Abigail

"What if YOUR child became a pedophile as an adult because of a traumatic experience he or she had suffered as a child at the hands of a pedophile?" It would break my heart beyond repair. I am the mother of two boys and I cannot even begin to imagine the horror of it, nor can I say with a certainty what I would do if the hypothetical were reality. But given the hypothetical and thankfully and hopefully never faced with the reality - I would say kill him and help stop the cycle so more children don't grow up to be just like that.

"But what if my child had become a victim? Sure, the perp would be dealt with. But what of the ticking time bom that MAY have been set? Do I ignore it, pretend nothing happened, hope for the best? Do I hound my child with threats and supplications not to "turn out like that?" Do I stick her in counseling three days a week until she's 18? And what if none of it worked? What if, like the innocent bitten by a b-movie vampire, the curse is transferred? Do I then have her "dealt with?"" YES! Because it is only by keeping these people off the streets and away from our children that we stop the cycle, so to speak. Michigan is currently working on legistlation that would set a MINIMUM 25 year prison sentence for anyone convincted of a CSC I or II against a child under 13. It would further require they be on an electronic tether for life, once released. Its a start. Two days ago I wrote a letter to my Senator, asking her to support this bill. I explained that there are 4 convicted peodphiles living within 5 blocks of my home. One lives right next to an elementary school, two live right next door to each other, and one is already a repeat offender. These pervs get to live free, - come and go as they please. As a result, my children cannot ride their bikes around the block without adult supervision. My back yard now has a 6' privacy fence around it with locked gates, as well. Why do the criminals get to live free, while the innocent children must remain locked up?!? And BowTWI is correct. Because of our criminal injustice system, it is even imparative that parents keep an extremely watchful eye on their children. Like Bow, I am very cautious about who I leave my children with. Only my sister and the parents of two of my son's friends have earned enough of my trust - and that after I did a background check on the parents. Likewise, I don't let my kids wander the neighborhood or go to parks without an adult. It is tough, as my 9 year old certainly feels he should be able to ride is bike to the park to play without me. This past winter we bought some two-way radios, and I have agreed to let him ride his bike around the block WITH friends, as long as he has the radio so we can stay in contact. Thankfully, as much as a part of him resents my "over-protectiveness", it does also give him a sense of securty. Last weekend he was riding bikes in the alley and radioed me that he was coming in because there was an adult in the alley that was making him nervous. I congratulated him and told him I was very proud of him for trusting his instincts. But how sad it is, that at 9 he is so painfully aware of the dangers of being a child. How sad that such dangers even exhist!

"so at least have the honesty to drop yourself and spare us the trouble of rooting you out, because we will do so if you don’t mean business" In other words, they'll be expecting a detailed report of how you spend every penny. I wonder if they pulled credit reports on Way Corps. to verify they had no debt? "in essence you say that you are perfectly happy with the way you are living your lives and you don’t give a d@mn what Don or I think" Shame, shame, shame on them for daring to use the brain God gave them! "It’s also very clear from your letters and from your lives that XXXX is not the spiritual head of his family. That sin alone would necessitate being dropped from the WC. I don’t know who you all think you are, but you better wake up." And how dare any man think his wife would know what is best for their family - surely those at HQ who barely know you, would know much more about your life than some silly woman!

(((SafariVista)))) Happy Birthday, girl!!! Where the heck are ya?

Thank you, everyone! Breakfast was heavenly with Star Bucks, bagels, and lox. I also have a brand new radio/tape/cd player for my new office at work! I spent my day yesterday cleaning and doing my part to "change the system" so today I could take the day off. :)

"if that is the point then how is twi responsible for some of the less than desirable behaviours some of their people did?" Responsible for all of it? no. But they are certainly responsible for encouraging some of that less than desirable behavior - and yes, they did encourage some of it. They also layed a foundation that allowed some less than desirable behaviours to flourish. "could they control them did they have Power over people ?" To somede degree or another, yes. They had the power, for example, to demote or remove abusive leadership. They likewise had the responsibility. If they can kick people out for asking honest questions, why could they not kick people out, or demote them, for publicly humiliating others? for encouraging abusive behaviors in others? "did they decide who would marry whom?" In some situations, yes. TWI did arrange marriages in some cases and in some cases they strongly encouraged marriages between couples who might otherwise have not married. " did they tell you who to leave your kids with? " Yes, they did. They also told us who NOT to leave our kids with. "sounds like a double standard really. good question at what point is anyone accountable for other folks behaviour? " We are accountable to the degree that we have influence over another, for when and how we use that influence. No man lives on an island. When my spouse decided I was not allowed to have anyone in my home without tracking him down at work first and getting his permission, leadership backed him up. When my spouse decided I was not allowed to listen to anything but TWI music, leadership backed him up. Both of those are arguments I may very well have prevailed in, had leadership not supported my spouse in them. They are responsible for the influence they weilded, and how they used it. When I sought out marriage counseling with my spouse, ultimately the counselor could not help us, in part, because TWI taught my spouse that these "worldly counselors" were devilish and did not know "The Word". Yes, TWI is responsible to some degree for all of the above because it came from people whom they gave power to, via placing them in leadership positions and via the doctrine the taught.

I don't think it was about "turning women into men". I think it was about letting you know you weren't good enough no matter what your gender, no matter who you were. I was a fairly "opinionated" person, in that I wasn't afraid to say what I thought, until about my last 5 years in TWI. So for me, the experience wasn't that I was "too weak" or "too emotional", it was that I was too "opinionated" and "not submissive". Ultimately, the goal was to keep us feeling insecure, off balance, and unable to trust ourselves, so that we would trust and obey the leadership instead.

We were once reprove for being 5 minutes early instead of the mandatory 10 minutes early.

and boundaries, Mark. Dignity and boundaries. Predators are very good at slowly moving back your personal boundaries. It is a "testing" of how far they can go. Once they've seen that they can, in fact, inch your boundaries back, they move in for the kill. TWI was GREAT at inching boundaries back.

"If a Christian leader functions correctly within the body of Christ, there is no need for him to ask the question that Martindale asked. Except when some/most of his sargeants, lieutenants, captains and such, are possibly/probably thinking that the leader is ineffective, off the wall, corrupt, worshipping other gods, etc. At that point, a line has to be drawn. It is incumbent upon the leader to ask/request/demand of his sargeants, lieutenants, captains and such, where they stand." Actually, Oldies there are other options. If most of year "sargeants" etc. are thiking that you are an ineffetive leader, off the wall, corrupt, etc. then maybe it is time to take a good hard look in the mirror, instead of just demanding they swear loyalty to you. In hind sight especially, this would have been a good idea.

that is truly sad news, Hills. We love that movie and I use that phrase with the boys on a regular basis regarding the crazy ideas they get into their heads.

hahahahahahahaha roflmao Our wonderful Sushi and I are the same way. He's the rule follower and I'm the rule breaker. I am always asking him, what is the point of that rule? Or telling him, yes in general it is a good rule and then coming up with all kinds of circumstances that would be the exception to that good rule. I think I make him dizzy sometimes.

The others are right. I know the boy's principal got a pie in the face for a contest earlier this year. BUT I would never advise someone to just ignore their gut either. So, I would ask instead, have you met the gym teacher? Does HE make you feel creepy or is is it simply the prize? If it is the latter, maybe you should meet him and see what your gut tells you then. If it is the former, then I might suggest some further investigation.

Happy Birthday (((Radar)))

Has your doctor referred you to a nutricionist/dietician? If not I would ask for such a referral. If you are disciplined enough to follow a dieticians recommendations, in combination with exercise, reduced or eliminated caffeen and alcohol intake, you may very well succeed at lowering your cholesterol without medication. However, if you can't, then depending on how high your cholesterol levels are, particularly your triglycerides, you should give serious consideration to the medication.

Spare the child, spoil the rod. I'm not as think as you dumb I am. hair of the bit that dogged ya. Every thorn has a rose. You make a better window that a door. no gain no pain you bless God A penny saved is a penny earned. birds of a stick feather together.

There is no solution to "pop culture", per se. There is, however, a solution in how we raise our kids. The moral values we teach them, the supervision, guidence, and boundaries we provide for them. And equally important, our ability and persistence in having honest communication with them. Even with all of that, there are no guarantees our kids won't at least experiment at some point in time. But at least they will have a good foundation and a loving family to fall back on when they are done with their experiments and ready to really grow up. Personally, I think ExC's son hit the nail on the head. It's about attention and shock value. But most kids who come from loving homes and have good relationships with their parents won't need that kind of attention either at all, or for very long if they do seek it out. And Laleo makes some valuable points too. Keeping them occupied with other activities. Kids who are bored or often kids who end up in trouble.

The link to the dateline story is HERE. They've actually been doing a series on this topic. They have caught people from all walks of life, including teachers, a rabbi, a criminal investigator for the Department of Homeland Security, military personnel, you name it. They've also caught a number of men who had extensive criminal records, many of them violent and many of them with a history of preying on children. One man had just been arrested 5 months prior to the show for having oral sex with a 15 year old boy and already was back on the streets, preying on kids again. What continues to amaze me is that our society keeps letting these men out again! OH yeah, you can also go to pervertedjustice.com and learn more there.

Mark, if you get to be the token Catholic, can I be the token Jew? I don't believe in the trinity either. Welcome Protint - have some coffee on me. Well, on second thought, I'd rather I weren't wearing it.

I am just stunned. I do believe this is the first time a show has been posted that I actually watched growing up. And not just one, but two! So I'll just say, Sudo's show is definitely NOT Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Kathy's is NOT the Hulk. :)

Cath, Sushi asked me to post this for him. Oh how sad they sound the songs the queen must sing of dying A prisoner upon her throne, the melancholy sighing If she could see her mirror now She would be free of those who bow and Scrape the ground beneath her feet Silently she walks among them dying midnight roses Watches as each moment goes that never really knows her And so it seems she doesn't care If she has dreams of no one there Within the shadows of her room But all my frozen words agree, and say it's time to Call back all the birds I sent to Fly behind her castle walls, and I'm Weary of the nights I've seen Inside these empty halls Wooden lady turn and turn among my weary secrets And wave within the hours past and other empty pockets Maybe we've found what we have lost When we've unwound so many crossed and tangled misunderstandings; But all my frozen words agree and say it's time to Call back all the birds I sent to Fly behind her castle walls, and I'm Weary of the nights I've seen Inside these empty halls

See Me, Has the law itself actually been written or are you trying to get someone on the legistlature to write the law? I am curious because I passed your blog on to a friend of mine who also has a rather popular blog and asked her to post it. She wrote me back and said the law was too broad and she wasn't comfortable with it. She and I have some rather big differences when it comes to "politics" so I thought I should check and read the language of the law itself, but couldn't find it.

Mark, I really appreciate your willingness and effort to look at all sides of an issue! And I agree it is a very difficult issue, not at all black and white. I feel compelled to add, as a woman and a mother, I think it is the rare woman who lightly makes a decision to have an abortion. A friend of mine recently posted an incident on his blog about his grandmother. She had 5 children and the family was living in serious poverty. She became pregnant with a 6th child and knew she would not be able to care for another one. They were already dealing with choices between paying bills and eating food, and struggling to pay for healthcare costs for their family. Naturally, in her day, abortion was not legal. She opted to have an illegal abortion and died from complications at the age of 30. Now, in reading this, you have to keep in mind that was a MARRIED woman with 5 children. I would imagine she loved those children and could have loved a 6th child as well. Additionally, in her day, women did not usually work outside the home (and how could you while raising 5 kids?). Birth control was not yet legal in every state (I don't know whether it was or not where she lived). Women were to submit to their husbands and were still, to a degree, treated as property. Therefore, one cannot assume she recklessly and carelessly got pregnant again. I recognize circumstances are somewhat different today, in terms of the availability of birth control, etc. But even birth control is not always a guarantee, even when used properly. Likewise, even today in the day of Roe v Wade, there are poverty stricken women who cannot afford an abortion. Yes, there are those who will take "charity cases". However, poverty stricken women are often very poorly educated and may not have the knowledge or the resources to find those who would help them. Food for thought.

Hope you have a safe trip home. I'm really glad you had a "mostly" great time!

here's the thing Mark, I would imagine that there are probably at least a few instances where a woman was denied a medically necessary abortion pre Roe v Wade. But finding it is going to be very difficult. For one thing, the era we are discussing was not one where things like sexuality were openly discussed. An abortion, necessary or by choice, was even less talked about. In addition, the most likely candidate to be denied a medically necessary abortion would be a woman living in poverty. I am not entirely clear on what point you are trying to make here, but if the point is that for the most part, medically necessary abortions have been allowed even before Roe v Wade, you would be correct.