To our founding fathers

Published by Starfish

Just a quick note to our founding fathers:

I am so sorry that this wonderful nation with an inspired constitution that you have created is being trampled on and torn apart. I am sorry that Americans have allowed politicians to have too much power, which have in turn led to precious liberties being taken away from us. You fought so hard and risked so much to provide for us a nation that would allow us prosperity and ingenuity and religious freedom, and our government is completely ignoring the precious constitution that you have put together.

Our nation is still the best nation in the world because of what you have fought for and I thank you for that. I just wanted to let you know that there are some of us who still fight to keep, and to get back to, what you have created.

Signed,

Starfish.

THOUGHTS ON DIRTY POLITICS

Published by FRSC

Is it possible that running for President can be a greater undertaking than being the President?

Even if a candidate has tried to live a wholesome and clean life the attempts to diminish him or her because of so-called prior “bad acts” puts a bad taste in the mouth of this political junky. It smells bad. It’s call “foul-play” for a reason. Politics is often referred to as a game because it almost seems like the candidate’s team coaches are strategizing with clever trick plays. Are we watching an “end around”, or a “slant”, or a “reverse”? These are all offensive football plays—but in politics they are just plain offensive. My interest in dramatic political theatre wanes.

Candidly, I do care if a candidate is so dense that he would not remove a racial slur from the name of his vacation home (Rick Perry) because it reflects on the dignity he might bring to the white house. On the other hand, I am not interested in knowing if a candidate put his family dog in a portable kennel on top of the family car when he went on vacation (Mitt Romney). I see the former as a character flaw but the later as nick-picking.

So, what do I think about the spotlight on Herman Cain and accusations of previous employees? Well, time will tell on this one. Initially it seemed innocent and the accuser was hyperbolic. As the days go by other revelations build this into a legitimate case of concern regarding Cain’s ability to function as the “executive-in-chief”. The Oklahoma pollster who witnessed the incident is being second-guessed because he is a Rick Perry supporter. Well, one would have to ask why a political influencer who once worked closely with Herman Cain is not supporting Herman Cain. I think comments of a third party witness are worth consideration. The other element of this story that fascinates me is that the woman does not want to go public. She wants her privacy. Does this mean she doesn’t want to answer questions about the incident or that the incident truly was traumatic and she can’t deal with it? Who knows for sure, except the woman and she won’t say. We are left to judge for ourselves.

Is judging candidates something we are entitled to do? I say yes. I say all laundry, clean or dirty, is open to inspection when a person runs for President. For example, Michelle Bachman’s family business, Christian Counseling Center, offering gay reparative therapy may be a negative to some voters but to others it is quite the opposite. Either way, it is open for public assessment. She puts herself out there and we get to decide.

In the end it seems to me that we should judge based on the counsel from God. Matthew 7:16 says: “Ye shall know them by their fruits.” We also read in the New Testament, “That they do good, that they be rich in good works” (I Tim 6:18.) This tells me that when a person lives a life that shows good works (yields good fruit) whether it is in private, public, family, church, or anywhere, they are deserving of more opportunities to do good.

If there is a litmus test for a President, then that is the one I use. I want a person who does “good” within their circle of influence because they will likely do “good” when they influence my circle.

REFERENCE:

Everyone has the right to free speech

Published by Starfish

So after I had read that blog post that I linked you to in the last post, I couldn't get this particular video that was shared in it, off of my mind. Obviously I still can't. Maybe writing this out will help me. 

For one thing, I think we can all agree that the guy being run down here is clearly a weird jerk. But that's besides the point I'm about to make. The very first of the thing that rubbed me wrong about this video (don't judge), is the guy taking the video and yelling at this racist Nazi guy. He's following Nazi guy around like a fly on poop, yelling at him, saying, "You ARE NOT welcome here! This is a Tea Party, you are not our kind, please leave!" (Imagine that being quoted to you in a mocking tone). Then they prayed for him (puh-leaze). Okay, really? Personally I am starting to get really bugged by this whole "tea party" thing. Somehow SOMEWHERE, someone took the name of "Tea Party" and turned it into an unorganized organization and made up some unwritten "written rules". When Tea Parties first came up, it was simply an assembly of regular grassroots citizens of America, to show their disdain for more and more government intrusion in our private lives, that's it. Politicians spoke at them, regular citizens spoke at them and held up signs displaying a particular distaste for government. It was peaceful, yet made a point. This Nazi guy has every RIGHT to be there and say and wear and express whatever he wants. It is to his own detriment, but who cares? Let him stay. He didn't seem to be bothering anyone and then this guy whipped out his cell phone camera and decided to make a scene. Personally I hope there is no one like THAT at any Tea Party I go to. How embarrassing would it be to be associated with someone who doesn't agree with free speech at an exact expression of free speech?

Wall Street Protesters

Published by Starfish


I was going to make a comment about these Wall Street protesters who no one, not even themselves, no what they are protesting. However, I fell upon this amazing commentary that covers all the aspects that go with the subject. This is truly a well thought out piece here, I strongly encourage you read it all: http://frostcave.blogspot.com/2011/10/tea-party-vs-occupy-wall-street-guest.html

Enjoy!

I think this must be said

Published by Starfish

When moms are sick, they don't get to take the day off and have others cater to them. In extreme circumstances they call other family members or friends to help watch the kids, but it's always an "only in an emergency" type thing. When we are sick, life goes on. We barely complain. We still have to get up and take care of feeding the kids that must be fed, changing diapers, doing the laundry that must be done, doing the dishes that must be cleaned, etc. Even though we feel like our head is going to explode, our stomach contents may come up and out at any minute, we're so weak we can barely pour a glass of milk. Life goes on. Even if you're a working mom and you call into work sick, the children just see it as, "Oh, Mom is staying home! She gets to do everything for us today."

When Dad is sick, the world must stop for him. Mom is already home with the kids so why not add Dad into the mix. He gets to call into work sick, lay in bed and ask his pretty wifie to bring him water and empty his barf bucket. This is not to say that Mom minds doing this for Dad, it is a loving service. But it makes a point.

I've got to be honest, while I support the traditional roles of husband and wife, mom and dad, with Dad as the provider, and I am thankful for all the Dad's who provide for their family so Mom can stay home; there is something very wrong with this picture. A big part of me wants to say that I am tired of hearing from Dr. Laura about how all the husbands are our knight-in-shining-armor out slaying dragons and we need to have a clean home, warm biscuits in the oven, a roaring fireplace, and a fresh newspaper ready for them when they get home. I do agree that we should be warm and welcoming to them and try to be happy and not immediately say things like, "Oh good, you're home, can you clean this up?" But my job as a mother, a homemaker, and a wife, is like working double duty 24/7. I'm not going to stress myself out to have everything perfect at the end of the day, because I never get a break.

Just sayin'...

Little Girl Princesses

Published by Starfish

My husband and I have this mini-argument going on. He keeps wanting to call our 17-month-old daughter a "princess". That just makes me go "ick".

Why do I hate this so much? I have two reasons.

Reason 1: Everyone calls their little daughter(s) princesses (it's written all over little girls clothing and accessories), and my daughter will not be compared to other girls, and is also non-comparable to other girls, in my opinion. She is better (everyone thinks this about their children, but really never say it out loud, I am saying it now though). One time my husband suggested using the term "Queen", and I decided I could definitely live with that. Daughters of God are not princesses, but queens. I want my daughter to recognize herself as a daughter of her Heavenly Father.

Reason 2: I think part of the problem of this society is that every generation feels more and more entitled due to the selfishness that is being promoted to all of us. Somehow the term "princess" says they deserve to "boss around" and demand things they want or feel they need or deserve. They can throw tantrums and immediately we will be there to settle the tantrum down, giving in to them however they deem. The term "Queen" resembles an amount of responsibility, and ownership for actions. A queen works in her kingdom. Calling her "Queen" will give her something to live up to.

Honestly, I would rather just call her by her name or her cute nicknames we made up. But the whole point of this post was to express how much I detest the term "Princess". I honestly think my husband uses it just to get to me. He's a tease.

Another commentary on the Tea Party

Published by Starfish


I just got an e-mail from Grassfire Nation that got me all fired up. It also had me laughing. Here is what it stated

The latest comes from actress Eva Longoria who spoke of the new "extremist movement" that is "very dangerous" and is"not the character of America."

Who are these "dangerous" "extremists"? The Tea Party, of course. This comes just days after Morgan Freeman blasted the Tea Party as "racist" and the "dark, underside of America."
...

Sadly, these attacks from the Left are working. "Tea Party" has become the new "dirty word" in politics. In fact, The New York Times reports that the number of people with an"unfavorable" opinion of the Tea Party has more than doubled in the past 18 months. Even worse, according to the Times:

           "The Tea Party ranks lower than any of the 23 other groups we asked about... It is even less popular than much maligned groups like 'atheists' and 'Muslims.'"

Aside from the obvious reason this is happening (being an agenda to destroy any chances of a conservative winning the presidency), I am laughing so hard deep inside.

Either these commentators have an empty skull, or they really are very stupid. Another option, they are simply part of the agenda, you know how these "actors" can be.

The Tea Party is just a movement to promote LESS GOVERNMENT. That's all. They are not racist, they are not dangerous, they are not extremists. Could there be racists and extremists going to Tea Party rallies? Yeah, sure. There are extreme and racists democrats, but not all democrats are extreme and racist. But that is not what it is about.  I'd like for these people to have some proof, because without justification for their comments, they just look as they are, which is stupid. I've been to a Tea Party rally, it certainly is anything but the "dark, underside of America". Everyone there was excited and happy despite their reason for being there. They have hope, and it's because they are using their right as an American, the constitution which they love, to make a difference for their government. As a patriotic American myself, I know that exciting feeling.

Another note: In just a couple of months the government is taking over the internet, to regulate it, to silence the Tea Party (conservatives). Now let's assess this. Who are the extremists? I'd say that anything Nazi-like is pretty extreme.

Beliefs, Movements and Avoiding Trends

Published by FRSC

One of my core beliefs is having core beliefs. I admire that people will show some fervor about their principles. “Grassroots activities” are events I like to watch with a bit of longing to jump in and swim in the trenches. With that said, I am not really a “joiner” and don’t like to get on someone else’s band wagon. It feels trendy. The word “trendy” is not a word I associate with genuineness.

With that said, grassroots movements can make a difference. Historically some movements did not have the same goals that I had and the power of the movement didn’t necessarily bring about positive results. For example, the “progressive movement” of pre-World War II was a disaster and we are still feeling the pain of it. The Civil Rights Movement lasted for decades and resulted in Title 7.

A powerfully constructive movement was the Moral Majority of the late 1970s. This group was a mix of ideals in both the religious and political arena. It resulted in the ousting of Jimmy Carter and the wildly popular Reagan Administration.

In many ways the Tea Party (movement) reminds me of the Moral Majority. Although there are huge differences – one of which was the MM had a visible leader in Jerry Falwell, Another difference was the blatant fund-raising done by the MM as a PAC. Tea Partiers are not as unified. Segmented organizations refer to themselves as Tea Partiers, each expousing various agendas. Some leaders claim to be a strong voice for the Tea Party (movement) but my view is that it is only within each segment do you have objectives and goals. For instance, Freedomworks wants something different than Young Americans for Liberty. Candidly I get confused on what a “tea-partier” believes. Is it all about no-government (a Libertarian Ideologue) or is it about making the government do their job in things such as stopping illegal immigration (Constitutional Conservatism).

Please weigh in on these questions –
1. Why did the Moral Majority have enough power to be politically influential for more than a decade?
2. Are those who are involved in the Tea Party movement the same people who supported the MM?
3. Do Tea Partiers expouse strong religious inclinations?
4. And last but not least, if the answer to the last question is yes – are those religious inclinations the same religious beliefs that I hold?

I don’t think grassroots movements have the same spiritual convictions that I do. And, my spiritual convictions are the basis for every political passion I hold dear. I suppose that is why I am not a joiner.

Thought Police

Published by FRSC

Today I am playing "thought police" and instead of giving out a citation I am nominating someone for an "Accomodation". I love this insightful composition. I agree wholeheartedly - do you?

Too Conscientious

A recent magazine article discussed the electability of presidential candidates based on personality traits. The lead-in said that Mitt Romney rated low on electability because he is too conscientious. My reaction was, “how can that possibly be a deficiency?”

The article went on to explain that being overly conscientious is off-putting to the general public. Mitt was described as being proper, diligent, detail-oriented, and super-rational. Those seem like redeeming qualities to me. The most electable candidate in recent history, the article stated, was Bill Clinton because he is an extrovert. I think history shows how that worked out.

The theory is that people want to relate to candidates. Does that mean the average person is not proper, less than diligent, sloppy about details, and irrational? Certainly a segment of society has a poor work ethic, lacks manners, and is unreasonable in many ways. Those are the clerks who provide poor customer service, persons who don’t want to be accountable, the habitually late, the rude movie-goers who texts during the show, or insert your own pet peeve. I like to think this is a small minority. It is too sad to consider that most people cannot relate to someone who is conscientious.

According to the article, the attractiveness of extroverts compared to those who are mannerly and meticulous is a recent phenomenon. I believe that we are returning to the thoughtful ways of yesteryear; the plethora of citizen activists is an indication. The silence of the majority was deafening in November 2010 when republicans regained the majority in the Congress.

Mitt Romney is indeed conscientious. Astute analysts think he is the most electable candidate. I don’t know who created the personality based rating scale but I think it is bunk. It reminds me of the notion that only attractive people can become president. I guess the populace wasn’t aware of that criterion in 1860 when they elected Abraham Lincoln. He led the country through a great constitutional, military and moral crisis with integrity and vigor. Who cares about his haggard and rather homely appearance? The electorate got it right and we are blessed with the legacy of his leadership.

By November 2012 we’ll know who is elected to be president of the United States. A constellation of conditions will determine the outcome. I am convinced that it will not be because someone is too conscientious.

Marilyn Mitchell

You are not forgotten

Published by Starfish

In the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day-Saints, we believe the true church to be set up as Christ originally set up his church when he was on earth. We believe in a prophet who leads the church on earth under the direction of Jesus Christ. We believe in apostles who stand as witnesses of Jesus Christ in our day. Throughout the year we have the opportunity to hear them formally address us and give us counsel world-wide. 

Often, these addresses are so powerful and uplifting that it changes my life. One such was given last night at the Relief Society General Broadcast.

Dieter F. Uchtdorf  gave a talk, using a forget-me-not flower as a metaphor, that really touched me. You can view it here.

Three things really stood out to me about it:

1. I am NOT forgotten. God and Jesus Christ know me. As vast and as complicated as this universe is, He knows me. He created everything in it; the stars, the planets, the beasts and the fowl. He also created ME, and he does not forget me and does not intend to leave me alone on this path.

2. "The Gospel of Jesus Christ is not an obligation, it is a pathway." Yes, I remember that quote word for word, didn't even write it down. That simple statement means so much. What a blessing it is to have a testimony of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I have direction. If I become lost, I have a map to find my way back.

3. Be positive about life! I need to be patient with myself, understand my limits, and give myself credit. I have been thinking about this all week, actually, as I realized that I am a happy person despite my current stressful circumstances. After struggling with postpartum depression I have found myself in the last month or so feeling happy about life no matter what is happening. Yes I get stressed, yes I complain and get angry. But I feel normal again. This talk just confirmed what I had been thinking over the last week, I can find joy in my blessings! Instead of always thinking about what I want or think I deserve and letting that control my life, I need to revel in what I HAVE. Just last night I told my husband that even though we have things to worry about, I am finding it hard to worry, because I know that I have him and I have my children.

A friend on Facebook shared this blog post from another blog. I have not seen this blog before, but I love this "reminder" of the talk that President Uchtdorf gave. (I hope it's okay to post it here, I have linked to the blog post on the picture.) 

Now I want to plant some forget-me-nots in my front yard. I guess it will have to wait until Spring. 

Freedom of Speech is Dead in The UK

Published by Starfish

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/blogsfaithblog/52570874-180/missionaries-mormon-bus-buses.html.csp

Stop preaching on buses, Mormon missionaries told

Published on Sep 12, 2011 08:02PM  

A British bus company is asking Mormon missionaries to stop proselytizing its riders, especially telling passengers that their faith is all wrong.

“We do not permit any commercial or other organization to promote their products, services or views,” Stephie Barber, operations manager for the company, Stagecoach in Lancaster, told the Lancaster Guardian, “through direct engagement with passengers on our services.”

Robert Preston, president of the England Manchester LDS Mission, told the paper that he has encouraged his missionaries — about 140 young people in his charge — to talk to people on buses about their religion, but “we would not want people to feel intimidated.”

If a person does not want to hear the Mormon message, Preston said, the missionaries “should move away.”

Bus policies may now make even polite faith-filled conversations off-limits for the young missionaries and the Utah-based church.

Peggy Fletcher Stack 

I have been intently curious about what is happening in the UK. Some articles I've read have me thinking; What is wrong with them? They use to be strong and prideful, just like the US. Now they are just a bunch of push-overs. Muslims are taking over Britain, my friends. Even thought this particular article does not mention them, that is the instigator of what is happening here. That is not how it should be. ALL religions should be welcomed and tolerated. Not being able to talk about God in public? Hmm... well I guess we'll see what God has to say about that. And I thought the US was good at pushing God out.

NEED MORE DRAMA

Here is a suggestion for an antidote to the dole-drums of a long-drawn-out political season. We need more drama – not Obama drama (we’ve had 3 years of that and I am bored already). We need political theater. We need some comedy and tragedy. We need the kind of political theatre we enjoyed when Clinton was President. Say what you want about his reign, good or bad, Clinton provided 8 years of entertainment.

We are still enjoying the slogans or new clichés that came out of his presidency. For example, it was during the pre-election run against George Bush #41 that we first heard the expression “It’s the economy, stupid!” Here we are two decades later saying the same thing. We also got the beloved “It depends on what the meaning of the word IS is.” That came during a classic staged political event, for which we still don’t know the answer. But I remember the question – do you? Ironically, it was a yes or no question and only the king of drama could answer a closed-ended question with a quip such as that.

Nevertheless, we need clever slogans such as “drill baby drill” or “read my lips, no new taxes” (which is remembered because the aforementioned George Bush gave in after that promise and raised taxes.)

So what can we hope to see as the kind of fun and frivolity we might experience in the 2012 election season? I don’t think our current President will provide any illuminated moment of excitement. We are all tired of his shenanigans. At least I am.

Will some of the expressions we’ve heard so far carry forward through the next 14 months? How about the Romney comment, “Corporations are people, too, my friend.” Or, it could be Perry’s description of the Social Security system as a ponzi scheme? Who knows? I sure would like to have a sound bite that sticks. I want to make history – and not the downtrodden history of inflation and socialism that has taken over our life in the last three years.

Have you read or heard of an expression that can give some sizzle to our desire for drama? Share them. I want some entertainment.

Signed FRSC

True patriotism for right now

Published by Starfish

A big TV "DUH".

Published by Starfish

The following article was shared in an online group I am in. I have to admit that it made me laugh. Even though the article mentions that only 60 subjects were involved in the study I am surprised that a study needed to be done.

Now why oh why would people let their young children watch this kind of garbage? My children barely watch TV at all. Who has time to watch this kind of programming? It's on cable for one thing, so it has to actually be found on the guide and turned on for the kids to watch. Parents are letting this happen. What is wrong with Word World, or Sesame Street, or Barney? All on public TV and all educational and LOVED by children for generations. If you're going to have the TV on, let it be something useful... please.

Study: Fast-Paced Kids’ TV Can Cause Short-Term Attention ProblemsSeptember 12, 2011 at 10:09 am , by Holly Lebowitz Rossi
A new study of 4-year-old children found that just nine minutes spent watching fast-paced shows like the Nickelodeon television programSpongeBob SquarePants can cause short-term learning and attention problems, The Associated Press reports.The study, which was published online in the journal Pediatrics, was small, researchers caution (only 60 children were involved), so the results should be taken with a grain of salt.  But the findings did show that children who watched SpongeBob scored measurably worse on mental function and impulse control tests than children who either watched the slower-paced PBS program Caillou or drew pictures for nine minutes.SpongeBob, researchers said, is not the problem per se, but it is an example of a type of fast-paced programming that has a short-term impact on children’s attention:
University of Virginia psychology professor Angeline Lillard, the lead author, said Nickelodeon’s “SpongeBob” shouldn’t be singled out. She found similar problems in kids who watched other fast-paced cartoon programming.
She said parents should realize that young children are compromised in their ability to learn and use self-control immediately after watching such shows. “I wouldn’t advise watching such shows on the way to school or any time they’re expected to pay attention and learn,” she said.
A Nickelodeon spokesperson told the AP that the study was unfair because SpongeBob is made for older kids, 6-11 years old.
(image via: http://spongebob-squarepants.otavo.tv)

Since this is an opinion blog, I must say how much I HATE Spongebob. I can't stress it enough. One of my children got a Spongebob in a kids meal once and I told him he could only play with it for one day and then it had to be thrown out. When he asked why, I simply said, "Because Spongebob annoys me and I don't want it in my home." I guess I'm a lot like my own mother because she had similar weird rules.

Introducing FRSC

Published by FRSC

Being born smack-dab in the middle of the baby boom, one might think that I am either hyper-conservative or a bleeding-heart liberal. During the 1970s decade, many of my buddies were liberals. It was tough to be politically involved during that time and stand up for my conservative convictions. I can’t honestly say that I am not unaffected by the Vietnam War Era. Although I applaud the principle of the 2nd amendment I am a pacifist at heart. Even though I have a right to carry a gun, I would choose to loose my life rather than take one. I just will never own a weapon.

If faced with a life-threatening situation I would not strike-out against my fellowman, except to stand firm for God, or protect my family. The 2nd amendment can live strong with my son-in-law, Tom Selleck and other famous members of the NRA. When looking at all of the 10 amendments in the Bill of Rights, I’m convinced that the first amendment (free speech, press, religion and petition) is listed as #1 for a reason. It is the most basic and important privilege Americans have.

Two forgotten amendments are numbers nine and ten. Number ten reserves the right of the state to make law—protecting each state from being forced to live by the dictates of the federal government. Number nine says that the constitution shall not take away rights as voted by the people. Local government by the voice of the people is how I describe a democracy. I believe the Founding Fathers understood the evils of big government. Small government executed through the people’s vote is intended to have the most power—not a government dictated by the legislative process, nor the courts, and not the President. Legislative, judicial and executive branches abusing the system deter freedom and economic growth.

A former governor of Massachusetts who believed in small-government and conservative principles once said, “The business of America is business.” That public servant was Calvin Coolidge who helped heal America after the scandal of Warren Harding. We have a scandalous situation in our country today. I call it scandalous because American core principles of liberty and the strength of the individual is overpowered by a big giant federal machine that costs trillions of dollars to maintain, each year—led by a man who thinks bigger is better. It is not.

Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, a German architect, used modern materials to bring efficiency and clarity to structural design in the post World War 1 era. He is associated with two expressions that describe my philosophical bent. He said, “Less is more” and “God is in the details.” If we all adopted that way of thinking the world would be a better place.

Signed: FRSC, An advocate for free religion, speech and commerce

Inequality for the Stay-At-Home-Mom

Published by Starfish

Sometimes I feel like I'm not recognized for all of my abilities. Because I am Mormon married at 21 I must be this naive and child-like individual who doesn't know how to learn or read a book and must have never done anything to contribute in her life. The people who are closest to me "say" they think I am smart and capable, but I am pretty sure they do not really feel that way. I could put together a resume for them, but why should I have to do that to gain the respect I deserve from the people who are closest to me. It makes me angry when I think about it. Being a stay-at-home mom is the only thing I have ever wanted to do and it is the most important work in the world. I feel privileged to have this job and I know it is a great work that God has entrusted me with. How could raising up the next generation be put  below a Billing Specialist, or Administrative Assistant, or a receptionist for a corporate offices, etc.? All of these things I could start and do right now and I know I could work my way up to something even bigger. Most people don't think that I am capable, or even know how a business runs, or how the economy works, or even how a computer works. Trust me I know all of these things and I use this knowledge to run my own family. (I feel the need to express this is not time spent sitting around on my butt doing nothing. I'm plenty busy and plenty productive, I do a lot. The stay-at-home mom's that are bored, simply aren't doing enough). It is an upside down world we live in people, that I should even worry about people thinking I am capable of these things when I am doing the most important work in the world. I guess I needed to write this post to remind myself. I blame it on the evilness that is Feminism. Ironically the one movement that was suppose to create equality for women has created a perception of inequality for women in working at home as a mom. Ironic, don't you think?

A quote worth noting

Published by Starfish

"When Frederich Nobel, the inventor of Kindergarten in 19th-century Germany, fashioned his idea he did not have a 'garden of children' in mind, but a metaphor as teachers as gardeners and children as the vegetables. Kindergarten was created by a way to break the influence of their mothers on their children. " -John Gatto

This time of year there are a lot of mothers expressing anxiety over having to give up their children to Kindergarten. Sometimes I want to tell them, "You don't have to!" I think the above quote says it all.

I am a mother and I am more than just a maid and a cook. I am a teacher. I refuse to let others have such a prominent influence on them. Young minds are ripe, I'm going to stuff them with all the information about goodness and proper learning that I can.

Decency and kindness to our fellow man

Published by Starfish


There is something to be said about what Jesus taught when he said, "Do unto others...," you know the rest. Facebook can drum up a lot of drama. A recent comment I saw on my news-feed had to do with someone complaining over a door-to-door salesman that came to their door even though they have a "No Soliciting" sign. While I understand being annoyed over such a thing as a solicitor, (we've all been there), I still think these people deserve kindness. The person commenting on Facebook handled the situation pretty well and I don't blame her for being upset. However, it made me think of the people who slam the door and yell at these people who are just trying to earn a living like the rest of us. It also made me think of the times I went door-to-door asking for donations to a charity and how I would see those "No Soliciting" signs, automatically thinking the homeowners were probably grouchy people. I always walked away from those homes and never knocked. Hopefully they weren't people who desired to be charitable, because they missed out on that chance.

This is just something to think about. Even though these people can be one of the cliched "most annoying" people, they still deserve our kindness, because we are all trying to live in this world. As long as you're not mooching off the rest of us via government "taxation", I'll be nice to you.

Introduction of Starfish

Published by Starfish

There will be two authors on this blog, Starfish and FRSC.

I am known as someone who voices her convictions readily. If I read something bothersome somewhere, or hear something somewhere, I am ready to vent about it as if to correct it. I usually turn to the same kind and understanding resources, but part of me wishes I could reach more people. I have my own blog which is geared toward family journal-keeping and I intend to keep it as such. It is also a private blog and my notions would only reach a few people. I have intended to make my own blog where I can spout off my opinions and testimonies for a long time now. I'm finally doing it and I hope you enjoy it.

I will say forthright; I am a conservative leaning toward libertarian American. I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day-Saints. All of this influences my convictions. I am not a clever writer. I will try to be brief and to the point, since I don't want to bore people and make them want to stop reading before they finish. However, I will try to be convincing my readers of my conviction which I am writing about. I do not represent my church as an institution or official spokesperson, and I will never claim to. I do hope to be a genuine good example of a Mormon and disciple of Jesus Christ. This is merely an opinion and belief blog.

I also have a level of humor that can often be dry or undetected. I recognize this about myself and I hope you will please consider this as you read my posts. I do not intend to deeply offend others.