[beeler]

So you're actually suggesting that it's better for strangers and/or the government to raise your children? That is a disgusting idea fit only for DU and the women's studies departments of the many socialist re-education camps across the nation. You appear to be the prime example of those selfish, lazy parents who have been duped by the anti-American Left into believing you're unable to raise your children by yourself. It's quite sad and disheartening to see so many people like you on the "conservative" FR boards. This kind of thought not only tends to be the norm in the libertine blue states and their largest cities, but my guess is it extends to the heartland and south as well. Our Republic truly has been lost, at least to some degree. And we have people like you to thank for it. I am honestly shocked that so many in this forum think it's not much better (or worse, in your case) to have a child raised by a mother or father as opposed to being raised by strangers. Also, your "two generation" statement is complete BS. The idea that at any time in our history there were "many" families who employed stay-at-home-strangers to raise their children is a statement worthy of the most ardent anti-family communist feminist in academia (you obviously have been educated in a public university). You, yourself may know "many" who can afford to employee people to raise their children, but the rest of us working for a living can't see all the way up your pedestal.

[nopardons]

You MUST have gone to public school...your level of reading comprehension is sub-par; neither have you the ability to reason and are completely illogical. You are all raw nerves and emotion.

Quite unlike your benighted suppositions, I was a stay at home mother. And also unlike you, I know history, know what it is like to have and raise a child into adulthood, and have not condemned nor name called people who are unable to be a stay at home parent.

You want to know who the real monster is, it is you. And you are also self centered, arrogant, pompous, and supercilious; completely lacking understanding and compassion for those who don't agree with you 110%. Your puerile little temper tantrums are not only childish, but exactly like what one finds on DU.

Historically, women have hired others to look after their children, used slaves to look after their children, and throughout the most of recorded history, shipped out their children to other families ( even what you might consider lower middle class people...I suggest you go read up on apprentices ), who trained them to be knights or taught them a trade; well, sort of. LOL

And just WHAT is so wonderful about having a five year old look after a baby, or a twelve year old looking after babies or toddlers, as the mother worked in the fields or in a factory? Perhaps you prefer hanging swaddled to a board babies hanging on trees or a peg? Yes, that was also what many poor women did, as they worked in a field or around the house.

Your overtly sentimentalized views of child rearing, never really existed. Even in the not so distant past, when few women worked outside the house, many mothers had someone to help them look after their children; even if it was only a baby nurse, for the first two or three weeks after giving birth.

No, it wasn't "people like you ( me )" who have "ruined" your cartoon, sitcom dream world. Rather, it has been hysteric, girly-men whingers, such as you, who give a bad name to CONSERVATISM, who ruin this forum; n00b. And your pathetic class warfare and pretend victimhood are deplorable , contemptible, and disgusting.

Please............don't reproduce. ;^)