LDS and stay at home moms?

[_Gazelam]

I agree with what Jersey said. In a broad general sense women are by their nature more nurturing, but of coarse theres always aberations. In most cases the mother should stay home, but I'm sure there are the unusual cases where the man could/should.

[_Gazelam]

So Gaz, what you're suggesting is that the best situation in the case of divorced parents is for the child to have 4 parents?

The optimal would be for one parent to surrender custody and the children stay in one home.

Four parents is odd, but preferable to a parent flitting between boyfrieds/girlfriends, a new face popping up every few weeks/months in one of the parents homes while the child is "visiting".

[_Jersey Girl]

I agree with what Jersey said. In a broad general sense women are by their nature more nurturing, but of coarse theres always aberations. In most cases the mother should stay home, but I'm sure there are the unusual cases where the man could/should.

Gaz...I'm really not trying to torture you here, though I'm sure it might feel that way.

What do you mean by aberrations?

[_Gazelam]

What do you mean by aberrations?

A deviation of what is normal. The majority of women are more nurturing and kind than men are. that's just nature. Men are the testosterone filled hunters, who go out and bring home the bacon or whatever. Our nature is to build a house, gather in supplies, and provide the enviorment for the wife to make a house a home and do her nesting thing and rear good children.

The best and proper enviorment is for the children to see a strong healthy relationship betwen two parents who love each other and properly fulfill their roles.

Do oyu disagree that in most circumstances the woman is more nurturing by nature than a man? Thereby it is an odd thing for the opposite to be the case?

[_Jersey Girl]

A deviation of what is normal. The majority of women are more nurturing and kind than men are. that's just nature. Men are the testosterone filled hunters, who go out and bring home the bacon or whatever. Our nature is to build a house, gather in supplies, and provide the enviorment for the wife to make a house a home and do her nesting thing and rear good children.

Part of that makes me smile, Gaz, but in a good way. Last time I looked, women were doing the gathering of supplies!

The best and proper enviorment is for the children to see a strong healthy relationship betwen two parents who love each other and properly fulfill their roles.

I agree to the extent that roles are agreeable to each partner.

Do oyu disagree that in most circumstances the woman is more nurturing by nature than a man? Thereby it is an odd thing for the opposite to be the case?

I think that most women are biologically designed (and wired) to nurture but there are exceptions and all sorts of circumstances that can screw that up. I don't think it's "odd" for men to be biologically predisposed as nurturers at all. If you believe that God created them, you might consider that unusual....but not "odd".

I do think that there is a mindset prevalent today where an emphasis on "things" competes with the nurturing of children and where adults know more about how their "things" work than they do their own children.

[_Gazelam]

I do think that there is a mindset prevalent today where an emphasis on "things" competes with the nurturing of children and where adults know more about how their "things" work than they do their own children.

I think Porter might have something in getting rid of the TV's in his house. No one to sell you and your family the hottest bestest new gizmo. Things can be bad if you allow them to be. And things don't go into the next world with you. Your children do.

[_Jersey Girl]

I do think that there is a mindset prevalent today where an emphasis on "things" competes with the nurturing of children and where adults know more about how their "things" work than they do their own children.

I think Porter might have something in getting rid of the TV's in his house. No one to sell you and your family the hottest bestest new gizmo. Things can be bad if you allow them to be. And things don't go into the next world with you. Your children do.

He hasn't stated why he got rid of it.

[_Polygamy Porter]

I do think that there is a mindset prevalent today where an emphasis on "things" competes with the nurturing of children and where adults know more about how their "things" work than they do their own children.

I think Porter might have something in getting rid of the TV's in his house. No one to sell you and your family the hottest bestest new gizmo. Things can be bad if you allow them to be. And things don't go into the next world with you. Your children do.

He hasn't stated why he got rid of it.

It was a waste of time.

Like posting on this board :)


Seriously, I grew tired of the same Nicko-freaakin-lodian episodes.. back to back.

Sponge Bob every time I got near the TV and kids watching it...

I freaked one day while watching Sponge Bob with the kids. A commercial came on between episodes and it was a guy who was talking to the camera as if he was in the room speaking to the kids. "Hey, you on the couch..." he sat up, "Go outside and play for a while!" he got closer, "GO! Turn off the TV! We will be here when you get back, so go, go, go play outside!"

I freaked and said WOW! This is ridiculous! The TV show feels the need to prod the viewers to go and play! Un-freaking-believable.

Additionally, I realized I was reading all of the news BEFORE I saw it on the 6 o'clock nightly news... read it on the net earlier... SOMETIMES the same exact story word for word! So why watch the news? For the weather? http://intellicast.com is better, plus I did not have to sit threw their drivel to hear the forecast.

What about the history/learning/discovery/etc channels?

An inch deep and a mile wide on the content. Nothing indepth, nothing new. And then there was the 20-25 minutes per hour of commericals... all about the NEXT SHOW coming UP!

I really do not know if we will ever turn the boobtube back on.

Same with the newspaper. WHY? I have not handled a newspaper in eight or nine years.

The internet has given me freedom, and not just from Mormonism!

[Guest]

So Gaz, what you're suggesting is that the best situation in the case of divorced parents is for the child to have 4 parents?

The optimal would be for one parent to surrender custody and the children stay in one home.

Four parents is odd, but preferable to a parent flitting between boyfrieds/girlfriends, a new face popping up every few weeks/months in one of the parents homes while the child is "visiting".

Wow! You're saying that it is healthy for a child to essentially LOSE a parent? How can you even fathom this? I'm assuming you believe YOU would give up custody of your kids so another man can raise them?

This is very, very, very, detrimental to children! Is this sort of thinking rampant in the LDS community?

As soon as ex found a LDS husband they did everything in their power to turn son away from my husband. They tried to remove all contact with my husband (by the way, my husband raised his son by himself for 4 years) and actually told son that his father didn't care about him anymore. It is called Parental Alienation Syndrome and it HURTS kids. It is child abuse.

http://www.paskids.com/

[Guest]

Gaz, my kids are 12, 11, almost 7, and almost 3.

I thought better of it and took the picture off.