Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] There are lies and there are lies, was guns
Lynda
Well, I'd rather my kids lied till they were blue in the face than that they
play with guns and accidently kill a playmate or themselves.
I think laying down absolutes doesn't accomplish anything. Each incident
should be judged on its own merits. There are gray areas in all things.
Until children reach an age where they either feel comfortable putting their
own two feet down or aren't too shy to take things into their own two hands,
I think the use of parents is a very acceptable safety measure!
Do you teach your children that they should respond in all situations with
absolute truth? My kids were in a situation not too long ago which is a
perfect illustration of the truth not being a good thing. We were at the
grocery store and one of the little girls from youngest kidlet's softball
team was there with her mother and their new addition. Now, if you want
honesty, this baby was sooo ugly it could give a person nightmares! The
usual conversation was going on about "oh what a cute/sweet/pretty/doesn't
she look just like/you are so lucky" blah, blah blah. Well, one of the
lol's turns to youngest kidlet and says, "Don't you think Marissa is pretty?
Don't you think Sara is lucky to have such a pretty little sister? Don't you
wish you could have a pretty little sister just like Marissa?" Honesty
would have required a "No, I don't think she's pretty, No, I don't think
Sara is lucky (by now the baby was screaming at the top of her lungs) and
No, I don't want a little sister like Marissa." Would you require that
"no?"
Lynda
play with guns and accidently kill a playmate or themselves.
I think laying down absolutes doesn't accomplish anything. Each incident
should be judged on its own merits. There are gray areas in all things.
Until children reach an age where they either feel comfortable putting their
own two feet down or aren't too shy to take things into their own two hands,
I think the use of parents is a very acceptable safety measure!
Do you teach your children that they should respond in all situations with
absolute truth? My kids were in a situation not too long ago which is a
perfect illustration of the truth not being a good thing. We were at the
grocery store and one of the little girls from youngest kidlet's softball
team was there with her mother and their new addition. Now, if you want
honesty, this baby was sooo ugly it could give a person nightmares! The
usual conversation was going on about "oh what a cute/sweet/pretty/doesn't
she look just like/you are so lucky" blah, blah blah. Well, one of the
lol's turns to youngest kidlet and says, "Don't you think Marissa is pretty?
Don't you think Sara is lucky to have such a pretty little sister? Don't you
wish you could have a pretty little sister just like Marissa?" Honesty
would have required a "No, I don't think she's pretty, No, I don't think
Sara is lucky (by now the baby was screaming at the top of her lungs) and
No, I don't want a little sister like Marissa." Would you require that
"no?"
Lynda
----- Original Message -----
From: <SandraDodd@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 1:56 PM
Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] guns
> << I also waited for a time of maturity when my dd
> would be able to separate the honest person she is from a moment of crisis
> that may call for lying. Yes, I do believe there are rare events which a
> higher calling takes precedence. >>
>
> I was discussing all this with a close friend last night. On another list
> we're on, the past few days have also involved guns and honesty,
> coincidently, and that was about what factors might affect or totally
> preclude an SCA teacher/student relationship. Monday I had written that
> although I don't like or have guns, gun ownership wouldn't be a big factor
> for me with students, but honesty was my big #1.
>
> So in telling him that this list had come to the juncture of guns and
honesty
> too, on the the next day, he made this point:
>
> If a child is taught that there are times when lying is acceptable, the
> parents should not be surprised when the children then lie to the parents.
> Moments of crisis and rare events will happen between teens and parents.
>
> And I didn't mean toy guns. I meant that I would rather give my children
> real guns to play with than to teach them to lie.
>
> Sandra
>
>
> Message boards, timely articles, a free newsletter and more!
> Check it all out at: http://www.unschooling.com
>
> Addresses:
> Post message: [email protected]
> Unsubscribe: [email protected]
> List owner: [email protected]
> List settings page: http://www.egroups.com/group/Unschooling-dotcom
>
>
[email protected]
Marty says, "Not if it's going to hurt someone's feelings. I'd say 'Yeah,
she's lucky.'"
Holly's saying she might say "I wish I had a little sister" or "I wish I was
still a baby!"
There's a difference between not lying and telling hurtful, tactless "truth."
To say "That dress is hideous" isn't even necessarily truth! Some people say
things which either they don't believe (said for effect) or which are totally
subjective.
But if someone asked Holly, "Did you make that dress?" I wouldn't want her
to tell anything but whatever the truth was. Either she made it or I made it
or someone else did, or it was a hand-me-down, or whatever. Or maybe she
doesn't know. The "I don't know" is the answer.
It's the favorite red herring of people who want to defend dishonesty, to say
that if someone thinks truth is important that they will walk around telling
people "Your roots are showing" or "your baby is ugly."
It is possible to be kind and truthful. Even my kids do it.
Sandra
she's lucky.'"
Holly's saying she might say "I wish I had a little sister" or "I wish I was
still a baby!"
There's a difference between not lying and telling hurtful, tactless "truth."
To say "That dress is hideous" isn't even necessarily truth! Some people say
things which either they don't believe (said for effect) or which are totally
subjective.
But if someone asked Holly, "Did you make that dress?" I wouldn't want her
to tell anything but whatever the truth was. Either she made it or I made it
or someone else did, or it was a hand-me-down, or whatever. Or maybe she
doesn't know. The "I don't know" is the answer.
It's the favorite red herring of people who want to defend dishonesty, to say
that if someone thinks truth is important that they will walk around telling
people "Your roots are showing" or "your baby is ugly."
It is possible to be kind and truthful. Even my kids do it.
Sandra
[email protected]
In a message dated 2/7/01 11:11:18 PM Pacific Standard Time,
SandraDodd@... writes:
<< It is possible to be kind and truthful. Even my kids do it. >>
This much I agree with. It's actually easy to say something positive and not
lie. My dd is actually very good at this, quite sensitive to other's
feelings. She loves babies so I'm sure she might have just said exactly that.
Kris
SandraDodd@... writes:
<< It is possible to be kind and truthful. Even my kids do it. >>
This much I agree with. It's actually easy to say something positive and not
lie. My dd is actually very good at this, quite sensitive to other's
feelings. She loves babies so I'm sure she might have just said exactly that.
Kris
[email protected]
In a message dated 2/8/01 12:16:57 AM, SandraDodd@... writes:
<< But if someone asked Holly, "Did you make that dress?" I wouldn't want
her
to tell anything but whatever the truth was. Either she made it or I made it
or someone else did, or it was a hand-me-down, or whatever. Or maybe she
doesn't know. The "I don't know" is the answer. >>
Boy was *I* sleepy!! I thought I had started off with "where'd that dress
come from." I guess if the asked if she made it and she said "I don't know"
she'd be hard to carry conversations on with ANYtime!!
What I meant was if she didn't know where a dress came from "I don't know"
would be an honest answer.
Sorry to seem so dim, but it was late and I WAS dim!
Sandra
<< But if someone asked Holly, "Did you make that dress?" I wouldn't want
her
to tell anything but whatever the truth was. Either she made it or I made it
or someone else did, or it was a hand-me-down, or whatever. Or maybe she
doesn't know. The "I don't know" is the answer. >>
Boy was *I* sleepy!! I thought I had started off with "where'd that dress
come from." I guess if the asked if she made it and she said "I don't know"
she'd be hard to carry conversations on with ANYtime!!
What I meant was if she didn't know where a dress came from "I don't know"
would be an honest answer.
Sorry to seem so dim, but it was late and I WAS dim!
Sandra
Lynda
Sooo, when asked if she wanted a little sister just like that one, she
should have said "I don't know?" That would have been a lie! Her answer
was no! When asked, "Isn't the baby pretty?" She should have said "I don't
know." That would have been a lie. Her answer was no!
If you want to talk subjective, then you can't use an absolute as your
guidelines. I think it is kind of hard to justify an inflexible stand, "you
shall not lie under any circumstances" when you turn around and encourage
prevarication and equivocation.
And I'll say it again, there is no black and white! Everything has some
gray areas.
Lynda
should have said "I don't know?" That would have been a lie! Her answer
was no! When asked, "Isn't the baby pretty?" She should have said "I don't
know." That would have been a lie. Her answer was no!
If you want to talk subjective, then you can't use an absolute as your
guidelines. I think it is kind of hard to justify an inflexible stand, "you
shall not lie under any circumstances" when you turn around and encourage
prevarication and equivocation.
And I'll say it again, there is no black and white! Everything has some
gray areas.
Lynda
----- Original Message -----
From: <SandraDodd@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 11:10 PM
Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] There are lies and there are lies, was
guns
> Marty says, "Not if it's going to hurt someone's feelings. I'd say 'Yeah,
> she's lucky.'"
>
> Holly's saying she might say "I wish I had a little sister" or "I wish I
was
> still a baby!"
>
> There's a difference between not lying and telling hurtful, tactless
"truth."
>
>
> To say "That dress is hideous" isn't even necessarily truth! Some people
say
> things which either they don't believe (said for effect) or which are
totally
> subjective.
>
> But if someone asked Holly, "Did you make that dress?" I wouldn't want
her
> to tell anything but whatever the truth was. Either she made it or I made
it
> or someone else did, or it was a hand-me-down, or whatever. Or maybe she
> doesn't know. The "I don't know" is the answer.
>
> It's the favorite red herring of people who want to defend dishonesty, to
say
> that if someone thinks truth is important that they will walk around
telling
> people "Your roots are showing" or "your baby is ugly."
>
> It is possible to be kind and truthful. Even my kids do it.
>
> Sandra
>
>
>
> Message boards, timely articles, a free newsletter and more!
> Check it all out at: http://www.unschooling.com
>
> Addresses:
> Post message: [email protected]
> Unsubscribe: [email protected]
> List owner: [email protected]
> List settings page: http://www.egroups.com/group/Unschooling-dotcom
>
>
[email protected]
In a message dated 2/7/01 11:16:54 PM Pacific Standard Time,
SandraDodd@... writes:
<< It is possible to be kind and truthful. Even my kids do it.
wasn't in response to mine). My daughter's friend asked her if she liked her
haircut which she did not and she simply said, "It's not my style, but it
suits your personality." It was all true.
It was actually to the original example of a gun and other situations where
harm can come to someone that I was referring. While a lie is never the
preferred choice, I would not have my children sacrifice their lives or
well-being on the altar of the truth.
candice
~~~~~~
A single grateful thought toward heaven is the most complete prayer.
-Gotthold Lessing
SandraDodd@... writes:
<< It is possible to be kind and truthful. Even my kids do it.
>>As do mine. My point was not about tact, (and I recognize that this post
wasn't in response to mine). My daughter's friend asked her if she liked her
haircut which she did not and she simply said, "It's not my style, but it
suits your personality." It was all true.
It was actually to the original example of a gun and other situations where
harm can come to someone that I was referring. While a lie is never the
preferred choice, I would not have my children sacrifice their lives or
well-being on the altar of the truth.
candice
~~~~~~
A single grateful thought toward heaven is the most complete prayer.
-Gotthold Lessing
[email protected]
In a message dated 2/8/01 10:25:37 AM, czuniga145@... writes:
<< While a lie is never the
preferred choice, I would not have my children sacrifice their lives or
well-being on the altar of the truth.
be sacrificing their lives on the altar of truth is a bit much to defend
saying "I just remembered, I was supposed to be home ten minutes ago." "I'm
going home now" is sufficient, AND true.
<< While a lie is never the
preferred choice, I would not have my children sacrifice their lives or
well-being on the altar of the truth.
>>In the example being given, there was no reason to lie, and to say they would
be sacrificing their lives on the altar of truth is a bit much to defend
saying "I just remembered, I was supposed to be home ten minutes ago." "I'm
going home now" is sufficient, AND true.
[email protected]
In a message dated 2/8/01 10:33:52 AM, lurine@... writes:
<< And I'll say it again, there is no black and white! >>
There is a difference between saying something you KNOW is untrue and saying
something which is true and tactful and serves the same purpose.
-=-If you want to talk subjective, then you can't use an absolute as your
guidelines. I think it is kind of hard to justify an inflexible stand, "you
shall not lie under any circumstances" when you turn around and encourage
prevarication and equivocation.
-=-
I'm talking priorities and good judgment and compassion.
<< And I'll say it again, there is no black and white! >>
There is a difference between saying something you KNOW is untrue and saying
something which is true and tactful and serves the same purpose.
-=-If you want to talk subjective, then you can't use an absolute as your
guidelines. I think it is kind of hard to justify an inflexible stand, "you
shall not lie under any circumstances" when you turn around and encourage
prevarication and equivocation.
-=-
I'm talking priorities and good judgment and compassion.
[email protected]
In a message dated 2/8/01 10:05:41 AM Pacific Standard Time,
SandraDodd@... writes:
<< In the example being given, there was no reason to lie, and to say they
would
be sacrificing their lives on the altar of truth is a bit much to defend
saying "I just remembered, I was supposed to be home ten minutes ago." "I'm
going home now" is sufficient, AND true >>
Again, we chose the words specifically. Kids are smart and one kid suddenly
saying "I'm going home now" would be a strong clue that they are leaving
because of the gun. I want to remove ANY reason for them to try and stop
her. We considered the choice you suggested and decided that it was NOT
sufficient.
Within a short time the kids would know WHY she left because I would be
contacting the parents and, if necessary, the police.
Kris
SandraDodd@... writes:
<< In the example being given, there was no reason to lie, and to say they
would
be sacrificing their lives on the altar of truth is a bit much to defend
saying "I just remembered, I was supposed to be home ten minutes ago." "I'm
going home now" is sufficient, AND true >>
Again, we chose the words specifically. Kids are smart and one kid suddenly
saying "I'm going home now" would be a strong clue that they are leaving
because of the gun. I want to remove ANY reason for them to try and stop
her. We considered the choice you suggested and decided that it was NOT
sufficient.
Within a short time the kids would know WHY she left because I would be
contacting the parents and, if necessary, the police.
Kris
[email protected]
In a message dated 2/8/01 10:36:07 AM Pacific Standard Time,
SandraDodd@... writes:
<< In the example being given, there was no reason to lie, and to say they
would
be sacrificing their lives on the altar of truth is a bit much to defend
saying "I just remembered, I was supposed to be home ten minutes ago." "I'm
going home now" is sufficient, AND true. >>
No, I agree that it could be sufficient and true, except there are times when
other kids won't let you get out of it so easily, as I stated in my previous
post. I was referring to extreme situations such as that, as well as the ones
I listed before. We don't know what the circumstances of the gun play may be,
since it's hypothetical.
What if the kid replied, "No, you're not," while pointing the gun at my
daughter, and standing between her and the door? That's the kind of turn of
events I was imagining. The truth has been tried, now I want her to use her
wits, truth or no truth, to get out of there. At this point, no, I don't want
them sacrificing their lives so they can say they were honest.
candice
candice
~~~~~~
Más vale morir parado
que vivir de rodillas.
SandraDodd@... writes:
<< In the example being given, there was no reason to lie, and to say they
would
be sacrificing their lives on the altar of truth is a bit much to defend
saying "I just remembered, I was supposed to be home ten minutes ago." "I'm
going home now" is sufficient, AND true. >>
No, I agree that it could be sufficient and true, except there are times when
other kids won't let you get out of it so easily, as I stated in my previous
post. I was referring to extreme situations such as that, as well as the ones
I listed before. We don't know what the circumstances of the gun play may be,
since it's hypothetical.
What if the kid replied, "No, you're not," while pointing the gun at my
daughter, and standing between her and the door? That's the kind of turn of
events I was imagining. The truth has been tried, now I want her to use her
wits, truth or no truth, to get out of there. At this point, no, I don't want
them sacrificing their lives so they can say they were honest.
candice
candice
~~~~~~
Más vale morir parado
que vivir de rodillas.
[email protected]
In a message dated 2/8/01 6:26:23 PM, czuniga145@... writes:
<< What if the kid replied, "No, you're not," while pointing the gun at my
daughter, and standing between her and the door? >>
Does she know kids like that? Do you?
It sounds very much like a scene from a movie, and not even a very
imaginative movie. Sorry.
If you expect other people to act like dramatic movie characters, then I
guess you should have your own dramatic movie lines prepared.
So far I've disarmed (pun intended) more people with the truth than with any
thought-out dialog.
Perhaps it's a personality thing which my kids inherited. When they want to
leave a situation, they just leave, and the people they've walked away from
are usually well aware of why.
Sandra
<< What if the kid replied, "No, you're not," while pointing the gun at my
daughter, and standing between her and the door? >>
Does she know kids like that? Do you?
It sounds very much like a scene from a movie, and not even a very
imaginative movie. Sorry.
If you expect other people to act like dramatic movie characters, then I
guess you should have your own dramatic movie lines prepared.
So far I've disarmed (pun intended) more people with the truth than with any
thought-out dialog.
Perhaps it's a personality thing which my kids inherited. When they want to
leave a situation, they just leave, and the people they've walked away from
are usually well aware of why.
Sandra
[email protected]
In a message dated 2/8/01 5:45:31 PM Pacific Standard Time,
SandraDodd@... writes:
<< Does she know kids like that? Do you?
It sounds very much like a scene from a movie, and not even a very
imaginative movie. Sorry.>>
I didn't say it *has* happened, or that any of her friends *would* do it. It
was obviously meant to be hypothetical. But there are certainly kids who play
around like that all the time. When I grew up, I knew kids who though it was
funny to play on dangerous ways. I can't believe that is so unimaginable.
<<If you expect other people to act like dramatic movie characters, then I
guess you should have your own dramatic movie lines prepared. >>
Oh, okay. (sarcasm intended)
<<So far I've disarmed (pun intended) more people with the truth than with
any
thought-out dialog.
Perhaps it's a personality thing which my kids inherited. When they want to
leave a situation, they just leave, and the people they've walked away from
are usually well aware of why.
suggested they use wit when necessary. Although we have discussed what would
be wise to say or do in such situations, the other person doesn't always know
their lines.
I'm sure I've reiterated that I don't expect any of these instances to be
everyday situations. Sure, we can *usually* walk away from bad situations,
but it does not *always* work. I'm not discussing the usual, rather the
unusual.
candice
SandraDodd@... writes:
<< Does she know kids like that? Do you?
It sounds very much like a scene from a movie, and not even a very
imaginative movie. Sorry.>>
I didn't say it *has* happened, or that any of her friends *would* do it. It
was obviously meant to be hypothetical. But there are certainly kids who play
around like that all the time. When I grew up, I knew kids who though it was
funny to play on dangerous ways. I can't believe that is so unimaginable.
<<If you expect other people to act like dramatic movie characters, then I
guess you should have your own dramatic movie lines prepared. >>
Oh, okay. (sarcasm intended)
<<So far I've disarmed (pun intended) more people with the truth than with
any
thought-out dialog.
Perhaps it's a personality thing which my kids inherited. When they want to
leave a situation, they just leave, and the people they've walked away from
are usually well aware of why.
>>I didn't say they did or should have thought-out dialogue, which is why I
suggested they use wit when necessary. Although we have discussed what would
be wise to say or do in such situations, the other person doesn't always know
their lines.
I'm sure I've reiterated that I don't expect any of these instances to be
everyday situations. Sure, we can *usually* walk away from bad situations,
but it does not *always* work. I'm not discussing the usual, rather the
unusual.
candice
[email protected]
In a message dated 2/8/01 5:42:14 PM Pacific Standard Time,
SandraDodd@... writes:
<< Does she know kids like that? Do you? It sounds very much like a scene
from a movie, and not even a very imaginative movie. Sorry.>>
Yes and yes. I do not allow her, nor does she want to play in their homes.
She doesn't care to play with them at all. However, these kids have been
known to show up at the homes in which she is allowed to play.
Picturing one of the kids trying to stop her or pointing the gun towards her
is NO stretch of the imagination, nor is it a head "drama" for me. They have
become such a problem that they are known to every neighbor and rather than
deal with their parents (it gets nasty every time) folks now resort to
calling the police.
I'm truly happy for anyone who lives in a neighborhood free of this kind of
problem but it's a present threat in ours.
<<If you expect other people to act like dramatic movie characters, then I
guess you should have your own dramatic movie lines prepared.>>
Perhaps if you were living in our neighborhood the drama would be in YOUR
head. Are you assuming that the kids you encounter where you live are the
same that others do? Perhaps they are, perhaps MOST of them are but if
you've encountered kids similar to a few who live here I'm not sure you would
see the scenario as so fanciful.
Is it so far fetched to believe that those of us who make a choice that
diverges a bit from your own are capable of equally careful, judicious and
honest in making them?
<<So far I've disarmed (pun intended) more people with the truth than with
any
thought-out dialog.>>
Same here and I hope as much for my dd, she is already quite adept in this
area. When it comes to a crisis moment I have to use my best discernment in
equipping her with the tools to cope. I'm the only one who knows her
challenge areas so well.
As in most decisions made when parenting we have to access risk vs risk and
only WE can KNOW the risks we face. Our ethics effect these decisions but
I'm hoping that slight differences aren't fodder for diminishing one
another's concerns because we don't share them.
Kris
SandraDodd@... writes:
<< Does she know kids like that? Do you? It sounds very much like a scene
from a movie, and not even a very imaginative movie. Sorry.>>
Yes and yes. I do not allow her, nor does she want to play in their homes.
She doesn't care to play with them at all. However, these kids have been
known to show up at the homes in which she is allowed to play.
Picturing one of the kids trying to stop her or pointing the gun towards her
is NO stretch of the imagination, nor is it a head "drama" for me. They have
become such a problem that they are known to every neighbor and rather than
deal with their parents (it gets nasty every time) folks now resort to
calling the police.
I'm truly happy for anyone who lives in a neighborhood free of this kind of
problem but it's a present threat in ours.
<<If you expect other people to act like dramatic movie characters, then I
guess you should have your own dramatic movie lines prepared.>>
Perhaps if you were living in our neighborhood the drama would be in YOUR
head. Are you assuming that the kids you encounter where you live are the
same that others do? Perhaps they are, perhaps MOST of them are but if
you've encountered kids similar to a few who live here I'm not sure you would
see the scenario as so fanciful.
Is it so far fetched to believe that those of us who make a choice that
diverges a bit from your own are capable of equally careful, judicious and
honest in making them?
<<So far I've disarmed (pun intended) more people with the truth than with
any
thought-out dialog.>>
Same here and I hope as much for my dd, she is already quite adept in this
area. When it comes to a crisis moment I have to use my best discernment in
equipping her with the tools to cope. I'm the only one who knows her
challenge areas so well.
As in most decisions made when parenting we have to access risk vs risk and
only WE can KNOW the risks we face. Our ethics effect these decisions but
I'm hoping that slight differences aren't fodder for diminishing one
another's concerns because we don't share them.
Kris
[email protected]
In a message dated 2/8/01 7:48:05 PM, czuniga145@... writes:
<< I'm sure I've reiterated that I don't expect any of these instances to be
everyday situations. Sure, we can *usually* walk away from bad situations,
but it does not *always* work. I'm not discussing the usual, rather the
unusual.
encourage lying? (And honestly, I don't know who first told the story, and
so I'm not being personal. I haven't tracked who's said what so far.)
Sandra
<< I'm sure I've reiterated that I don't expect any of these instances to be
everyday situations. Sure, we can *usually* walk away from bad situations,
but it does not *always* work. I'm not discussing the usual, rather the
unusual.
>>My point is that not knowing what the other "players" are doing, why
encourage lying? (And honestly, I don't know who first told the story, and
so I'm not being personal. I haven't tracked who's said what so far.)
Sandra
[email protected]
In a message dated 2/8/01 7:00:46 PM Pacific Standard Time,
SandraDodd@... writes:
<< My point is that not knowing what the other "players" are doing, why
encourage lying? (And honestly, I don't know who first told the story, and
so I'm not being personal. I haven't tracked who's said what so far.)
it clearly enough. I do *not* encourage lying. My children and I have
discussed many ways to be honest when it is difficult to do so. My daughter
has amazed me with her ability to be tactful and wise in these situations. I
don't know who originally brought it up either, so I don't take it personally.
What I was saying is that in situations where the truth has not worked to get
them out of a dangerous situation, I would prefer that they lie rather than
fall victim to harm that could have been avoided with the right words.
The example I used was a rapist in my home asking me if there was anyone else
there. I wouldn't feel a need to be honest and reveal my daughter's presence.
Dramatic? Maybe. I was going for the extreme situations because they are the
exceptions to my ban on lying.
candice
SandraDodd@... writes:
<< My point is that not knowing what the other "players" are doing, why
encourage lying? (And honestly, I don't know who first told the story, and
so I'm not being personal. I haven't tracked who's said what so far.)
>>No, I'm afraid you've misunderstood what I was saying. Maybe I haven't said
it clearly enough. I do *not* encourage lying. My children and I have
discussed many ways to be honest when it is difficult to do so. My daughter
has amazed me with her ability to be tactful and wise in these situations. I
don't know who originally brought it up either, so I don't take it personally.
What I was saying is that in situations where the truth has not worked to get
them out of a dangerous situation, I would prefer that they lie rather than
fall victim to harm that could have been avoided with the right words.
The example I used was a rapist in my home asking me if there was anyone else
there. I wouldn't feel a need to be honest and reveal my daughter's presence.
Dramatic? Maybe. I was going for the extreme situations because they are the
exceptions to my ban on lying.
candice
Vicki A. Dennis
>Sandra said:
> In a message dated 2/8/01 10:25:37 AM, czuniga145@... writes:
>
> << While a lie is never the
> preferred choice, I would not have my children sacrifice their lives or
> well-being on the altar of the truth.
> In the example being given, there was no reason to lie, and to say they wouldA group of kids playing with a forbidden gun can easily lead to someone losing
> be sacrificing their lives on the altar of truth is a bit much to defend
> saying "I just remembered, I was supposed to be home ten minutes ago." "I'm
> going home now" is sufficient, AND true.
life. And my experience both in my own child/teen years and more recent
involvement in young lives would certainly lead me to conclude that "I'm going
home now" would be insufficient. I have no difficulty at all
understanding the truth of the statement that a child was supposed to be home
BEFORE the gun became a toy or treasure. Or that a teen was supposed to be
home before the keg came out at the party. Or before things got out of
hand at lovers lane. I encourage my children to think of home (and me!) as
a safe refuge and they KNOW I want them to be safe. If they are feeling
strong enough or safe enough to try to lecture to others involved, that is
fine..........but it is not at all necessary in my opinion. Perhaps young
people need more time and age to reach that point and I find part of my
responsibility as a parent to be helping them live long enough to reach that
point.
Vicki
Lynda
Gee, how soon we forget! Either that or you have no kids. And, not being
one to trust to my own memory, heaven forbid the accusations that would
follow that <g>, I asked a group of kids from three age groups.
While, the kids might not necessarily point a gun at anyone deliberately, it
is quite possible they would inadvertantly point the gun. But, 100% agreed
that regardless of age (8-10, 13 and 16 & 17 yo's), the concensus was that
they have never been able to leave a group gathering without the old "don't
go now," "why, now" and various other coercive statements. That is reality.
When I asked if there would be less of a problem if they used the excuse
given by whomever's daughter, the general concensus was that the kids
wouldn't try to stop the other kid from leaving but would probably give out
some teasing such as "you're gonna be in trouble" or something of that sort
and the child would be out the door with little or no trouble.
And what an adult may get away with and what a child will encounter or two
seperate animals.
Lynda
one to trust to my own memory, heaven forbid the accusations that would
follow that <g>, I asked a group of kids from three age groups.
While, the kids might not necessarily point a gun at anyone deliberately, it
is quite possible they would inadvertantly point the gun. But, 100% agreed
that regardless of age (8-10, 13 and 16 & 17 yo's), the concensus was that
they have never been able to leave a group gathering without the old "don't
go now," "why, now" and various other coercive statements. That is reality.
When I asked if there would be less of a problem if they used the excuse
given by whomever's daughter, the general concensus was that the kids
wouldn't try to stop the other kid from leaving but would probably give out
some teasing such as "you're gonna be in trouble" or something of that sort
and the child would be out the door with little or no trouble.
And what an adult may get away with and what a child will encounter or two
seperate animals.
Lynda
----- Original Message -----
From: <SandraDodd@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 5:41 PM
Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] There are lies and there are lies, was
guns
>
> In a message dated 2/8/01 6:26:23 PM, czuniga145@... writes:
>
> << What if the kid replied, "No, you're not," while pointing the gun at my
>
> daughter, and standing between her and the door? >>
>
> Does she know kids like that? Do you?
> It sounds very much like a scene from a movie, and not even a very
> imaginative movie. Sorry.
>
> If you expect other people to act like dramatic movie characters, then I
> guess you should have your own dramatic movie lines prepared.
>
> So far I've disarmed (pun intended) more people with the truth than with
any
> thought-out dialog.
>
> Perhaps it's a personality thing which my kids inherited. When they want
to
> leave a situation, they just leave, and the people they've walked away
from
> are usually well aware of why.
>
> Sandra
>
>
> Message boards, timely articles, a free newsletter and more!
> Check it all out at: http://www.unschooling.com
>
> Addresses:
> Post message: [email protected]
> Unsubscribe: [email protected]
> List owner: [email protected]
> List settings page: http://www.egroups.com/group/Unschooling-dotcom
>
>
Lynda
Make up your mind, you said the truth, period regardless absolute. Then you
qualified it.
Prevaricate: evade the truth, a substitute for a lie
Equivocate: the use of ambiguity
"Don't you think the baby is cute?" If you don't think the baby is cute
and, in fact, think the baby is ugly, to answer with "something" that is
truth but is not a direct answer to the question is to prevaricate, as in
"evade the truth, substitute for a lie."
In other words, a lie by any other name is still a lie.
Lynda
qualified it.
Prevaricate: evade the truth, a substitute for a lie
Equivocate: the use of ambiguity
"Don't you think the baby is cute?" If you don't think the baby is cute
and, in fact, think the baby is ugly, to answer with "something" that is
truth but is not a direct answer to the question is to prevaricate, as in
"evade the truth, substitute for a lie."
In other words, a lie by any other name is still a lie.
Lynda
----- Original Message -----
From: <SandraDodd@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 10:10 AM
Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] There are lies and there are lies, was
guns
>
> In a message dated 2/8/01 10:33:52 AM, lurine@... writes:
>
> << And I'll say it again, there is no black and white! >>
>
> There is a difference between saying something you KNOW is untrue and
saying
> something which is true and tactful and serves the same purpose.
>
> -=-If you want to talk subjective, then you can't use an absolute as your
> guidelines. I think it is kind of hard to justify an inflexible stand,
"you
> shall not lie under any circumstances" when you turn around and encourage
> prevarication and equivocation.
> -=-
>
> I'm talking priorities and good judgment and compassion.
>
>
>
>
> Message boards, timely articles, a free newsletter and more!
> Check it all out at: http://www.unschooling.com
>
> Addresses:
> Post message: [email protected]
> Unsubscribe: [email protected]
> List owner: [email protected]
> List settings page: http://www.egroups.com/group/Unschooling-dotcom
>
>
Ashling Ranch
Vicki,
Just tell 'em that they are supposed to be home (or leave) before
any of that stuff occurs. So whe / if it does, they are already late. :-)
. . .. and that's the truth!
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Vicki A. Dennis <mamaxaos@...>
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Date: Thursday, February 08, 2001 10:39 PM
Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] There are lies and there are lies, was
guns
Just tell 'em that they are supposed to be home (or leave) before
any of that stuff occurs. So whe / if it does, they are already late. :-)
. . .. and that's the truth!
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Vicki A. Dennis <mamaxaos@...>
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Date: Thursday, February 08, 2001 10:39 PM
Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] There are lies and there are lies, was
guns
>would
>>
>> In a message dated 2/8/01 10:25:37 AM, czuniga145@... writes:
>>
>> << While a lie is never the
>> preferred choice, I would not have my children sacrifice their lives or
>> well-being on the altar of the truth.
>
>Sandra said:
>> In the example being given, there was no reason to lie, and to say they
>> be sacrificing their lives on the altar of truth is a bit much to defend"I'm
>> saying "I just remembered, I was supposed to be home ten minutes ago."
>> going home now" is sufficient, AND true.losing
>
>A group of kids playing with a forbidden gun can easily lead to someone
>life. And my experience both in my own child/teen years and morerecent
>involvement in young lives would certainly lead me to conclude that "I'mgoing
>home now" would be insufficient. I have no difficulty at allhome
>understanding the truth of the statement that a child was supposed to be
>BEFORE the gun became a toy or treasure. Or that a teen was supposed tobe
>home before the keg came out at the party. Or before things got out ofas
>hand at lovers lane. I encourage my children to think of home (and me!)
>a safe refuge and they KNOW I want them to be safe. If they arefeeling
>strong enough or safe enough to try to lecture to others involved, that isyoung
>fine..........but it is not at all necessary in my opinion. Perhaps
>people need more time and age to reach that point and I find part of mythat
>responsibility as a parent to be helping them live long enough to reach
>point.
>
>Vicki
>
>
>
>
>
>Message boards, timely articles, a free newsletter and more!
>Check it all out at: http://www.unschooling.com
>
>Addresses:
>Post message: [email protected]
>Unsubscribe: [email protected]
>List owner: [email protected]
>List settings page: http://www.egroups.com/group/Unschooling-dotcom
>
>
[email protected]
In a message dated 2/9/01 12:06:29 AM, lurine@... writes:
<< "Don't you think the baby is cute?" If you don't think the baby is cute
and, in fact, think the baby is ugly, to answer with "something" that is
truth but is not a direct answer to the question is to prevaricate, as in
"evade the truth, substitute for a lie."
In other words, a lie by any other name is still a lie.
My whole life there have been people who were determined to prove I lied, and
that a policy of truthfulness wasn't possible. Nobody's proven it yet, and
I'm 47. If it makes you feel better about your own practices and theories to
believe strongly that it's not possible, then you're doing something with
yourself, and not to me.
But at this point in the discussion it does seem pretty personal. Like this,
for example: -=-Gee, how soon we forget! Either that or you have no kids.
-=-
-=-And what an adult may get away with and what a child will encounter or two
seperate animals.__
Then perhaps it is my children's luxury of never having been to school, and
hanging out with families either they have chosen or we their parents have
chosen because of philosophical similarities (La Leche League, Society for
Creative Anachronism, homeschooling), or intelligence or SOMETHING somehow
selective, and my kids' self confidence or something.
There is one boy they hang around with who has gotten Marty in minor trouble
a couple of times. Once the police stopped and talked to them because they
were out walking around at night and had made too much noise. But right in
front of the other kid I told Marty (and so him along with it) that Marty
needed to agree with or veto all actions, and he couldn't blame kidx, and
that kidx needed to NOT push Marty, or he wasn't coming over anymore. But
they came right in reporting that the police had talked to them and told them
to "run home" (from half a mile and some) and that the policeman was going
to come and talk to me and they better be home.
He lied. And that half mile was too far and too dangerous to run, in the
dark, next to a major road. And I tried hard not to say "Well he lied," but
I really did not appreciate a law officer lying to my son.
I wish he HAD come and talked to me and to them. It would have been more
effective.
But they've not yet since been in trouble and they hang around much in groups
of four or six and the other kids would tell me or hint if those two had been
difficult. They're 12 and 13.
I have not only the three children I have now (9, 12, 14), but had custody of
my accidental half-brother for a few years, in the early/mid 1980's (a
habitual liar, fetal alcohol syndrome, raised in very sad situation, which is
why my mother relinquished parental rights. And that was after I had married
a friend in 1975 because his parents both died in very short time and his 10
and 12 year old siblings were going to be taken away (a long story). With
them, lying was not common, but was done sneakily to "keep peace," but it
only kept peace for that moment, until the truth was found out and there were
ten units of work/talk to make up for that one unit of peace.
Having grown up carefully honest, this confirmed my theories.
My husband and I have known one another since 1977, and I know of no lies
which have passed between us. Is it genetic? Are we naturally brave and
confident? That could be, as there seem some people who are naturally timid
and easily led. Maybe what we believe is training and values passed down is
more genetic.
To have my awareness, honest and motherhood questioned in public should hurt
me, and twenty years ago would have, but now I'm used to it. It doesn't
change the truth.
Sandra
P.S. I HAVE been asked directly "Isn't she cute?" about babies and have
said "Some people think all babies are cute, but I never have." (Which is
true.) and "All babies look like Eisenhower or Churchhill at first."
Probably I get away with such things socially because it's not ALL I'm going
to say in the conversation. I've also referred to many babies, my own
included as "grubs" or "the larva stage" meaning they weren't yet doing
anything impressive or coordinated but someday they would. I've never said
"that is a grub" and walked away.
<< "Don't you think the baby is cute?" If you don't think the baby is cute
and, in fact, think the baby is ugly, to answer with "something" that is
truth but is not a direct answer to the question is to prevaricate, as in
"evade the truth, substitute for a lie."
In other words, a lie by any other name is still a lie.
>>I'm used to this.
My whole life there have been people who were determined to prove I lied, and
that a policy of truthfulness wasn't possible. Nobody's proven it yet, and
I'm 47. If it makes you feel better about your own practices and theories to
believe strongly that it's not possible, then you're doing something with
yourself, and not to me.
But at this point in the discussion it does seem pretty personal. Like this,
for example: -=-Gee, how soon we forget! Either that or you have no kids.
-=-
-=-And what an adult may get away with and what a child will encounter or two
seperate animals.__
Then perhaps it is my children's luxury of never having been to school, and
hanging out with families either they have chosen or we their parents have
chosen because of philosophical similarities (La Leche League, Society for
Creative Anachronism, homeschooling), or intelligence or SOMETHING somehow
selective, and my kids' self confidence or something.
There is one boy they hang around with who has gotten Marty in minor trouble
a couple of times. Once the police stopped and talked to them because they
were out walking around at night and had made too much noise. But right in
front of the other kid I told Marty (and so him along with it) that Marty
needed to agree with or veto all actions, and he couldn't blame kidx, and
that kidx needed to NOT push Marty, or he wasn't coming over anymore. But
they came right in reporting that the police had talked to them and told them
to "run home" (from half a mile and some) and that the policeman was going
to come and talk to me and they better be home.
He lied. And that half mile was too far and too dangerous to run, in the
dark, next to a major road. And I tried hard not to say "Well he lied," but
I really did not appreciate a law officer lying to my son.
I wish he HAD come and talked to me and to them. It would have been more
effective.
But they've not yet since been in trouble and they hang around much in groups
of four or six and the other kids would tell me or hint if those two had been
difficult. They're 12 and 13.
I have not only the three children I have now (9, 12, 14), but had custody of
my accidental half-brother for a few years, in the early/mid 1980's (a
habitual liar, fetal alcohol syndrome, raised in very sad situation, which is
why my mother relinquished parental rights. And that was after I had married
a friend in 1975 because his parents both died in very short time and his 10
and 12 year old siblings were going to be taken away (a long story). With
them, lying was not common, but was done sneakily to "keep peace," but it
only kept peace for that moment, until the truth was found out and there were
ten units of work/talk to make up for that one unit of peace.
Having grown up carefully honest, this confirmed my theories.
My husband and I have known one another since 1977, and I know of no lies
which have passed between us. Is it genetic? Are we naturally brave and
confident? That could be, as there seem some people who are naturally timid
and easily led. Maybe what we believe is training and values passed down is
more genetic.
To have my awareness, honest and motherhood questioned in public should hurt
me, and twenty years ago would have, but now I'm used to it. It doesn't
change the truth.
Sandra
P.S. I HAVE been asked directly "Isn't she cute?" about babies and have
said "Some people think all babies are cute, but I never have." (Which is
true.) and "All babies look like Eisenhower or Churchhill at first."
Probably I get away with such things socially because it's not ALL I'm going
to say in the conversation. I've also referred to many babies, my own
included as "grubs" or "the larva stage" meaning they weren't yet doing
anything impressive or coordinated but someday they would. I've never said
"that is a grub" and walked away.
Carolyn
i remember being 18, on my own for the first time, in a city far away
from home. i met a guy, a neighbor, at a party and when the party was
over he followed me out and eventually pulled out his gun. his intent
and desire were made clear to me.
i took a deep breath and then decided. i told the guy how cute i
thought he was (he was ugly), how i'd liked him from the moment we'd met
(i hadn't noticed him), how i wanted to get to know him better (not),
and that he was going about this all wrong. i spoke of romance and
flowers and love, about starting things off right with a date. even i
thought it sounded preposterous. i couldn't believe i had a chance,
that he would ever possibly believe anybody would like him, but in my
panic it was the only thing i thought of to do. my mother taught us to
be honest but in her own life demonstrated that she wasn't always
honest. maybe that saved me from being raped or worse. i don't know.
i do remember seeing in his face that he wanted to believe me and i
persisted. it gave me some time and i was able to escape. i think i
was clever and very lucky. and, oh, yes, dishonest.
i don't even know why people want to think their baby is "cute". what
people always commented on about my daughter as an infant, was that she
was the happiest baby they'd ever seen. that's a compliment that meant
the world to me!
carolyn
from home. i met a guy, a neighbor, at a party and when the party was
over he followed me out and eventually pulled out his gun. his intent
and desire were made clear to me.
i took a deep breath and then decided. i told the guy how cute i
thought he was (he was ugly), how i'd liked him from the moment we'd met
(i hadn't noticed him), how i wanted to get to know him better (not),
and that he was going about this all wrong. i spoke of romance and
flowers and love, about starting things off right with a date. even i
thought it sounded preposterous. i couldn't believe i had a chance,
that he would ever possibly believe anybody would like him, but in my
panic it was the only thing i thought of to do. my mother taught us to
be honest but in her own life demonstrated that she wasn't always
honest. maybe that saved me from being raped or worse. i don't know.
i do remember seeing in his face that he wanted to believe me and i
persisted. it gave me some time and i was able to escape. i think i
was clever and very lucky. and, oh, yes, dishonest.
i don't even know why people want to think their baby is "cute". what
people always commented on about my daughter as an infant, was that she
was the happiest baby they'd ever seen. that's a compliment that meant
the world to me!
carolyn
Sandi & Scott Spaeth
>My whole life there have been people who were determined to prove I lied, andI was going to stay out of this, but I do not think I can after that comment.
>that a policy of truthfulness wasn't possible. Nobody's proven it yet, and
>I'm 47. If it makes you feel better about your own practices and theories to
>believe strongly that it's not possible, then you're doing something with
>yourself, and not to me.
In many cases, I do think the truth may be a SUBJECTIVE thing. Personally,
in *MY* opinion, the way that you, Sandra, handled things with Christina
over her personal email to you was VERY, VERY dishonest. You might not
have flat out lied about anything, but you were dishonest in your handling
of the situation none the less.
If that email had bothered you that badly, you should have brought it to
the list right away, or at least to the moderators. But instead, you kept
it, THOUGHT you saw an opportunity to use it against her, and forwarded a
PERSONAL email to a list of over 450 people. Not because it bothered you,
but because YOU THOUGHT YOU HAD CAUGHT HER IN A LIE. THEN, when you
*should* have realized you were wrong, you instead made a big deal about
people sending personal emails off the list, which was NOT what the issue
was about even!! You jumped on the chance to embarrass someone and prove
them wrong, and that is worse than any little white lie a child has ever told.
First off, a personal email should remain that way, PERSONAL. On just
about every list I have ever been on in the six years I have been using the
internet, the policy has always been to take personal emails OFF the list.
On my own list we often request that people take PERSONAL thing to PERSONAL
emails, so that the rest of us do not have to be in it. Most of the time
people have enough sense to do it on their own. Christina did not threaten
you, and though her email may have been rude and possibly off the mark, it
was still made in *private*. If I were to come to you with a private
problem and asked you for help, would you forward THAT to the list as
well? You know, when Chris said that she could not access the vaccine info
page, I emailed her OFF LIST and told her I would get the info she needed
for her. We then emailed each other a few times, should we make those
emails public too? Does everyone out there wish to be bored with every
little personal exchange?
Second, you waited until you THOUGHT she was trying to pull something over
on the group (ie lying about her identity) which, if you had read the
email, she was not. Whereas I do not agree with Chris's position on the
topic of abortion, I did not see her post, using the name Tina instead of
her own, as dishonest. I could have easily done the same thing in my own
post. It is a way to make an anecdotal story MORE dramatic. People use
that tactic often, there is nothing at all dishonest about the technique.
So, you get all high and mighty and decide you are going to put this girl
in her place! You call her on her so called bluff, only to realize that
YOU WERE IN THE WRONG (which maybe you never realized seeing as that you
are never wrong). But, instead of being honest and admitting this mistake,
you turn it into some thing about not sending private emails, when that was
not even what the issue was about. You thought you had caught this person
that pissed you off in some kind of lie, but you had not. And instead of
saying OOPS, which would have been the HONEST thing to do, it turned into
some whole other monster.
Now, you can justify this out and rationalize it any way you wish IN YOUR
MIND, but the fact remains, that there are plenty of us out here, on this
list, that found your sending that email when you did and your further
reaction to it to be totally dishonest. So are you wrong because some of
us feel that you are wrong and dishonest, or are you totally ok because
*you* feel rationalized in what you did? And if you do feel that you were
in the right with what you did in regards to that email, isn't the child
that tells a white lie to get out of a bad situation just as right? In
certain grey areas, doesn't the truth become just a little more subjective
than a clear cut case of right or wrong?
Honesty is not always about truth telling. It is also how you handle
situations and info. If I tell you a secret in confidence, and then I piss
you off, do you have the right to go and tell that secret? Do I tell my
friend with the ugly baby and PPD that her kid is uglier than my dog? Do I
tell my landlord that the second cat (which was my daughters bday gift) he
sees really is ours when I know he will make us get rid of it? Do I tell
my sister when she ask, every little thing her kid has done wrong while she
was out with her husband for their anniversary date? Do I tell you that
you really do come off as a snotty, holier than thou, Ms Know-It-All over
email?
Sometimes the truth is nothing more than our OPINIONS, and more times than
not, they really should be kept to ourselves anyway. Opinions are
subjective, and therefore, so can be the truth. Marrying a *friend* so he
could retain custody of his siblings might not have been an HONEST thing to
do, and to many it might have even been a LIE, but it was probably the
RIGHT thing to do.
There is no blanket policy of truth. Life is not black and white, and
truth is not always that simple. Hurting someone's feeling just so you can
feel self righteous is much worse than telling a small white lie.
Thats just my opinion though, and I have probably opened myself up to one
hell of a flame war, so bring it on.
Sandi (not to be confused with Sandra)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Take no heroes,
Only inspiration.
Piston Ported Vespas:
http://www.piston-ported.hompage.com/index.html
words
http://www.geocities.com/vespass/words.html
ST Louis Secular Homeschooler's Co-Op
http://www.stlsecularhomeschool.org
-------------------------------------------------------------
[email protected]
In a message dated 2/9/01 2:42:50 PM, vespass@... writes:
<< If that email had bothered you that badly, you should have brought it to
the list right away, or at least to the moderators. >>
No, I mentioned it right away.
I just didn't post it until she showed that she hadn't left the list, but had
stayed.
<<First off, a personal email should remain that way, PERSONAL.>>
I didn't need private insult over public commentary. I wasn't being personal
on the list.
<If I were to come to you with a private problem and asked you for help,
would you forward THAT to the list as well?>>
That wouldn't be harrassment. If someone wrote to me privately and later
claimed something about the exchange that flatly wasn't true, I wouldn't
hesitate to defend myself with the facts.
<< We then emailed each other a few times, should we make those
emails public too? Does everyone out there wish to be bored with every
little personal exchange?>>
I doubt either of you was insulting the other or making false claims. I wish
I had only gotten boring little personal mail instead of BIG nasty personal
mail.
<< that there are plenty of us out here, on this
list, that found your sending that email when you did and your further
reaction to it to be totally dishonest. >>
I was straightforward at each point along the way.
Whether a white lie or a big deal lie or an elaborate set of falsehoods is
right or wrong is subjective. I've already said that in my own set of
priorities truth is #1. Others have other priorities. I was talking all
along here about what I would do. For some people it's guns, or choice, or
being a good Christian, or a Republican, or a Pagan, or having kids who win
contests or clean their rooms or whatever. Everybody has their top five
(ten, whatever) sacred obligations.
So again, for explaining and defending what I believe, people are insulting
me very directly and personally.
When one's truth is no more than opinion, that's what discussions are made
of. When a person makes a statement she knows to be false, she judges
herself and others judge who know of it. It kinda depends who you want to
please and what you believe about what God knows and cares about, too.
In the case of preventing a rape or harboring Jews in WWII, those are BIG
exceptions which are justifiable. Some here considered the presence of a
gun to be a similar life and death situation. I didn't. That doesn't make
me a criminal. That makes me a person who believes that teaching children to
lie is worse than having children see/touch guns.
Some people feel that strongly about sending their kids to school, or
vaccinating, or feel that strongly that natural childbirth is stupid and
breastfeeding is disgusting and all KINDS of things.
<<Honesty is not always about truth telling. It is also how you handle
situations and info. If I tell you a secret in confidence, and then I piss
you off, do you have the right to go and tell that secret? Do I tell my
friend with the ugly baby and PPD that her kid is uglier than my dog? Do I
tell my landlord that the second cat (which was my daughters bday gift) he
sees really is ours when I know he will make us get rid of it? Do I tell
my sister when she ask, every little thing her kid has done wrong while she
was out with her husband for their anniversary date? Do I tell you that
you really do come off as a snotty, holier than thou, Ms Know-It-All over
email?>>
In this and all else, the best anyone can do is do what they think is right
and live with the consequences.
If one of the (VERY minor) consequences is that someone you don't even know
might, on an e-mail loop say "I wouldn't do that," that should be a
consequence you can live with.
I think it's right to be honest about what I believe. Because of that
belief, there are people homeschooling who wouldn't have if I'd have just
said "huh. Yeah, your ideas about school seem right" or who would not be
unschooling if I'd have said, "Sure, yeah--keep on pushing that curriculum.
You paid good money for it. If he doesn't finish his work, ground him or
something." There are MANY, many unschoolers and mothers in similar
attachment parenting situations of all sorts who, just by sharing honestly
and being somewhat critical of other people's non-working theories who have
made gigantic differences in those other people's lives and families and the
futures of their children. I'm not apologizing. When someone says "I can't
decide whether to do this or that," or "I think TV is evil and so I don't let
my children visit where TVs are" or "I will unschool, all except math and
English," and if they do it on this list, or on unschooling.com, or at a
homeschooling meeting where I am, I won't say "Good Idea!" And if they seem
open to another point of view, I won't keep quiet about what I have learned
through dealings with my own kids and the other homeschooling families I
know.
The assumption on discussion lists is that all participants are open to other
points of view. I think it would be nice if those offering points of view
would not be attacked for it.
Sandra
<< If that email had bothered you that badly, you should have brought it to
the list right away, or at least to the moderators. >>
No, I mentioned it right away.
I just didn't post it until she showed that she hadn't left the list, but had
stayed.
<<First off, a personal email should remain that way, PERSONAL.>>
I didn't need private insult over public commentary. I wasn't being personal
on the list.
<If I were to come to you with a private problem and asked you for help,
would you forward THAT to the list as well?>>
That wouldn't be harrassment. If someone wrote to me privately and later
claimed something about the exchange that flatly wasn't true, I wouldn't
hesitate to defend myself with the facts.
<< We then emailed each other a few times, should we make those
emails public too? Does everyone out there wish to be bored with every
little personal exchange?>>
I doubt either of you was insulting the other or making false claims. I wish
I had only gotten boring little personal mail instead of BIG nasty personal
mail.
<< that there are plenty of us out here, on this
list, that found your sending that email when you did and your further
reaction to it to be totally dishonest. >>
I was straightforward at each point along the way.
Whether a white lie or a big deal lie or an elaborate set of falsehoods is
right or wrong is subjective. I've already said that in my own set of
priorities truth is #1. Others have other priorities. I was talking all
along here about what I would do. For some people it's guns, or choice, or
being a good Christian, or a Republican, or a Pagan, or having kids who win
contests or clean their rooms or whatever. Everybody has their top five
(ten, whatever) sacred obligations.
So again, for explaining and defending what I believe, people are insulting
me very directly and personally.
When one's truth is no more than opinion, that's what discussions are made
of. When a person makes a statement she knows to be false, she judges
herself and others judge who know of it. It kinda depends who you want to
please and what you believe about what God knows and cares about, too.
In the case of preventing a rape or harboring Jews in WWII, those are BIG
exceptions which are justifiable. Some here considered the presence of a
gun to be a similar life and death situation. I didn't. That doesn't make
me a criminal. That makes me a person who believes that teaching children to
lie is worse than having children see/touch guns.
Some people feel that strongly about sending their kids to school, or
vaccinating, or feel that strongly that natural childbirth is stupid and
breastfeeding is disgusting and all KINDS of things.
<<Honesty is not always about truth telling. It is also how you handle
situations and info. If I tell you a secret in confidence, and then I piss
you off, do you have the right to go and tell that secret? Do I tell my
friend with the ugly baby and PPD that her kid is uglier than my dog? Do I
tell my landlord that the second cat (which was my daughters bday gift) he
sees really is ours when I know he will make us get rid of it? Do I tell
my sister when she ask, every little thing her kid has done wrong while she
was out with her husband for their anniversary date? Do I tell you that
you really do come off as a snotty, holier than thou, Ms Know-It-All over
email?>>
In this and all else, the best anyone can do is do what they think is right
and live with the consequences.
If one of the (VERY minor) consequences is that someone you don't even know
might, on an e-mail loop say "I wouldn't do that," that should be a
consequence you can live with.
I think it's right to be honest about what I believe. Because of that
belief, there are people homeschooling who wouldn't have if I'd have just
said "huh. Yeah, your ideas about school seem right" or who would not be
unschooling if I'd have said, "Sure, yeah--keep on pushing that curriculum.
You paid good money for it. If he doesn't finish his work, ground him or
something." There are MANY, many unschoolers and mothers in similar
attachment parenting situations of all sorts who, just by sharing honestly
and being somewhat critical of other people's non-working theories who have
made gigantic differences in those other people's lives and families and the
futures of their children. I'm not apologizing. When someone says "I can't
decide whether to do this or that," or "I think TV is evil and so I don't let
my children visit where TVs are" or "I will unschool, all except math and
English," and if they do it on this list, or on unschooling.com, or at a
homeschooling meeting where I am, I won't say "Good Idea!" And if they seem
open to another point of view, I won't keep quiet about what I have learned
through dealings with my own kids and the other homeschooling families I
know.
The assumption on discussion lists is that all participants are open to other
points of view. I think it would be nice if those offering points of view
would not be attacked for it.
Sandra
Valerie Stewart
i remember being 18, on my own for the first time, in a city far away
from home. i met a guy, a neighbor, at a party and when the party was
over he followed me out and eventually pulled out his gun. his intent
and desire were made clear to me...
carolyn
***Carolyn I think you were very level-headed and did the only smart thing.
I've also taught my kids (all girls) that if someone pulls a gun or even
talks about playing with one to take their little sisters and *leave*...no
explanations necessary. Lying would be fine with me, too if that would get
them out of there all the quicker.
Valerie in Tacoma
from home. i met a guy, a neighbor, at a party and when the party was
over he followed me out and eventually pulled out his gun. his intent
and desire were made clear to me...
carolyn
***Carolyn I think you were very level-headed and did the only smart thing.
I've also taught my kids (all girls) that if someone pulls a gun or even
talks about playing with one to take their little sisters and *leave*...no
explanations necessary. Lying would be fine with me, too if that would get
them out of there all the quicker.
Valerie in Tacoma
[email protected]
<< To have my awareness, honest and motherhood questioned in public should
hurt
me, and twenty years ago would have, but now I'm used to it. It doesn't
change the truth.>>
Just for what it's worth, Sandra, when you state that you never lie I don't
doubt your word. You've been a source of inspiration (not a word I chose
lightly) for to me for some time now. I even save some of your posts to
reread at another time, usually something that encourages me to be less
timid, more bold and/or relax. I've recommended this list and the web site
often and mention your name telling them to take note of when you post and
how much what you've written has meant to me.
I got a chuckle at myself when I read your age. I've often noted how someone
younger than me had so much more confidence. Now I know that you're 3 years
older. Don't ask me why I made this assumption, obviously it doesn't matter.
We don't always agree and that doesn't alter my respect for your opinion. I
hope that nothing I've said has come across as a personal attack.
<<P.S. I HAVE been asked directly "Isn't she cute?" about babies and have
said "Some people think all babies are cute, but I never have." (Which is
true.) and "All babies look like Eisenhower or Churchhill at first."
Probably I get away with such things socially because it's not ALL I'm going
to say in the conversation. I've also referred to many babies, my own
included as "grubs" or "the larva stage" meaning they weren't yet doing
anything impressive or coordinated but someday they would. I've never said
"that is a grub" and walked away.>>
*snicker* I'm one of those who thinks all babies are cute so my response is
usually, "To me all babies are cute". The thought of someone calling
someone's baby a "grub" cracks me up though.
Kris
hurt
me, and twenty years ago would have, but now I'm used to it. It doesn't
change the truth.>>
Just for what it's worth, Sandra, when you state that you never lie I don't
doubt your word. You've been a source of inspiration (not a word I chose
lightly) for to me for some time now. I even save some of your posts to
reread at another time, usually something that encourages me to be less
timid, more bold and/or relax. I've recommended this list and the web site
often and mention your name telling them to take note of when you post and
how much what you've written has meant to me.
I got a chuckle at myself when I read your age. I've often noted how someone
younger than me had so much more confidence. Now I know that you're 3 years
older. Don't ask me why I made this assumption, obviously it doesn't matter.
We don't always agree and that doesn't alter my respect for your opinion. I
hope that nothing I've said has come across as a personal attack.
<<P.S. I HAVE been asked directly "Isn't she cute?" about babies and have
said "Some people think all babies are cute, but I never have." (Which is
true.) and "All babies look like Eisenhower or Churchhill at first."
Probably I get away with such things socially because it's not ALL I'm going
to say in the conversation. I've also referred to many babies, my own
included as "grubs" or "the larva stage" meaning they weren't yet doing
anything impressive or coordinated but someday they would. I've never said
"that is a grub" and walked away.>>
*snicker* I'm one of those who thinks all babies are cute so my response is
usually, "To me all babies are cute". The thought of someone calling
someone's baby a "grub" cracks me up though.
Kris
Sandi and Scott
--- In Unschooling-dotcom@y..., SandraDodd@a... wrote:
15997? Is that where you mention it? If that is what you are
talking about, that is a sorry way to mention something.
What difference if she did or if she did not leave? Perhaps she
reacted out of anger, perhaps she left and came back. Since when are
you the list gatekeeper? Why send her WHOLE letter to the list, and
was not the reason you sent it in because of her using different
names? That was the impression I was given. You said it was about
the list and ETHICS. What other reason than busting her in what you
thought was a lie did you have for sending it in right then?
***Sandra: Does she know kids like that? Do you?
It sounds very much like a scene from a movie, and not even a very
imaginative movie. Sorry.
If you expect other people to act like dramatic movie characters,
then I
guess you should have your own dramatic movie lines prepared.***
To me, that was kind of a mean, snide and personal jab.
should have prompted you to send in her off list email. Her comments
were not directed to you. People do have a right to change their
minds, or in your world do they not? What facts where you trying to
debunk by sending it in? That is what I would like to know. You
even go on to say at the end there:
"Next time you want to be really insulting, please own up to it
honestly.
Better in pubilc (as I did, with my own regular name) than under the
table in
secret."
Personally, except for the last few lines and the PS, I do not really
find her letter at all harrassing. And I am not harrassing you, I am
being honest, since the issue is about honesty.
table, you open yourself up to it, like I know I did by starting
this.
myself about what I have started here, but not a single one will find
its way to this list because they are personal.
our children in ways other than YOU would do it.
There is a world off difference between little Tommy looking you in
the face and telling you that he did not break that vase you watched
him break, and Tommy telling his friends playing with the gun that he
was expected home 10 mintues ago. And maybe YOU would rather your
kids stay and play with a gun rather than lie, but for the rest of us
the safety of our kids is more important than anything else.
into it.
much think of it as a life and death situation too. I have lost
friends, and had friends that accidentally shot people, so I have
been on both sides too. My cousin lost his life at 14 while out
hunting with his younger brother. One of our close friends lived
here in St Louis with his dad instead of in New York with his mom and
brothers because when he was four years old the eight year old
neighbor handed him a gun that happened to be loaded and our friend
managed to fire that gun and kill the boy that handed it to him. I
knew two young men that lost their lives playing russian roulette.
Under normal circumstances, these young men were very smart. It
happens, and to some of us it happens all too often.
My own husband carried a gun with him around town when he was 15. He
went to a military school, was familiar with guns, understood them,
but still walked around with an unloaded gun in his coat just to mess
with people. He never really stopped and thought about meeting up
with ANOTHER fool with a gun that might be loaded.
I didn't. That doesn't make
any damn day of the week. My big thing is that they come tell ME
right away what happened so we can deal with it, and not lie to me.
And you can go on and on about how lying leads to lying and blah blah
blah. I guess you never did santa, easter bunny, tooth fairy, told
fairy tales, imagined you were something you were not with your
kids? If not, you must live in a REALLY boring house!!
keep coming back with how TERRIBLE it is PERIOD to lie AT ALL.
subject of the guns, and this actually has nothing to do with your
opinion on that. But I do think you are being a hypocrite about
honesty and about how you have never lied, never been dishonest,
etc. You are coming off as quite pious and self righteous and if
that is your intention, then so be it. I have a sister that is just
like that and no one ever wants to talk to her or be around her
either.
Because of that
said, feel free to rationalize it out any way you wish. As long as
you can live with yourself at the end of the day, then so be it.
I'm not apologizing. When someone says "I can't
opposing discussions. Your posts that I have read often come off as
blunt, rude, or down right condecending. Or another option is just
not take part! Just because you happen to have an opinion on
EVERYTHING does not mean you always have to share. I kept my opinions
on AP parenting to myself when that was going on. I am not a fan of
it myself, but I am not going to step in and come down on someone
that really believes in it. Just because it is NOT FOR MY FAMILY
does not make it wrong or evil for someone elses.
All of this is beside the point. The fact of the matter still
remains that in the opinion of some you were totally in the
wrong and dishonest about what you did with Christina. And since
honesty is of the utmost importance for you, I thought I should share
that. And since you INSISTED it all be done on the list, that is
what I have done.
Have a good evening,
Sandi
>brought it to
> In a message dated 2/9/01 2:42:50 PM, vespass@s... writes:
>
> << If that email had bothered you that badly, you should have
> the list right away, or at least to the moderators. >>list, but had
>
> No, I mentioned it right away.
> I just didn't post it until she showed that she hadn't left the
> stayed.I guess you mean your very brief and VAGUE blip at the end of message
>
15997? Is that where you mention it? If that is what you are
talking about, that is a sorry way to mention something.
What difference if she did or if she did not leave? Perhaps she
reacted out of anger, perhaps she left and came back. Since when are
you the list gatekeeper? Why send her WHOLE letter to the list, and
was not the reason you sent it in because of her using different
names? That was the impression I was given. You said it was about
the list and ETHICS. What other reason than busting her in what you
thought was a lie did you have for sending it in right then?
> <<First off, a personal email should remain that way, PERSONAL.>>being personal
>
> I didn't need private insult over public commentary. I wasn't
> on the list.What about this comment you made:
>
***Sandra: Does she know kids like that? Do you?
It sounds very much like a scene from a movie, and not even a very
imaginative movie. Sorry.
If you expect other people to act like dramatic movie characters,
then I
guess you should have your own dramatic movie lines prepared.***
To me, that was kind of a mean, snide and personal jab.
> That wouldn't be harrassment. If someone wrote to me privately andlater
> claimed something about the exchange that flatly wasn't true, Iwouldn't
> hesitate to defend myself with the facts.But she never said ANYTHING to you in the email about abortion that
>
should have prompted you to send in her off list email. Her comments
were not directed to you. People do have a right to change their
minds, or in your world do they not? What facts where you trying to
debunk by sending it in? That is what I would like to know. You
even go on to say at the end there:
"Next time you want to be really insulting, please own up to it
honestly.
Better in pubilc (as I did, with my own regular name) than under the
table in
secret."
Personally, except for the last few lines and the PS, I do not really
find her letter at all harrassing. And I am not harrassing you, I am
being honest, since the issue is about honesty.
> I doubt either of you was insulting the other or making falseclaims. I wish
> I had only gotten boring little personal mail instead of BIG nastypersonal
> mail.Get used to it. When you start putting your opinions down on the
>
table, you open yourself up to it, like I know I did by starting
this.
> << that there are plenty of us out here, on thisfurther
> list, that found your sending that email when you did and your
> reaction to it to be totally dishonest. >>Not in my opinion of truth, and I have gotten several emails off list
>
> I was straightforward at each point along the way.
>
myself about what I have started here, but not a single one will find
its way to this list because they are personal.
> Whether a white lie or a big deal lie or an elaborate set offalsehoods is
> right or wrong is subjective. I've already said that in my ownset of
> priorities truth is #1. Others have other priorities. I wastalking all
> along here about what I would do.And you made it clear how very wrong the rest of us are for directing
our children in ways other than YOU would do it.
There is a world off difference between little Tommy looking you in
the face and telling you that he did not break that vase you watched
him break, and Tommy telling his friends playing with the gun that he
was expected home 10 mintues ago. And maybe YOU would rather your
kids stay and play with a gun rather than lie, but for the rest of us
the safety of our kids is more important than anything else.
> When one's truth is no more than opinion, that's what discussionsare made
> of. When a person makes a statement she knows to be false, shejudges
> herself and others judge who know of it. It kinda depends who youwant to
> please and what you believe about what God knows and cares about,too.
>I am not out to please people, and being an atheist, no god enters
into it.
> In the case of preventing a rape or harboring Jews in WWII, thoseare BIG
> exceptions which are justifiable. Some here considered thepresence of a
> gun to be a similar life and death situation.Having lost several friends, and a cousin in gun accidents, I pretty
much think of it as a life and death situation too. I have lost
friends, and had friends that accidentally shot people, so I have
been on both sides too. My cousin lost his life at 14 while out
hunting with his younger brother. One of our close friends lived
here in St Louis with his dad instead of in New York with his mom and
brothers because when he was four years old the eight year old
neighbor handed him a gun that happened to be loaded and our friend
managed to fire that gun and kill the boy that handed it to him. I
knew two young men that lost their lives playing russian roulette.
Under normal circumstances, these young men were very smart. It
happens, and to some of us it happens all too often.
My own husband carried a gun with him around town when he was 15. He
went to a military school, was familiar with guns, understood them,
but still walked around with an unloaded gun in his coat just to mess
with people. He never really stopped and thought about meeting up
with ANOTHER fool with a gun that might be loaded.
I didn't. That doesn't make
> me a criminal. That makes me a person who believes that teachingchildren to
> lie is worse than having children see/touch guns.I would rather live with a liar than visit the grave of an honest kid
>
any damn day of the week. My big thing is that they come tell ME
right away what happened so we can deal with it, and not lie to me.
And you can go on and on about how lying leads to lying and blah blah
blah. I guess you never did santa, easter bunny, tooth fairy, told
fairy tales, imagined you were something you were not with your
kids? If not, you must live in a REALLY boring house!!
> In this and all else, the best anyone can do is do what they thinkis right
> and live with the consequences.Which is what most of these ladies have been saying, to which you
>
keep coming back with how TERRIBLE it is PERIOD to lie AT ALL.
> I think it's right to be honest about what I believe.I do too, and personally, I was not really too interested in the
subject of the guns, and this actually has nothing to do with your
opinion on that. But I do think you are being a hypocrite about
honesty and about how you have never lied, never been dishonest,
etc. You are coming off as quite pious and self righteous and if
that is your intention, then so be it. I have a sister that is just
like that and no one ever wants to talk to her or be around her
either.
Because of that
> belief, there are people homeschooling who wouldn't have if I'dhave just
> said "huh. Yeah, your ideas about school seem right" or who wouldnot be
> unschooling if I'd have said, "Sure, yeah--keep on pushing thatcurriculum.
> You paid good money for it. If he doesn't finish his work, groundhim or
> something." There are MANY, many unschoolers and mothers insimilar
> attachment parenting situations of all sorts who, just by sharinghonestly
> and being somewhat critical of other people's non-working theorieswho have
> made gigantic differences in those other people's lives andfamilies and the
> futures of their children.I am not even sure where you are going with all of that. And as I
said, feel free to rationalize it out any way you wish. As long as
you can live with yourself at the end of the day, then so be it.
I'm not apologizing. When someone says "I can't
> decide whether to do this or that," or "I think TV is evil and so Idon't let
> my children visit where TVs are" or "I will unschool, all exceptmath and
> English," and if they do it on this list, or on unschooling.com, orat a
> homeschooling meeting where I am, I won't say "Good Idea!" And ifthey seem
> open to another point of view, I won't keep quiet about what I havelearned
> through dealings with my own kids and the other homeschoolingfamilies I
> know.And neither will anyone else.
>open to other
> The assumption on discussion lists is that all participants are
> points of view. I think it would be nice if those offering pointsof view
> would not be attacked for it.Then do not attack others. There are tactful ways to take part in
>
> Sandra
opposing discussions. Your posts that I have read often come off as
blunt, rude, or down right condecending. Or another option is just
not take part! Just because you happen to have an opinion on
EVERYTHING does not mean you always have to share. I kept my opinions
on AP parenting to myself when that was going on. I am not a fan of
it myself, but I am not going to step in and come down on someone
that really believes in it. Just because it is NOT FOR MY FAMILY
does not make it wrong or evil for someone elses.
All of this is beside the point. The fact of the matter still
remains that in the opinion of some you were totally in the
wrong and dishonest about what you did with Christina. And since
honesty is of the utmost importance for you, I thought I should share
that. And since you INSISTED it all be done on the list, that is
what I have done.
Have a good evening,
Sandi
Bonnie Painter
And there are several of us on this list that feel Christina did the
dishonest thing by attacking Sandra personally off list.
As you have stated in a million different ways, we all have a right to our
own opinion and if Sandra felt attacked by this email, she has a right.
And you have the right to feel that what Sandra did was wrong, but I really,
honestly (no pun intended) do not see what the point is in continuing to
attack Sandra for having opinions and expressing them.
If you chose to keep your opinions to yourself, that is your choice. Again,
you have a right to that choice just as Sandra has a right to share her
opinions.
JMHO,
Bonnie
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
dishonest thing by attacking Sandra personally off list.
As you have stated in a million different ways, we all have a right to our
own opinion and if Sandra felt attacked by this email, she has a right.
And you have the right to feel that what Sandra did was wrong, but I really,
honestly (no pun intended) do not see what the point is in continuing to
attack Sandra for having opinions and expressing them.
If you chose to keep your opinions to yourself, that is your choice. Again,
you have a right to that choice just as Sandra has a right to share her
opinions.
JMHO,
Bonnie
>_________________________________________________________________
>All of this is beside the point. The fact of the matter still
>remains that in the opinion of some you were totally in the
>wrong and dishonest about what you did with Christina. And since
>honesty is of the utmost importance for you, I thought I should share
>that. And since you INSISTED it all be done on the list, that is
>what I have done.
>
>Have a good evening,
>
>Sandi
>
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
Sandi & Scott Spaeth
At 02:16 AM 2/10/01 +0000, you wrote:
to do so.
in everyone eyes as she likes to think she is. She is more than willing to
put her opinions of others on the table, but when others do it to her, it
is an attack, and that is just wrong.
And I never came out and said what Christina said was right either, and in
fact said she was quite rude and off the point. The fact still remains
that the email was not sent in as an honest way of dealing with an ongoing
problem, but was sent in to nail someone for doing something wrong, which
she had not even done! Sandra's point was that this girl had used a
different name when she sent in the PRIVATE email, and she was trying to
call her on THAT. It was evident that this girl was not doing that, but
instead of saying OOPS, she did not.
So, I was just merely pointing this out. The subject was honesty was it
not? Did I not go on to say that if Sandra felt justified in what she did,
then that was all that matters?
Just as she kept stating over and over that these mothers were wrong to
encourage these children to maybe lie in hard situations, I am just stating
that I feel she is equally wrong in saying that she is free from being
dishonest herself. And that honesty is often a SUBJECTIVE thing.
She has a right to share her opinions, as I do, and just as she will call
bull on something, so will I.
Sandi
--------------------------------------------------------------
Take no heroes,
Only inspiration.
Piston Ported Vespas:
http://www.piston-ported.hompage.com/index.html
words
http://www.geocities.com/vespass/words.html
ST Louis Secular Homeschooler's Co-Op
http://www.stlsecularhomeschool.org
-------------------------------------------------------------
>And there are several of us on this list that feel Christina did theThen she should address it fully when it happens, not when it is convenient
>dishonest thing by attacking Sandra personally off list.
>
>As you have stated in a million different ways, we all have a right to our
>own opinion and if Sandra felt attacked by this email, she has a right.
to do so.
>And you have the right to feel that what Sandra did was wrong, but I really,It was not meant as an attack, but pointing out that she is not as honest
>honestly (no pun intended) do not see what the point is in continuing to
>attack Sandra for having opinions and expressing them.
>
>If you chose to keep your opinions to yourself, that is your choice. Again,
>you have a right to that choice just as Sandra has a right to share her
>opinions.
>
>JMHO,
in everyone eyes as she likes to think she is. She is more than willing to
put her opinions of others on the table, but when others do it to her, it
is an attack, and that is just wrong.
And I never came out and said what Christina said was right either, and in
fact said she was quite rude and off the point. The fact still remains
that the email was not sent in as an honest way of dealing with an ongoing
problem, but was sent in to nail someone for doing something wrong, which
she had not even done! Sandra's point was that this girl had used a
different name when she sent in the PRIVATE email, and she was trying to
call her on THAT. It was evident that this girl was not doing that, but
instead of saying OOPS, she did not.
So, I was just merely pointing this out. The subject was honesty was it
not? Did I not go on to say that if Sandra felt justified in what she did,
then that was all that matters?
Just as she kept stating over and over that these mothers were wrong to
encourage these children to maybe lie in hard situations, I am just stating
that I feel she is equally wrong in saying that she is free from being
dishonest herself. And that honesty is often a SUBJECTIVE thing.
She has a right to share her opinions, as I do, and just as she will call
bull on something, so will I.
Sandi
--------------------------------------------------------------
Take no heroes,
Only inspiration.
Piston Ported Vespas:
http://www.piston-ported.hompage.com/index.html
words
http://www.geocities.com/vespass/words.html
ST Louis Secular Homeschooler's Co-Op
http://www.stlsecularhomeschool.org
-------------------------------------------------------------
[email protected]
In a message dated 2/9/01 5:35:17 PM Pacific Standard Time,
vespass@... writes:
<< ***Sandra: Does she know kids like that? Do you?
It sounds very much like a scene from a movie, and not even a very
imaginative movie. Sorry.
If you expect other people to act like dramatic movie characters,
then I
guess you should have your own dramatic movie lines prepared.***
To me, that was kind of a mean, snide and personal jab.
take it to be an attempt at a jab, but didn't let it bother me since I knew I
was being realistic, *not* overly dramatic. I responded with a humorous (I
hope) bit of sarcasm, and clarification of my point, and left it at that.
I decided not to take it personally since Sandra doesn't actually know me and
everyone else on this list is intelligent enough to make their own
determination about what I was saying. I didn't worry about it because I am
secure in my position. I have lost a grandfather, a best friend, and a cousin
to guns so I recognize any situation where a fool is playing with a gun as
dangerous. I also enjoy target shooting at a gun range, so I don't feel like
an extremist on the subject.
I think it's great that so many people on this list have strong opinions
about things. I think it's helpful to remember, though how our messages will
be perceived, no matter how we intend them. My dad always taught me I could
catch more flies with honey. That doesn't mean compromising your principles,
it simply means communicating with respect, candor, and compassion. I sure do
love my daddy.
candice
~~~~~~
A single grateful thought toward heaven is the most complete prayer.
-Gotthold Lessing
vespass@... writes:
<< ***Sandra: Does she know kids like that? Do you?
It sounds very much like a scene from a movie, and not even a very
imaginative movie. Sorry.
If you expect other people to act like dramatic movie characters,
then I
guess you should have your own dramatic movie lines prepared.***
To me, that was kind of a mean, snide and personal jab.
>>Well, that comment by Sandra was in response to my post. To be honest, I did
take it to be an attempt at a jab, but didn't let it bother me since I knew I
was being realistic, *not* overly dramatic. I responded with a humorous (I
hope) bit of sarcasm, and clarification of my point, and left it at that.
I decided not to take it personally since Sandra doesn't actually know me and
everyone else on this list is intelligent enough to make their own
determination about what I was saying. I didn't worry about it because I am
secure in my position. I have lost a grandfather, a best friend, and a cousin
to guns so I recognize any situation where a fool is playing with a gun as
dangerous. I also enjoy target shooting at a gun range, so I don't feel like
an extremist on the subject.
I think it's great that so many people on this list have strong opinions
about things. I think it's helpful to remember, though how our messages will
be perceived, no matter how we intend them. My dad always taught me I could
catch more flies with honey. That doesn't mean compromising your principles,
it simply means communicating with respect, candor, and compassion. I sure do
love my daddy.
candice
~~~~~~
A single grateful thought toward heaven is the most complete prayer.
-Gotthold Lessing
[email protected]
In a message dated 2/9/01 7:40:11 PM, vespass@... writes:
<< Then she should address it fully when it happens, not when it is
convenient
to do so. >>
I believed it was someone who was no longer on the list. Why make a deal
about someone who was gone?
I believed she was telling me the truth when she said she was leaving the
list.
<<I am just stating that I feel she is equally wrong in saying that she is
free from being
dishonest herself. >>
It would be really cool for people who want to defend lying if they could
believe everyone lies, consciously and willingly, and that it's really REALLY
okay. I don't believe that. I know lots of people who do not. I have
former friends who are gone for being dishonest.
It's a personal thing and I can't expect it of everyone (or anyone, except my
own family and closest friends). I was stating that just as some people's
main issue in life is abortion (pro or con) or guns (pro or con) mine is
honesty.
-=-So yes, if one must have a gun,
safty precautions MUST be taught.
I do not like guns and will not have them in the house.-=-
My parents were both hunter safety instructors. I never took their course.
I never had a gun, and have never gone hunting. Many of the other kids at
school thought that bizarre--they LOVED my parents and they loved hunting,
and they saw it as a big waste that I wasn't taking advantage of the
opportunity literally in my own home.
Sandra
<< Then she should address it fully when it happens, not when it is
convenient
to do so. >>
I believed it was someone who was no longer on the list. Why make a deal
about someone who was gone?
I believed she was telling me the truth when she said she was leaving the
list.
<<I am just stating that I feel she is equally wrong in saying that she is
free from being
dishonest herself. >>
It would be really cool for people who want to defend lying if they could
believe everyone lies, consciously and willingly, and that it's really REALLY
okay. I don't believe that. I know lots of people who do not. I have
former friends who are gone for being dishonest.
It's a personal thing and I can't expect it of everyone (or anyone, except my
own family and closest friends). I was stating that just as some people's
main issue in life is abortion (pro or con) or guns (pro or con) mine is
honesty.
-=-So yes, if one must have a gun,
safty precautions MUST be taught.
I do not like guns and will not have them in the house.-=-
My parents were both hunter safety instructors. I never took their course.
I never had a gun, and have never gone hunting. Many of the other kids at
school thought that bizarre--they LOVED my parents and they loved hunting,
and they saw it as a big waste that I wasn't taking advantage of the
opportunity literally in my own home.
Sandra