[email protected]

In a message dated 01/12/2003 3:49:35 PM Central Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:

<< And not to have sex with someone whose baby you wouldn't want to have.
That
was advice to me from a friend many, many years ago. (If you're not willing
to carry and raise his child....) >>

Hmmm? That's what birth control (and, as a drastic measure, abortion) is
for....to enable us to have sex with people we *don't* want children
with....or at least don't want them with at a particular point in time.

I didn't even "want children with" Dh till we both were well into our 30's.
;-)

Becky in Iowa (who forgets that, though she lurks a lot, she's mostly
invisible )

[email protected]

In a message dated 1/12/2003 5:17:19 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Beckyleach@... writes:


> That
> was advice to me from a friend many, many years ago. (If you're not willing
>
> to carry and raise his child....) >>
>
> Hmmm? That's what birth control (and, as a drastic measure, abortion) is
>
> for....to enable us to have sex with people we *don't* want children
> with....or at least don't want them with at a particular point in time.
>

Yeah, but NONE are 100% preventative. Even if you're using birth control,
there's always that chance. Are you willing to risk it?


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Shyrley

kbcdlovejo@... wrote:

> In a message dated 1/12/2003 5:17:19 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> Beckyleach@... writes:
>
> > That
> > was advice to me from a friend many, many years ago. (If you're not willing
> >
> > to carry and raise his child....) >>
> >
> > Hmmm? That's what birth control (and, as a drastic measure, abortion) is
> >
> > for....to enable us to have sex with people we *don't* want children
> > with....or at least don't want them with at a particular point in time.
> >
>
> Yeah, but NONE are 100% preventative. Even if you're using birth control,
> there's always that chance. Are you willing to risk it?
>

I did. So do lots of people. Life is full of risks and generally we accept the consequences of what we do, especially if the risk is small. Therefore, when I was younger I slept with people I didn't
want kids with, or even a long term relationship. The risk of pregnancy was very small.
I spend a lot of time cycling on busy North Virginian roads. People fret and ask me if I know its dangerous. Sure there is a risk, but its very small. It's worth it for the fun and enjoment I get from
cycling.

If we were not willing to face risks in life, whatever they are, then life would be dull, always the same, boring.

Shyrley

[email protected]

In a message dated 1/12/2003 7:39:09 PM Eastern Standard Time,
shyrley.williams@... writes:


> Yeah, but NONE are 100% preventative. Even if you're using birth control,
> > there's always that chance. Are you willing to risk it?
> >
>
> I did. So do lots of people. Life is full of risks and generally we accept
> the consequences of what we do, especially if the risk is small. Therefore,
> when I was younger I slept with people I didn't
> want kids with, or even a long term relationship. The risk of pregnancy was
> very small.
> I spend a lot of time cycling on busy North Virginian roads. People fret
> and ask me if I know its dangerous. Sure there is a risk, but its very
> small. It's worth it for the fun and enjoment I get from
> cycling.
>
> If we were not willing to face risks in life, whatever they are, then life
> would be dull, always the same, boring.
>
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[email protected]

In a message dated 1/12/2003 7:39:09 PM Eastern Standard Time,
shyrley.williams@... writes:
> Yeah, but NONE are 100% preventative. Even if you're using birth control,
> > there's always that chance. Are you willing to risk it?
> >
> I did. So do lots of people. Life is full of risks and generally we accept
> the consequences of what we do, especially if the risk is small. Therefore,
> when I was younger I slept with people I didn't
> want kids with, or even a long term relationship. The risk of pregnancy was
> very small....
> If we were not willing to face risks in life, whatever they are, then life
> would be dull, always the same, boring.

And I did too, but her advice made me think about it a bit more (and maybe
avoid a partner or two). And be VERY diligent about taking the pill! And it's
advice I've passed on to Cameron because it's something to consider. And he
can't be SURE that the girl is diligent about HER pill (even though he got
condoms for Christmas. But he's not sexually active...yet).

Sure, risks are exciting. And consequences need to be weighed. I just want
him to be aware of all the possible consequences.

~Kelly



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Julie Bogart <[email protected]>

--- In [email protected], Shyrley
<shyrley.williams@v...> wrote:

> >
> > Yeah, but NONE are 100% preventative. Even if you're using
birth control,
> > there's always that chance. Are you willing to risk it?
> >
>
> I did. So do lots of people. Life is full of risks and generally we
accept the consequences of what we do, especially if the risk is
small. Therefore, when I was younger I slept with people I didn't
> want kids with, or even a long term relationship. The risk of
pregnancy was very small.
> I spend a lot of time cycling on busy North Virginian roads.
People fret and ask me if I know its dangerous. Sure there is a
risk, but its very small. It's worth it for the fun and enjoment I
get
from
> cycling.
>
> If we were not willing to face risks in life, whatever they are,
then life would be dull, always the same, boring.

When I read this and other posts I'm aware of how strongly I've
held my Christian viewpoint about sex being for marriage. When
I look back at dating and sex, I remember liking very much the
fun part of kissing and being physically involved with the boys I
dated. In fact, I have great memories of those experiences and
don't regret them at all. I didn't have sexual intercourse until I
was married and feel good about that decision for the most part
(ie. I'm glad I didn't have multiple partners or VD or pregnancy).
On the other hand, what I don't like about the way my husband
and I "did it" is that there was heavy indoctrination about the evils
of sex outside of marriage and the need for extremely tight
boundaries (which we repeatedly crossed) leading up to the
wedding day and that brought with it all kinds of guilt and a
sense of failure that wasn't good for me or our new marriage. I
wish I had felt it fine to explore each other while not going "all
the way" before marriage.

The reason I asked this question about sex and dating (and
have so appreciated the variety of responses) is that I guess I
still prefer the "no sex until marriage" view but am unsure what it
means to "impart" that view to my kids without all the baggage of
their being judged harshly by God or that they will naturally
become pregnant or filled with VD. I'm realizing that what Shyrley
said here is largely true—the risks are smaller than my
faith community has admitted and mostly they've used the Bible
and conditioning to maintain the status quo (no sex before
marriage). And while I can stand back from Shyrley and think,
"Fine for you" (I feel no judgment at all) I still feel queasy thinking
of my kids having sex before marriage.

Is it wrong to want our kids to hold our values, share our core
beleifs about things like sex? Oh I know you'll say it isn't wrong.
But how do we go about it? One of you (sorry I forgot who now)
said that she wants her daughter to be a virgin until marriage
and hopes that she will marry a man who is committed to God
like she is. That's how I've seen it too. Now I am just trying to
picture how our kids live with freedom in so many areas and
then feel this parental clamp down on things like drinking, sex,
drug experimentation. Or do you?

My daughter has two really wonderful books: Girlosophy and
Girlosophy 2. I like them because the writer points out all the
implications of choosing various relationships with boys/men
(she does it without some big guilt trip or admonition about
which to choose). She describes what the benefits are and price
to be paid in each scenario. And she affirms the girl in her
thoughtful choices and even in her mistakes. It was such a
contrast to all the girl Bible study guides I looked at that are all
about repeatedly telling girls that they had better be careful or
they'll end up in bed and judged by God.

I like the Girlosophy approach a lot. But I still find that I want to
be bold enough to say what I believe (even if they don't agree
with it) as a marker for how they form their beliefs. What do you
think? Does that make sense?

What is scary about this form of parenting is that it feels as
though all the markers for how to teach my kids are gone. Yet I
think of them as being inexperienced to make the informed
decisions that I would hope they make. I want to state strongly
when I think something is dangerous or bad for them. And I hope
to create a context that will bear that out (not letting them go to a
party where I think drugs will be, saving car dating for later teen
years rather than early teen years). Is that unreasonable?

Julie B

[email protected]

In a message dated 1/12/03 6:33:43 PM, julie@... writes:

<< Now I am just trying to

picture how our kids live with freedom in so many areas and

then feel this parental clamp down on things like drinking, sex,

drug experimentation. Or do you? >>

I'm not clamping down about anything with my kids. Our dialog is still
really clear and open and I would not want to risk their trust by any threats
or ultimatums.

<<What is scary about this form of parenting is that it feels as

though all the markers for how to teach my kids are gone. Yet I

think of them as being inexperienced to make the informed

decisions that I would hope they make. I want to state strongly

when I think something is dangerous or bad for them. And I hope

to create a context that will bear that out (not letting them go to a

party where I think drugs will be, saving car dating for later teen

years rather than early teen years). Is that unreasonable?>>

I don't think a family can be practicing a strict form of Christianity and
still give their kids real trust and freedom.

If I believed that a mistake on my part or my child's could land them in an
eternal fiery pit, I would be living my life differently. For those who do
fear fiery pits, that becomes an abiding priority, doesn't it? And how a
child's self esteem is falls way down on the charts?

<<without all the baggage of

their being judged harshly by God or that they will naturally

become pregnant or filled with VD. >>

That appeared lower in your post than the first mention:

<<I didn't have sexual intercourse until I

was married and feel good about that decision for the most part

(ie. I'm glad I didn't have multiple partners or VD or pregnancy). >>

I had sex with three men, all of whom I trusted and knew well, before I was
married, and didn't have VD or pregnancy. But I saw that later in your post
you filed that under a natural consequence threatened by the church (or a
Godly punishment, maybe).

I'm not sure both discussions can mesh.

Sandra

[email protected]

In a message dated 1/12/03 6:52:01 PM, kbcdlovejo@... writes:

<< Sure, risks are exciting. And consequences need to be weighed. I just want
him to be aware of all the possible consequences. >>

I told my boys if they get a girl pregnant they are fathers for life. Maybe
they won't have the opportunity to be decent fathers. Maybe they'll live
with a life of guilt for not being with or around that child. So they need
to avoid that permanent change.

Sandra

Jim Selvage

Julie,

I just wanted to let you know, that though I am new to unschooling, I am
with you on the these issues. I am also one who would like my children to
save sex for marriage and we have talked about that and told them why.
Since I am new to unschooling, I was waiting to let others answer this, but
I also know that my value is not going to change because we are unschoolers.
Our children already know that we have these values, and why, and they know
it because we have talked about things, talked about the bible and why we
believe it, etc.

Neither my husband or I were raised in a Christian home, so our values were
not put upon us, we came to Christ of our own accord, and in some ways,
probably hold our views more strongly because of that. We, of course, hope
that our children will take on our values, but if they do not, they will
still always be our children and we will love them for who they are. Of
course, the children see the values played out on a daily basis and we talk
a lot about why we do what we do, etc. Just my two cents!

many blessings,
erin
>> When I read this and other posts I'm aware of how strongly I've
> held my Christian viewpoint about sex being for marriage. When
>
> The reason I asked this question about sex and dating (and
> have so appreciated the variety of responses) is that I guess I
> still prefer the "no sex until marriage" view but am unsure what it
> means to "impart" that view to my kids without all the baggage of
> their being judged harshly by God or that they will naturally
> become pregnant or filled with VD. I'm realizing that what Shyrley
> said here is largely true-the risks are smaller than my
> faith community has admitted and mostly they've used the Bible
> and conditioning to maintain the status quo (no sex before
> marriage). And while I can stand back from Shyrley and think,
> "Fine for you" (I feel no judgment at all) I still feel queasy thinking
> of my kids having sex before marriage.
>
> Is it wrong to want our kids to hold our values, share our core
> beleifs about things like sex? Oh I know you'll say it isn't wrong.
> But how do we go about it? One of you (sorry I forgot who now)
> said that she wants her daughter to be a virgin until marriage
> and hopes that she will marry a man who is committed to God
> like she is. That's how I've seen it too. Now I am just trying to
> picture how our kids live with freedom in so many areas and
> then feel this parental clamp down on things like drinking, sex,
> drug experimentation. Or do you?
>

kayb85 <[email protected]>

> Hmmm? That's what birth control (and, as a drastic measure,
abortion) is
> for....to enable us to have sex with people we *don't* want
children
> with....or at least don't want them with at a particular point in
time.

I would think that abortion would be opposed to the philosophy of
unschooling. We always respect our children and take care of their
needs. Why not respect the most helpless of all children--the
unborn?

People study the effects of drugs on the unborn, the effects of the
mother's emotions on the unborn and what effects literature reading
and music have on the unborn. And then we're going to say it's ok to
take their lives? I don't think that taking the life of a child
sounds like even an option for an unschooler.

Sheila

[email protected]

In a message dated 1/12/2003 9:44:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, sheran@...
writes:
> I would think that abortion would be opposed to the philosophy of
> unschooling. We always respect our children and take care of their
> needs. Why not respect the most helpless of all children--the
> unborn?
>
> People study the effects of drugs on the unborn, the effects of the
> mother's emotions on the unborn and what effects literature reading
> and music have on the unborn. And then we're going to say it's ok to
> take their lives? I don't think that taking the life of a child
> sounds like even an option for an unschooler.


I think CHOICE is the operative word. WOULD I have one? I seriously doubt it.
Do I think I should have the option? You betcha!

~Kelly


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[email protected]

In a message dated 1/12/03 7:44:28 PM, sheran@... writes:

<< People study the effects of drugs on the unborn, the effects of the
mother's emotions on the unborn and what effects literature reading
and music have on the unborn. And then we're going to say it's ok to
take their lives? I don't think that taking the life of a child
sounds like even an option for an unschooler. >>

This isn't a religious list and I don't think this is a good topic for this
list at all.

Sandra

kayb85 <[email protected]>

--- In [email protected], kbcdlovejo@a... wrote:
> In a message dated 1/12/2003 9:44:27 PM Eastern Standard Time,
sheran@p...
> writes:
> > I would think that abortion would be opposed to the philosophy of
> > unschooling. We always respect our children and take care of
their
> > needs. Why not respect the most helpless of all children--the
> > unborn?
> >
> > People study the effects of drugs on the unborn, the effects of
the
> > mother's emotions on the unborn and what effects literature
reading
> > and music have on the unborn. And then we're going to say it's
ok to
> > take their lives? I don't think that taking the life of a child
> > sounds like even an option for an unschooler.
>
>
> I think CHOICE is the operative word. WOULD I have one? I seriously
doubt it.
> Do I think I should have the option? You betcha!

But how is that different than saying, "Would I spank my child? I
seriously doubt it. But I think I should have the option!".
Or, "Would I subject my child to hours of homework each night? No,
but I should have the option." You wouldn't hear that either. You
wouldn't hear those things on an unschooling list very often.

I'm not even talking about having a choice politically (I do have an
opinion on that, but that would be getting off the topic of
unschooling so I won't even mention it). What I'm talking about is
that giving a child what he needs--even before birth--would seem to
me to be in line with the unschooling philosophy.

Sheila

kayb85 <[email protected]>

--- In [email protected], SandraDodd@a... wrote:
>
> In a message dated 1/12/03 7:44:28 PM, sheran@p... writes:
>
> << People study the effects of drugs on the unborn, the effects of
the
> mother's emotions on the unborn and what effects literature reading
> and music have on the unborn. And then we're going to say it's ok
to
> take their lives? I don't think that taking the life of a child
> sounds like even an option for an unschooler. >>
>
> This isn't a religious list and I don't think this is a good topic
for this
> list at all.
>
> Sandra

I never said anything about religion. I am not talking about whether
or not God forbids abortion. I'm not even talking about whether or
not abortion should be legal.

I'm saying that I think having an abortion would be incompatable with
the unschooling philosophy in the same way spanking or forced
seatwork would be incompatable with the unschooling lifestyle. It is
not putting the needs of the child first.

Sheila

[email protected]

In a message dated 1/12/03 8:13:06 PM, sheran@... writes:

<< Or, "Would I subject my child to hours of homework each night? No,
but I should have the option." >>

We do have the option and have chosen not to.

<<I'm not even talking about having a choice politically (I do have an
opinion on that, but that would be getting off the topic of
unschooling so I won't even mention it). What I'm talking about is
that giving a child what he needs--even before birth--would seem to
me to be in line with the unschooling philosophy. >>

I don't think this is a good unschooling topic.

Sandra

Shyrley

"Julie Bogart " wrote:

> When I read this and other posts I'm aware of how strongly I've
> held my Christian viewpoint about sex being for marriage.
>

snipped

>
>
> The reason I asked this question about sex and dating (and
> have so appreciated the variety of responses) is that I guess I
> still prefer the "no sex until marriage" view but am unsure what it
> means to "impart" that view to my kids without all the baggage of
> their being judged harshly by God or that they will naturally
> become pregnant or filled with VD. I'm realizing that what Shyrley
> said here is largely true—the risks are smaller than my
> faith community has admitted and mostly they've used the Bible
> and conditioning to maintain the status quo (no sex before
> marriage). And while I can stand back from Shyrley and think,
> "Fine for you" (I feel no judgment at all) I still feel queasy thinking
> of my kids having sex before marriage.
>

I think it is our differing viewpoints about marriage too. I personally feel that marriage isn't important. It's Govt interferance in a partnership or relationship. Wy should I need a piece of paper
issued by the Govt to say we're 'married'.
My husband and I didn't get married for ages. After we had our first child we found out that there were extra tax benefits to being married, so we popped down the local registrars office and did the
deed. It meant nothing to either of us.
As it happens its fortunate we did as 9 years later we decided to move here and the INS would not have let me in or his kids unless we'd been legally married. DH couldn't have bought in his family
without that piece of paper. The INS would also have been suspicious if we'd married just before the immigration application. As it was they grilled me for 40 mins about whetehr my marriage was *real*
and whether I had married him just to get into America 10 years later! This is with our 3 kids standing next to me! Like I'd have been *that* desperate to get into the US that I'd be with a man fior 10
years and have 3 kids.
Back home in the UK the tax incentive has now gone so when we get home we might get divorced (costs £30) just to annoy the more strait-laced relatives ;-)

Shyrley

Shyrley

"

>
> I never said anything about religion. I am not talking about whether
> or not God forbids abortion. I'm not even talking about whether or
> not abortion should be legal.
>
> I'm saying that I think having an abortion would be incompatable with
> the unschooling philosophy in the same way spanking or forced
> seatwork would be incompatable with the unschooling lifestyle. It is
> not putting the needs of the child first.
>
> Sheila
>

Which leads to the question....when does the ball of cells become a child? 2 cells? 4 cells?1 million?

Shyrley

Mary Bianco

>From: "kayb85 <sheran@...>" <sheran@...>

<<I'm not even talking about having a choice politically (I do have an
opinion on that, but that would be getting off the topic of
unschooling so I won't even mention it). What I'm talking about is
that giving a child what he needs--even before birth--would seem to
me to be in line with the unschooling philosophy.>>


Wouldn't that also have to do with when people actually think there is a
baby there? Not everyone believes it's at conception. And would you consider
the day after pill abortion?

Mary B


_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Mary Bianco

>From: SandraDodd@...

<<I don't think this is a good unschooling topic.>>


I can certainly understand where this can get messy yet understand the idea
behind questioning how this follows the unschooling philosophy. She's not
getting religious or even political about it. Just inquiring.

Mary B


_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

Mary Bianco

<<From: Shyrley <shyrley.williams@...>

<<I think it is our differing viewpoints about marriage too. I personally
feel that marriage isn't important.>>


I agree. I don't see marriage as all important either. What I see as
important is the commitment to the relationship between the two people that
want to make it.

Mary B

_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

Fetteroll

on 1/12/03 8:32 PM, Julie Bogart <julie@...> at
julie@... wrote:

> The reason I asked this question about sex and dating (and
> have so appreciated the variety of responses) is that I guess I
> still prefer the "no sex until marriage" view but am unsure what it
> means to "impart" that view to my kids without all the baggage of
> their being judged harshly by God or that they will naturally
> become pregnant or filled with VD.

Rather than telling them why something should be important to them, how
about telling they why something was important to you. Why *you* made the
choices for *yourself*. Rather than trying to convince them to think like
you, trust that they look up to you and that your words will have more
weight than other view points.

They need those other view points so they can decide for themselves. If
their information is limited to one view point then they aren't really
thinking about something. They're just memorizing what they're supposed to
do. If the conclusions are as universally right as 1+1=2 then they'll come
to the same conclusions.

> And while I can stand back from Shyrley and think,
> "Fine for you" (I feel no judgment at all) I still feel queasy thinking
> of my kids having sex before marriage.

I think that's perfectly natural! It's a tough process to get from seeing
our role as helping them make the right (by our standards) decisions to
helping them make decisions.

If we live what we believe to be right and true and pass on why it feels
right and true *for us*, then it's very likely they will find it's right and
true for them too. Or at least they'll have very positive feelings about it.
If we *make* them do what we believe is right and true, if we fill them full
of fears of what will happen if they don't do what we believe is right and
true, then what happens when they're away from us? Will the fear be enough
to hold them? Will the need to be free from control be so strong that they
will do what feels wrong just to be free?

Joyce

Fetteroll

on 1/12/03 10:22 PM, SandraDodd@... at SandraDodd@... wrote:

> I don't think this is a good unschooling topic.

The thoughts of child respect and abortion do seem incompatible so it seems
worthwhile to discuss.

I think it can be discussed if we stick to why we believe those thoughts are
not incompatible and not whether those whys are right or wrong. But if we
start treading into the "How can you possibly believe that" territory, then
we've gotten onto a topic that will go nowhere and fill up people's mail
boxes for no unschooling benefit.

For me, I'd extend the respect to what kind of life I felt I could provide
for a child. Probably there's rarely a perfect time to have a child, but
there are circumstances that would clearly be soulfully damaging to a child.
Where someone draws that line, is going to be different for every person.

And fodder for flaming debate so we don't need to discuss the rightness of
where to draw the line or even whether it's right to draw it at all.

Joyce

Julie Bogart <[email protected]>

Thank you Erin for your post. I am in so many transitions right
now my head is spinning. My husband and I too also became
Christians of our own accord. Now I am going through a serious
reevaluation of much of the theology I've been taught and have
believed. But for now, we still do hold to many of our values from
that Christian commitment and I think that is what is leaving me
feeling vulnerable and at times just worn out.

Thank you for speaking up. It helps to hear multiple voices on
each issue. Like you, I want my children to choose their beleifs
for themselves.

Julie B

--- In [email protected], "Jim Selvage"
<jselvage@u...> wrote:
> Julie,
>
> I just wanted to let you know, that though I am new to
unschooling, I am
> with you on the these issues. I am also one who would like my
children to
> save sex for marriage and we have talked about that and told
them why.
> Since I am new to unschooling, I was waiting to let others
answer this, but
> I also know that my value is not going to change because we
are unschoolers.
> Our children already know that we have these values, and why,
and they know
> it because we have talked about things, talked about the bible
and why we
> believe it, etc.
>
> Neither my husband or I were raised in a Christian home, so
our values were
> not put upon us, we came to Christ of our own accord, and in
some ways,
> probably hold our views more strongly because of that. We, of
course, hope
> that our children will take on our values, but if they do not, they
will
> still always be our children and we will love them for who they
are. Of
> course, the children see the values played out on a daily basis
and we talk
> a lot about why we do what we do, etc. Just my two cents!
>
> many blessings,
> erin

[email protected]

In a message dated 1/12/03 9:44:28 PM Eastern Standard Time, sheran@...
writes:

> ? I don't think that taking the life of a child
> sounds like even an option for an unschooler.
>
> Sheila
>
>
>
Some don't see it as "taking the life of a child"

*~*Elissa Jill*~*
unschooling Momma to 3 beautiful brilliant people
Loving partner for life to Joey
terrible guitarist, fair singer and happy woman.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Julie Bogart <[email protected]>

Joyce thanks for a very helpful post. VERY helpful.

So far, this is exactly how I have dealt with our views, but at times
wonder if I am being too "post modern" in my "This is my view
and I found it right for me; you'll have to come to your own view"
way of expressing myself. Sometimes I wonder if kids just want
to know that there is a right way or a wrong way... all this
nuancing of everything can feel so muddled... and yet that is
precisely where I find myself right now. No getting away from it or
around it. And that modeling of the struggle may be helpful to
them some day.

The biggest benefit of going through a spiritual crisis that I can
see is that I have far more empathy for multiple positions,
beliefs, ideas and how they can be arrived at with integrity even
when I don't share the conclusions.

And thanks for hosting a truly diverse group of women. I know
that certain topics can push buttons, but it's the variety of replies
that helps me the most—not just one party line that is the only
acceptable answer.

Peace,
Julie


--- In [email protected], Fetteroll
<fetteroll@e...> wrote:
> on 1/12/03 8:32 PM, Julie Bogart <julie@b...> at
> julie@b... wrote:
>
> > The reason I asked this question about sex and dating (and
> > have so appreciated the variety of responses) is that I guess
I
> > still prefer the "no sex until marriage" view but am unsure
what it
> > means to "impart" that view to my kids without all the
baggage of
> > their being judged harshly by God or that they will naturally
> > become pregnant or filled with VD.
>
> Rather than telling them why something should be important to
them, how
> about telling they why something was important to you. Why
*you* made the
> choices for *yourself*. Rather than trying to convince them to
think like
> you, trust that they look up to you and that your words will have
more
> weight than other view points.
>
> They need those other view points so they can decide for
themselves. If
> their information is limited to one view point then they aren't
really
> thinking about something. They're just memorizing what they're
supposed to
> do. If the conclusions are as universally right as 1+1=2 then
they'll come
> to the same conclusions.
>
> > And while I can stand back from Shyrley and think,
> > "Fine for you" (I feel no judgment at all) I still feel queasy
thinking
> > of my kids having sex before marriage.
>
> I think that's perfectly natural! It's a tough process to get from
seeing
> our role as helping them make the right (by our standards)
decisions to
> helping them make decisions.
>
> If we live what we believe to be right and true and pass on why
it feels
> right and true *for us*, then it's very likely they will find it's right =

and
> true for them too. Or at least they'll have very positive feelings
about it.
> If we *make* them do what we believe is right and true, if we fill
them full
> of fears of what will happen if they don't do what we believe is
right and
> true, then what happens when they're away from us? Will the
fear be enough
> to hold them? Will the need to be free from control be so strong
that they
> will do what feels wrong just to be free?
>
> Joyce

Julie Bogart <[email protected]>

--- In [email protected], Fetteroll
<fetteroll@e...> wrote:
> on 1/12/03 10:22 PM, SandraDodd@a... at SandraDodd@a...
wrote:
>
> > I don't think this is a good unschooling topic.
>
> The thoughts of child respect and abortion do seem
incompatible so it seems
> worthwhile to discuss.

Thanks. I am interested in discussing it.

>
> For me, I'd extend the respect to what kind of life I felt I could
provide
> for a child. Probably there's rarely a perfect time to have a
child,
but
> there are circumstances that would clearly be soulfully
damaging to a child.
> Where someone draws that line, is going to be different for
every person.

I think the issue of abortion cuts deeply because it focuses on
two very significant parts of family. The child who is conceived is
received as a child/baby when the mother who is looking forward
to pregnancy sees the little + sign on her pregnancy test strip.
The woman who finds herself pregnant unexpectedly does not
feel she is a mother at that moment in quite the same way but
almost feels invaded by an alien being that is sent to ruin her life.
And I can imagine that would be terrifying and lonely.

Starting from these two places creates very different emotions
about the role of abortion in our families or for women in general.
Abortion is legal (not as a right as in free speech but as in legal
like drinking alcohol is legal) because of those women who feel
keenly the need to protect women who bear children from feeling
victimized by the obligations of pregnancy and child rearing.

But for women who start with the premise that children are
sacred from conception or that pregnancy begins the role of
nurturing that life, then abortion stands in relief against that view.
And as an unschooler, I can see how it is perfectly natural to
want to evaluate at what point we say we are mothers whose
role it is to protect and care for that little life (even if it means
giving it up for adoption or raising it as a single mother) rather
than ending it before it has emerged from the womb.

>
> And fodder for flaming debate so we don't need to discuss the
rightness of
> where to draw the line or even whether it's right to draw it at all.

Makes sense to me.

After reading so much about abortion on the other side of the
debate (which for me meant reading pro-choice material since I
had always been pro-life) in the last year, I am much more
sympathetic to the desire to protect women. I understand better
not wanting to criminalize abortion. I also understand better why
women feel unfairly singled out by their reproductive
capabilities to bear the burden of child-bearing and rearing.

Even after that, though, I find that motherhood for me began the
first time that little strip turned red or showed the + sign. My
odyssey of parenting began in that moment. And it continues
with the same level of concern and agitation and joy that it began
with that day six weeks after conception.

In our home, abortion would be an incompatible choice with
unschooling. As I raise a teenage daughter, I find that is how we
see it too. Motherhood is the direct result of sexual activity that
is unprotected (and then even sometimes when it is, as we have
daily proof with our number five who defied the condom). I would
hope that she would take that potential responsbility seriously
even before she is married and would not choose abortion if
faced with pregnancy.

Julie

Jim Selvage

Julie,

I am glad I could help a little. I know this is quite a transition all
around (unschooling) and my husband and I have been having some amazing
discussions about it and how it fits into our previous beliefs.

I think even though we take on a set of beliefs, out of choice, we still
need to continually test those beliefs up to what is happening in our lives.
Though I too am still holding on to my beliefs in Jesus, I have changed a
lot since I first became a Christian and am still changing today! .

many blessings,
erin


> Thank you Erin for your post. I am in so many transitions right
> now my head is spinning. My husband and I too also became
> Christians of our own accord. Now I am going through a serious
> reevaluation of much of the theology I've been taught and have
> believed. But for now, we still do hold to many of our values from
> that Christian commitment and I think that is what is leaving me
> feeling vulnerable and at times just worn out.
>
> Thank you for speaking up. It helps to hear multiple voices on
> each issue. Like you, I want my children to choose their beleifs
> for themselves.
>
> Julie B