We did it all wrong.

Today is my 41st birthday, and it's difficult to avoid the introspection. Last year, hitting that big-4-0 was more than a little anticlimactic, probably because I was just a little over a week and a half out from major surgery and felt like doing little more than curling up in a heap of pillows and sleeping. This year, I still don't have the fanfare of birthday celebration ... it quite literally is "just another day". I made breakfast for everybody, washed everyone's laundry, and will spend the rest of my day doing the same things I do every other day of the year. That's pretty much the way it's always been. My husband is not one to go out of his way to make grand (or even small?) romantic gestures, and as several have quipped, at my age anything grand or spectacular could be dangerous to my health ...

I shouldn't be surprised that things look different at our house than in most other households. We've never really done anything the way "everyone else" does it--be it birthdays, Valentine's Day (most people don't have birthday celebrations ON Valentine's Day ... but we do!), Mother's Day, birthdays, anniversaries, even Christmas are all rather unconventional here. That's just how we roll.

Pete and I have always marched to a different drummer. In fact, by almost every societal standard, we are marching to the WRONG drummer. We have done everything "wrong" since our relationship began. I really wonder sometimes how on earth we've managed to keep seven children alive, considering how completely incapable we are of doing anything right! (If you can't appreciate sarcasm ... well, you might want to stop reading my blog. I season liberally with it.)

Our relationship began under the most ridiculous of circumstances. I said yes to that first date because I couldn't get RID of the guy. I knew he'd asked out one of my best friends and she'd said no ... and I knew I was his second choice. I'm ok with that; I just wanted him to leave me alone, and if that meant going out with him just so I could break up with him, then fine. Anyway ... we never should have even dated in the first place. He was a senior, I was just a sophomore. Neither of us had a clue what a healthy relationship was supposed to look like. He was from a military family, and the military was completely foreign to me. We had two completely different religious backgrounds. Hmm ... pretty much the only thing we had in common was music. Ahhh, yes, that band geek thing. Disaster waiting to happen.

Actually, it really was.

Instead of doing things the way everyone KNOWS they are supposed to be done--graduation, four years of college, getting the career started, THEN looking for a mate and starting a family--oh NO. We just threw all common sense to the wind and broke every rule in the book. I quit high school because I was pregnant, we got married, he joined the Army and started basic training ten days after the wedding, leaving me to live at my parents' house until the Army decided his wife could live with him. Instead of staying in the "teen parent program" (which, quite frankly, was a complete insult to anyone with a brain ... just because we did something we shouldn't have doesn't mean I suddenly went from AP-level courses to below-average grade level ability), I signed up for the GED test. Of course, taking that exam without all of the suggested preparatory classes was a bad idea; I have no idea how on earth I managed to ace the exam the first time. Must have been sheer luck. It's sad that my parents will never be able to say that both of their children are successful; I'm so thankful that at least my brother graduated from college so they have someone to be proud of.

We never should have made it to our first anniversary. We were way too young and immature. People told us we were being stupid, that we should either give the baby up for adoption or abort him so we could both "enjoy our youth" and get married when we were actually ready to instead of when we "had to", because we might decide that we didn't want to be together anyway. The big question was how would we ever manage to have a successful life without college, and how would either of us go to college if we got married and started a family so young? Everyone knows that the military isn't a good way to support a family. With all of those deployments and separations and all of the hardships that we went through, combined with never having enough money to do anything other than survive from paycheck to paycheck, how were we ever going to get ahead, or even be happy?

Of course, we have a whole list of did-it-wrongs. There's that whole homeschool thing ... you know, our children should have turned out to be antisocial pariahs, completely incapable of holding intelligent conversations, and there's no way any of them would ever be able to get a job. How would they, as crippled as they are by our poor parenting choices? And then there was the fact that there are SO MANY of them. Goodness knows we obviously just had  no self-control; it's a shame we never figured out what caused it before we were "stuck" with seven children. Surely we'll never have any way to buy them all the best of anything, and they'll never be able to go to college and escape the cycle of poverty that we cursed them with. Right?

Sound harsh? Guess what? I have heard EVERY SINGLE ONE of these zingers over the course of the last twenty-five years.

Since when did it become okay to tell people that there is a right or wrong way to approach this life? Since when do we have to follow a formula to achieve that level of success that we're "supposed to" achieve? Since when is success measured by the number of degrees we manage to attain or the number of zeroes in our bank account balance (although ... we've had plenty of zero balances over the years, so ... hey, success!!), or even the order and spacing of major life events? Are children who are born 11 months apart really going to be that messed up?

My hard-working hubby will start yet another college term tomorrow evening. After completing his work day, he'll spend five hours in a classroom. He's just two classes away from completing his Associate's degree, and after that will only need a few more credits before he's finished his Bachelor's degree. He spent twenty years in the Army, working harder than many people ever will. Funny thing is, even without a single day of college, he was able to secure his DREAM job--one he'd told me ten years prior to retiring from the Army that he wanted to have "when he grew up". He didn't need a degree to support his family for 25 years. He's only going to college because the corporation he works for wants its employees to have a degree. His degree isn't even related to what he does for a living. If it wasn't for his GI Bill, I'd say it was a complete waste of money ... except it gives him job security. Am I proud of this man, who is living his dream despite doing things totally contrary to the norm? YOU BET I AM. But I can also say that him getting a college degree won't make me respect him ANY more than I already do. The only thing it will change for him or for the rest of the family is a slight pay raise--the incentive his employer offers for their ability to say that hey, all of their employees have done things the right way!

We've both done a lot of growing up in the two and a half decades we've been together. We're both far more mature, more secure in our own skin, and far stronger spiritually than we were when we made that rather brash decision to cast off all common sense and get married. But looking back, now at the "old" age I'm at now, I can say with 100% certainty that I wouldn't change a thing. We have a WONDERFUL life, even if we did all of it completely WRONG.

**DISCLAIMER** My adherence to grammatical rules was tossed aside while I composed this blog post. To. Make. A. Point. Mmmkay?

I just don't know how you do it!

DISCLAIMER--if you can't take a joke or if you are easily offended by people whose life choices are different than yours, you may want to find another blog to read. I'm a conservative (but not legalistic), Christian, homeschooling mother of seven children who would have gladly have had more if my body had not gone into full mutiny. It is obvious that I am different. I don't care. And guess what? It doesn't offend me that YOU may be different, or that you might find my decisions insane, ridiculous, whatever. I just don't care; I'm too busy living my life to tell you how you've got to live yours. You're entitled to your opinion, as am I. If you're okay with that, and you're okay with hearing the "other" side of the story, then by all means, read on! If not, well, don't say I didn't warn you.

"I just don't know how you do it."

I honestly do not know how many times a year/month/week I hear this statement. The minute people start counting all these little blonde heads (even though right now there are--don't laugh-- *only* five), the questions about how I "do it all" come up. Inevitably, the question of school will come up once or twice a week, with a variety of responses. About half the time, I get a wonderfully supportive, "I think that's great!", but just as often, I am befuddled with how to respond when someone starts rattling off their own reasons for why they *can't* homeschool. I don't ever recall asking why ANYONE doesn't homeschool. Ever. People just feel the need to justify their reasons, I suppose. I'm not so sure I understand that response, but considering I'm in a particularly snarky mood today, I'm going to join in on the argument and tell some of "you people" (remember what I said about getting offended? Keep that in mind.) who send your kids to public or private schools  why it is I just don't understand "how you do it".

1. I'm a major control freak. This is probably THE biggest reason I had issues with having our oldest two in a public school setting. I wasn't in control--of the curriculum, of their time, of their influences, their clothing, their school supplies, not even of their lunches. It was ridiculous, and I felt like I was handing the job of parenting my children over to a total stranger for six hours a day. When that kindergarten teacher told me that I had to tell my 5-year-old to stop reading because it was making the other kids [who couldn't read yet] feel bad about themselves, I lost it. The control monster in me took over. When we put them back in a public high school for just one semester, I felt like I'd had all of my maternal control ripped away. I do not do well with that. I am the one who will answer for how my children have been influenced, and because of that, I'm going to run with this control-freak nature God made me with and BE in control of those things I have every right to control.
2. Public schools start too early in the morning for me. Petty, I know, but ask my mom--I have been a night owl ALL of my life. I came by it honestly--she is the same way. My brain clicks into full gear at about 10pm, and doesn't settle in for the night until about 1 or 2am. This does not make for an easy transition into early mornings. I hear all the time about how to make the morning rush easier, how to get the kids up and out of the house without a struggle; my kids aren't the problem. I'm the one who would not hear the alarm at 6am, and by 7:30 we'd all be scrambling probably three or four days a week, just to get UP and out the door. Thankfully, homeschooling allows me the freedom to "do school" on my brain's schedule, not the one determined by the local administration. This is yet another one where I have to say, "I do NOT know how you do it."
3. I'm selfish, and I want to be the one seeing all their 'light bulb" moments. I love watching my children learn. I love seeing the fascination in their eyes as they soak up information and I simply cannot fathom sharing that look of accomplishment that they get upon mastering a new skill. I just can't. I'm their mother. I want to be the one with them as they learn to read. I want to be the one cheering them on to apply that new division skill. 
4. I ENJOY being with my children. It perplexes me to be confronted by parents who seemingly cannot stand being around their own offspring. Goodness, folks--if YOU don't like 'em, do you really think a complete stranger is going to be thrilled to have to spend all day with them!? No, I'm not the type of person who makes an idol of my progeny; I rather enjoy having that elusive quiet time to myself and a date every so often with the man I married, but I have to tell you--I find it rather strange to hear a mother say she cannot wait to get away from her children. It seems very counter-intuitive to me. I happen to like mine. Even the little tornado whose damage path leaves me pulling my hair out several times a week. My life would be completely different if they weren't an all-day, every-day fixture in my life, and I dare say I wouldn't enjoy it as much.
5. I don't like summer vacation. It's hot, and I don't like hot. Everywhere you can go is crowded, and I don't like crowds. I would much rather spend my summer inside, in the comfort of my air conditioned house, sipping sweet tea with reckless abandon. I like to take our time "off" when everyone else is in school--during the cool days of fall and spring, when being outside is gloriously refreshing and the crowds are sparse. I'm weird that way. Of course, I also detest Black Friday, which has on more than one occasion been used to support the idea that I'm more than a little bit goofy in this respect. Point is, I don't like being told when to take my vacations. If my husband is off work, ALL of us are off. When it's less crowded and cooler, we take our vacations and enjoy being somewhat removed from the craziness.
6. There is no way I have the patience for institutionalized education. This one goes WAY back. I do not like being told I have to stop what I'm doing and wait for the rest of the class to catch up. I spent many a day in elementary school bored out of my skull, and I don't want that for my children. If they want to work ahead, I let them. Oh--and the other thing about waiting--I do NOT do well in lines. Waiting for the first bell, waiting around in the bus lane, I just get very restless. I don't like waiting 9 weeks for a progress report or report card to know if one of my children is having trouble in any particular subject. I don't like waiting. If there's a problem, I want to know now so I can work on it. Maybe y'all had better luck, but the only time during our three years of experience in the public school system, I had virtually zero communication with my children's teachers unless it was time for a progress report or report card.
7. Excused absences. I loathe them. The idea that a child who has not seen his or her father for six months would have to miss a day's assignments and potentially risk their grades because Dad is being welcomed home from a deployment is not just unfathomable, it's INEXCUSABLE. Oh, and in case you are wondering, this actually happened to several of our friends the days their dads came home from a deployment to Saudi Arabia/Kuwait. In fact, my children were two of the very few school-age children who were present when those buses pulled up because it was during school hours, and the school didn't allow them an excused absence. I find it ridiculous that a parent has to justify an absence with a doctor's note. Who do these children belong to, anyway? Shoot, if we need a mental health day, we're taking one!
8. Textbooks give me the creeps. It's like Bac-O's. I don't serve my kids fake bacon, and I'm not keen on the idea of them getting watered-down, purified, politicized, and politically-corrected lessons. 
9. Buses. I've ridden them. My older  two children have had experience with them. They're horrible. Everything about them is horrible. Again, petty? Maybe. But these are MY complaints, remember? My turn.
10. I do not EVER want my children to be targeted by bullies just because they love to learn. I want to be by their sides as they mature, showing them how to handle situations and circumstances they do not understand or that make them uncomfortable. I do not want them to ever feel as if they are alone in this big world. Go ahead, tell me I'm sheltering them. I assure you, I'm doing little more for them than I would my baby cucumber plants, which I lovingly "train" up a trellis so they can spread their leaves and have something to grab onto for support when wind or harsh rain threatens.
11. This may be the most maddening of all of my reasons, but I guarantee you, it is behind every single excuse I hear listed by those who "can't" homeschool for any of a hundred reasons. The reason? I DON'T WANT TO. There. I said it. Is there something "wrong" with not wanting to send my kids to public school? Only if there's something "wrong" with not wanting to homeschool.

Home education is not for everyone. Having children is not for everyone. Marriage is not for everyone. College is not for everyone. Owning a home isn't for everyone. Cats aren't for everyone. Gardening isn't for everyone. And that's okay, because NONE of these things is an issue that will threaten our salvation in and of itself. I have convictions that some others of you do not have. Some of you have convictions that I do not share. That's okay too, as long as those convictions aren't formed on opinions that violate the Word of God. But ya know what, public/private school parents? I just don't know how you do it! :)

The end of the innocence?

This afternoon, yet another shred of innocence was chipped away from America's youth when the Boy Scouts of America announced that it will now allow "openly and avowed" homosexual members. Not leaders, they assure us. No, we don't want anyone to go accusing the Scouts of opening *that* can of worms. No, this is simply an admission that they will now allow a homosexual boy to be open about his attraction to his own gender.

Yay for them! Go Boy Scouts! Way to go for finally "getting with the program" and "evolving" past all of those old-fashioned, archaic, and oppressive standards that tied you to all of those religious nut jobs! Now our boys can be "loud and proud" about their homosexuality! It's about time the BSA caught up with the GSA, right?

Lest you not know me well, the sarcasm was dripping from that like a 3-year-old with a popsicle. For the record, I am thoroughly disgusted. I think it was the worst decision the BSA could have made, and I do believe they have alienated thousands of supporters and they may be seeing a sharp decrease in their membership as a result. This was an organization KNOWN for its adherence to strong moral values and principles. Yet what they did was cave to political and social pressure to "evolve" and make gay boys more comfortable in their ranks.

Go ahead, call me a hater. I'm used to it by now. You may as well throw around the "homophobe" label too, while you're at it, since that's the token accusation, right? After all, I'm "one of those" who believes that homosexuality is contagious like leprosy, and of course if one gay boy is allowed in, he's going to go recruiting.

Yet more sarcasm. I'm in that kind of mood tonight.

Actually, I'm not going to throw around the typical justification for my opinion. I'm not even going to bring the Bible into this at all, because sometimes, common sense just needs to speak for itself. I want to explain just why it is I'm completely appalled by the BSA's change of policy.

I have seven children, but only one boy. Way back when he was in the tender years of adolescence, while we were stationed in Germany, I volunteered to lead his Webelos den of 13 boys while their dads were almost all deployed (what was I thinking???), and even though I was stressed out most of the time, I thoroughly enjoyed every minute I spent with those boys. It also allowed me to fulfill a dream I'd had for years of "being" a Boy Scout. See, years and years ago when I was just a wee, snarky sprout, I spent a year as a Junior Girl Scout. It was horrible. They all wanted to talk about fingernails and hair and purses and "girl power", and I was the lone wolf during the troop campout who was willing to get dirty, so I made the fire, cleaned up the muddy campsite, and chased off a raccoon that got into our tent. Those girls were WAY too girly for me, and I dreamed of being a Boy Scout to do the *really* fun stuff. However, it was very matter-of-factly explained to me back then in terms I would not understand for several more years that there is a VERY good reason why there weren't any girls in the Boy Scouts nor were there boys in the Girl Scouts. I used to think it was because boys didn't want to wear those stupid berets or the silly little sock taggie things.

And then I had children, and I understood VERY well why it is that there is a clear division between the BSA and GSA. I'll not get into my issues with the Girl Scouts right now, but let's just fast forward a few years, shall we? Right now, with two (married) adult children and five little girls moving at an alarming rate toward adolescence, their father and I were faced with a predicament--we wanted our girls to have some sort of non-church, non-sport activity that both supported our own values and encouraged them to grow up to be strong young ladies ... without the co-ed nature of the church's youth group, or our homeschool group (no offense to the families of those boys, they are OUTSTANDING young men) or their karate class. Why? Why on earth would our girls need something isolated from boys?

Two words--sexual tension. Somewhere between the ages of 9 and 12, a curious thing happens to every young person--they become acutely aware that the opposite sex is very, very different, and they begin noticing that they have an awkward feeling around those "other" people. They suddenly feel self-conscious and, even if ZERO attraction exists, the tension is there that this other person might be looking at me, noticing me, staring at me, etc.

In a "safe", one-sex setting, boys are able to be boys, and girls are able to be girls. Sure, they will eventually start comparing notes, sharing the who-likes-who and how this girl/boy is cute, but not *as readily* under circumstances when their attention is being diverted toward character-building activities. 

The BSA just removed that barrier. No, I'm not comparing gay boys to Girl Scouts. However, there *IS* going to be something there that wasn't there before--sexual tension. It's not supposed to be there! Our CHILDREN are supposed to have a safe haven where this kind of thing doesn't exist! They should be able to be pimply, awkward, and innocent. Now they have this added issue of a boy who is not "just" gay, but who is being encouraged to be "openly and avowed" about his sexual attraction to the boys who, up until now, had this one place they could escape that sexual tension! WHY do we have to bring sexuality into Scouting??? Why?? Last time I checked, the orienteering badge had nothing to do with gender! No, I'm not being flippant--I'm quite serious. I do not ever remember anything in my son's Scout manual about sexuality. Nothing. So WHY now do we need to be "open and avowed" with ANY kind of sexuality??? Why on earth would we be encouraging 11, 12, or 13-year-old CHILDREN to explore sexuality of any kind? I do not understand for the life of me why we Americans have this ridiculous need to be "open and avowed" with things that should be very private in nature. I know there have been homosexuals in scouting--both sides-- probably since their establishment. My question is this: Why is it suddenly necessary to make it public, especially when "exploring" one's sexual desires can have such disastrous consequences? Why can't our children just have one "safe place" that they can be children? Why do we have to strip them of their innocence and turn them into tiny adults before they're emotionally capable of handling it?

Why has it come to this?

I have had a battle going on inside my head for several months now over whether or not I would broach this subject at all, but you know what? It needs to be broached, plowed through, ironed out, and buried in the compost pile where it belongs. I know someone is going to get their panties in a wad about it, but we need to talk about these things ... so let's put on our big-girl panties and deal with the wads as they come, shall we?

Sometime late last year, I mentioned on one of my random "this is my crazy life" status updates on Facebook that I'd essentially run myself through the wringer on what was one of my "Crazy Thursdays", and in a mental response to a flippant comment from another grocery store patron, I added that "no one had better say I'm not a working mother". Wouldn't you know it, someone I know in real life took MAJOR offense to this. Not just eye-rolling offense, but responding with a "You've GOT to be kidding me!!!" offense. She then proceeded to detail her own day, spent in the office and then doing various and sundry around-the-house "wifely and motherly" tasks when she returned home, as opposed to what she perceived as the simplistic day of a stay-at-home mom (who had not been home from 8am till 6pm). In the rather confusing dialogue that ensued (because I knew it was my statement that had her so upset, I attempted to explain that I in no way, shape, or form was attempting to take anything away from what she does), it became glaringly obvious that there is something very serious going on under the surface. Had I not just been told by that grocery store guy that "You'd better be glad you don't work!", I might have taken it a little better, but alas, I did not. And I was exhausted. From what, though, if I hadn't WORKED all day??

What defines a "working mother"? Better yet, what defines "work"? Desk work? Standing and teaching a class of twenty-five? Construction? Making sure all of the diners in a restaurant have full iced tea glasses? In the dead-end dialogue I had with the offended party, I learned that anything I said about what I had done during that day was taken as a direct insult on the sacrifice she and her family had made to have a career and a successful life. I couldn't win that battle, nor was I even trying, because I wasn't trying to take any of the respect or prestige away from her job-for-pay, and I was simply trying to gain the same respect for my chosen career-not-for-pay. My question is this: WHY, ladies ... WHY are we beating each other up over whether or not someone is "working", and why on earth would we EVER assume to say that what one of us does is work while the other one does not work, based solely on the single matter of a paycheck? Why do we DO that????

I, as a stay-at-home mother, do not envy those who work outside the home. Period. I wouldn't want it. It's not for me, I know that, and I'm perfectly okay with being "just a wife and mom". Yes, it requires certain sacrifices, and yes, I understand unequivocally that my choice is a PERSONAL one, based on not just personal beliefs, but personal convictions and personal preferences. I don't do "team player" well, and that doesn't lend itself well to a job that requires working with people. I know this, and to some extent, this played a big part of my CHOICE to occupy myself in the work I find in my own home and family. I do have convictions that cemented this decision, but they are MINE. I don't dare assert my convictions on others, because we are individuals! I do value the career (albeit unpaid in any form of income that is monetary) that I have chosen above any other I could have chosen, because I see the value in it to my own family. Does it mean I look down on other wives or mothers who have chosen other paths? Heavens, no! I know the vast majority of people in this world would not choose to be a stay-at-home mother of seven who homeschools while her husband frequently travels the globe for weeks on end. I know that! But ladies, just because I have opted out of spending six years in college to get a Master's degree in fill-in-the-blank (other than music and the challenge of being a combat pilot, nothing else ever interested me) and I don't spend my days at an office, in a classroom, or whatever else I may find to do, does NOT mean what I do all day is not "work". I absolutely guarantee you that I work--sometimes from sunup to long past midnight, and not just at "normal" tasks like laundry and dishes and getting a heater fixed while dealing with a belligerent home warranty company. I do some things--some for myself, some for my family, some for others--that I would never have the time or energy to do, were I putting in 40+ hours working somewhere else. I enjoy that 'luxury'.

Ladies, we have GOT to get past this idea that a paycheck defines work. We have got to stop thinking that because a woman has CHOSEN to stay at home taking care of her home and family full time, that she is somehow less successful or "busy" than a woman who works outside the home for a paycheck. It's ludicrous, and it's demeaning to the many girls and women who desire a simple domestic life. I can't even begin to tell you how much it hurt to have my oldest daughter be lectured over and over again when she graduated from high school about going to college and finding a "worthwhile career" and to be told she was "wasting her life" and "taking the lazy way out" simply because she desired to be "just" a wife and mom.

I'm not a feminist by any stretch of the imagination, but isn't it a bit self-defeating and completely hypocritical to say that a woman can be "anything she wants" as long as she "works", but yet we define work as something that brings in pay, instead of being honest work that can benefit a family in other ways? Why are we doing this to each other?

Stepping up on the political soapbox

It's a dangerous place to be, I know, especially for Christians. The secular world tells us to separate our religious beliefs from politics, but those of us whose faith is firmly engrafted with every other part of our life, that's just impossible to do. It's true that the Bible does not give firm directives for our involvement in politics (other than to "render to Caesar what is Caesar's" and to "honor the king"--Nero, at the time), but our freedom of religion and what we know of our nation's strongly Christian heritage both allows and requires us to use our convictions when participating in the political process.

It is argued that the very reason the United States "rose to power" and became uniquely respected by other nations was because of the values system that our Founding Fathers poured into her foundation.There is an old adage (which is wrongly attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville, but its origin is unknown) that says,

"I sought for the greatness and genius of America in her commodious harbors and her ample rivers - and it was not there . . . in her fertile fields and boundless forests and it was not there . . . in her rich mines and her vast world commerce - and it was not there . . . in her democratic Congress and her matchless Constitution - and it was not there. Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits flame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power. America is great because she is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, she will cease to be great"

This quotation echoes of the respect held for America in other countries. True, many countries (or portions of those coutnries' populations) hold a deep-seeded resentment and hatred of America, but if you dig deeply you will discover that hatred is based in jealousy--they hate us because we have freedoms they will never have. Our leaders do not assume power by brute force and intimidation; our laws are not carried out tyrannically.

Yet.

Go ahead, roll your eyes. Accuse me of watching too much FoxNews. Tell me I'm an alarmist, that I put too much stock in the scare-tactic news coverage that preys on the gloom-and-doom nature of hypersensitive conservatives. Go ahead. Have your field day. And then LISTEN.

Those who TRULY study the Constitution (not just the 1st Amendment) will realize that there is a balance of power issue that is coming under fire, right under our noses, and by and large, the American populace is letting it go because the idea of the Federal Government "taking care of things" sounds really good. We *like* the idea of making sure that our air, water, land, and food are all safe. So why shouldn't we let the government legislate laws to protect it? We all want everyone in the country to be fed healthy food. We don't want children to go hungry. We don't want people to be homeless. We don't want someone to be turned away from getting health care because they don't have the ability to pay for it. It all sounds SO good. So does the idea of keeping our military out of harm's way and not "being the world's policemen". We don't want to look like bullies. We want to be liked. We don't want anyone to think we are telling them how they can live. We want everyone to be happy, to have whatever they want to make their life easy.

Or do we? Do we really realize that this ideology will eventually threaten the rights our nation's founders fought so hardly to give us? Do we not realize that the more power we give the government, the less power the American people will have IN that government?

Of course not. Because our schools aren't teaching it anymore. Elementary schools have stopped teaching America's hard-fought history of freedom in favor of "social studies", where we all learn how important the idea of being "nice" is and that we have to accept everyone no matter what they do--we don't DARE try to impose a values system on people, that's limiting their personal freedom! What we have going on in the United States right now is frightening--there are two very different fundamental ideologies at work, and we are finding ourselves very UN-united. One side holds to our country's traditional Christian-based values systems and the principles on which our country was founded; the other insists that we will be "held back" by an adherence to these values, that we need to realize we live in a changing world (never mind the change is occurring BECAUSE of the movement within the US to "evolve") and that we must alter the way we look at freedoms so we don't offend anyone or presume to set any limits at all on anyone. This latter view is becoming increasingly hostile toward the Christian values that have been historically the basis of our morality. Now "morality" is such a vague and unpopular term that many social circles are attempting to remove any reference to right and wrong entirely. Our children are being taught as young as kindergarten that the only absolute "wrong" in this world is telling someone that there are moral absolutes.

When we look at our Constitution under the microscope of vague "tolerance", clear definitions disappear. "The greater good" will rise to the top, and the individual freedoms and liberties we have enjoyed will be blurred as the government assumes a level of power that is very difficult to remove.

Why are our fundamental ideologies important? Because our freedom depends on it. And so does our ability to practice our faith openly as our Founding Fathers intended.

Life "support"

There are many "hot topic" debates right now, considering the upcoming US election. Most of the political ones are so opinionated and inflammatory that I have removed myself completely from any discussion--I will speak with my vote and let the mudslingers just go ahead and do their thing. However, this particular topic is one that has been ongoing for YEARS and will continue as long at the atrocities continue to be legal, and I will continue to speak up about it because it is truly a repulsive fact to consider that this "debate" even goes on at all. It makes me absolutely sick to my stomach to have a picture of my precious little grandson in the same post as what I am about to write about, but in some respects, it is the perfect life-affirming place for his picture to be.

In a day and age where political debates (some VERY heated) abound regarding the "rights" of people to do whatever they so please, you'd think people would at least be jumping to defend the innocents who cannot defend themselves, wouldn't you? Seriously, how can a woman's "right" to do whatever she wants supersede another individual's right to LIVE?

Well, because the two "sides" don't agree on what LIFE is, that's how.

When does life begin? Ummm .... well, uhhhh, I think ....

BALONEY! It has nothing to do with what we THINK! This isn't a debate about opinions over whether there's a God or not. This has nothing to do with whether we view something as a sin or not. This isn't a debate about something that our "belief" essentially doesn't matter, because it involves the very right of a human being to avoid being exterminated to make another human have a supposedly better quality of life. Care to see how flippantly the "other side" views it? Here is a quote taken from just ONE site--but I assure you, most I found were pretty much identical.

          "Throughout history, theologians, philosophers, and scientists have debated the question of when life begins. There is no single answer. That is why each woman must be free to make the decision about abortion based on her own moral, ethical and religious beliefs, including her beliefs about when life begins. The critical question is who should decide; at NARAL Pro-Choice Missouri, we believe it should be the woman, not the government." 

So "each woman" determines when life begins? Circumstances dictate whether the human embryo/fetus developing inside her womb is a cherished baby or a lump of lifeless cells? Permit me to give you one little bit of scientific FACT for a second--we learned in elementary school biology that the difference between something that is alive and something that is not is one little thing: CELLS. If it is a life form, it has cells. One cell, many cells, doesn't matter. One would never say that a single-celled organism such as an amoeba is not "alive". But the difference between an amoeba and a rock is the fundamental makeup of that amoeba. The three designations for all matter on earth are mineral, plant, and animal. The amoeba is not a mineral. It has cells. On the microscopic level, the presence of CELLS indicates either plant or animal life. LIFE! Unless that cell is dead and no longer growing, regenerating, etc., it is alive. In the amoeba's case, just one cell--and then when it divides, that other cell is just as alive as the parent cell. In humans (this is something taught in biology class as well), the precise minute that the parent cells combine (ahem ... CONCEPTION!), a new organism is formed. That organism is not a non-living being. It is not a rock. It is a human being. It has all the genetic makeup that it will have for the rest of its life in that one moment. The two parent cells--the sperm and egg--cease to exist as a new LIFE begins. This new life is completely different in its genetic makeup and separate from either of its parents--yet through at least part of its life cycle, it is completely dependent upon the mother for its survival. Does that dependence indicate a non-existence of life? Well, if that were the case, then "life" wouldn't exist until the human being was about, say, 6 or 7 years of age and theoretically capable of fending for itself and providing its own food source. Shoot, I know of some 35-year-olds who seem somehow to be completely dependent on the care of others for their survival--does that make them less "alive" because they have not developed well enough to be independent?

The idea that life exists only at a certain point in development (which, incidentally, came about BECAUSE of  pro-choice arguments) tends to lend itself to subjective reasoning in a "debate" that really needs to be seen objectively. At what point in development is life present? When the heartbeat is detectable with instruments from the outside? When the brain fully forms? When all of the necessary systems are working properly? When the human takes its first breath? How about when that human is weaned, or when it is capable of speech? When it learns to reason? When it can vote?

To allow circumstance, whether it be the child's conception or the mother's (or family's) financial condition or the presence of other siblings of the same gender that would make another child of that gender "unacceptable", to determine the existence of life is utterly ridiculous. What manner of person would choose to cause the death of an elderly parent or grandparent--or even a child who had been stricken with some disability that caused him or her to be incapacitated in some form--merely because their dependence is a burden? We understand that to be an incomprehensible idea, yet that is exactly what abortion does.

Why is it easy to extinguish a human life before it is born? Before we've seen images on a screen? Before we've heard a heartbeat? Well, duh. Because that life isn't strong enough to fight back. That's why.

I want you to look again at the picture of my sweet little grandson at the top of this post. Go ahead. Look. Take a good, long look at the tubes, wires, and medical apparatus that he is hooked up to. Do you know what those things do? They support life. They SUPPORT something that is already there. Those machines do not GIVE life, that was already there before Levi was born. They sustain it. They provide the support his mother's body no longer can. Had he been born a full-term infant, he would not need that support--but he does. Is he less "alive" than a full-termer who can sustain his or her own body temperature, regulate his/her own body system functions well enough to breathe, suck, and swallow to gain nourishment? That idea is ridiculous. OF COURSE Levi is alive. So is the tiny little baby who is his NICU "neighbor, who was born at just 24 weeks gestation--which, shockingly enough, is just DAYS after the legal limit for abortion in several US states.

My little grandbaby, perfectly formed and strong as a tiny little ox, is just as "alive" as the cardiac patient in the ICU a few floors under the one he's currently in. Levi is just as "alive" as the man or woman who will take their last breath in the next few days, but for now are being sustained by a ventilator and IV nourishment. And whether the pro-choice crowd would acknowledge it or not, biologically our little grandson is just as ALIVE as the baby developing within the body of his Mom and Dad's friends in Pensacola who learned of their pregnancy just a few days before Levi's birth. LIFE is LIFE. And life in such fragile forms needs our support. These precious little lives did NOTHING to warrant a death sentence just so Mom can be rid of the burden of raising an unwanted child. How barbaric a society can we be, when we hold the comfort and happiness of some in higher regard than the LIFE of another?

God help us.

"Just let him go"

It has been twenty-two and a half years since that phone call, but I don't think I will ever forget it. It is very true that hardship brings out a person's true character, and that "friend" I had kept in my life for two years suddenly revealed something to me that I had never even dreamed I'd hear. In fact, I learned a LOT about people and society and priorities and values in a very short amount of time. All because of something someone called a "mistake".

Ironically, I don't remember the date, and what's even more ironic--I don't even remember my own reaction to seeing the second pink line show up on that pregnancy test. I don't even remember Pete's reaction. I do remember that neither of us ever gave a second thought to what WE would do. I don't even think there was an "if" conversation. But for a couple of weeks, we hid a secret we knew we couldn't hide for long while we tried to get up the nerve to face it. What followed was a dizzying flurry of emotions, threats, insults, and guilt that broke our hearts far beyond what the immediate consequences could. The two lines on that little stick had more impact on the two of us than on anyone else, but both of us spent the first four months eaten up with regret over what our actions had done to everyone ELSE. What I realize now, all these years later, is that the reason *we* have a good life now has everything to do with us not listening to people who really had no vested interest whatsoever in our lives.

It was the summer between my sophomore and junior years in high school. I had just turned 16. Pete had graduated, enlisted in the Army, and was ready to leave home, move on, and get his own life started. I'm not even sure my parents knew how "ready" I was to begin my own life, because I had kept to myself the fact that I had already begun the process of applying for appointment to the Air Force Academy. Pete and I really had no "plan" other than to go our separate ways. Yes, we cared for each other. Yes, we were teenagers and more than just a little reckless, but we were not stupid, as is often thought the case. Morality never really entered the thought process, but we were "careful". We'd been through all of the oh-so-informative sex ed classes at school. We knew the "risks", so we took "precautions".

We became statistics.

What I do remember of our reactions was that we somehow flipped a switch, going from planning out independent lives to having a life together immediately. There was never any other question. Both of us had enough of that traditional, moral training to know that there really only was one option. I think what shocked us was that there were so many around us who tried to convince us otherwise! Surprisingly (but maybe not so?), one was a Catholic priest. Pete was raised in the Catholic church, so when we started discussing plans of marriage, well, that became a MAJOR issue. To say the least, the Catholic church doesn't "play" well with other religious groups, and Pete was told by this priest that since the Catholic church would neither recognize a marriage with a non-Catholic or a child who was not raised according to the tenets of that faith, he should just "cut his losses" and leave us behind, that he had "no obligation" to me or the child God had blessed us with. He left the Catholic church instead.

The priest's comments probably bothered Pete much more than they did me, mostly because he lost all respect for the faith he'd been raised with in one fell swoop, but I won't say it didn't really hurt me to hear it. However, one comment has stuck in my mind and still hurts as much to this day as it did the day it crossed my ears. I remember I had been out of my regular classes at school for about two weeks (Our high school put pregnant students in a vo-tech program for teen moms at a different campus so we could "finish" our school year presumably without a hiccup. Yeah ... not so much. But that's another post entirely.) and Pete was preparing to leave for basic training, all while we were going through wedding planning and prenatal care. I'd had little contact with many of the friends I had become so close to in school, when out of the blue a fellow trumpet player (and someone I considered one of my "good" friends) called. He told me first that it was really bad that I wasn't there, since I was going to have been the section leader that year (yeah, thanks for that little zinger there), and that he missed goofing around in Algebra class with me. But then he said something that left me almost speechless, and all I remember doing was hanging up the phone. He said, "You know, Pete has a life, and you're better than this. Why don't you just have an abortion, let him go, and get on with your life?"

That really was, in all reality, the FIRST time that word had ever crossed my brain. An ABORTION??? Are you SERIOUS?? Kill someone, just because I want my "life" back?

Yeah, I know what pro-choicers think. They want to believe it's a "potential" person, not a real, live human being, just a blob of cells. Whatever. That's garbage. It's a made-up justification for people like this JERK who believe it is our right to decide who lives and dies based on whatever kind of life we want for ourselves so we can fix that "ooops!!!!" See, here's where I lose my political correctness. And my patience with "choice". Pete and I **DID** make a choice. We decided, at 16 and 18 years of age, that we had the right to do whatever we wanted to do, regardless of whether we were ready for that and regardless of whether it was even RIGHT. That was the CHOICE.

We dealt with consequences. Yes, we spent several years in near-poverty because it is VERY difficult to live on military pay--especially 22 years ago. Yes, things could have been much "easier" for us had we chosen a different route. I might be an Air Force officer like I'd planned. Pete might have been able to play for the high-falootin' military honor bands like he'd wanted to. We might be together, or we might not have ever seen each other again. Who's to know?

WHO CARES??

What I do know is that Pete and I have had a pretty good life, these last 23 years. We are proud of every single one of the children God blessed our family with, and we wouldn't trade a single one of them for an "easier" life. I also know that my jerk friend grew up to be a very bitter, cynical, mean-spirited man. He has no children--only cats. He's a professor of political history now. He has had what most would consider to be a pretty good life too. But I like mine better. I'm glad I didn't "just let him go live his life". I'm glad that God saved me from myself with the blessing of life Pete and I received through our choice to take liberties we should never have taken. Our son isn't a mistake. No child is ever a mistake. And the life I have now? It's better than any I could ever have dreamed up for myself as a 16-year-old.

I have blogged about this subject before, a few years ago on Veteran's Day. However, it is something that is very dear to my heart and considering some of the disturbing comments I have seen around cyberspace these last few days, I'm really feeling the need to repeat it somewhat.

This photograph has been circulating on Facebook recently, and as with most of the people commenting on it, I'm incensed when I see it. You can "blame" this picture for fueling my ire and prompting this blog post.

We are a patriotic family--I make no apologies for this. Our first and primary allegiance is to the Almighty God that our very beings belong to, but we are also very aware and proud of our great nation's Christian heritage and the service our family has given to this country throughout its existence is a source of heart-swelling reverence to God for the blessing of our liberties. Our patriotism stems out of our faith--they are intertwined.

In the last three years, I have had a son join the Army, a husband retire from the Army, and a son-in-law join the Army. Many of our friends and loved ones have been affected by deployments to one region of the world or another. My own son spent a year in Afghanistan. We have had several opportunities to witness parades, ceremonies, and other "patriotic" functions. Lord willing, my husband and I will be able to attend the Veteran's Day Parade here in town next month. The last one we had the privilege of attending, Pete "marched" in. Well, no ... more accurately, he rode in it atop the HIMARS launcher that he trained other soldiers to repair. Pete has had several odd-feeling moments as he has experienced the military pomp and circumstance more from the audience since our son enlisted--and especially since he retired. In fact, when we attended our son-in-law's basic training graduation at Fort Jackson this past April, it got REALLY weird. Pete's father had marched across that same field both as a basic training graduate and for his own retirement ceremony before Pete even graduated from high school, and they both stood there welcoming yet another generation of our family's soldiers into the ranks as retired soldiers.

One thing I'm really not fond of seeing again at this year's parade is something we have experienced at every single one of the 'patriotic' events we've attended these last few years--the lack of respect for our flag and those who defend it. People, it's not just a piece of fabric on a pole. It represents the blood that was shed to unite this country in solidarity against outside forces that sought to abolish freedoms that our founding fathers believed in enough to sacrifice life and limb for! It stands for FREEDOM. It is identified worldwide with a nation that seeks to liberate people from tyrannical rule.

At least it used to be.

Nowadays our own people are bringing disrespect to our own flag. Many Americans are more concerned with preserving the heritage of nations they came FROM and showing how proud they are of THAT culture. We find people who are offended by the display of our OWN FLAG!!?? We have church groups (I refuse to even identify these people as "lowercase" christians ... anyone who uses the name of God to promote hatred doesn't deserve to wear His name, in my opinion, and if I'm wrong on that, I'll answer to God, thankyouverymuch!) who are making a mockery of funerals, bringing pain to people mourning the loss of soldiers while preaching anti-American false doctrine with very little regard to those men and women who have died to allow them the freedom to spew such vitrol. We have a generation who do not instinctively stand out of respect of our flag and what it stands for.

Look at that picture at the top of this post again. Look at all of those people sitting on the curb, and the handicapped veteran who is standing. He's not forcing their respect; he's not making a scene. He isn't belittling them for their lack of patriotism. He's just doing what comes naturally. And so are the ones who give no respect to the flag. Why the difference? Training.

"Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country." --John Fitzgerald Kennedy

What does this nation "owe" anyone? Not a thing, save the billions of dollars we borrow to keep hundreds of meaningless programs running to super-regulate things that probably shouldn't be regulated in the first place. (woah ... soapbox. Stepping down ... )

What do we OWE our country? Respect.

Train your children to understand WHY this country exists. Train them to understand HOW it came to be. Train them to show respect. Train them to do for OTHERS and not expect everything to be handed to them on a silver platter. Train them to honor their elders. Train them to appreciate. Train them to show gratitude. Train their hearts to hurt when they see others hurting, and to look for ways to help. That's what makes this country great--its foundation in the principles of the Bible. It's what will return this great nation to her roots. It's what will preserve our freedoms. It's what will ensure that those veterans who stand to honor the flag they fought for will not stand alone.

UNITED we stand.

Stand up, America. For heaven's sake, get off your butts and STAND.