Posted on 01/03/2005 8:31:56 AM PST by qam1
How many kids do you have???
We're not talking about a child dying. We're talking if they had it to do over again.
Only if it's 10/$1.
Yeah, me too
HA! Boy are you ignorant.
I've known some of these people too, but I think with these people it's a "Cat's in the Cradle" thing. They learn too late.
That wasn't the point of my statement. I'm not going to repeat myself. Read my other posts.
Obviously, I did not word my post very well.
What I found disturbing about this article is that fact that child-less women want some kind of recognition for, well, nothing. That is where the "me, me, me" came from. Seriously, establishing a "Queen for a day" celebration to, I suppuse, counter Mother's Day? Selfish, "me-oriented" people, not unlike small children who don't know any better.
I'm not siding with people who have cildren or people who don't. That decision is up to the couple. The people featured in this article seem like selfish children to me, not because they don't have kids, but because they demand the same attention, or more, than those who do.
My wife certainly doesn't feel deprived of any attention simply because she hasn't given birth. I say the people in this article are just jealous of the attention and respect that mothers get.
How about, it is nobody's business as to which couples have children and which don't. That is between them and their God, if indeed they choose a faith.
It is certainly none of my business, and I'll be damned if I'll judge their union, just as I hope they'd respect mine.
Speaking from personal experiance as a man, being there when your little angel is born and those few years bonding with your little girl are unlike anything else life has to experiance.
I use to say to myself if God appeared in front of me and said someone has to die today you or your wife (ex now) I would hem and haw before saying well I guess I have to go but can I have a going away party.
If on the other hand it had been my little angel I would have grabbed ahold of God instantly and not let go.
You dont know love untill you have born a child. Of course thats just my experiance.
I wonder how many of those reputed "conservatives" have paid attention to what Dr. Laura has said on this matter. Firstly, do not get married unless you are truly ready for it and can "afford" it (both financially and emotionally) and, secondly, only have kids if you can give them a proper situation, generally inclusive of stay-at-home motherhood and extensive effort in terms of educating them in the current debauched cultural environment. What "conservative" would want to promote such things as excessive financial debt, latch-key kids, nannies, and government schools?
The solution here is to dump soccer practice and paying for college. It kills me that people say that they can't have any more children because they couldn't afford college for two or three or whatever. Who the hell cares about college in comparison to bringing another life into the world?
My older lady friend who was estranged from her daughter asked me to become her power of attorney. I declined but wish I had done it for her.
When her daughter went to the apartment to remove everything, she gave the off duty police woman she had hired to help her, my old friends Wurlitzer organ. What was funny was that it didn't work and I had even been on the internet looking for parts so that I could get it fixed and found out that no one made replacement parts for it anymore so the police woman and her boyfriend got bubkus for their effort.
I don't think I've ever met anyone who had a baby, but then failed to love that baby in some fashion, even if only instinctually.
Most (childless) people can't understand how quickly and totally one becomes attached to a child until it happens to them.
It is instinct. (The very small percentage of women who kill their children at childbirth are mentally deranged.)
That's a major reason why people have kids and I think that's very selfish. It's like breeding for a slave.
I'm child-free, by choice, and I don't vote liberal.
But I'm paying for someone else's kids to get a primary education, I'm paying for libraries (I buy my own books, thank you very much), I'm subsidizing child-care vis a vis WIC and welfare, and all sources of other programs that I will never, ever benefit from.
So before the knee-jerkers start calling us selfish, just take into consideration - my income helps subsidize your child-rearing in more ways than one, and you get the immediately benefits of it.
I agree. But that doesn't make it any easier on the children. A child knows when he isn't wanted, and I think it would have been better for these children if their parents had decided not to have children in the first place.
Around here in the blue zone, it's actually the dimocraps who have most of the kids. Firstly there are the dimocrap recruits (e.g. immigrants) having them. Secondly, the debt loving, government school promoting, nanny empoloying set also are having them. Conservatives like me, insistent as we are on standards (of finances, of schooling, of stay-at-home parenting) simply find it difficult, living in the blue zone, to create the proper conditions which meet our standards for having kids. Either we wait (maybe too long!) or we move.
I didn't know I was asking for advice, really, I have given this a lot of thought and know my situation well enough, but I'm open to discussion.
Try to have a baby. The horses can wait. You might wonder why you even wanted to do that sort of stuff after you have a child.
My horse can't wait, he's aged. His time for trail riding is now or never. If you're right, and we never got into trail riding and wanted rid of the horses in our life, I would hate that outcome. My dream has been to have horses and a companion to ride with me in the woods. My goal is to operate a boarding stable and care for many more than my own as a business. That is the life plan we had in mind when we married, I don't want to turn that upside-down on a whim.
It's totally fair to have a child at 40....if you can. Most women's fertility starts going downhill at 27, so I know this sounds kind of harsh, but you're behind already.
I know you are right about being behind. My mom died at 58 of cancer, and she is not the only terminal cancer in my family. If I didn't get cancer, I might be the only one. I don't know what my life expectancy is, I don't want to abandon a child as young as I was left by my mom, and I don't know if my genes are particularly good to pass on. I think about that a lot.
Of course, adoption is also an option....a great one IMO, but it's not for everyone. It costs a lot, and takes a lot of time, so 40 for many adoptive parents ends up looking really young.
This is an option my husband and I have talked about. But in terms of adopting an older child, one who would not be disadvantaged by our age if we adopted later on.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.