay hidden for long, what with spy satellites, drones, paid informers, and just ordinary peasants who've seen the group(s) moving about in the forest.


----------



## MaidInBedlam (Jul 24, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> What I really wonder is whether the physical location of the girls has in fact been determined. Nigeria's not that large--it would seem impossible to me that they could stay hidden for long, what with spy satellites, drones, paid informers, and just ordinary peasants who've seen the group(s) moving about in the forest.


I have wondered that that myself. I tend to think ordinary Nigerian peasants who might have seen any groups of girls have kept silent because to fear of reprisal from Boko Haram. Boko Haram seems to be greatly feared in Northern Nigeria.

The group of girls who have been pictured on the news is supposedly made of about 100 of the over 200 girls who were kidnapped. We are told that the kidnapped girls have been divided into small groups. If that's true, they would be much harder to find. Some have reportedly been taken across the Nigerian border and into countries north of Nigeria.

It seems to me that the Nigerian government is reluctant to take appreciative action against this terrible act. Perhaps they want Nigeria to become a Muslim state. Perhaps they are intimidated by Boko Haram. I'm not up-to-date about what our "advisors" who have been sent to Nigeria are doingright thi minute , but they do have more sophisticated ways to search for people. Much as I hate to say it, this crime may be swept under the rug


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> I have wondered that that myself. I tend to think ordinary Nigerian peasants who might have seen any groups of girls have kept silent because to fear of reprisal from Boko Haram. Boko Haram seems to be greatly feared in Northern Nigeria.
> 
> The group of girls who have been pictured on the news is supposedly made of about 100 of the over 200 girls who were kidnapped. We are told that the kidnapped girls have been divided into small groups. If that's true, they would be much harder to find. Some have reportedly been taken across the Nigerian border and into countries north of Nigeria.
> 
> It seems to me that the Nigerian government is reluctant to take appreciative action against this terrible act. Perhaps they want Nigeria to become a Muslim state. Perhaps they are intimidated by Boko Haram. I'm not up-to-date about what our "advisors" who have been sent to Nigeria are doingright thi minute , but they do have more sophisticated ways to search for people. Much as I hate to say it, this crime may be swept under the rug


I know what you mean--it would be sickening if some or none of those girls were rescued. I'm not sure whether all the public scrutiny has in fact had any positive effect on the situation, but the general public has the attention span of gnats--if media scrutiny is all that's pushing forward efforts then those girls are in serious trouble (or will be as soon as some new crisis diverts everyone's attention).


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> What I really wonder is whether the physical location of the girls has in fact been determined. Nigeria's not that large--it would seem impossible to me that they could stay hidden for long, what with spy satellites, drones, paid informers, and just ordinary peasants who've seen the group(s) moving about in the forest.


Considering that the US and others, have satellites that can spot a quarter from outer space, and can look at previous data whenever they wish, I think they know where the girls are!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Woman Delivers Dying Moms Baby After Auto Accident, Babys Head Was Sticking Out of Her Stomach


It wasn't sticking out of her stomach. It may have been sticking out of her abdomen. I can understand that the woman who delivered the baby would say "stomach," but surely the "journalist" who wrote this should know the difference between the upper part of the digestive system and the below-the-waist location of the womb.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Considering that the US and others, have satellites that can spot a quarter from outer space, and can look at previous data whenever they wish, I think they know where the girls are!


I can't imagine that they don't know their location. I wonder why they're stalling.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> I can't imagine that they don't know their location. I wonder why they're stalling.


I don't know the reason but perhaps its the same reason that Hillary Clinton as secretary of state, refused to classify Boco Haram as a terrorist organization? Even though they had terrorized and killed thousands of people?


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> I can't imagine that they don't know their location. I wonder why they're stalling.


I suspect there's lots of behind-the-scenes wheeling and dealing going on. Neither side wants to lose face, I suppose.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> I suspect there's lots of behind-the-scenes wheeling and dealing going on. Neither side wants to lose face, I suppose.


What do you mean by "lose face"? What do they have to lose face over?


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> To change the subject:
> 
> Has anyone noticed how the kidnapped Nigerian girls haven't been in the news recently?


Maybe the people who are trying to rescue them are doing so quietly so as not to alert the kidnappers of what they are doing. I would hope that is the case. Those poor terrorized children, even if they are successfully rescued, will probably never trust again and will always be fearful.

When there is a crisis of this sort, as much as the public needs to be informed, the well being of the victims has to be the first priority.

Let us all pray, each in our own way, that these children are rescued successfully. And that the horrible people who are subjecting them to this fearful ordeal get the fate they deserve.

I hope we hear good news sooner rather than later.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> The real problem is that the American people aren't ready to hear the truth. We see ourselves as saviors to the world. If we really knew all that our government had done in our names, we would throw them out! Maintaining power and control is most important to them.


That and keeping the world safe for billionaires.


----------



## MarilynKnits (Aug 30, 2011)

MaidInBedlam said:


> They were mentioned on the CBS evening news yesterday, but the story concentrated on the aid the US is giving the Nigerian government. It seems that the search and the technology provided to improve the search for those girls who are living as captives in God knows what condition is more important than the girls themselves.
> 
> The picture of a group of the girls who Boko Haram said had willingly converted to Islam chills me. This statement is incredibly absurd, and deeply offensive. No captive ever does anything willingly.


But the longer they remain captive, the greater the chance of Stockholm Syndrome. Chilling.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> What do you mean by "lose face"? What do they have to lose face over?


Well, the Nigerian government doesn't want the world to know what kind of ransom they might have to fork over to get the girls back, and the Boko Haram doesn't want to let them go without a big pile of something shiny (release prisoners, munitions, and basic supplies would also probably suffice) in return--it wouldn't due to appear to be backing down in the face of world pressure.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> Maybe the people who are trying to rescue them are doing so quietly so as not to alert the kidnappers of what they are doing. I would hope that is the case. Those poor terrorized children, even if they are successfully rescued, will probably never trust again and will always be fearful.
> 
> When there is a crisis of this sort, as much as the public needs to be informed, the well being of the victims has to be the first priority.
> 
> ...


I would have thought that the very first thing those with authority would have done, is look at the sattelite images. First problem solved! For some reason, either US authorities or the Nigerian authorities didn't want to step in and rescue the girls.

I do, so pray for these girls! Even if they get rescued they will be dealing with the trauma for the rest of their lives. I'd heard that the girls were being raped and trained as sex slaves??? If so, will their families accept them back? In many parts of the world, virginity is primary to acceptance.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

MarilynKnits said:


> That and keeping the world safe for billionaires.


I agree except that the world is always safe for billionaires. They've plenty of body guards and politicians protecting them!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

socpuppet02 said:


> I think sometimes that happens because there are plans or negotiations in the works and TPTB don't want press reportts to escalate a situation.


I hope that's what it is and not just short attention span.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Well, the Nigerian government doesn't want the world to know what kind of ransom they might have to fork over to get the girls back, and the Boko Haram doesn't want to let them go without a big pile of something shiny (release prisoners, munitions, and basic supplies would also probably suffice) in return--it wouldn't due to appear to be backing down in the face of world pressure.


Oh, ok. I knew that they wanted prisoners released but not the other. I would think that they'd just ask for assistance and go in and take them out.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I would have thought that the very first thing those with authority would have done, is look at the sattelite images. First problem solved! For some reason, either US authorities or the Nigerian authorities didn't want to step in and rescue the girls.
> 
> I do, so pray for these girls! Even if they get rescued they will be dealing with the trauma for the rest of their lives. I'd heard that the girls were being raped and trained as sex slaves??? If so, will their families accept them back? In many parts of the world, virginity is primary to acceptance.


You're absolutely right, Nebraska. I'm sure they'll get at least some of those girls back, but what then? They'll be stigmatized for life, especially those who become pregnant. I think they're going to need heavy-duty counseling, education, and job-training in order to make new lives for themselves.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> You're absolutely right, Nebraska. I'm sure they'll get at least some of those girls back, but what then? They'll be stigmatized for life, especially those who become pregnant. I think they're going to need heavy-duty counseling, education, and job-training in order to make new lives for themselves.


 I think they'll also need to be resettled somewhere where not being a virgin is acceptable.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> You're absolutely right, Nebraska. I'm sure they'll get at least some of those girls back, but what then? They'll be stigmatized for life, especially those who become pregnant. I think they're going to need heavy-duty counseling, education, and job-training in order to make new lives for themselves.


I agree but probably more than that. If Nigeria is one of the countries that would reject them for not being virgins or for being pregnant (?) Then it would be preferable to relocate them. I don't know much about Nigeria but I do know that the men are utter dictators over the women. So that doesn't bode well.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> I think they'll also need to be resettled somewhere where not being a virgin is acceptable.


Oops! Didn't see this. I agree!


----------



## peacegoddess (Jan 28, 2013)

We might be underestimating the Nigerian community as they have been very vocal about their outrage over the kidnappings and they may well embrace the girls and make sure they are accepted back into the community.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> I think they'll also need to be resettled somewhere where not being a virgin is acceptable.


Would resettlement be the only way to find them husbands? I've read that in past times a sizeable dowry could go a long way in making up for any perceived defects in the bride's background or character. It's pretty interesting--in Victorian England, for example, a former prostitute who managed to save some funds was often considered even more marriageable than a woman who worked for rock-bottom wages in a factory and consequently had nothing to show for it.

It's awful to think of those girls having to "purchase" husbands, but relocation and resettlement can be pretty traumatic too. I suppose, ultimately, it has to be up to them.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

A funny story (well, we all thought it was funny)... My daughter in law's father is (or was) a Nigerian. She hadn't seen or spoken to him since she was seven years old. But her brother kept in contact. When she and my son got engaged, her father called and she was informed that he had invited the entire Nigerian community between Omaha and Kansas City. She was told that she would have a Nigerian wedding with Nigerian dress and Nigerian food. He wasn't paying for it, they were. She told him No and that he'd better uninvite them but he refused. He said that the man decides and she must do as he said. After much wrangling, her brother (being a man) was able to talk to him and convince him that she would have it her way. In the end, her father, his wife, her uncle and his two wives showed up in Nigerian gowns with very large headdresses. The only compromise was that dil and son had ONE photo taken wearing the headdresses. If you knew my dil, you would understand why it was funny. She is a very independent woman but talking to him was like talking to a brick wall. BTW, her mother walked her down the aisle as she had been both mother and father to my dil.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

peacegoddess said:


> We might be underestimating the Nigerian community as they have been very vocal about their outrage over the kidnappings and they may well embrace the girls and make sure they are accepted back into the community.


I hope you're right! It seems that in so many parts of the world, respect for women is lacking.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> A funny story (well, we all thought it was funny)... My daughter in law's father is (or was) a Nigerian. She hadn't seen or spoken to him since she was seven years old. But her brother kept in contact. When she and my son got engaged, her father called and she was informed that he had invited the entire Nigerian community between Omaha and Kansas City. She was told that she would have a Nigerian wedding with Nigerian dress and Nigerian food. He wasn't paying for it, they were. She told him No and that he'd better uninvite them but he refused. He said that the man decides and she must do as he said. After much wrangling, her brother (being a man) was able to talk to him and convince him that she would have it her way. In the end, her father, his wife, her uncle and his two wives showed up in Nigerian gowns with very large headdresses. The only compromise was that dil and son had ONE photo taken wearing the headdresses. If you knew my dil, you would understand why it was funny. She is a very independent woman but talking to him was like talking to a brick wall. BTW, her mother walked her down the aisle as she had been both mother and father to my dil.


Thumbs up to your DIL, Nebraska! :thumbup:

I do believe men from other countries are often taken aback by the "forwardness" of American women. My husband is from Eastern Europe, and he's been asked who wears the pants in our family countless times by friends, parents, cousins etc etc.


----------



## aw9358 (Nov 1, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I hope you're right! It seems that in so many parts of the world, respect for women is lacking.


Something of an understatement. It ranges from disrespect and contempt to outright hatred, it seems to me. It sometimes doesn't feel like it, but we really are very fortunate in our birthplaces.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Huckleberry said:


> KPG
> Hilarious is that you have no clue about what was said. Always trying to buffalo your Co-horts into making them believe you know SOMETHING about everything. You are clueless about MOST things and simply like to promote your stuff.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Huckleberry said:


> MaidInBedlam
> I call the War in Iraq a Scandal with hundreds of thousands of death, not 4. Any one death is terrible but hundreds of thousands for Greed is reprehensible. Let's open that Can of Worms over and over and over again. Not too late folks since we will be paying for that atrocity for many years to come.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

socpuppet02 said:


> No legislators chose not to believe their President would do.something as horrendous as lying about something like that.
> 
> However the ONLY group that was questioning the veracity were those on the left, including the French who were proven right, btw.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

socpuppet02 said:


> The problem is they should have made that argument to the American people.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

socpuppet02 said:


> Agreed, she might as well posted a synopsis of some romance novel.
> 
> Has nothing to do with anything other than her tendency to believe fairytales


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thank you.



socpuppet02 said:


> Amen!!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I have been wondering about that? I hate to think the public would just lose interest and forget about it.



Poor Purl said:


> To change the subject:
> 
> Has anyone noticed how the kidnapped Nigerian girls haven't been in the news recently?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Thumbs up to your DIL, Nebraska! :thumbup:
> 
> I do believe men from other countries are often taken aback by the "forwardness" of American women. My husband is from Eastern Europe, and he's been asked who wears the pants in our family countless times by friends, parents, cousins etc etc.


Hahahaha! I guess they just don't understand! We all wear pants these days!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I think not. What does it say about the public's attention? Old news?



susanmos2000 said:


> I have...not a good sign, is it?


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

aw9358 said:


> Something of an understatement. It ranges from disrespect and contempt to outright hatred, it seems to me. It sometimes doesn't feel like it, but we really are very fortunate in our birthplaces.


Oh, for sure! I wouldn't have done very well someplace else!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Agreed 100%.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Oh, for sure! I wouldn't have done very well someplace else!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> Agreed 100%.


Oh! YAY! You agree with me on something! I doesn't happen very often so I feel the need to celebrate! :lol:


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

Gotta go! My grandson's waking up from his nap. I've had him since yesterday morning and I'm exhausted!


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Hahahaha! I guess they just don't understand! We all wear pants these days!


So true. It's especially ironic because the women I know in Serbia are anything BUT delicate little flowers. There sphere may be limited, but by gosh no man had better tell them how to manage it.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Gotta go! My grandson's waking up from his nap. I've had him since yesterday morning and I'm exhausted!


You poor thing! I hope you can catch up on your rest. Remember the old adage: Nap while the baby naps (not that that ever worked for me, though  )


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> A funny story (well, we all thought it was funny)... My daughter in law's father is (or was) a Nigerian. She hadn't seen or spoken to him since she was seven years old. But her brother kept in contact. When she and my son got engaged, her father called and she was informed that he had invited the entire Nigerian community between Omaha and Kansas City. She was told that she would have a Nigerian wedding with Nigerian dress and Nigerian food. He wasn't paying for it, they were. She told him No and that he'd better uninvite them but he refused. He said that the man decides and she must do as he said. After much wrangling, her brother (being a man) was able to talk to him and convince him that she would have it her way. In the end, her father, his wife, her uncle and his two wives showed up in Nigerian gowns with very large headdresses. The only compromise was that dil and son had ONE photo taken wearing the headdresses. If you knew my dil, you would understand why it was funny. She is a very independent woman but talking to him was like talking to a brick wall. BTW, her mother walked her down the aisle as she had been both mother and father to my dil.


Great story.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I guess it's just our little secret.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Hahahaha! I guess they just don't understand! We all wear pants these days!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I'm sorry. Let's keep trying.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Oh! YAY! You agree with me on something! I doesn't happen very often so I feel the need to celebrate! :lol:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

How old is he?



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Gotta go! My grandson's waking up from his nap. I've had him since yesterday morning and I'm exhausted!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Maybe that's why they try to control things here? Why don't they just get a dog that needs training?



susanmos2000 said:


> So true. It's especially ironic because the women I know in Serbia are anything BUT delicate little flowers. There sphere may be limited, but by gosh no man had better tell them how to manage it.


----------



## peacegoddess (Jan 28, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> I hope you're right! It seems that in so many parts of the world, respect for women is lacking.


Here in the good ole USA too. Example the sexual assaults in the military and rapes on college campuses and also of young high school girls by football players.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> So true. It's especially ironic because the women I know in Serbia are anything BUT delicate little flowers. There sphere may be limited, but by gosh no man had better tell them how to manage it.


I was glad to hear this. Its always interesting to hear what its like for women in other countries. It seems we're so insulated. Please share more when you feel like it.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> You poor thing! I hope you can catch up on your rest. Remember the old adage: Nap while the baby naps (not that that ever worked for me, though  )


My son and dil finally came about 9pm. They stayed til 10 and then my friend called. I am beyond tired but will be very busy this weekend. So I wanted to respond before I go to bed. And no! No naps for me! I've been acting like a fool, running and chasing, swinging and climbing on the play set. And I'll bet we blew a million bubbles! People my age should not run! Hahaha! I am tired and sore!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> I'm sorry. Let's keep trying.


Don't be sorry! I'm just so appreciative that we can communicate. As I've said before, it doesn't matter if we agree or not, its the conversation that matters. I was only amused that we occasionally find things on which to agree. :lol:


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> How old is he?


He will be three at the end of June. He has boundless energy and likes to run! He's really quite fun!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

peacegoddess said:


> Here in the good ole USA too. Example the sexual assaults in the military and rapes on college campuses and also of young high school girls by football players.


Isn't it outrageous that these things are going on now, in our country. It seems to get worse instead of better.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> My son and dil finally came about 9pm. They stayed til 10 and then my friend called. I am beyond tired but will be very busy this weekend. So I wanted to respond before I go to bed. And no! No naps for me! I've been acting like a fool, running and chasing, swinging and climbing on the play set. And I'll bet we blew a million bubbles! People my age should not run! Hahaha! I am tired and sore!


The joys of being a non custodial grandparent, you can give them back at the end of the day. When they are tired and grizzly and swinging from the chandelier, you just say "They want their mummy and hand them back".


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Excellent points Peacegoddess.



peacegoddess said:


> Here in the good ole USA too. Example the sexual assaults in the military and rapes on college campuses and also of young high school girls by football players.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

You may be tired beyond belief, but you are a fun grandma. Hooray for Grandma!



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> My son and dil finally came about 9pm. They stayed til 10 and then my friend called. I am beyond tired but will be very busy this weekend. So I wanted to respond before I go to bed. And no! No naps for me! I've been acting like a fool, running and chasing, swinging and climbing on the play set. And I'll bet we blew a million bubbles! People my age should not run! Hahaha! I am tired and sore!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Tell us about him anytime. Love baby stories.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> He will be three at the end of June. He has boundless energy and likes to run! He's really quite fun!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Years ago, I would have said such things were impossible. Shows you what I knew.



Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Isn't it outrageous that these things are going on now, in our country. It seems to get worse instead of better.


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Amanda Marcotte Continues the Junk Science Attack on When Human Life Begins
> 
> by Wesley J. Smith | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 5/23/14 1:12 PM
> 
> ...


Very interesting article, Joey. I've always felt that when we learn enough, abortion will be a thing of the past. Science is getting us to that point.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> 11-Year-Old Rape Victim Gives Birth to Twins, Babies Saved Thanks to Abortion Ban


What does this story have to do with abortion, other than what the author inserts into it? This poor girl is raped - poor in all senses of the word - and there's no compassion for her. Nobody suggests that she have an abortion, no "abortion activists" around except in the mind of the author. Are we now going to be treated to a whole series of uneventful pregnancies and births in which imaginary "abortion activists" do nothing and are blamed for who-knows-what?

No feeling for the child victim of a brutal crime, but hurray, her body still worked as an incubator. She's lucky to live among people willing to supply her with milk. Who knows how long that will go on?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Woman in Coma Gives Birth to Healthy Baby Boy


Yet another story about a woman's body used as an incubator. We all hope she recovers and lives to enjoy the baby, but really....


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Amanda Marcotte Continues the Junk Science Attack on When Human Life Begins


You don't understand and never will. It's never been a question of when life begins, except for some religions. It's simply a question of whether a woman can be in control of her own life. The best thing your scientists could do to end the practice of abortions is to work on a foolproof way to keep the embryo developing outside the human body. But don't you have a problem with _in vitro_ fertilization, too?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

bonbf3 said:


> Very interesting article, Joey. I've always felt that when we learn enough, abortion will be a thing of the past. Science is getting us to that point.


As was pointed out to Joey, it's never been a question of when life begins, except for some religions. It's simply a question of whether a woman can be in control of her own life. The best thing your scientists could do to end the practice of abortions is to work on a foolproof way to keep the embryo developing outside the human body, and for your community to see that it has a life after gestation.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> What does this story have to do with abortion, other than what the author inserts into it? This poor girl is raped - poor in all senses of the word - and there's no compassion for her. Nobody suggests that she have an abortion, no "abortion activists" around except in the mind of the author. Are we now going to be treated to a whole series of uneventful pregnancies and births in which imaginary "abortion activists" do nothing and are blamed for who-knows-what?
> 
> No feeling for the child victim of a brutal crime, but hurray, her body still worked as an incubator. She's lucky to live among people willing to supply her with milk. Who knows how long that will go on?


I agree with you, Purl. The focus seems to be on an abortion that never took place rather than the girl's life circumstances, which are appalling. She was raped by a neighbor and apparently had to live next door to that fiend until the police were prodded into action--a hostile relationship between her divorced parents--no further education--not enough food for either her or her babies--no financial support from her biological father. The issue of abortion seems to be the least of the girl's problems--I'm not sure what this sad little story is even doing in the archives of the anti-abortion group that wrote it.


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> I am glad you agree life begins at conception. So with your reasoning every abortion ends a human life.
> 
> embryo = fetus = baby = toddler = child =adolescent = teen = adult = senior. No matter what name you use, it is a human life. Therefore, deliberately ending that life at whatever stage is murder.
> 
> ...


You said this so well. I wholeheartedly agree. I do feel that it's just a matter of time before society sees the brutality and pain of abortion and puts a stop to it, finding more and better ways to help mothers in need.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> I am glad you agree life begins at conception. So with your reasoning every abortion ends a human life.
> 
> embryo = fetus = baby = toddler = child =adolescent = teen = adult = senior. No matter what name you use, it is a human life. Therefore, deliberately ending that life at whatever stage is murder.


I know you've stated this before, Joey, but I'm not convinced that you yourself truly believe it. The acid test would seem to be situation Rick Santorum and his wife found themselves in--troubled pregnancy, massive infection, and then labor-inducing drugs to end it even though at 20 weeks there was no hope of survival. Do you believe they committed an act of murder by do so?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> What does this story have to do with abortion, other than what the author inserts into it? This poor girl is raped - poor in all senses of the word - and there's no compassion for her. Nobody suggests that she have an abortion, no "abortion activists" around except in the mind of the author. Are we now going to be treated to a whole series of uneventful pregnancies and births in which imaginary "abortion activists" do nothing and are blamed for who-knows-what?
> 
> No feeling for the child victim of a brutal crime, but hurray, her body still worked as an incubator. She's lucky to live among people willing to supply her with milk. Who knows how long that will go on?


 :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: More joey drivel. Cut & paste queen. She appears unable to clearly convey her viewpoint. So....bye bye.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> Yet another story about a woman's body used as an incubator. We all hope she recovers and lives to enjoy the baby, but really....


 :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: Well put. Thanks Purl.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Save your breath and your logical thoughts. They don't get it.



Poor Purl said:


> You don't understand and never will. It's never been a question of when life begins, except for some religions. It's simply a question of whether a woman can be in control of her own life. The best thing your scientists could do to end the practice of abortions is to work on a foolproof way to keep the embryo developing outside the human body. But don't you have a problem with _in vitro_ fertilization, too?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I agree Susan & Purl.



susanmos2000 said:


> I agree with you, Purl. The focus seems to be on an abortion that never took place rather than the girl's life circumstances, which are appalling. She was raped by a neighbor and apparently had to live next door to that fiend until the police were prodded into action--a hostile relationship between her divorced parents--no further education--not enough food for either her or her babies--no financial support from her biological father. The issue of abortion seems to be the least of the girl's problems--I'm not sure what this sad little story is even doing in the archives of the anti-abortion group that wrote it.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I would be interested in an answer to your question. A real situation, a conservative, religious couple, and CHOICE...for them, but for no one else????



susanmos2000 said:


> I know you've stated this before, Joey, but I'm not convinced that you yourself truly believe it. The acid test would seem to be situation Rick Santorum and his wife found themselves in--troubled pregnancy, massive infection, and then labor-inducing drugs to end it even though at 20 weeks there was no hope of survival. Do you believe they committed an act of murder by do so?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> I am glad you agree life begins at conception. So with your reasoning every abortion ends a human life.
> 
> embryo = fetus = baby = toddler = child =adolescent = teen = adult = senior. No matter what name you use, it is a human life. Therefore, deliberately ending that life at whatever stage is murder.
> 
> ...


As I've told you before, my religion regards life as beginning with full-term childbirth. Please don't hold me to your own religious beliefs.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

bonbf3 said:


> You said this so well. I wholeheartedly agree. I do feel that it's just a matter of time before society sees the brutality and pain of abortion and puts a stop to it, finding more and better ways to help mothers in need.


In fact, she said it poorly, putting words in my mouth that I would never agree to. You're welcome to your beliefs, even though I don't believe likewise, but you're not welcome to convert what I say into what you (really, Joey) would have liked me to say.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> This is science not religion.


This is not science. It's reframing science in a way that will coincide with your religious beliefs.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

damemary said:


> I would be interested in an answer to your question. A real situation, a conservative, religious couple, and CHOICE...for them, but for no one else????


Yes, it boggles the mind, Dame--especially as Santorum had always been adamant that abortion was murder, even when the mother's life was in jeopardy. I can't imagine he stills sees it quite that way--does anyone know for sure?


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Whoops--you answered my question. Thanks, Joey.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

joeysomma said:


> This is science not religion.


 :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD: :XD:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Has anyone had the nerve to ask him the question? That may be worth some research.

Ps. How do you like my new avatar?



susanmos2000 said:


> Yes, it boggles the mind, Dame--especially as Santorum had always been adamant that abortion was murder, even when the mother's life was in jeopardy. I can't imagine he stills sees it quite that way--does anyone know for sure?


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

damemary said:


> Has anyone had the nerve to ask him the question? That may be worth some research.
> 
> Ps. How do you like my new avatar?


Beautiful, Dame!


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> I know you've stated this before, Joey, but I'm not convinced that you yourself truly believe it. The acid test would seem to be situation Rick Santorum and his wife found themselves in--troubled pregnancy, massive infection, and then labor-inducing drugs to end it even though at 20 weeks there was no hope of survival. Do you believe they committed an act of murder by do so?


We all have to follow our consciences. If the life of the mother is in danger, inducing labor is to save her life, not to abort the baby. There really IS a difference. I'm sure there was also some hope of survival at 20 weeks. However, if they baby had not been born, mother AND baby probably faced certain death from the massive infection. This would have been a last resort - last ditch effort.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thank you. In my opinion their action is hypocritical at best.



joeysomma said:


> I know nothing about the one you are talking about other than he wanted to be a candidate for president. Therefore, I am unable to state an opinion.
> Abortion is murder, no matter who it is. He has to answer to God for his decision.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Whoops--you answered my question. Thanks, Joey.


And demonstrated her ignorance at the same time.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I've got a bunch of them. I thought it might helpl us get in the mood.



susanmos2000 said:


> Beautiful, Dame!


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

damemary said:


> :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: :hunf: More joey drivel. Cut & paste queen. She appears unable to clearly convey her viewpoint. So....bye bye.


Well, I just got on here and got my first taste of a personal attack. I thought this was a discussion group. Let's all act like grown-ups, how 'bout it?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> Has anyone had the nerve to ask him the question? That may be worth some research.
> 
> Ps. How do you like my new avatar?


Not quite Princess Grace, but graceful enough.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Nothing new. I'd still love to hear what Santorum has to say one the subject. Excuses? Religious tracts? Silence? Prayers all will disappear?



Poor Purl said:


> And demonstrated her ignorance at the same time.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> Thank you. In my opinion their action is hypocritical at best.


Their action was the most real thing they did. It's their words that are hypocritical.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

damemary said:


> Nothing new. I'd still love to hear what Santorum has to say one the subject. Excuses? Religious tracts? Silence? Prayers all will disappear?


Apparently he's become silent on the subject of same-sex marriage, too. I wonder what that's about.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

bonbf3 said:


> Well, I just got on here and got my first taste of a personal attack. I thought this was a discussion group. Let's all act like grown-ups, how 'bout it?


 :thumbup: to that, Bonnie. This is very interesting.


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

damemary said:


> Nothing new. I'd still love to hear what Santorum has to say one the subject. Excuses? Religious tracts? Silence? Prayers all will disappear?


Why don't you google it? I'm sure he's spoken about it.


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> :thumbup: to that, Bonnie. This is very interesting.


Thanks, Susan.


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> I am sure the embryologist's are much more knowledgeable about this subject than either you or I. I must agree with them. I will challenge you to find an embryologist that will state life begins only when the child takes a breath. Include website.
> 
> Real science agrees with my religious beliefs.
> 
> ...


Great source. I think I"ll save that. Thanks, Joey.


----------



## Country Bumpkins (Feb 18, 2011)

damemary said:


> Has anyone had the nerve to ask him the question? That may be worth some research.
> 
> Ps. How do you like my new avatar?


Looks like she is drunk.


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> This is science not religion.


I remember someone - not on here - said that life begins with self-awareness.

Boy - if that's true, there sure are a lot of dead people walking around! Maybe that's why everyone loves that zombie show.


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Yes, it boggles the mind, Dame--especially as Santorum had always been adamant that abortion was murder, even when the mother's life was in jeopardy. I can't imagine he stills sees it quite that way--does anyone know for sure?


It always surprises me how many women actually have the courage to forego treatments like chemotherapy because it could hurt or kill the baby they're carrying. That takes a lot of faith - but there are those who do it.

In the Santorum case, I think the mother AND baby's lives were in danger.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> I am sure the embryologist's are much more knowledgeable about this subject than either you or I. I must agree with them. I will challenge you to find an embryologist that will state life begins only when the child takes a breath. Include website.
> 
> Real science agrees with my religious beliefs.
> 
> ...


The following has so many answers to the question of when life begins that I can't sum it up. I would recommend that you read this to see what other scientists have to say, but I doubt that you will. Your mind is made up, and I'm not trying to change it. But I'd like the same courtesy from you.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/When_does_life_begin%3F


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

bonbf3 said:


> Why don't you google it? I'm sure he's spoken about it.


I did...and he's softened a bit to now allow abortion in case of rape, incest, or for the sake of the mother's life. That's reassuring, but I still feel troubled. He changed his mind after witnessing his wife's extremely troubled pregnancy...but what if they'd been lucky enough to never to go through that? Has he ever thought how ghastly it would have been if someone with no experience in such matters had trumpeted the "Abortion is murder" line and taken away his and his wife's right to choose?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

bonbf3 said:


> Great source. I think I"ll save that. Thanks, Joey.


Please save mine, too. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/When_does_life_begin%3F


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Country Bumpkins said:


> Looks like she is drunk.


Either that or very cheerful. In either case, she looks as though she'd be fun to hang around with.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> I did...and he's softened a bit to now allow abortion in case of rape, incest, or for the sake of the mother's life. That's reassuring, but I still feel troubled. He changed his mind after witnessing his wife's extremely troubled pregnancy...but what if they'd been lucky enough to never to go through that? Has he ever thought how ghastly it would have been if someone with no experience in such matters had trumpeted the "Abortion is murder" line and taken away his and his wife's right to choose?


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

bonbf3 said:


> It always surprises me how many women actually have the courage to forego treatments like chemotherapy because it could hurt or kill the baby they're carrying. That takes a lot of faith - but there are those who do it.
> 
> In the Santorum case, I think the mother AND baby's lives were in danger.


True, there was absolutely no way that pregnancy was going to go to term, but trying to prolong it for even another couple of weeks might have made a difference. Of course I have no beef with Mrs. Santorum and the choice she made...she said in an interview that she needed to live for the sake of the three children she already had. That seems reasonable--a woman with no children might have made a different choice, of course, and that would be OK too. But that's always the trouble with abortion--no two woman's circumstances are ever the same, so it's hard to come up with a one-size-fits-all rule.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> True, there was absolutely no way that pregnancy was going to go to term, but trying to prolong it for even another couple of weeks might have made a difference. Of course I have no beef with Mrs. Santorum and the choice she made...she said in an interview that she needed to live for the sake of the three children she already had. That seems reasonable--a woman with no children might have made a different choice, of course, and that would be OK too. But that's always the trouble with abortion--no two woman's circumstances are ever the same, so it's hard to come up with a one-size-fits-all rule.


It's always bothered me that given the choice, the anti-choice would pick the unborn organism over the mother of living children. I'm glad the Santorums made the rational choice.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> It's always bothered me that given the choice, the anti-choice would pick the unborn organism over the mother of living children. I'm glad the Santorums made the rational choice.


I feel the same--given their opposition to abortion the decision must have been gut-wrenching.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Where is the real embryologist? That was the challenge.


He's named in the article: Scott F. Gilbert is the Howard A. Schneiderman Professor of Biology at Swarthmore College, where he teaches developmental genetics, embryology, and the history and critiques of biology. Most of the biological points in the article are his.


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Yes, it boggles the mind, Dame--especially as Santorum had always been adamant that abortion was murder, even when the mother's life was in jeopardy. I can't imagine he stills sees it quite that way--does anyone know for sure?


I have two sources with two different political leanings, LifeNews.com and Salon magazine online.

From LifeNews.com
The Santorums child was not going to live regardless, yet Karen Santorum risked her life to take the pregnancy as far as possible. Both she and her husband committed to an early delivery with hope that a miracle would occur and their child would survive, Loesch explains. Karen Santorum wasnt going to live to carry the baby to term and the baby, due to a defect, didnt have much of a chance outside the womb, but there was a chance. It does happen.

Link to article - http://www.lifenews.com/2012/01/06/liberal-web-site-lies-claims-santorums-wife-had-abortion/

I will add that I read in the last month or so that the first baby to ever survive this defect, which prevents excretion of urine into the amniotic sac, is the baby girl of a Congresswoman. The baby is a few months old. They did a surgery, she is now on dialysis and wll have a kidney transplant when she's older. I THINK it's the same condition.

Link - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/29/jaime-herrera-beutler-baby_n_3671417.html

From Salon online:
The Santorums child was not going to live regardless, yet Karen Santorum risked her life to take the pregnancy as far as possible. Both she and her husband committed to an early delivery with hope that a miracle would occur and their child would survive, Loesch explains. Karen Santorum wasnt going to live to carry the baby to term and the baby, due to a defect, didnt have much of a chance outside the womb, but there was a chance. It does happen.

and also from the Salon article"

. 'In the 19th week of pregnancy, the paper reported, a radiologist told them that the fetus Karen was carrying had a fatal defect and was going to die. They opted for a bladder shunt surgery that led to an intrauterine infection and a high fever.'

Link to article - http://www.salon.com/2012/01/06/karen_santorum_did_not_have_an_abortion/

Link describing bladder shunt surgery - 
http://www.pennlive.com/bodyandmind/index.ssf/2012/05/serious_condition_calls_for_in.html


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Then this what he says:
> 
> Embryology
> 
> ...


Not exactly. Did you read it all?


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Yes, it boggles the mind, Dame--especially as Santorum had always been adamant that abortion was murder, even when the mother's life was in jeopardy. I can't imagine he stills sees it quite that way--does anyone know for sure?


I have two sources with two different political leanings, LifeNews.com and Salon magazine online.

From LifeNews.com

The Santorums child was not going to live regardless, yet Karen Santorum risked her life to take the pregnancy as far as possible. Both she and her husband committed to an early delivery with hope that a miracle would occur and their child would survive, Loesch explains. Karen Santorum wasnt going to live to carry the baby to term and the baby, due to a defect, didnt have much of a chance outside the womb, but there was a chance. It does happen.

Link to article - http://www.lifenews.com/2012/01/06/liberal-web-site-lies-claims-santorums-wife-had-abortion/

From Salon online:

'In the 19th week of pregnancy, the paper reported, a radiologist told them that the fetus Karen was carrying had a fatal defect and was going to die. They opted for a bladder shunt surgery that led to an intrauterine infection and a high fever.' *

I will add that I read in the last month or so that the first baby to ever survive this defect was born AFTER the Santorums baby. She is the baby girl of a news reporter. This defect prevents excretion of urine into the amniotic sac., The urine provides the amniotic fluid, and without that, the baby's lungs cannot expand. A baby with this defect suffers from not only the kidney defect, but also lung damage. They did a surgery in utero on the baby, she is now on dialysis and will have a kidney transplant when she's older. I THINK it's the same condition.

Also from the Salon article:
"The physician I spoke to strongly disputed that characterization (as induction) of what was at stake. She did not have an induction of labor, the doctor said. She was in spontaneous labor because of the severe infection. The use of antibiotics in no way augments labor nor does it initiate contractions in any way, shape or form. In fact, sometimes the opposite is true, and antibiotics can help forestall labor.

There is another medical misunderstanding that may stem from the multiple layers of accounts and recollections, described in this sentence of the Inquirer story: As her fever subsided, Karen  a former neonatal intensive-care nurse  asked for something to stop the labor. Her doctors refused, Santorum recalled, citing malpractice concerns. While this shows Karen Santorum being consistent with her stated view that inducing labor would be tantamount to abortion, the doctor told me it would have been impossible to stop the labor at that stage."

Link to article - http://www.salon.com/2012/01/06/karen_santorum_did_not_have_an_abortion/

Link describing bladder shunt surgery - 
http://www.pennlive.com/bodyandmind/index.ssf/2012/05/serious_condition_calls_for_in.html

So it looks like:

1- discovered defect that no baby had ever survived
2 - did surgery on baby
3 - massive infection resulted
4 - large doses of antibiotics were given
5 - spontaneous labor began
6 - mother requested medication to stop labor
7 - labor continued


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Then this what he says:
> 
> Embryology
> 
> ...


Hmm...your last statement doesn't seem to square with what you said earlier, and what a lot of anti-abortion folks believe (that life begins at conception). Does that mean that you wouldn't have any problem with the morning-after pill or IUDs?


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

bonbf3 said:


> I have two sources with two different political leanings, LifeNews.com and Salon magazine online.
> 
> From LifeNews.com
> The Santorums child was not going to live regardless, yet Karen Santorum risked her life to take the pregnancy as far as possible. Both she and her husband committed to an early delivery with hope that a miracle would occur and their child would survive, Loesch explains. Karen Santorum wasnt going to live to carry the baby to term and the baby, due to a defect, didnt have much of a chance outside the womb, but there was a chance. It does happen.
> ...


I don't know--I think it's a bit of a stretch for the Santorums to claim that they believed a miracle would take place, and therefore taking Pitocin wasn't deliberately inducing a miscarriage/stillbirth. There simply is no hope of survival below twenty-one weeks--that seems to be the limit as far as viability is concerned.

One question: did the baby girl you speak of have surgery in utero?


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> True, there was absolutely no way that pregnancy was going to go to term, but trying to prolong it for even another couple of weeks might have made a difference. Of course I have no beef with Mrs. Santorum and the choice she made...she said in an interview that she needed to live for the sake of the three children she already had. That seems reasonable--a woman with no children might have made a different choice, of course, and that would be OK too. But that's always the trouble with abortion--no two woman's circumstances are ever the same, so it's hard to come up with a one-size-fits-all rule.


I understand what you're saying, but the circumstances are the same for the baby - it is killed.

I don't believe in the death penalty. Sometimes I think it's what people deserve for vicious crimes, BUT I still have to stand against it. I believe the death penalty is wrong because it takes a human life. That's why I believe abortion is wrong also.

Just because we want to do it and can do it doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.

Just my opinion - I don't expect to change any minds, and I realize that decisions are different for people who are living in the situation. That's why I'm so glad it's not my job to judge. I don't know what brings others to their decisions; I only know what brings me to mine.

It is not my place to judge, but it is my responsibility to be compassionate under all circumstances. On my really good days, I can almost do it.


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> I don't know--I think it's a bit of a stretch for the Santorums to claim that they believed a miracle would take place, and therefore taking Pitocin wasn't deliberately inducing a miscarriage/stillbirth. There simply is no hope of survival below twenty-one weeks--that seems to be the limit as far as viability is concerned.
> 
> One question: did the baby girl you speak of have surgery in utero?


Yes. You could probably read about it online with just the words reporter baby first survivor kidney defect

Oops -not a reporter. She's a Congresswoman. Here's a link -
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/29/jaime-herrera-beutler-baby_n_3671417.html

Did you read the whole post? I just finished it about a minute ago. Whether or not labor was induced seems to be in question. Salon reported that one doctor said she went into spontaneous labor due to the infection.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

bonbf3 said:


> I understand what you're saying, but the circumstances are the same for the baby - it is killed.
> 
> I can't feel sorry for serial killers who get the death penalty, BUT I still believe the death penalty is wrong because it takes a human life.
> 
> Just because we want to do it and can do it doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. Just my opinion - I don't expect to change any minds, and I realize that decisions are different for people who are living in the situation. That's why I'm so glad it's not my job to judge. I don't know what brings others to their decisions; I only know what brings me to mine.


Well, of course--I think freedom to choose is (obviously) the guiding principle of the pro-choice movement. Only the pregnant woman knows her true circumstances--an unintended pregnancy might be an "inconvenience" for a woman in the US, a grave matter in some country run according to the principles of Sharia, and a life and death situation (not just for the fetus, but for a mother and any children she may already) have in a country ravaged by famine. That's why a cut-and-dried "Abortion is murder" belief doesn't sit well with me. Nothing in life is ever that simple.


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Well, of course--I think freedom to choose is (obviously) the guiding principle of the pro-choice movement. Only the pregnant woman knows her true circumstances--an unintended pregnancy might be an "inconvenience" for a woman in the US, a grave matter in some country run according to the principles of Sharia, and a life and death situation (not just for the fetus, but for a mother and any children she may already) have in a country ravaged by famine. That's why a cut-and-dried "Abortion is murder" belief doesn't sit well with me. Nothing in life is ever that simple.


Freedom to choose. We do have that. Those who oppose abortion do so because of the consequence of the choice - death of an innocent child.

We have many choices - to kill or not, to hit or not, to steal or not. But we have laws that compel us to suffer consequences if we make some of those choices. I just happen to think it should apply to abortion. I don't think the law should support the killing of an innocent human being.

Pro-life supporters believe in helping mothers, not condemning them. People understand they are in a difficult circumstance if they're contemplating such a decision.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

bonbf3 said:


> Yes. You could probably read about it online with just the words reporter baby first survivor kidney defect
> 
> Oops -not a reporter. She's a Congresswoman. Here's a link -
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/29/jaime-herrera-beutler-baby_n_3671417.html
> ...


I think Salon is correct--she apparently did go into spontaneous labor and then was given to Pitocin to ensure that those contractions continued. But it also appears that she asked for something to stop the labor and was denied. I can't quite figure out who was making the decisions here...her doctors? Her husband? It's complicated...obviously she was right there making her wishes known, and no one was paying much attention--maybe because she was so ill that, legally, she was temporarily incompetent?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> I read about Embryology. That was the challenge. You were to find someone in the field of embryology that would state life begins at birth. Other fields of science may say something different.


You're splitting hairs. Whatever an embryologist says is embryology. Did you notice the part where he says "Modern research shows that 30% or fewer fertilised eggs will go on to become foetuses. Many of these early miscarriages are because of abnormal numbers of chromosomes. The view that every fertilised egg is a potential human being is wrong in around 70% of cases."

I didn't realize you wanted me to find an embryologist to back up Jewish law, in your attempt to prove it wrong. Jewish law accords with the science of its time, which was several hundred years ago, so I won't find it. But the "science" you found doesn't explain the part about 70% of fertilized eggs not being viable. Given this, isn't the probability that at least 70% of abortions don't kill anyone?


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> I think Salon is correct--she apparently did go into spontaneous labor and then was given to Pitocin to ensure that those contractions continued. But it also appears that she asked for something to stop the labor and was denied. I can't quite figure out who was making the decisions here...her doctors? Her husband? It's complicated...obviously she was right there making her wishes known, and no one was paying much attention--maybe because she was so ill that, legally, she was temporarily incompetent?


According to Salon, which had the most info and quotes from doctors, her doctors said it was due to chance of malpractice. I think another doctor said it wouldn't have stopped the contractions.

There's more to the article. I didn't post the whole thing since you can read it all using the link.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

bonbf3 said:


> I understand what you're saying, but the circumstances are the same for the baby - it is killed.
> 
> I don't believe in the death penalty. Sometimes I think it's what people deserve for vicious crimes, BUT I still have to stand against it. I believe the death penalty is wrong because it takes a human life. That's why I believe abortion is wrong also.
> 
> ...


You appear to be a consistently moral person, a good person. It's good to have you to talk to, instead of the doctrinaire, judgmental ones.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

bonbf3 said:


> According to Salon, which had the most info and quotes from doctors, her doctors said it was due to chance of malpractice. I think another doctor said it wouldn't have stopped the contractions.


Well, maybe...but it might have slowed them down enough for the pregnancy to continue for a few more days or a week.

Thinking about all this, I find myself feeling very sorry for Mrs. Santorum's doctors. Knowing how the couple felt abortion they must have been in a panic over how to deal with this, how to explain what was happening with the pregnancy, and the choice of drugs to use or withhold. One false move and the mom-to-be could have been permanently disabled or even died--and of course the baby _did_ die, which must have made the insurance company lawyers' blood run cold. To say that this was a challenging case is something of an understatement, I'm afraid.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

bonbf3 said:


> I understand what you're saying, but the circumstances are the same for the baby - it is killed.
> 
> I don't believe in the death penalty. Sometimes I think it's what people deserve for vicious crimes, BUT I still have to stand against it. I believe the death penalty is wrong because it takes a human life. That's why I believe abortion is wrong also.
> 
> ...


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

You do a very good job of being compassionate. I admire it that you are kind and giving - I appreciate the fact that you are here and stating your feelings. I know you are absolutely true about your thoughts on the matter. I respect it that you are honest and believe you and others have the choice to choose for others.--

I believe that for centuries and in many countries around the world still , men make the decisions about what women are 'allowed' to do with their own bodies.
I believe that anyone who is against abortion has that absolute right to feel that way whether it be because of their Religion or because they feel strongly about it for whatever reason.

I would not in any situation recommend abortion nor would I have ever had one myself -- however I cannot do what many different people do, and that is Judge those who feel differently. I believe that we should have the same rights as men and that other people should not decide decisions about any person's choice in regards to something that to me should be a right of that person to choose. I don't believe that abortion in some cases is a sin, when a woman has been raped, or abused, or is ll or 12 years old.

I can not bring myself to judge - as I don't walk in her shoes. I believe that each of us will be judged individually and I am not in a place where I want to make that judgement. I don't feel that any one else should make that personal decision for me. I don't have a problem with an opinion -- but when it comes right down to it I don 't believe that others l/3rd or l/2 of the people in a place have the right to decide for the other 2/3's or half of the others. It is not their business in my opinion. I don't begrudge any one choosing their way, and I don't begrudge anyone for speaking their opinion, but I am a thinking being and have a mind, I am not suggesting making a law about having an abortion.

I do however believe that as individuals we have to make these types of decisions ourselves. not allow others to decide to decide something so important for us. We all have different beliefs. I think there is a misconception of liberals -- most of us don't like abortion, most of us would never have one, but it is the right for each person to be responsible for their decisions, whether it be because of Religious beliefs., personal opinion or whatever.

It is a subject that will never be satisfactorily solved. There are those who want to decide for all Women, we want women to have the ability to be able to decide for themselves.

All over the world for centuries woman have been second class citizens and their lives and how they live is decided by either Religion or by men. The religions usually are slanted by men and their belief that they have the right to decide for their women. Woman have every right to be against abortions - just as others have the right to decide for themselves.

Just to clarify -- my husband and I have been happily married for 59 years. We have a partnership. I admire him
and his beliefs and his complete feeling that we are equal. I have never once been treated like I am a second class citizen by him. He knows that I love him and he loves me -- and on important subjects we somehow have managed to meet a mutual ground , sometimes closer to his wishes and sometimes closer to my wishes. He respects me and I respect him. We try to find a place where we agree that something will work for each of us. As far as abortion is concerned it has never come up -

When people believe that an l2 year old girl or a rape victim or a mother who has already got children she cannot afford to look after and who is left by the main bread winner makes a decision she feels is right (there are so many different situations- who am I to make that decision for her?) I don't care to decide what she should do.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> You appear to be a consistently moral person, a good person. It's good to have you to talk to, instead of the doctrinaire, judgmental ones.


You are absolutely correct in my opinion. She is kind, giving and loving and a person who lives by her beliefs -- I applaud that she has strong feelings about this subject, and is willing to come here and talk about it.

It is just that some of us (most of us) don't believe a group of strangers has the right to decide for individual women about what they are 'allowed' to do in a very difficult situation. It is refreshing that we are having a discussion and expressing our opinions even though I doubt we will ever agree. As long as we can accept that we should be 'allowed' to have different opinions without attacking each other - we have all gained. I have never seen her attack anyone even though she has strong opinions.

At least she is willing to accept it that everyone doesn't agree, and is willing to talk about it. I wish we all did agree but we are all individuals and all have different outlooks.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Ever wonder what joeysomma is trying to overcome? She feels guilty about something, no doubt about it and it is VERY personal.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> This is science not religion.


joeysomma
really? Who are the Scientists?


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> Do you mean when Jewish law was established, women could not feel the life in their womb?
> 
> If the fertilized egg is not viable, it would be a miscarriage not an abortion. Abortion is the *deliberate* taking of the life of the baby.
> 
> ...


joeysomma
who is paying you to spread so much nonsense?


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> Do you mean when Jewish law was established, women could not feel the life in their womb?


 Thanks for that snotty remark. I'll keep it in mind as I answer you.

I'm sure women felt some movement in their innards, but certainly not until about 3 or 4 months, and it could just as easily have been colitis as pregnancy. The rabbis seem to have decided that since there was still considerable risk that no live baby would result from a conception (remember the 70%), it would not be considered a person until a) it had come to term and b) it was at least at the point of emerging from the womb.



> If the fertilized egg is not viable, it would be a miscarriage not an abortion. Abortion is the *deliberate* taking of the life of the baby.


Whether it's viable or not may not be known until well into the pregnancy. Unfortunately, some women end up with stillbirths. Others may choose to have the fetus removed before that happens - presto, it's an abortion. Many of the products of abortion never had a chance in the first place. Would you prefer women to carry them around for 9 months and make their lives difficult.



> This was my challenge:
> "I am sure the embryologist's are much more knowledgeable about this subject than either you or I. I must agree with them. I will challenge you to find an embryologist that will state life begins only when the child takes a breath. Include website."


Well, you know what you can do with your challenge. To quote Yarnie, you can stick it where the sun don't shine.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> Ever wonder what joeysomma is trying to overcome? She feels guilty about something, no doubt about it and it is VERY personal.


Unfortunately, she's such a pain that I don't care what she feels. Personally, of course.


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> You appear to be a consistently moral person, a good person. It's good to have you to talk to, instead of the doctrinaire, judgmental ones.


Thank you - that's nice of you to say. I try to be. That's all we can do really - keep on trying.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Designer1234 said:


> You are absolutely correct in my opinion. She is kind, giving and loving and a person who lives by her beliefs -- I applaud that she has strong feelings about this subject, and is willing to come here and talk about it.
> 
> It is just that some of us (most of us) don't believe a group of strangers has the right to decide for individual women about what they are 'allowed' to do in a very difficult situation. It is refreshing that we are having a discussion and expressing our opinions even though I doubt we will ever agree. As long as we can accept that we should be 'allowed' to have different opinions without attacking each other - we have all gained. I have never seen her attack anyone even though she has strong opinions.
> 
> At least she is willing to accept it that everyone doesn't agree, and is willing to talk about it. I wish we all did agree but we are all individuals and all have different outlooks.


Designer, you expressed very well what I believe. Thank you.


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

socpuppet03 said:


> FYI , most people understand the term "viable" to mean that the fetus is able to survive outside the womb. not needing an incubater to thrive and grow.
> 
> At least for me, in the future understand thats what I mean when I use the term.


I didn't know the exact meaning of viable. It took a while to ferret out the info, but I found the following at:

http://www.peekabooicu.net/2012/02/your-growing-preemie-week-by-week/

23 Weeks:

Babies born at 23 weeks gestation have approximately a 17 percent chance of survival. At this date, 23 weeks is considered the lowest age of viability outside the womb.

The term micro-preemie is used to describe a baby born at 23 weeks. Babies born at this time will be covered in a fine thin hair medically termed lanugo. The eyes will typically be fused shut but they will have fully developed eyelashes and eyebrows. The tiny fingernails have formed but their skin is thin and very vulnerable. These babies do not have any brown fat yet so they will be very tiny and often weigh less than 500 grams. The 23 weeker is growing a sensitivity to sounds and will be familiar with your voice however, loud sounds are over stimulating and can be over bearing to their under developed neurological system.

Most of the bodys systems are underdeveloped, including the lungs. Only the lower airways are beginning to develop so respiratory support will be needed in order to survive. A long and often complicated NICU stay awaits the baby born at 23 weeks gestation."

My conclusion:
At 23 weeks gestation, a small number of babies are viable but will require a lot of special care. So survival outside the womb does allow for incubators, ventilators, etc.


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

Poor Purl said:


> Designer, you expressed very well what I believe. Thank you.


That's very nice. I think almost everybody is like that. It's when there's a double meaning that someone takes wrong or a harsh comment with hurt feelings that the feathers fly.

I saw something on FB that I really love, and I like to think we're doing this. It's a picture of two women walking down a wide country lane toward a lake. It's late in the day. The caption says, "We're all just walking each other home."

I love it. It makes me think kindly of the people I'm "walking" with.


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

socpuppet03 said:


> FYI , most people understand the term "viable" to mean that the fetus is able to survive outside the womb. not needing an incubater to thrive and grow.
> 
> At least for me, in the future understand thats what I mean when I use the term.


You got me thinking about what viable means. I looked it up and posted, but I didn't do it to correct you. I really didn't know what it meant when I started. I think it's probably used in different ways outside the medical community.


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

socpuppet03 said:


> I appreciate your thoughtfulness.
> 
> However sometimes its hard to believe someone say they don't judge when they're telling me they advocate allowing the government to force me into gestating and giving birth against my will.
> 
> ...


I am not judging. I have an opinion and a right to express it. But if I met someone who had an abortion, I would have no right to judge that person in the sense of condemning them. I don't know what's in their heart. I believe that God does know what's in our hearts. I also believe that God is more compassionate than I could ever imagine, so I don't worry so much about the state of others' souls. I'm not afraid for people getting "in trouble" with God. I am very sad that an innocent human being can be killed, that the life of a helpless baby can be taken without consequence, that we do not protect the most vulnerable of our girls and boys.

I am standing up for a principle, the sanctity of human life. I defend it because I believe in it and believe that I should speak out. Who knows? Maybe someone will decide to choose another path - not because of what I say, but because of what many people say. And maybe someone will have a life because others have spoken out.

If you believe the death penalty is inhumane, and I do, we are allowing the govt to deny people the right to punish evil killers. You would deny me that right if my child was murdered and I wanted to hang, shoot, electrocute, or poison the murderer.

We give up our rights to protect the safety and well-being of citizens. I just happen to believe that the unborn babies are citizens worthy of protection, too.

And this is where we step on dangerous ground and have to be very careful not to hurt one another while we discuss this issue. I hope it will work for us.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

joeysomma said:


> I am glad you agree life begins at conception. So with your reasoning every abortion ends a human life.
> 
> embryo = fetus = baby = toddler = child =adolescent = teen = adult = senior. No matter what name you use, it is a human life. Therefore, deliberately ending that life at whatever stage is murder.
> 
> ...


Your last sentence also applies to the male. If he is unwilling to father a child he should abstain. If he is unable to control his urges he should make sure he cannot impregnate a female. This procedure has been around for a long time now and is very simple. It takes TWO to make a baby, a man and a woman. It is the man who rapes the woman, forces her to submit to his carnal desires, there have been very, very few cases of women raping men. If men practiced what you preach - abstain from sex if you do not want to make a baby - then there would be a reduction in the rate of unplanned pregnancies. This would be very evident in teenage pregnancies. In the majority of cases it is the boy who cajoles the girl into giving into his carnal desires.

*Tell the men. They need to start before they have sex. Every time there is a chance of a pregnancy. So if he is unwilling to support the child, and the mother, he needs to either abstain or make sure he cannot father a child*.

Unfortunately you paint a picture of a life that lacks romance and spontaneous action. A life where sex is not an act of love but only to be engaged in in order to reproduce the species. That lowers humans to the level of most animalls.


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

socpuppet03 said:


> Survivability is different from viable. Your confusing the terms. Just because science gets to the point where a SPERM can "survive" with the aid of contraptions, doesnt make a sperm the same thing as a baby.
> 
> In anycase, MY opinion is if a fetus cant thrive and grow without the aid of an incubator it does not meet my definition of viable and therefore should not supercede the mother's quality of HER life choices.
> 
> ...


Actually, I was just going from your post. I wasn't sure the specifics of viability, so I checked. It's not the same as your personal definition of viability, but I guess that's okay as long as you know the difference. That way, if someone challenges you on it, you can defend yourself.

I don't think I was confusing it with survivability because I've never actually heard survivability in the context of a newborn baby.

I'm sorry my post made you angry. I'm trying not to do that. Maybe you are judging me a little too harshly.


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

socpuppet03 said:


> No we dont.
> 
> Other than the draft, Im unaware of any other circustance where anyone is forced against their will to protect others.


Why else do we have laws? They are to protect us. We can't punch each other. It's against the law. We can't rape, kill, hit, shoot, stab, or beat each other. It's against the law, which protects us from anyone who might want to do those things. Those are the circumstances. You want to kick someone, but you don't because they are protected by the law which would punish you if you did it.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Cut Bonnie some slack, would you Sockpuppet? Abortion is a really touchy subject, and we're all entitled to our views.


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

socpuppet03 said:


> No we dont.
> 
> Other than the draft, Im unaware of any other circustance where anyone is forced against their will to risk their own lives to protect others.


double post. Sorry.


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

socpuppet03 said:


> No we dont.
> 
> Other than the draft, Im unaware of any other circustance where anyone is forced against their will to risk their own lives to protect others.


Quote from socpuppet03:
"As I said, its mighty big of you to refrain from telling someone they deserve to go to hell, however make no mistake forcing someone into gestation and birthing against their will IS INDEED a willingess to condmn them into an extremely damaging situation."

socpuppet03, thank you. I think (hope) that you also would refrain from telling someone to go to hell because of their opinions and/or actions.


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Cut Bonnie some slack, would you Sockpuppet? Abortion is a really touchy subject, and we're all entitled to our views.


That's very nice of you, Susan. Thanks. You're right, it is a touchy subject.


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

socpuppet03 said:


> We have no law that requires us to risk our on lives or own well being or have medical procedures against our will in order to protect others.


You may be right. I'll have to think about that one. Of course, that still wouldn't mean we shouldn't have a law like that. Pregnancy is a pretty unique condition medically.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

bonbf3 said:


> Why else do we have laws? They are to protect us. We can't punch each other. It's against the law. We can't rape, kill, hit, shoot, stab, or beat each other. It's against the law, which protects us from anyone who might want to do those things. Those are the circumstances. You want to kick someone, but you don't because they are protected by the law which would punish you if you did it.


That's true, Bonnie, but even the issue of physical violence becomes problematic when things such as self-defense are taken into account. If abortion is a relevant social issue (and of course it is) then surely it can't be settled with a crisp "Abortion is murder under all circumstances". Even the anti-abortionists argue fiercely about possible exceptions for rape, incest, and the health and/or life of the mother. The fact that most are willing to forgive women who've had abortions shows that they in fact don't view an eight-week old fetus in the same light as an eight-day old baby, no matter what the rhetoric.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

bonbf3 said:


> That's very nice of you, Susan. Thanks. You're right, it is a touchy subject.


No problem, Bonnie.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

bonbf3 said:


> Freedom to choose. We do have that. Those who oppose abortion do so because of the consequence of the choice - death of an innocent child.
> 
> We have many choices - to kill or not, to hit or not, to steal or not. But we have laws that compel us to suffer consequences if we make some of those choices. I just happen to think it should apply to abortion. I don't think the law should support the killing of an innocent human being.
> 
> Pro-life supporters believe in helping mothers, not condemning them. People understand they are in a difficult circumstance if they're contemplating such a decision.


Bonnie -- I think you are making a flat statement. I don't think that all Pro life supporters believe in helping mothers. I know you do -- however I have read many posts on the Right wing threads where there is a strong feeling that anyone or nearly anyone who is unable to care for themselves and asks for help is considered a 
deadbeat- The posters resent any programs that are there to help people like unwed mothers who don't have jobs, or can't find work, or when they do have to accept a job that is not enough to live on. Yet they also say that if for whatever reason they find themselves pregnant - they must have the baby - even if they know that there is no possibility of them being able to live without help to at least get them started.

I found very little sympathy for anyone who receives aid -just from the posts - I realize that education and assistance to get started would help the abortion situation, however, there does not to be much chance of a poor teenager or young mother of getting help. So, often the child grows up in poverty and does not have much of a chance for an education, proper manners, proper food , proper clothes, good schooling.

That I believe is one reason a woman makes such a choice -- certainly there are lots of other reasons but that is one of the main reasons in the US and Canada right now. Poverty, which is getting more and more prevalent but receiving less and less support from those on the Right who 
'have worked hard all their lives and why should their taxes be used to help deadbeats.?"''''

In l960 a woman became pregnant in Vancouver- She was employed in a Bank but was not married, and at that time there was a stigma and it was just not 'viable' to keep a baby out of wedlock. She decided to have the baby and put it up for adoption. 
I am thankful she did as that baby became our beloved youngest child, our daughter. At the same time a friend of our's family, had a young girl who was slightly mentally challenged. The father of that family got cancer a year earlier, and left no insurance. They lost their house and the Mother and daughter and 2 other younger children moved into an apartment. She did not have a great education or a trade . She struggled and struggled -- her daughter became pregnant and the grandmother knew there was no way she could afford to raise another child - At that time there was no legitimate abortions -- but the young girl found an abortion doctor and had an abortion, she nearly died as she got an infection.

The Grandmother was devastated about the whole situation, but I remember her saying to me that there was no way that she could afford to raise another baby, that her daughter required special meds and would always be living with her as she was unable to live on her own and never would be able to. The Grandmother had gone to the Social Services and the baby could not be put up for adoption - as there were about 2% of those wishing to adopt who would accept a baby with from a Mother who was mentally and physically disabled as her physical disabliity could easily be passed down. That is two cases - one where it was probable that another result could happen for the baby - (us adopting her) and those where there was no good answer.

By the way when our daughter turned l9 I gave her a poem written by her birth mother which was given to us to keep for her until she was an adult ,and we started a search for her. We found her and they were reunited . I am still her Mother but she has a good relationship with her birth mother. We have met her and we keep in touch.

Two different stories , two different situations.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Well, here's something that I've been wondering about.

A few days back the subject of teenage pregnancy came up in another thread, and some of the posters recounted the stories of girls they'd known in high school who'd been forced to drop out--most often due to official policy, and usually after they'd begun showing.

My question is this: why on earth would a girl ever volunteer the information that she was pregnant in such circumstances? Wouldn't it be possible to hide that telltale bulge by wearing a heavy coat, telling people you'd gained some weight (true enough), or just flat-out refusing to answer if anyone dared ask?


----------



## kangaroo (May 20, 2011)

alcameron said:


> :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


Yes and yes again...we do have a brain ..and we do have a right to make own choices in life...no matter what it is ...we were given this right by GOD...and no man has a right to change this :thumbup: [this is just cutting it short of what I would truly like to say on this subject] for all women in this world


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I love your language.



Poor Purl said:


> Their action was the most real thing they did. It's their words that are hypocritical.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Hmmmmmm....



Poor Purl said:


> Apparently he's become silent on the subject of same-sex marriage, too. I wonder what that's about.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

EveMCooke said:


> Your last sentence also applies to the male. If he is unwilling to father a child he should abstain. If he is unable to control his urges he should make sure he cannot impregnate a female. This procedure has been around for a long time now and is very simple. It takes TWO to make a baby, a man and a woman. It is the man who rapes the woman, forces her to submit to his carnal desires, there have been very, very few cases of women raping men. If men practiced what you preach - abstain from sex if you do not want to make a baby - then there would be a reduction in the rate of unplanned pregnancies. This would be very evident in teenage pregnancies. In the majority of cases it is the boy who cajoles the girl into giving into his carnal desires.
> 
> *Tell the men. They need to start before they have sex. Every time there is a chance of a pregnancy. So if he is unwilling to support the child, and the mother, he needs to either abstain or make sure he cannot father a child*.
> 
> Unfortunately you paint a picture of a life that lacks romance and spontaneous action. A life where sex is not an act of love but only to be engaged in in order to reproduce the species. That lowers humans to the level of most animalls.


This last is certainly true. I wonder at the quality of the life these people are living. It must be at least dull if not depressing.

What is obvious, also, is that the woman must be punished for enjoying sex.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

I started to but stopped.



bonbf3 said:


> Why don't you google it? I'm sure he's spoken about it.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

She's winking, you know.

I changed pictures. I hope you like this one better CB.



Country Bumpkins said:


> Looks like she is drunk.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thank you Shirley.



Designer1234 said:


> ==================
> 
> You do a very good job of being compassionate. I admire it that you are kind and giving - I appreciate the fact that you are here and stating your feelings. I know you are absolutely true about your thoughts on the matter. I respect it that you are honest and believe you and others have the choice to choose for others.--
> 
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Perhaps someone is ordering her rather than paying her.



Huckleberry said:


> joeysomma
> who is paying you to spread so much nonsense?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Well reasoned.



socpuppet03 said:


> I appreciate your thoughtfulness.
> 
> However sometimes its hard to believe someone say they don't judge when they're telling me they advocate allowing the government to force me into gestating and giving birth against my will.
> 
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Interesting thought.



socpuppet03 said:


> Quite frankly what defines "Life" is more philosphical than anything else IMO.
> 
> The medical community's definition is only one aspect and perspective to consider.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Agreeing to discuss rather than preach would be nice. For the millionth and last time, not everyone believes the same.



socpuppet03 said:


> Please stop pretending that we've all agreed that a fetus is a baby or should have the same rights as the mother, or even that a woman's quality of life is less important than the survival of a fetus and therefore should be sacrificed.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

socpuppet03 said:


> No one has agreed that an embryologist is the only or even best authority on the matter.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Excellent points Eve. Thank you.



EveMCooke said:


> Your last sentence also applies to the male. If he is unwilling to father a child he should abstain. If he is unable to control his urges he should make sure he cannot impregnate a female. This procedure has been around for a long time now and is very simple. It takes TWO to make a baby, a man and a woman. It is the man who rapes the woman, forces her to submit to his carnal desires, there have been very, very few cases of women raping men. If men practiced what you preach - abstain from sex if you do not want to make a baby - then there would be a reduction in the rate of unplanned pregnancies. This would be very evident in teenage pregnancies. In the majority of cases it is the boy who cajoles the girl into giving into his carnal desires.
> 
> *Tell the men. They need to start before they have sex. Every time there is a chance of a pregnancy. So if he is unwilling to support the child, and the mother, he needs to either abstain or make sure he cannot father a child*.
> 
> Unfortunately you paint a picture of a life that lacks romance and spontaneous action. A life where sex is not an act of love but only to be engaged in in order to reproduce the species. That lowers humans to the level of most animalls.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

socpuppet03 said:


> No we dont.
> 
> Other than the draft, Im unaware of any other circustance where anyone is forced against their will to risk their own lives to protect others.


Interesting way of expressing it. Thank you.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

And I must admit that I get out of sorts with the abortion topic, mostly because of Ms. Cut & Paste, joeysomma. Forgive me please.



bonbf3 said:


> That's very nice of you, Susan. Thanks. You're right, it is a touchy subject.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

susanmos2000 said:


> That's true, Bonnie, but even the issue of physical violence becomes problematic when things such as self-defense are taken into account. If abortion is a relevant social issue (and of course it is) then surely it can't be settled with a crisp "Abortion is murder under all circumstances". Even the anti-abortionists argue fiercely about possible exceptions for rape, incest, and the health and/or life of the mother. The fact that most are willing to forgive women who've had abortions shows that they in fact don't view an eight-week old fetus in the same light as an eight-day old baby, no matter what the rhetoric.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

socpuppet03 said:


> Again no one has conceeded that an embryologist should be the primary authority as to who determines when life begins.
> 
> When life begins can be scientifically addressed by a variety of specialties.
> 
> An embryologist can merely help pinpoint that if life is determined to start at a certain point they can tell you what stage of the development may meet that criteria.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> He is talking about the "embryo will continue to be viable"... until about 6 weeks... He is not talking about a viable premature baby.
> 
> The original article was when an *Embryologist* stated that life began when the egg was fertilized. There was a disagreement and my challenge was to find an *Embryologist* that stated life began when the baby took its first breath.
> 
> No one has and I do not think one can be found. An Embryology is the branch of science that studies fertilization. See definition on page 92.


That the "embryo will continue to be viable" merely speaks of it as an embryo,  not a baby - it will remain an embryo and not be flushed out of the woman's body, as most are. "He also says "For many scientists, this determines the start of an 'individual'. The likelihood that the embryo will continue to be viable is now much higher than before." He doesn't say "all scientists" or even "most scientists," nor does he state his own opinion. He also says that the likelihood of continue viability is "much higher than before," which, as you'll recall, was 30%. So it might be as high as 45 or 50%, or even higher, but it is not assured.

You keep talking about your "challenge," but nobody's paying attention to you. You have a very childish view of reality, where there's only one way of looking at things, or at least that's how you come across.


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Thank you for sharing Shirley.



Designer1234 said:


> Bonnie -- I think you are making a flat statement. I don't think that all Pro life supporters believe in helping mothers. I know you do -- however I have read many posts on the Right wing threads where there is a strong feeling that anyone or nearly anyone who is unable to care for themselves and asks for help is considered a
> deadbeat- The posters resent any programs that are there to help people like unwed mothers who don't have jobs, or can't find work, or when they do have to accept a job that is not enough to live on. Yet they also say that if for whatever reason they find themselves pregnant - they must have the baby - even if they know that there is no possibility of them being able to live without help to at least get them started.
> 
> I found very little sympathy for anyone who receives aid -just from the posts - I realize that education and assistance to get started would help the abortion situation, however, there does not to be much chance of a poor teenager or young mother of getting help. So, often the child grows up in poverty and does not have much of a chance for an education, proper manners, proper food , proper clothes, good schooling.
> ...


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Perhaps because those tactics could only work for so long?



susanmos2000 said:


> Well, here's something that I've been wondering about.
> 
> A few days back the subject of teenage pregnancy came up in another thread, and some of the posters recounted the stories of girls they'd known in high school who'd been forced to drop out--most often due to official policy, and usually after they'd begun showing.
> 
> My question is this: why on earth would a girl ever volunteer the information that she was pregnant in such circumstances? Wouldn't it be possible to hide that telltale bulge by wearing a heavy coat, telling people you'd gained some weight (true enough), or just flat-out refusing to answer if anyone dared ask?


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

socpuppet03 said:


> Absolutely not. Would never do so.
> 
> I am not the one advocating that your POV be determined illegal.
> 
> ...


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## gjz (Dec 2, 2013)

damemary said:


> She's winking, you know.
> 
> I changed pictures. I hope you like this one better CB.


This one is much better!


----------



## damemary (Mar 14, 2012)

Poor Purl said:


> That the "embryo will continue to be viable" merely speaks of it as an embryo,  not a baby - it will remain an embryo and not be flushed out of the woman's body, as most are. "He also says "For many scientists, this determines the start of an 'individual'. The likelihood that the embryo will continue to be viable is now much higher than before." He doesn't say "all scientists" or even "most scientists," nor does he state his own opinion. He also says that the likelihood of continue viability is "much higher than before," which, as you'll recall, was 30%. So it might be as high as 45 or 50%, or even higher, but it is not assured.
> 
> You keep talking about your "challenge," but nobody's paying attention to you. You have a very childish view of reality, where there's only one way of looking at things, or at least that's how you come across.


 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

damemary said:


> Has anyone had the nerve to ask him the question? That may be worth some research.
> 
> Ps. How do you like my new avatar?


Oh! You mean Hillary "what difference does it make" Clinton? Oh, please, please, please! Don't go there!


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

bonbf3 said:


> You may be right. I'll have to think about that one. Of course, that still wouldn't mean we shouldn't have a law like that. Pregnancy is a pretty unique condition medically.


Do you think we should have a law that requires the parents of a living child to donate an organ if the child needs one to survive? I see no difference between that and requiring that a woman continue a pregnancy, that she place her body at the service of something that couldn't survive without it. (I realize that calling it "something" sounds very cold, but I don't think it is yet an individual, just a part of a woman's body.)

One problem in even discussing this subject is that babies are helpless and usually cute, and most women would want to protect them. However, we're not really talking about babies but about women and what they must be required to surrender in order to keep a fetus alive. Yet they're not required to surrender any body part to keep alive a living child


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

socpuppet03 said:


> I understand that most people generally use (misuse) the word as a synonym to survivability, but most definitions I've read refer to the fetus developing to the point of being capable of living INDEPENDENTLY, outside the uterus.
> 
> Anyway, as I said, that's how the definition has been used for decades. And that's what I mean when I use the term viable. outside the womb.
> 
> ...


I'm not sure that's exactly what Bonnie is saying, but it's certainly a possible approximation.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Oh! You mean Hillary "what difference does it make" Clinton? Oh, please, please, please! Don't go there!


Sorry, Nebraska--I know the coming election season is going to be rough, what with all the talk about 'Mrs. C'. Hang tough! 
:thumbup:


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

kangaroo said:


> Yes and yes again...we do have a brain ..and we do have a right to make own choices in life...no matter what it is ...we were given this right by GOD...and no man has a right to change this :thumbup: [this is just cutting it short of what I would truly like to say on this subject] for all women in this world


Hello, kangaroo. Someday you ought to tell us what you'd like to say.

Thanks for that absolutely gorgeous rose, which I believe is alive but is so perfect that it looks artificial.


----------



## Knitted by Nan (Aug 3, 2013)

damemary said:


> She's winking, you know.
> 
> I changed pictures. I hope you like this one better CB.


Are you conducting the choir. Ode to Joy from Beethoven's 9th perhaps? I liked both photos.


----------



## gjz (Dec 2, 2013)

I have been looking for the comment about have 2 women as parents. I can't find it. Let me say this...you think you know what you think, until it actually happens. Your mindset has to be reset to make sense of this. 

Same thing with abortion...until you are faced with a pregnancy that isn't what is "typical" or "expected" you have to rethink what you have thought before...it isn't a fun.

I have this theory...we are all conditioned--or taught--to think one way. Then...something happens that is contrary to what you have been taught. 

Then, people call you nasty names, or you think there is something wrong with you. Maybe you just haven't figured out how the new "idea or situation" fits into your upbringing. Maybe you are struggling with how to understand and make this new "idea" fit into what has been taught as you grew up. 

More than once, I have said, "You can do that?" 

People arrive at new thinking at a totally different rate. I think much of what is happening in the world is like this. "You can do that?" It may not be put like this, but it is what is happening. We can't stop the new thinking that is going on in the US (and perhaps elsewhere) however, we can give people time to adjust their thinking and give everyone the opportunity to adjust their thinking. If a person is unable to adjust their thinking...it is what it is. 

We, as people, living on this planet, need to realize that we are all here together and we need to help one another navigate through this weird (not to be equated with a bad thing) time we are in. 

Thanks for listening. Have a nice evening.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

joeysomma said:


> This was your scientist not mine. You did not find an embryologist or any scientist that stated life begins when the baby takes its first breath.


If you want me to start cursing, please continue with this.


----------



## Designer1234 (Aug 9, 2011)

.

We, as people, living on this planet, need to realize that we are all here together and we need to help one another navigate through this weird (not to be equated with a bad thing) time we are in.

Thanks for listening. Have a nice evening.[/quote]

Well put! I agree!


----------



## gjz (Dec 2, 2013)

Designer1234 said:


> .
> 
> We, as people, living on this planet, need to realize that we are all here together and we need to help one another navigate through this weird (not to be equated with a bad thing) time we are in.
> 
> Thanks for listening. Have a nice evening.


Well put! I agree![/quote]

Thank you for acknowledging what I posted. It means a lot.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

gjz said:


> I have been looking for the comment about have 2 women as parents. I can't find it. Let me say this...you think you know what you think, until it actually happens. Your mindset has to be reset to make sense of this.
> 
> Same thing with abortion...until you are faced with a pregnancy that isn't what is "typical" or "expected" you have to rethink what you have thought before...it isn't a fun.
> 
> ...


You have some interesting thoughts, gjz--thanks for your input.

I think you're absolutely right that people need time to adjust to new ways of thinking--the 19th Amendment (votes for women), desegregation, women working outside the homes--people were absolutely shocked when these things came to pass. Now we take them for granted--racism still exists in our country, but I think one would have to really dig to find an American who wanted to return to "colored" drinking fountains, "white" lunch counters, and all the rest of it.

Interestingly enough, the right to abortion doesn't appear to be one of those things that's gained acceptance over time. It's been legal for some forty years, and people are still arguing and debating fiercely as ever. I'm not quite sure why that is--ideas, anyone?


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Something to consider. China, in order to keep their population controlled only allows 1 child per family. If a woman in China gets pregnant after having 1 child, it is mandatory abortion. Choice is taken away from them. And yet here in this country, they ( the republicans) also want to take a woman's choice away.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> You have some interesting thoughts, gjz--thanks for your input.
> 
> I think you're absolutely right that people need time to adjust to new ways of thinking--the 19th Amendment (votes for women), desegregation, women working outside the homes--people were absolutely shocked when these things came to pass. Now we take them for granted--racism still exists in our country, but I think one would have to really dig to find an American who wanted to return to "colored" drinking fountains, "white" lunch counters, and all the rest of it.
> 
> Interestingly enough, the right to abortion doesn't appear to be one of those things that's gained acceptance over time. It's been legal for some forty years, and people are still arguing and debating fiercely as ever. I'm not quite sure why that is--ideas, anyone?


I think different religious teachings have a lot to do with it. Catholics are vehemently against it. (Remember the mother who they let die in Ireland? This was because the hospital and doctor were Catholic and abortion is not legal there.) Earlier the Catholic Church had stated that there was no life until the baby took it's first breath outside of the womb.They obviously changed their stance.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> Something to consider. China, in order to keep their population controlled only allows 1 child per family. If a woman in China gets pregnant after having 1 child, it is mandatory abortion. Choice is taken away from them. And yet here in this country, they ( the republicans) also want to take a woman's choice away.


Either way it's wrong, of course. I made that argument once on another thread to folks who were advocating for complete parental control over underage daughters' uteruses. Of course they were thinking in terms of preventing abortions, but I realized (and said) that denying girls freedom to choose also meant that the parents could force teens to have abortions against their will. That didn't go over very well, but I believe it's true.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Either way it's wrong, of course. I made that argument once on another thread to folks who were advocating for complete parental control over underage daughters' uteruses. Of course they were thinking in terms of preventing abortions, but I realized (and said) that denying girls freedom to choose also meant that the parents could force teens to have abortions against their will. That didn't go over very well, but I believe it's true.


While I never chose to have an abortion, I can not condone the act of forcing a woman either way. You are right, Susan.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> I think different religious teachings have a lot to do with it. Catholics are vehemently against it. (Remember the mother who they let die in Ireland? This was because the hospital and doctor were Catholic and abortion is not legal there.) Earlier the Catholic Church had stated that there was no life until the baby took it's first breath outside of the womb.They obviously changed their stance.


I believe you're right, Patty. The pro-choice movement probably would have gained a lot more acceptance had the Catholic and other churches come out in favor of it. It's hard for people to accept new ideas when their religious leaders (whomever they happen to be) refuse to budge.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

socpuppet03 said:


> Please stop pretending that we've all agreed that a fetus is a baby or should have the same rights as the mother, or even that a woman's quality of life is less important than the survival of a fetus and therefore should be sacrificed.


Here's a "fetus" that survived st 21 weeks, 5 days. I don't see how anyone could deny that she's s baby! 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/25/worlds-most-premature-baby_n_853389.html

My triplet grandbabies were born at 22 weeks, 5 days. They were definitely babies! Perfectly formed babies. They lived for hours and hours but they would do nothing to help them because they'd been born two days before the cut off!


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Oh! You mean Hillary "what difference does it make" Clinton? Oh, please, please, please! Don't go there!


Knitter from Nebraska
I like strong, intelligent Women and Hillary fits that Category.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

BrattyPatty said:


> I think different religious teachings have a lot to do with it. Catholics are vehemently against it. (Remember the mother who they let die in Ireland? This was because the hospital and doctor were Catholic and abortion is not legal there.) Earlier the Catholic Church had stated that there was no life until the baby took it's first breath outside of the womb.They obviously changed their stance.


I do remember that story. The life of the mother of living children was nothing compared to this fetus that was destined not to survive.

Well, at least now I know why joey keeps bringing up the baby's first breath, which I never said (she seems to think I did). She has Judaism confused with Catholicism, making it clear that she knows nothing about either.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> Either way it's wrong, of course. I made that argument once on another thread to folks who were advocating for complete parental control over underage daughters' uteruses. Of course they were thinking in terms of preventing abortions, but I realized (and said) that denying girls freedom to choose also meant that the parents could force teens to have abortions against their will. That didn't go over very well, but I believe it's true.


They tried very hard to ignore it.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> Do you think we should have a law that requires the parents of a living child to donate an organ if the child needs one to survive? I see no difference between that and requiring that a woman continue a pregnancy, that she place her body at the service of something that couldn't survive without it. (I realize that calling it "something" sounds very cold, but I don't think it is yet an individual, just a part of a woman's body.)
> 
> One problem in even discussing this subject is that babies are helpless and usually cute, and most women would want to protect them. However, we're not really talking about babies but about women and what they must be required to surrender in order to keep a fetus alive. Yet they're not required to surrender any body part to keep alive a living child


Poor Purl
Some Religions forbid some life saving treatment. Let us remember that.


----------



## gjz (Dec 2, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> You have some interesting thoughts, gjz--thanks for your input.
> 
> I think you're absolutely right that people need time to adjust to new ways of thinking--the 19th Amendment (votes for women), desegregation, women working outside the homes--people were absolutely shocked when these things came to pass. Now we take them for granted--racism still exists in our country, but I think one would have to really dig to find an American who wanted to return to "colored" drinking fountains, "white" lunch counters, and all the rest of it.
> 
> Interestingly enough, the right to abortion doesn't appear to be one of those things that's gained acceptance over time. It's been legal for some forty years, and people are still arguing and debating fiercely as ever. I'm not quite sure why that is--ideas, anyone?


Maybe it's because babies are so precious...as a grandparent, I can't imagine having an abortion. But, babies are a symbol of what is to come. When you take that away, things become difficult. The future is important and "snuffing" out the future doesn't feel right. Just my thoughts.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> Poor Purl
> Some Religions forbid some life saving treatment. Let us remember that.


I'm aware that some forbid any normal medical interventions, but I'm not sure why you bring that up, Huck.


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> I do remember that story. The life of the mother of living children was nothing compared to this fetus that was destined not to survive.
> 
> Well, at least now I know why joey keeps bringing up the baby's first breath, which I never said (she seems to think I did). She has Judaism confused with Catholicism, making it clear that she knows nothing about either.


Poor Purl
joeysomma spews what others force her to say. She has no mind of her own, that has become very obvious. Poor thing.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

bonbf3 said:


> I am not judging. I have an opinion and a right to express it. But if I met someone who had an abortion, I would have no right to judge that person in the sense of condemning them. I don't know what's in their heart. I believe that God does know what's in our hearts. I also believe that God is more compassionate than I could ever imagine, so I don't worry so much about the state of others' souls. I'm not afraid for people getting "in trouble" with God. I am very sad that an innocent human being can be killed, that the life of a helpless baby can be taken without consequence, that we do not protect the most vulnerable of our girls and boys.
> 
> I am standing up for a principle, the sanctity of human life. I defend it because I believe in it and believe that I should speak out. Who knows? Maybe someone will decide to choose another path - not because of what I say, but because of what many people say. And maybe someone will have a life because others have spoken out.
> 
> ...


Thanks bon! I agree!


----------



## Huckleberry (May 27, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> I'm aware that some forbid any normal medical interventions, but I'm not sure why you bring that up, Huck.


Poor Purl
Sorry, I wanted to respond to someone-else.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> I believe you're right, Patty. The pro-choice movement probably would have gained a lot more acceptance had the Catholic and other churches come out in favor of it. It's hard for people to accept new ideas when their religious leaders (whomever they happen to be) refuse to budge.


It was never talked about in the Catholic school that I attended. But in church on Sunday, the priests would pound the podium and speak of the evil of abortion. I had no idea what abortion was. I asked my mother who said "we don't talk about those things". I was in the 7th grade at the time. I asked my teacher who was a nun and her face turned apple red and she slapped me, called my mother who in turn also slapped me. When I had to join the family at the dinner table, I was to sit next to my father. He asked me why the nun had slapped me and I told him the truth. I told them that that was all they talked about in church and that I just wanted to understand what they were talking about. My sister was choking on her food and my brothers put their heads down. I thought this was it! I could be crawling on the floor in a minute trying to see where my head landed. He spared me the back of his hand and lauded me for asking questions. But I never did get an answer from them. But he did say that the church changes it's stands and viewpoints quite often and that they should make up their minds on which way they want it to be.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

gjz said:


> Maybe it's because babies are so precious...as a grandparent, I can't imagine having an abortion. But, babies are a symbol of what is to come. When you take that away, things become difficult. The future is important and "snuffing" out the future doesn't feel right. Just my thoughts.


That's a good point. There's definitely a feeling that gets in the way of rational discussion. Because though, as you say, "babies are a symbol of what is to come," what they may symbolize to some women is not the wonderful life that most of us are hoping for.


----------



## Poor Purl (Apr 14, 2011)

Huckleberry said:


> Poor Purl
> joeysomma spews what others force her to say. She has no mind of her own, that has become very obvious. Poor thing.


Huck, do you think that by now she still needs to be forced? She's so thoroughly indoctrinated that it all comes out spontaneously. That still has nothing to do with her mind, such as it is.


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

Designer1234 said:


> Bonnie -- I think you are making a flat statement. I don't think that all Pro life supporters believe in helping mothers. I know you do -- however I have read many posts on the Right wing threads where there is a strong feeling that anyone or nearly anyone who is unable to care for themselves and asks for help is considered a
> deadbeat- The posters resent any programs that are there to help people like unwed mothers who don't have jobs, or can't find work, or when they do have to accept a job that is not enough to live on. Yet they also say that if for whatever reason they find themselves pregnant - they must have the baby - even if they know that there is no possibility of them being able to live without help to at least get them started.
> 
> I found very little sympathy for anyone who receives aid -just from the posts - I realize that education and assistance to get started would help the abortion situation, however, there does not to be much chance of a poor teenager or young mother of getting help. So, often the child grows up in poverty and does not have much of a chance for an education, proper manners, proper food , proper clothes, good schooling.
> ...


Shirley, you gave me goose bumps. What a beautiful mother you are to your daughter.

As for the other story, that's exactly why I do not presume to ever judge people. I'm sure I do sometimes, but I don't want to. How do I know what they've been through? And if I don't know, I should either keep quiet or try to help the situation. That's my feeling about how to treat people. The fact that I believe we should protect the lives of the unborn does NOT change that.

We all have things that we just couldn't do. If a mother in distress feels she just cannot have that baby, I have my right to feel that I just cannot destroy it. I haven't tried to change minds on here, just to understand a little and be understood a little.

Socpuppet03's post has made me think, made me put myself in her shoes. It's good to put yourself in someone else's shoes and try to see how it feels. It brings us closer together, helps us to realize that the other person is a human being with a complicated life and sometimes with problems and difficulties. It helps me realize that to actually be in that situation, day in and day out, with all its implications, is a very big deal and not to be dismissed.

We are all individuals. This is a liberal post, but the people on here are not all the same. That's also true of the conservative Denim. We are not all the same over there either.

That's all for me. Good night, all.

Here's something nice from the internet. It's a bit stirring, so you might prefer to wake up to it rather than go to sleep by it.

http://www.ijreview.com/2014/05/141344-starts-just-another-street-performance-morphs-something-town-will-never-forget/


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

Hi Bonnie! Nice to see you join the discussion!


----------



## gjz (Dec 2, 2013)

Poor Purl said:


> That's a good point. There's definitely a feeling that gets in the way of rational discussion. Because though, as you say, "babies are a symbol of what is to come," what they may symbolize to some women is not the wonderful life that most of us are hoping for.


You are correct, the wonderful life that people are expecting may not come true, but every baby begins with the expectation that things will be better. I am sure most of us believe this to be true. Even the most downtrodden person believes that a baby will make things better for all involved. It's not the baby's fault if this doesn't happen. Abortion won't change this perception.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

gjz said:


> Maybe it's because babies are so precious...as a grandparent, I can't imagine having an abortion. But, babies are a symbol of what is to come. When you take that away, things become difficult. The future is important and "snuffing" out the future doesn't feel right. Just my thoughts.


Well sure, there's nothing cuter and more adorable than a newborn baby--but those chubby cheeks and double chins didn't keep the Romans and others from leaving the unwanted ones in the woods or tossing them into the nearest river. I do think for folks in a wealthy country babies truly are a symbol of hope...but I can appreciate too that woman in the famine-ravaged Sudan might see things a bit differently.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

EveMCooke said:


> Your last sentence also applies to the male. If he is unwilling to father a child he should abstain. If he is unable to control his urges he should make sure he cannot impregnate a female. This procedure has been around for a long time now and is very simple. It takes TWO to make a baby, a man and a woman. It is the man who rapes the woman, forces her to submit to his carnal desires, there have been very, very few cases of women raping men. If men practiced what you preach - abstain from sex if you do not want to make a baby - then there would be a reduction in the rate of unplanned pregnancies. This would be very evident in teenage pregnancies. In the majority of cases it is the boy who cajoles the girl into giving into his carnal desires.
> 
> *Tell the men. They need to start before they have sex. Every time there is a chance of a pregnancy. So if he is unwilling to support the child, and the mother, he needs to either abstain or make sure he cannot father a child*.
> 
> Unfortunately you paint a picture of a life that lacks romance and spontaneous action. A life where sex is not an act of love but only to be engaged in in order to reproduce the species. That lowers humans to the level of most animalls.


That is exactly what I taught my sons! I said, "Don't make a baby until you're ready to be a father"! I talked to them about what their child's life would be like and what it would be like for them. I doubt that we could eliminate abortion whether we wanted to or not. But we should be having this conversation BEFORE young girls or women get pregnant in the first place. Abortion should not be presented as an easy alternative, which to many, is. It shouldn't BE an easy choice. Society needs to encourage responsible behavior. Society needs to say that this is not desirable outcome. I'm not saying I want to shame women. I'm saying that this isn't cool and is not an alternative to birth control. It should never be a matter of pride that we can get abortion on demand. If society didn't say it was " OK", we'd see less need for abortion.


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Here's a "fetus" that survived st 21 weeks, 5 days. I don't see how anyone could deny that she's s baby!
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/25/worlds-most-premature-baby_n_853389.html
> 
> My triplet grandbabies were born at 22 weeks, 5 days. They were definitely babies! Perfectly formed babies. They lived for hours and hours but they would do nothing to help them because they'd been born two days before the cut off!


That's completely inhumane in my opinion. Little triplets - what a wonderful joy - and then to lose them. Unbearably sad. I can't imagine what you all went through.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

socpuppet03 said:


> No we dont.
> 
> Other than the draft, Im unaware of any other circustance where anyone is forced against their will to risk their own lives to protect others.


I've always thought that humanity required us to risk our lives to protect others. What is the point in leading a self centered life?


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

bonbf3 said:


> Shirley, you gave me goose bumps. What a beautiful mother you are to your daughter.
> 
> As for the other story, that's exactly why I do not presume to ever judge people. I'm sure I do sometimes, but I don't want to. How do I know what they've been through? And if I don't know, I should either keep quiet or try to help the situation. That's my feeling about how to treat people. The fact that I believe we should protect the lives of the unborn does NOT change that.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the link, Bonnie--beautiful!


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

susanmos2000 said:


> Cut Bonnie some slack, would you Sockpuppet? Abortion is a really touchy subject, and we're all entitled to our views.


Thank you, Susan!


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

susanmos2000 said:


> I believe you're right, Patty. The pro-choice movement probably would have gained a lot more acceptance had the Catholic and other churches come out in favor of it. It's hard for people to accept new ideas when their religious leaders (whomever they happen to be) refuse to budge.


The Catholic church is against the death penalty and abortion. Also euthanasia. They believe in the sanctity of life from conception to natural death.

This wonderful (I think) Pope Francis is now emphasizing compassion and love as more important than the concentration on laws of the church, although they are still laws of the church. In other words, love and compassion are necessary, no matter what the person is doing regarding the laws of the church. That is the true message of Christ, I believe. Love one another. It doesn't say love one another as long as the person is Catholic - or love one another as long as the person doesn't believe in capital punishment. He said 'Love one another as I have loved you." And the love of God is unconditional.

Oops - don't mean to be preachy. Good night.


----------



## susanmos2000 (May 10, 2011)

bonbf3 said:


> That's completely inhumane in my opinion. Little triplets - what a wonderful joy - and then to lose them. Unbearably sad. I can't imagine what you all went through.


I agree--that must have been agonizing. I'm sorry, Nebraska.


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

Knitter from Nebraska said:


> Thanks bon! I agree!


Thanks!


----------



## bonbf3 (Dec 20, 2011)

gjz said:


> Maybe it's because babies are so precious...as a grandparent, I can't imagine having an abortion. But, babies are a symbol of what is to come. When you take that away, things become difficult. The future is important and "snuffing" out the future doesn't feel right. Just my thoughts.


Hi, Patty - first I've seen you on here. That's an interesting point, Patty and Susan. I wonder why we just can't all get comfortable with it. Something to ponder.


----------



## Knitter from Nebraska (Jun 9, 2013)

socpuppet03 said:


> We have no law that requires us to risk our on lives or own well being or have medical procedures against our will in order to protect others.


That's not exactly true. Quarantine laws require us to risk our lives by restricting movement. If your town or city is quarantined, you may not leave, thereby risking your life. Another instance is that if you come upon or witness an accident, you are required to stop and give care. This can also be a risk.


----------



## BrattyPatty (May 2, 2011)

In some circumstances, KFN, but not all. People perform humane acts all the time without risking their lives.
I think it is okay to be a little self centered, but not ok to be selfish.


----------



## admin (Jan 12, 2011)

This is an automated notice.

This topic was split up because it reached high page count.
Please feel free to continue the conversation in the new topic that was automatically created here:

http://www.knittingparadise.com/t-262935-1.html

Sorry for any inconvenience.


----------

