Peter Damian arrived at 10:44 am on June 30th measuring 20″ long and 8 lbs. 1 oz. It was not the birth I should have had, but the bottom line is that he and I are healthy and thriving. Apparently, he has a tied tongue. But also, apparently, this is not causing any problems with nursing heartily. It might cause problems in the future with speech…and of course, he can’t stick out his tongue at his siblings (a necessary skill when you have 4 older brothers and sisters).
And I am tired…
I can’t believe I’ve posted nothing since February. Well, yes I can. After all, we moved in March! No time to post right now – Jenny just woke up. Can’t wait to post my birth story…when the baby finally gets here. Only a few more weeks…
After a miserable week of worrying about having to find an apartment in VA while waiting for base housing, we learned on Friday that a house will be available “next month”. Yippee. I was absolutely elated.
Now, the elation has somewhat subsided and I’m eager for something more specific than “next month”. I want to plan! Give me a date!!
Ah, the human mind grows so easily restless.
Yesterday, my 3 1/2 year old daughter seemed to react with a mixture of surprise and horror when she learned that she is not yet married. We had been talking about the legends of St. Valentine who supposedly married Roman soldiers against the emporer’s law and for this crime was imprisioned and killed. I asked her if Dad and I should run out and secure her a husband immediately. She said yes. So, note to daughter Katie in the future: you gave us permission. I’ve got a few ideas…
I promised her that in 20 years, she might have a different idea about who should be selecting her husband.
A few days ago she said that she would not be having any children. Fritz wants 100. My kids are so different.
At this time seven years ago, I was excitedly pregnant with my first child. Little did I know the tremendous changes that this new vocation would affect. Although not raised with high society standards of conduct, I did manage to function well in polite company. Motherhood, however, has led me to certain behavior which can only be described as, well, barbaric.
A few days ago, my three-year-old daughter shoved an entire bowl of rotini in her mouth. It was so full that she couldn’t even close it. As she attempted to chew the pasta, half-mangled pieces started to fall from her gaping jaw. Of course, since she’s only three, this bothered her none at all, and she didn’t even attempt to catch them. Appalled, I made her spit out the contents of her mouth and then kicked her out of the kitchen declaring that no barbarians were allowed there.
However, this is not exactly true. Although I have not sunk so low as to allow food to fall from my mouth, my table manners are not as refined as they were seven years ago. For example, I used to be able to enjoy a leisurely meal. No longer. A mother of young children learns early that if she wants her food hot or even warm, she must eat it as quickly as possible. Interruptions will come, and a screaming baby doesn’t care if you’re hungry or not. Yes, older children can and must be taught to wait for their pressing needs while mom has lunch, but in the last six and half years since my son was born, I have had at least one child (usually two) under the age of two, excepting one month before my fourth child was born.
So, I know where my daughter learned to shove an entire bowl of pasta in her mouth. I, barbarian mom, do it all the time.
And let’s take the generally accepted rule that one does not talk with one’s mouth full. As I just explained, mealtime is a time when I am consuming my food as rapidly as possible. There is never a moment when it is empty. Not talking with my mouth full would mean going ninety seconds or so without correcting my children. And when your oldest of four is under seven, that is just not an option. Throughout dinner, I am barking orders: “Sit down!”, “Finish your green beans!”, “Leave your sister alone!”, and, of course, “Don’t talk with your mouth full!”.
Now, the command to sit down at meals is frequently heard. My children are popping up and down so often that I feel like I’m living the carnival game where you try to hit the rodent on the head with a mallet. Of course, am I able to sit down throughout a meal? Of course not. The older children can fetch missing items from the fridge or cupboards, but babies inevitable want something that requires mom to get up to get. The green bean lover will suddenly decide that they are no longer acceptable, and mom begins a quest for a vegetable that will please the fickle palate. I become one of those rodents in that game.
Now another fine example of barbarism is climbing on the furniture and general jumping and running in the house. I often tell my boys that they are acting barbaric when they get a bit wild and wound up. But again, are my actions any better? With a baby around, the furniture becomes a convenient barrier to prevent her from wandering in forbidden territory. Of course, this only serves as an obstacle to the rest of us as well. The phone is on the third or fourth ring as I come running up from doing laundry, and I find the ottoman in my way. So, I leap over it to make it to the phone before the machine picks it up. Or, I am unable to find the ringing phone and begin to leap and dash around the house in an effort to find it. Or, I give up on finding the cordless phone and make a mad dash to the stairs and over the baby gate to the stationary phone on my desk.
Barbarians use fear and intimidation to dominate others. Just this morning, as my boys were climbing down the basement stairs in a particularly dangerous manner, I found myself saying, “If you hurt yourself while doing something stupid, I will beat you and make you hurt more.” Trumping that logic was that of my four-year-old who said, “But, Mom, we’re being secret agents.” Of course, secret agents are expected, nay, compelled, to engage in risky behavior. And which was the greater risk: falling down the stairs or suffering Mom’s wrath? Undecided.
And then there is that mother’s wrath. This is the final proof that motherhood is a barbaric vocation. I used to have a pretty even temper. Yes, there were moments of righteous indignation, but for the most part I did not often rant and rave. But those pregnancy books just did not prepare me for the behavior of real children. And I don’t mean the babies, who are angels despite the sleepless nights and the sleepless days. No, what puts me on the warpath is when I mistakenly think I’ve been blessed with fifteen minutes of peace only to discover that the damage done behind closed doors will take me an hour to clean up. Just hand me my spear and helmet.
Recently I walked into the living room and spotted the cap to a bottle of glue. Just the cap. A bad omen. I discovered the empty bottle lying on the floor near a white puddle and near a bed with two mysterious and giggling lumps and near the baby who was playing in the goo. And only a few days before the glue incident, for the second time in as many days, my children, with the six year old as ringleader, covered the floor and furniture with baby powder. The only thing that spared their lives that second time was that Dad, not Mom, discovered the disaster.
I do hope that in time, as the children age, my own manners will improve. I fear, though, that my behavior is predicated on their behavior, and unfortunately, I think things will get worse before they get better. In a few years and with a bit more education, my oldest child will, I’m sure, feel inspired to refer to me as Attila. The results are predictable.
This is the first Christmas that my oldest child, Fritz, now 6 1/2, is full of anticipation. The kind of anticipation that can only come when you already have a sense of what to expect. In previous years, he has known that SOMETHING was going to happen. We would talk about the season, the reason, the presents, the cookies, the parties, but he’d not really understand. This year, he knows EVERYTHING. It’s great. Mom, I can’t wait to look for the pickle on the tree…whoever finds it gets a prize! Mom, St. Nicholas brings coins, but they’re really chocolate inside! Mom, we ALWAYS go to Nana and Grandpa’s house on Christmas day! Mom, do you hear that song? It’s a Christmas song! And the best part is the excitment that he is able to generate in his siblings, which in unlike any excitement I could ever hope to inspire. Mom, says Billy, when are we going to put up the Christmas tree?
Hold on to your Bibles, folks. A new preacher is heading into town.
Slowly over the last week, the liberals have been coming around to the idea that, perhaps, the election defeat they just suffered was due to morals. Perhaps. Liberal columnist after liberal columnist is mentioning morals and values with the tentative acceptance that, yes, vast numbers of people turned up at the polls to pull a lever for someone who, they thought, had a more moral platform.
For them, this is very difficult to accept and understand. They just simply don’t think like that. To them, it’s the economy, stupid. It’s the war in Iraq. It’s things that really MATTER.
So, at first it began with the left saying, “What’s the matter with these people? Don’t they know that the Democrats want to help them? Why do they support tax cuts for the rich when they are so poor?” Ignoring the fact that the increase in the child tax credit helped EVERY taxpayer who had children or that the revisions to the marriage penalty taxes helped EVERY dual income married couple (who pays taxes) regardless of income. They make it seem as though nobody from middle America actually pays taxes.
Then, the left began to ponder if all those exit polls could possibly be true. “People who thought morals were important voted overwhelmingly for Bush.” They lament the ignorance of these people, the apparent hatred and close-mindedness of those who are not in favor of gay marriage. Who needs them anyway, they think. Yuck, we can’t embrace idiots and bigots. We are so much better than they are.
Then the reality: oh, we can’t win an election if we DON’T embrace them.
“Whatever shall we do?” they cry with all the drama of a Southern Belle.
And now, they are starting to formulate a plan. And here it is: they need to take back some moral high ground. They need to prove to the American people that they are moral too by pointing out how moral they are and how immoral the Republicans are on some issues.
Notice the “some issues” caveat. And here’s where the New Gospel according to the Left gets published. You see, they CAN NOT side with conservatives on the two biggest moral issues going: abortion and gay marriage. They just can’t do it. Too much of their base is made up of those who support views completely divergent from those of MOST of America (#1 abortion on demand from conception until about 10 minutes after birth and #2 total acceptance of homosexual relationships as equal to that of heterosexual relationships). MOST Americans think first trimester abortions are ok and MOST Americans care little about what goes on in someone’s bedroom privately. But the hard core liberals don’t want mere tolerance and certainly don’t want to be secretive about their lives. They want to indoctrinate new generations into total acceptance of abortion and gay marriage with no caveats. They want to suppress any religious views that say otherwise. The only intolerance allowed is intolerance of the religious. And the rest of the party follows along in fear of losing that base.
So, here comes the new list of morals that the Democrats have the upper hand in:
#1 The war in Iraq. This war is immoral, they believe. And they want us to believe it too. They will begin to quote from the Pope, soon, I’m sure, to regain those Catholics who for the first time in a long time actually favored a Republican over a Democrat. The problem with this issue comes if the elections go well and the Iraqis begin to manage their own affairs. I expect some odd behavior on the part of Democrats to actually THWART democracy in Iraq so that they can hold on to this issue. No kidding.
#2 Gay marriage. What? How can they win the moral high ground here? By turning the issue around. We need to look at the coin from the other side, they’ll suggest. Gay marriage is GOOD. Gay marriage is MORAL. It means these couples are monogamous. It means these couples can help take care of unwanted children through adoption – children who might otherwise be aborted. {If you don’t allow gay marriage, the blood of some babies will be on your hands, they’ll suggest.} These couples love each other. Their relationship should be given equal weight to that of heterosexual relationships. These couples just want to live fulfilled lives and anyone who is opposed to that is guilty of hatred, bigotry, and the confused notion of supremacy. It is IMMORAL to be hate-filled. It is EVIL to be bigoted. And then the tear-jerker arguments: a dying man unable to see his partner in the hospital, a loving “spouse” left penniless when her partner dies without a will, a stay-at-home dad with no health insurance because his “husband” can’t claim him as a dependent at work. And it’s all the fault of the right-wing conservatives who think their God wants them to oppress people. Jesus preached love and forgiveness and tolerance. What WOULD Jesus do? Approve gay marriage, of course. He probably would have done it in the Bible if that had been an issue back then, but since he couldn’t foresee the future (he was just a man, you see), he couldn’t preach on the topic.
#3 The poor. Yes, the poor will once again get dragged into the political arena. This time, though, any idea other than a government controlled “steal from the rich and give to the poor” program will be touted as immoral. We MUST help the poor and the only acceptable way is to highly tax the rich to fund all sorts programs for everybody else. It is IMMORAL for someone who makes $500,000 a year to be able to keep it all for themselves. And these evil (by default) people can not be trusted to fund the proper programs, so it is only fair for the government to take about half of that income to give to those less fortunate. Should the current administration succeed in getting some faith-based programs well established with government funds, expect that a liberal administration would seek to regulate the faith in these programs to ensure that those helped are well protected from any religious influence.
So, start watching for that new preacher. The one who will tell you that gay marriage is good. The one who will talk about innocent life in Iraq (and be silent on innocent life in the womb). Be prepared to be lectured on the new reality of good and evil. Their best hope is to get these positions established as bono fide moral issues. And then get people to look at HOW MANY issues the Democrats have the upper hand in. They will not try to win abortion, but will try to win as many other issues as they can in the hopes that America will see them as more moral because they are better on more issues. {This is like trying to convince someone that FIVE pennies is better than TWO dimes. It works great for a simpleton, but won’t cut it with anyone with an IQ exceeding 80.}
And now, my suggestions to the Democrats, not that anyone would really listen. I think the Democrats need do only two things to win. I still wouldn’t vote for them, but I think most Americans would fall for these ideas. If you want to take back middle America, here’s all you have to do:
#1 On gay marriage: do not side with the gays and lesbians on gay marriage, especially on a federal level. State that you think the states, particularly the PEOPLE in the states, should be able to decide for themselves. Do not support a mandate that one state accept another state’s gay marriage. Support civil unions only, except where a popular vote indicates marriage as acceptable. I think most Americans would “tolerate” civil unions. Promote this tolerance.
#2 On abortion: do not side with abortion on demand. Support parental notification. Denounce partial-birth abortion. I think most Americans would be satisfied if they were sure their daughters were protected and if they were spared the gruesome details of partial-birth abortion. I think the left has made enough people reluctant to criticize a woman who is unexpectedly pregnant who feels she has no choice but to abort the baby. There is enough talk about the health or life of the woman or those who were victims of rape or incest to make people feel that there might be a reason to allow an exception in favor of abortion.
Although neither of those new positions would change my mind, I think many, many Americans would be more comfortable in siding with the Democrats if these more moderate stances were adopted. In my opinion, however, the left is too entrenched in the radical policies of its base to change, this time. It will take yet another defeat when their new morality is not accepted before they will begin to change.
And my advice to my right-wing politically minded friends: stay alert. Be ready to confront this new way of thinking before it takes hold in your less conscientious friends. Be prepared to reiterate that the issue of abortion is much more important that any other moral issue. With regard to other issues like the war or helping the poor, be ready to talk about ways that the Republicans try to accomplish much of the same thing. Remember, conservatives (most of us) have a different idea of HOW to help the poor. The methodology is not a question of morality, it is merely a different idea. It is not immoral for the government to support greater charitable giving from an individual to a charity (as opposed to the socialist idea that the government will take it all and THEY will decide how to fairly distribute it). Gird your loins, friends, we’ve got work to do.
I am a Christian
by Maya Angelou
When I say… “I am a Christian”
I’m not shouting “I’m clean livin.”
I’m whispering “I was lost,”
Now I’m found and forgiven.
When I say…”I am a Christian”
I don’t speak of this with pride.
I’m confessing that I stumble
and need CHRIST to be my guide.
When I say… “I am a Christian”
I’m not trying to be strong.
I’m professing that I’m weak
and need HIS strength to carry on.
When I say… “I am a Christian”
I’m not bragging of success.
I’m admitting I have failed
and need God to clean my mess.
When I say… “I am a Christian”
I’m not claiming to be perfect,
My flaws are far too visible but,
God believes I am worth it.
When I say… “I am a Christian”
I still feel the sting of pain,
I have my share of heartaches
So I call upon His name.
When I say… “I am a Christian”
I’m not holier than thou,
I’m just a simple sinner
who received God’s good grace, somehow.
It is two days after election day. I am thankful that the ordeal is over and hope we can all get back to the business of being Americans and not pro-Bushies or pro-Kerries or anti-Kerries or anti-Bushies. I am thankful that we do not have a drawn out process full of hanging chads and recounts and litigation.
I am completely saddened at the high level of negetive emotions that have been displayed over the last few months. From my perspective, the anti-Bushies (the Michael Moore devoutees) have been completely consumed by a hatred directed at the person of George Bush. They desire, not only, to see him removed from office, but actually wish physical harm to come his way. Wouldn’t it be nice, they ponder, if someone just simply assassinated him?
I do not see this level of ill-will directed at John Kerry. I myself do not like the man’s policies. I have no opinion of him as a person, beyond my usual judgement about his character (or lack thereof). I admit that I have high standards when it comes to evaluating a person’s integrity, but the consolation I offer is forgiveness for not meeting those high standards. In other words, I have limited respect for the policies and values of someone who does not uphold my high standards, but I readily say, “It’s not his fault – he’s just swallowed the notion that morality is dictated by popular vote and not natural law.”
Of course, forgiveness for this mentality does not equate to any desire to see the person running the country.
But at least my attitude to John Kerry is one of annoyance at his limited viewpoint, his failure to understand human nature, his insistence of believing falsehoods as truths. But hatred? No. Especially not directed at him personally.
So, my thoughts go back four years to our last election. Was the level of hatred the same? I definitely did not feel intense hatred towards Al Gore. My attitude was much the same as that towards John Kerry. I had no desire to see him President, but did not feel all consumed by an intense loathing of him or his policies. I do think the personal hatred toward George Bush began four years ago with the perceived notion that he stole the election. But, of course, those who hated him had a limited arsenal of things to hate – he hadn’t done anything yet.
But I force myself to go back even farther to the years of Bill Clinton. Did conservatives have the same sort of personal hatred toward Clinton as the liberals have toward Bush? My instictive answer is “No…no way!” And it’s an emphatic answer, too. Yet every time I try to recall those emotions I felt those many years ago, my mind turns from the task. This leads me to suspect that the emotions did, in fact, run deep. The man’s bulbous nose still evokes a roiling of the stomach. Of all the people on the planet, I think Clinton would be one of the last I’d be interested in meeting. Perhaps his wife is #2. Did I wish him death? Perhaps I might have hoped for a sudden heart attack….except of course, that this would mean an Al Gore presidency. I am pretty sure that I never wished upon him the agonizing death I’ve heard desribed by one anti-Bushie who wanted to personally shoot the president with numerous shots to his extremities in the hopes of a slow and painful death.
So, did I hate the man, Bill Clinton? Yes, at the time I directed my hatred to the man AND his policies and not just to the policies. Do I still hate the man? No. He repulses me, but that’s not hatred. That’s the same gut reaction one might have when accosted by a beggar with leprosy. It is not an appropriate reaction, but a purely human one.
Will the anti-Bushies hate the man, George Bush, ten years from now? It is undoubtedly true. Liberals continue to despise Ronald Reagan and rejoice in his demise. They probably would have rejoiced in his illness, except that his mind was not able to comprehend it, and they would wish upon him an end of full consciousness of its misery.
What baffles me most, though, about these hate mongers who personally depise the President and wish him and his family and anyone like them ill, is THEIR insistance that conservatives are filled with hate. It seems to me a case of pointing out the splinter in your neighbor’s eye while ignoring the log in your own.
I know that most of the problem stems from the perception that the policies of social conservatives are xyz-ophobic or anti-abc. If we oppose gay marriage, we are homophobic. If we oppose illegal immigration, we are xenophobic. If we oppose abortion, we are anti-woman. If we oppose high taxes, we are anti-poor.
I’m sure the farthest thing from their minds is that social conservatives envision a better America…a more loving America…a freer America.
I explained to Bill last night: I think there was a time when society cared most about producing a better society. And that meant, promoting good and protecting children. It meant enforcing public decency. It meant encouraging behavior that was best for children and families, the building blocks of society and the seed of the future. It meant personal sacrifice for the good of all.
Today, this concept is seen as oppressive. We have freedom of speech, which includes foul language in public places. We have freedom of expression, which includes the right of young people to wear revealing clothing and grope each other in public. We have freedom of religion, which includes the right to attack or belittle other religions. We believe that no one, and certainly not the government, has any right to infringe upon our ability to do whatever we want and whenever we want. We can marry…we can divorce. If children are hurt by this, too bad.
Speaking of which, I have a student in my CCD class. I don’t know which one. I think it’s a girl. At the end of class, I ask each student to write a prayer request on a slip of paper which is placed in a prayer box. They are not read aloud, but I read them after class. Apparently this child’s parents are going through a divorce. Every week, without fail, she prays for their reunion. She doesn’t pray for their happiness. She doesn’t give a crap about THEIR happiness. All she cares about is HER happiness, which is non-existant in the current situation. I know many people think that a child would be happier in a divorced home, because living with two people who dislike each other would, in theory, be miserable. I propose that it is only miserable for the adults, and the children care little about how their parents feel about it. But there is an overriding right of parents to happiness, and it matters little that their children suffer immensely.
Wouldn’t it be nice if we all lived in a bubble and our actions had no effect on others?
Someone once said that freedom does NOT mean being able to do whatever you want. FREEDOM MEANS BEING ABLE TO DO THE RIGHT THING. We can’t do whatever we want. Our actions DO have an effect on others. We can’t kill our neighbor. We can’t steal from the grocery store or the mall. We can’t drive recklessly or at outrageous speeds. We can worship (or not) however we choose. We can publicly denounce a wrong action by another or by the government. We can get together in small or large numbers and have meetings about whatever we want and can do so on public property with proper permits. We can vote and can encourage others to vote and we can complain or celebrate those results.
And we can wait peacefully until the next election to change the government if we don’t like the way the current one is running things. And while we wait, we can work on grass roots efforts to educate others about the problems we see.
I can’t believe that it’s been a month since I posted something. I’ve been tired and uninspired. Bill is working nearly 200 miles away and comes home on the weekends. Nobody is happy with this situation. It’s a very stressful time.
On a good note, I’m about ready to declare victory against the squirrels. They’ve been eating the bird food and getting me pretty angry. I finally rigged a wire from one branch to another and dropped the feeder on a wire from the middle of that. I haven’t seen them on it in about a week. Of course, they might just be plotting a way, but we’ll see.
It’s not like I don’t feed them, too. The kids don’t like the crust, so the squirrels get PB&J on whole wheat nearly every day. I started feeding them regularly after they chomped through the plastic lid to my garbage can. It was last winter, but the winter wasn’t that bad. The lazy squirrels just didn’t store up enough nuts. My trees are oak, so there were plenty of acorns, they had no excuse. I was actually giving them leftover mixed nuts from the holidays. Having cashews when you’re used to acorns is like having filet mignon when you usually have hamburger.
So now they’re spoiled and don’t know how to fend for themselves. I hope the new tenents are as nice as I am or they will surely starve.
The baby is up often during the night. She wants to sleep only in my arms attached to a breast.
Sleeping in a semi-upright position on the couch is like charging a cell phone while it’s on. You don’t get a good charge, and eventually the battery wears out.
This has been going on for two weeks now.
I am so tired…
Reit This Way 