Jan 18th 2011 4:28PM The issue that bothers me the most in most discussions about parenting is that just about everyone confuses discipline with punishment. Children can be quite strictly disciplined yet have almost no punishment involved. Discipline (control) has to start early, be consistent, and be shown to be done out of love. Kids aren't stupid. They know when something is being done for their sake rather than that of the parent. Punishment is usually the last (but sometimes first) resort of a person who is himself or herself undisciplined.
Jan 18th 2011 4:21PM The issue that bothers me the most in most discussions about parenting is that just about everyone confuses discipline with punishment. Children can be quite strictly disciplined yet have almost no punishment involved. Discipline (control) has to start early, be consistent, and be shown to be done out of love. Kids aren't stupid. They know when something is being done for their sake rather than that of the parent. Punishment is usually the last (but sometimes first) resort of a person who is himself or herself undisciplined.
Jan 18th 2011 4:07PM Let's see, we now have Tiger Mom's, and Momma Grizzlies. What's next, Momma Crocodiles? Here in central Pennsylvania we have a lot of Momma Elephants, but that's got nothing to do with parenting - just eating. What I want to know is where and what species are the fathers in these animal-oriented family units? Geldings perhaps?
Jan 11th 2011 2:37PM If this guy Volkmann is a "Doctor" of chiropractic, it means he took a one year course comprised of 2 parts. 1. A little bit of human anatomy and 2. a big part of self promotional propaganda. Anyone claiming to have benefited from vsiting a "Doctor" of chiropractic is either delusional or just likes the "putting on of hands" therapy. A good hooker would do a lot more for most men than a chiropractor. There is no medical intervention which chiropractors actually provide.
Jun 16th 2010 10:09PM As a sailor of sorts, I would personally have a serious problem with agreeing to allow a 16 year old young woman (or young man) attempt to sail such a voyage alone. Just too many things to go disastrously wrong. But I find equal disagreement with parents who do all sorts of things to enhance a child's notoriety. Whether it be in highly competitive sports, theater, the arts, entertainment or any other pursuit. The key question seems to be whether the endeavor is in the child's best interest or that of the parents' (or some other person). The truth of the matter is that there is always a tension between wanting a child to live up to his or her full potential, versus pushing a child to some harmful extreme. The fact is that there is no one good answer, and therein lies the challenge of trying to be a good parent.
Jun 16th 2010 9:38PM The title of "worst father of the year" belongs to that man who would make that claim about someone else. There is a wise old French saying, "When the husband strays, the wife is not without blame, and when the wife sins, the husband is also guilty". Or words to that effect. As far as Tiger is concerned, he has a problem he is attempting to deal with. Only someone sicker than he is would view his unhealthy "sexual need" as some sort of moral lapse. Give the guy a break. Too many put him on a pedestal, it's not his fault he was not up to THEIR expectations.
May 22nd 2010 3:06PM I wonder if the same male chauvinist cretins who agree with this excommunication would say the same thing about "protecting life" if that life were a tumor growing in the Bishop Tommy Olmsted's prostate gland? It is, afterall, a life form, with cells replicating, seeking to grow and migrate to other areas of the body. Oh I see, since the cathoholic church is run by (queer) males, walking around in dresses all day, they get to interpret "god's will". Oh yes I also forgot, their "god" is another one of those male chauvinist pigs who has a hard-on for women, but not the healthy kind.
May 20th 2010 7:25PM Down here in the good old US of A we had a Cheney who trashed the whole damn country. Count yourself lucky.
May 8th 2010 2:38PM What if one were to suppose, just for argument sake, that the comments about African Americans, as a group, being of lower intellectual capability, were true. I don't think it's true, but let's suppose for a minute it were. My question is this, what the *##%@@* difference does it make with regard to how indivudual "whites" and "blacks" interact with one another, or how they are subject to the laws regarding racial discrimination? For example, clearly Barack Obama is more intellegent than many whites, certainly many I have known. But if as a group, any one ethnic group were to test lower in its mean intelligence score, I don't see that it would make an iota of difference in how people should be treated under the law or how they interact with each other. Nor might such a result necessarily be viewed as racist. To me, racism is not about how one group compares to another by any measure. Racism is about how individuals and groups are treated.
Apr 15th 2010 9:45AM As the Romans would say, "In vino veritas" - in wine one finds the truth.