Got to agree
I agree... four days out of seven away from one's children. Who cares about political power? I want to be mommy and put my babies to bed.
Sounds like common sense to me.
But what really causes me to scratch my head is why these working mothers of youngsters don't revel in their awesome power to affect the future.
"can do as good a job being parents as they can being legislators."
Let me just say that while these women are being legislators someone else is raising their children. So they must not be good legislators because they are slacking in the parent department This may sound harsh but I have been a nanny for seven years and I know that the ones who suffer the most from a working mother are their children.
Do I think it is sinful........not sure.
As for the merits of their protest . . . well, there are a lot of two-income households. If they disagree with the reverend, don't listen to him.
Is this the same Ralph Drollinger who was a Center for the UCLA Bruins basketball team back under Coach Wooden, and then turned down an NBA offer from the Boston Celtics to pursue ministry?
I'd have to ask: where's the child's daddy?
Children have 2 parents, after all.
Lawmakers should not deliberately intimidate anyone's profession of beliefs.
If you are truly BLESSED like me and your husband works and you are able to stay home with the kids when they are little that is GREAT! If you are a single mom and you HAVE to work to feed your little angels..... well................
Oh, there's no question about that...
That's ok with me because these "mothers" (and I use the term very very lightly) are actually raising future conservative republicans and just don't know it yet.
I don't see how Rev. Drollinger gets all this from Proverbs 31. In fact, if you actually read it, it seems to contradict what he is saying.
For example:
Proverbs 31:14 She is like the merchants' ships; she bringeth her food from afar.
Proverbs 31:31 Give her of the fruit of her hands; and let her own works praise her in the gates.
It starts off as words of a prophecy told to King Lemuel by his mother concerning, among other things, strong drink, and then launches into a description of a virtuous woman. None of the virtues listed is in conflict with being a virtuous woman, but moreover, there is no commandment that any woman must have all these virtues anyway.
Looks more to me like Rev. Drollinger is taking it upon himself to assume the mantle of God, who alone determines what sin is (Deuteronomy 5:7), not some self-appointed accuser.
His citation does not support his charges. He might be better served attending to his own sins, rather than inventing false sins to accuse others of committing.
I agree with the Reverend.
Captain Cook, Shaggy.
Absent fathers should receive the same condemnation.
I am a mom who has to work because I am a widow, and although I do believe my situation is a result of sin, I don't think that it is a sin to try to provide the best for my child by earning a living.
Each working moms case would be different but I suspect a lot of these woman legislators could perhaps not be working for God or their children but for themselves, which then would be a sin. But who are we to judge?
Funny however, if the Reverend would have just said he felt these woman were trying to climb the ladder of success for personal gain, he would have been praised, but in essence that is what he was meaning by saying these woman were sinning since they seemed more self motivating for personal gain than the success of their children.
A sad commentary about the whole issue is that using the word "sin" seems to be a derogatory word that cannot ever be spoken in public, even if it is meant for constrictive criticism. The word "sin" is so inflammatory to the self righteous they want to stamp out any utter of it so they themselves do not have to face their own judgment, explaining the odd antics and reaction!
Thank god there is an endless supply of sh*t.
Wow, what a creative protest. Well, that convinces me that they're good mothers. </sarcasm>
What does the reporter mean "usually bombastic"? I have met the scowling, abrasive, profane Mr. Burton, and he would be bombastic wearing a corset and a hoopskirt. The only difference between him and Congressman Pete Stark (he of the insulting voice mail message to a constituent) is that Burton usually is smart enough not to cuss at people in front of a microphone or a camera.
Note that there were no Republican lawmakers who were spoken of as participating in this nonsense. Not that they were necessarily in agreement, but that they didn't lower themselves to stunts like this.
This is what being a Californian is about, all you folks from the other 49. Putting up with this crapola -- and worse -- from our "leaders."