Raising children and daycare

[Burning Bright]

Originally Posted by SoonerCoug

Sorry I didn't phrase my question properly.

Why do you feel like it's OK to leave the door open? I guess you sort of answered that, but I disagree with you.

You may be right. I'm not saying you're not. Personally, I find it icky today but I'm not willing yet to impose my impose my societal point of view on it yet. On some subjects I'm willing.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by SoonerCoug

I actually think it borders on immoral for our society to encourage policies that leave so many women unable to provide for their children properly in the case of a divorce or death to the husband.

You think the church does that? What a crock! I've heard talks that specifically EXHORT women to get their education so that they are capable of being able to support their families should conditions require they have to earn money to provide for the family.

[SoonerCoug]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

You think the church does that? What a crock! I've heard talks that specifically EXHORT women to get their education so that they are capable of being able to support their families should conditions require they have to earn money to provide for the family.

I know what you're saying. LDS women hear things like: "Get as much education as possible, have more kids, stay at home, and be the best homemaker ever."

Oaks is telling people to quit delaying reproduction and to have more children.

Five of the six most recently ordained apostles have 3 or fewer kids, while 2 of the senior apostles have 10 kids.

Hinckley is telling women to get as much education as possible.

I think there's some serious inconsistency in the message that is being given to women from the pulpit, probably because opinions vary among GAs.

What's wrong with delaying reproduction? (unless you want to have 10 kids) One of the best ways for a woman to get as much education as possible is to delay reproduction. It's actually a very responsible approach.

You know as well as I do that the culture promotes early marriage and pregnancy, which is not compatible with advanced education for women.

[Burning Bright]

Originally Posted by SoonerCoug

I think I'm asking a direct question, and it seems to me that you won't give a direct answer, other than to say that a society's rules change over time. I don't think this defense applies in this situation, just like I don't think slavery was ever justified, even though most people didn't have a problem with slavery at one point.

It's an important question. Expecting that a woman stay in the home may have made sense in an era of infectious diseases and lack of birth control, but now it's the 21st century and a few things have changed. This is a case where the morality really should be able to adapt with changing times.

My point is that sometimes it's OK to adapt your moral code with time, and sometimes it's not.

Slavery and much older already-married men marrying 14 year olds=never OK.

Encouraging women to have advanced graduate training and careers...perhaps completely impractical in the early 20th century, but the opposite is true in the early 21st century. I actually think it borders on immoral for our society to encourage policies that leave so many women unable to provide for their children properly in the case of a divorce or death to the husband.

I hope I made it clear in my comments that there were obvious situations (death, disability, etc) that might require women with children to work. In those situations, I do not look down upon those women at all, but rather admire them for dealing with a difficult situation.

In my case, I encouraged and supported my wife 100% in getting an education and marketable skills. I take great comfort in knowing that if anything ever happens to me that she won't be helpless.

I also take great comfort in having a million dollar life insurance policy. A million dollars doesn't go far nowadays, but it'll help. She could get a smaller house and not have to work until the youngest graduated high school.

I have the same policy on her. If something happened to her, my children would still have a parent. They'd just eat more stuff out of the microwave.

Anyways, it's late. See you all later. Go Cougs!

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Burning Bright

I hope I made it clear in my comments that there were obvious situations (death, disability, etc) that might require women with children to work. In those situations, I do not look down upon those women at all, but rather admire them for dealing with a difficult situation.

In my case, I encouraged and supported my wife 100% in getting an education and marketable skills. I take great comfort in knowing that if anything ever happens to me that she won't be helpless.

I also take great comfort in having a million dollar life insurance policy. A million dollars doesn't go far nowadays, but it'll help. She could get a smaller house and not have to work until the youngest graduated high school.

I have the same policy on her. If something happened to her, my children would still have a parent. They'd just eat more stuff out of the microwave.

Anyways, it's late. See you all later. Go Cougs!

Why is it a preference for women to only use their skills in times of economic need and to buy a lesser house? That's certainly a moral judgment.

I've heard many women complaining, "Well she doesn't have to work but chooses to so that they can have that neat stuff."

Placing this limitation almost invites people to judge if a woman works because it brings fulfillment or if she needs to work.

[Mormon Red Death]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

BB, you didn't answer my question. Would you in a professional setting publicize your views of full-time professional women? Are you an owner of your firm? Do you hire women and take them away from child rearing or do you only hire men?

My reasoning is this. If you are so certain of the righteousness of your opinions stated in this thread, you shouldn't be scared to publicize them in the secular world, to your colleagues, male and female alike.

My reasoning is further that if you hire women to work full time at your firm, you're a hypocrite. You shouldn't be scared to engage in civil disobedience putting your beliefs into practice regardless of what Civil Rights laws you might violate. If you hire women believing what you believe you're like an OB who who speaks against abortion in private, but performs abortions at his clinic. I know abortion is a strong analogy, but I assume you ascribe great importance to your opinion on this issue. Following your reasoning, by hiring women to work full time you're harming children. I've got to assume you don't do that or you are truly a bad person.

Am I wrong?

Just curious do you let all your colleagues know all your views on everything? If not you are chicken!

[Burning Bright]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Why is it a preference for women to only use their skills in times of economic need and to buy a lesser house? That's certainly a moral judgment.

I've heard many women complaining, "Well she doesn't have to work but chooses to so that they can have that neat stuff."

Placing this limitation almost invites people to judge if a woman works because it brings fulfillment or if she needs to work.

We have a pretty big house. We can afford it, so we bought one we like. If our circumstances change, we would adjust our desire for a nice house to fit our budget. If she (or I) had to choose between a lesser house and taking care of our kids, it's a no brainer. The kids win.

And what's wrong with judging?

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Burning Bright

And what's wrong with judging?

It creates dissension.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

tooblue and jay santos = burning bright but not kidding around. They have no room to talk about pulling a sense of superiority.

You're a serious asshole. I've not judged anyone for putting their kids in daycare. You won't find anything close to it in any thread. You won't find it because I don't believe it. I didn't pull out my tax returns to show I'm better than someone else. That's truly disgusting.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by Mormon Red Death

Just curious do you let all your colleagues know all your views on everything? If not you are chicken!

I'm an open book. As you see. Everyone knows who I am. It's easy for me because I don't hold any radical or perverse or racist or sexist views.