Stellan

Stellan

is healthy,

perfectly healthy and

he’s

InCoveralls-2

newly two

looks here like he

might have stepped off the set of That 70′s Show

or

InCoveralls

maybe Happy Days

speaking of happy days

my friend Julie sent me the link to

this hysterical video clip

about the outcome of the Tuesday’s election day

probably not very funny to you if you lean

more to the liberal side politically though

just a warning

Stellan voted

InCoveralls-3

rather, he helped me vote

his one year rebirthday is coming up and

we are so thankful

yes we are growing his hair out and

InCoveralls-4

yes he has a very toothy smile

Stellan is

amazing and

we love him

the end

(‘cept it’s not for Stellan

since he is miraculously

alive)

Continue Reading

Gisele Bundchen, breastfeeding and the law

I have been thinking lately (Yes, thinking is entirely possible, even 10 days after giving birth. At least for me that’s been the case with our fifth child. After giving birth to our first, though? I am fairly certain that I didn’t think, clearly at least, for a minimum of six months. But that’s water under the bridge now and certainly not the point that I’m going to be getting at here.).

While I was in the hospital recently, I heard news of the mini uproar that a breastfeeding comment made by supermodel Gisele Bundchen generated. My own very first thought when I heard that Gisele said in an interview, “There should be a worldwide law…that mothers should breastfeed their babies for six months” was that it was spoken by a person who truly loved and understood breastfeeding. I had nary a doubt in my mind that she didn’t really mean there should be a worldwide law requiring all mothers to breastfeed. I mean, if she did mean that, clearly she doesn’t understand how laws work. A “worldwide law”, while perhaps a nice idea, is not likely to ever happen. I didn’t assume she literally meant that. I took, rather, her words to be exaggeration for effect. Sort of like if someone where to, ahem, say something like, “If I don’t get another box of Honey Nut Cheerios, I’m going to die!!”

You know, something like that.

Gisele seems passionate about breastfeeding; her now well-known quote on the subject didn’t seem to me to be an intentional slam of mothers who don’t share her passion. Her words didn’t throw me into a tizzy or cause me undue aggravation or sleepless nights. MckFlurry is granting me the latter just fine. And the former? I don’t like to let myself get overly aggravated about stuff that’s beyond my control and doesn’t really affect me anyway in the first place.

What has really gotten my (Christmas) undies in a bunch has been the mini uproar I alluded to. I mean, for the love of Pete, people. The woman was just trying to make a point! I doubt she really meant that breastfeeding should be a law. And, if she did, well…I’ll get to that in a moment. Yet critics have been having a field day with Gisele’s statement.

“It’s the most absurd thing I’ve ever heard,” actress Bethanny Frankel retorted regarding Gisele’s remarks, felt by some to be highly insensitive.

But you know what? The more I thought and thought about it, the more I realized how utterly not “absurd” Gisele’s statement actually was. At least not when compared to all the other laws (now, granted, they are not “worldwide,” but that little part of her quote is hardly what got people foaming at the mouth over) our own country, for example, has as it regards the care and health and well being of children. The fact that folks are so upset about the notion that breastfeeding should be a law screams irony in the loudest way.

Bethanny, after calling Gisele’s opinion “absurd,” went on to say that “breastfeeding is one of the most rewarding experiences, but it isn’t for everyone.”

The Brazilian model was absolutely waylaid by the media, mothering groups and internet chat boards, lambasted for her insensitivity towards mothers who choose not to breastfeed, or for one reason or another, cannot. To some, her words had a judgmental ring to them, and I can definitely understand seeing them in that light. That wasn’t how I took her quote, but nonetheless, I do understand why many people were upset by her words. Clearly breastfeeding is a personal choice, just as the choice to feed our children strained carrots over Gerber fruit puffs or avocado over Go-Gurt is. We should do what we can to keep our children safe and healthy, trying our best and not bringing other mothers down for not agreeing with us. What we feed our children should certainly be the parents‘ decision. End of sentence. Sort of.

I just wonder if the idea, whether Gisele literally meant it or not, of a law supporting breastfeeding is really as far-fetched and ridiculous an idea as some people are making it. Or, at the very least, if it’s really that different than other laws or beliefs largely agreed on by everyone.

Don’t get me wrong. I am not saying that I support a law, “worldwide” or otherwise, that would mandate breastfeeding. Far from it! It’s just that the (probably inadvertent) inconsistency with which those who saw fit to bash Gisele for her thoughts is so glaring, I couldn’t ignore it. If, in fact, it is so “absurd” to entertain the idea of a law supporting breastfeeding, then why oh why do we have throngs of people, and a President, in support of mandatory vaccination of children via the public school system? Yet it hasn’t been proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that vaccines are 100% safe for all children. And on that note, what on earth is up with laws about children in carseats!? In this case it is hardly arguable that carseats are safer for children in cars than no carseats are, right? We would all probably agree. However, I have yet to hear news of angry mothers and actresses pounding their fists on their children’s high chair trays and calling foul about carseat laws. But can you imagine if the topic at hand were switched? If Gisele had been talking about something other than breastfeeding? Now that would be absurd.

It might go something like this:

A beautiful model and mother is interviewed and says, “”There should be a worldwide law…that mothers should secure their babies into five point harnesses when riding in the car for six months.”

Another beautiful mother and actress, with thousands of other opinionated voices angrily behind her, chimes in, calling the idea of mandatory carseats “absurd,” saying “harnessing children into carseats when they travel in cars is one of the most rewarding experiences, but it isn’t for everyone.”

Um, what!?

Do you see where I’m going here? I cannot, just cannot, wrap my mind around the (very true, in my opinion) notion that the angry mob attacking Gisele’s words has been clinging to: that the government has no business telling us how to best care for our children when these same people daily support the government in fact stepping in and telling us, in other ways, how to best care for our children.

Even Bethanny’s quote that “breastfeeding is one of the most rewarding experiences, but it isn’t for everyone” kind of rubbed me the wrong way. It was as if she was saying that the benefits of breastfeeding are solely for the mother. That we get rewards from nursing our children. And certainly, as a lover of breastfeeding, I can attest that those rewards most definitely exist! But that isn’t the sole reason why I breastfeed. Neither should a mother thinking that breastfeeding just “isn’t for her” use that as her only reason not to nurse. What if taking the time to buckle our child into a carseat “wasn’t for us”? Or if making sure our children had enough vitamins in their diet just wasn’t a concern of ours? I venture to say that it shouldn’t matter. Breastmilk is best for our children. Carseats are the safest way to travel. Why the severe digging in of heels when the notion of a breastfeeding law is brought up, then?

I do realize, sadly from personal experience, that the desire to give a baby breastmilk is not the only factor in a mother’s ability to provide it. I shed many, many tears over the milk supply issues I had when Small Fry was a baby. I endured sore nipples, extreme engorgement, stress during the time of Stellan’s many hospitalizations and pregnancies while nursing that all contributed to a decline in my desire and ability to breastfeed. I have chosen to use other milks, have purchased donor breastmilk and have weaned some of my children much earlier than I would have liked. A law requiring me to have continued to nurse, for example, past one year would have been a very, very hard one for me to have fallen in accordance with. It’s pretty silly to think such a law would be enforceable or even wise. What about mothers with chronic mastitis? Inverted nipples? Adopted children? Although many of their adoptive mothers try, producing breastmilk is not always possible, and for a multitude of other reasons, it often isn’t, either. I think we ought to, nay we need to, give other mothers the benefit of the doubt and unconditional support in this journey of motherhood. It’s hard enough as it is without the pointing out how other mothers aren’t doing things the best way, according to use.

Why then the inconsistency with other areas of mothering? No one seems to get any flack for telling new mothers that they need to put baby back to sleep, should get all the recommended vaccines on schedule, are required by law to put children into carseats or that they must not allow their baby to eat honey, peanut butter or cow’s milk until at least after age one. What is the big deal, then, with breastfeeding? Isn’t it, also, a similar health related act that unarguably is best for baby? Why then did so many people balk at Gisele’s assertion that it also be required for young babies?

I don’t know why. I just wish that the same intensity with which so many people bristled (and rightly so) at the idea of a breastfeeding law would be also afforded to other areas of mothering. Educating mothers on what kind of milk is best for their babies, how long to rear face a carseat and what vaccines are recommended for their health is one thing, and a good thing at that. But supporting legislation that would require parents to, say, vaccinate, properly restrain while in a vehicle, circumcise or breastfeed their babies? Pretty much not the government’s job.

At least in my opinion. And I don’t really think Gisele meant that it was, either.

What think you?!

Continue Reading

my dream about President Obama

I dreamt about President Obama last night.

There was some big gala, and for some reason I was there. Wearing a prom gown or something. It might have been royal blue, but I’m not sure. I never actually went to prom in high school. The gala was upstairs. You had to take this long flight of stairs. As a matter of fact, it looked a lot like the lofted art gallery area where my husband and I had our wedding reception. There were tons of people there, but I wasn’t with anyone I knew.

President Obama and his wife were milling around the dinner, I think it was a dinner, talking to people. At one point, I had the brief opportunity to talk to Mrs. Obama. I don’t know what I said to her, but I’m sure it was really nice. Suddenly I wasn’t at the gala anymore. I was somewhere else. I changed clothes to more of my normal, comfy attire. The gala was still going on, and I really wanted to greet President Obama. I knew the event was almost over, so I hurried back up the stairs. I remember thinking that I wasn’t really dressed appropriately anymore, but I didn’t care and didn’t think he would either.

When I got back up to the gala, most of the people had left. In the corner, President Obama stood, with a small group of people standing around him, still talking. The Secret Service guys weren’t in my dream, so either they were hidden really well, or my dream wasn’t really spot on. One of the two. Probably the second one. I figured there was still a chance I might catch President Obama after he was done talking with the remaining gala guests. I decided to make my way over and stand by the group, hoping for a chance to shake Mr. President’s hand.

And now to the part of my dream that really matters. Well, matters because it gets to where I’m going with this post. I know, finally, huh? As I waited, I mulled over in my head what I wanted to say to President Obama. I knew that if I got a chance to talk to him, it would likely be very brief. I wanted to know what I was going to say, to make it count, to be prepared. And what I decided to say to the President in my dream is probably what I’d actually say to him in real life if I ever met him. It was this:

“I’m very honored to get to meet you, Mr. President. I just wanted you to know that I didn’t vote for you. However, I’m full of respect for you and I know you’re working hard as our president. Thank you. And also, I’m sorry there are people out there who are mean to you and have nothing but disrespectful things to say about you. That isn’t right. Well, that’s it!”

I mulled over my mini monologue in my head as I dreamt, but before I knew it, President Obama had to wrap up talking with the people in the corner and I never got my turn to talk to him. It all turned out all right, you see, because it was only a dream. Even if I had spoken to him, it wouldn’t have mattered. It didn’t really happen.

It’s what does really happen that’s been on my mind lately. What happens is many people, who vehemently disagree with another person, particularly in the political arena, think that their (possibly valid) feelings of disagreement give them free license to talk about that person in whatever manner they want. It irritates me so much, I tell you.

My husband likes to listen to conservative talk radio. I used to, too, but lately it’s been driving me bonkers. I absolutely love a lot of the points those guys make. I’m a huge fan of small government and am appalled and unhappy about many, many things that are happening in our government today. The direction we are moving in as a nation is, in my opinion, absolutely not the right one. And a lot of these radio talk show guys believe that, too. It can be invigorating and insightful to listen to them. But. But many times, way too often for my comfort, they take an inappropriate license to speak rudely and disrespectfully about those with whom they disagree. I disagree with a vast majority of liberal beliefs myself, but calling liberals “idiots” and telling them to “get their heads out of their butts” and so on and so forth is simply ridiculous. It’s rude. It makes the speaker look rude. And it takes away from the (in my opinion, valid) points they are trying to make.

If a point is worth making, if you believe it strongly enough to stake your flag in it, there should be no need to trash talk those who disagree. To talk like a bully doesn’t lend credibility to your point. Rather the opposite, in fact.

I cannot stand it when people bash our presidents. I couldn’t stand it when they did it to presidents I did vote for and I can’t stand when they do it to President Obama. My political persuasions don’t change my belief that it’s wrong to mock another person. That it does no favors to one’s point to try to tear down another with the opposite viewpoint. Calling President Bush a “big jackass” is just as inappropriate as calling President Obama a “big jackass.”

Of course, I’ve been on the receiving end of this kind of speech, too. People who don’t hold staunchly conservative viewpoints like myself often think it’s fair game to ridicule those who do. Referring to those who fall to the right, politically, as “narrow minded, Bible banging, greedy folk” just serves, in my opinion, to make the person saying that look bad. I even got called a racist based on the political opinions I’ve shared on my blog. Still haven’t figured out where that came from. I’ve never understood why some people feel the need for such language. If you really think you’re right, shouldn’t it be enough to state your viewpoint, politely point out fallacies in another’s opinion, and leave it at that? Deteriorating into trash talking rarely sways one to the other side, I would think.

I’ve always been a rather polite person who doesn’t swear or use foul words. However, even reading entries in my blog from a few years ago, I can see how I used to take uncomfortable liberties when discussing things with people who don’t agree with me. I came across, to me at least, as such a pompous know-it-all. I’m not happy about that, but as I grow and hopefully mature, I’m finding such talk less and less palatable. In “religious” circles, plenty of mud slinging goes on, too. For example, I am horrified by abortion and killing an unborn baby is never okay in my book. However, never would I sanction calling someone of a Pro-Choice persuasion a “baby killer.” It’s inflammatory, derogatory and is not, in my opinion, the right way to get someone to consider my way of thinking.

Yes, we need to be bold about our faith and our political beliefs. I am not one of those people who feels religion and politics are taboo topics. I don’t get the whole secrecy behind telling others who we voted for. If I believe in someone enough to vote for them, or not, as President of our great nation, why on earth would it not be appropriate for me to tell others what I did on my ballot? I can even tend to be, ahem, sarcastic when I talk about certain topics. But as a believer in Jesus, I think it is imperative that we don’t water down our faith by avoiding talking about it, that we speak loudly and with confidence about our belief in a Savior who came to die for everyone.

I simply don’t think that translates into the call to speak rudely or use name calling when describing others who don’t believe with us. That’s all.

Continue Reading

rally and ribs

We went to a political rally today.

MeStellanRallyCircle

In spite of it being very, very cold and drizzling and sleeting all day, we…

Continue Reading

in which I rant about socialism and chicken

We have small group every Sunday night. We meet with our pastor and his wife at their home with a handful of other couples from our church. We enjoy dinner together each week and then all of the children, ages toddler to teenager, chill together downstairs while we adults have our study. Right now we [...]

Continue Reading

Do the Duggar’s have too many children?

Through the grapevine (Okay, fine, it was People Magazine.), I’ve learned that Michelle and Jim Bob Duggar, parents already to 18 children, are expecting their 19th baby. Since the Duggars are on television, have already shared much of their lives with those (with cable) who want a peek in, and were so bold as to [...]

Continue Reading

twist my arm

I have been asked numerous times in the past few days: “What do you think of Sarah Palin*?” *Don’t worry if you don’t recognize the name. She’s newly in my vocabulary, too. John McCain chose her, the current governor of Alaska, recently as his running mate. Okay, twist my arm! Just make me write a [...]

Continue Reading

A question for Barack Obama: "When did MckMuffin’s life begin?"

Watch this YouTube video: I would like to pose these questions to Barack Obama: Mr. Obama, when did MckMuffin’s life begin? Is my unborn baby, whom I saw kicking and squirming on ultrasound today, a person? Is he alive? Should I fight hard to learn about his heart condition, or would you think that silly, [...]

Continue Reading

of politics and chickens

A friend of mine, who is so like me, she could be my brother from another mother, shared these funny bits of political chicken humor with me the other day. In her own words, she is “an aspiring small government libertarian personal responsibility advocate” and–dang!–I am too, come to think of it, though I couldn’t [...]

Continue Reading

politically speaking…

Preamble about the What On God’s Green Earth post: Good guessing guys! Hmm, this won’t take long, I don’t think and I promise not to drag this out like I did with the last “what is it” photo guessing game I had. That one nearly drove me to drink and I think a few of [...]

Continue Reading