To: VictoryGal
You still haven't answered my question from 2,518, so I shall restate.
Is a man incapable of taking care of children?
Why are you, and others like you, completely dismissing the father in this family.
2,663 posted on
09/02/2008 7:09:05 AM PDT by
Jotmo
(I Had a Bad Experience With the CIA and Now I'm Gonna Show You My Feminine Side - Swirling Eddies)
To: Jotmo
You nailed someone early on the breast feeding question. The “Bork Palin” crowd doesn’t want to go back there.
2,669 posted on
09/02/2008 7:12:45 AM PDT by
Arthur Wildfire! March
(Palin 2016! Palin 2016! Palin 2016! Palin 2016! Palin 2016! Palin 2016! Palin 2016!)
To: Jotmo
> Why are you, and others like you, completely dismissing the father in this family.
Oh, I am going to regret staying in this discussion.
Dads ARE important. Did you not catch my comment about BOTH parents taking leave when a baby is born? If Dads weren’t important, why would BOTH take a leave?
But we are talking new babies here. Moms are simply more important at this stage. You may feel differently, but that’s the way its been since caveman days. Kids get older, it’s a totally different story.
2,680 posted on
09/02/2008 7:19:33 AM PDT by
VictoryGal
(Never give up, never surrender!)
To: Jotmo
Is a man incapable of taking care of children?
I'm not intentionally dismissing him - but he is not a full-time stay at home dad, like many here have posted. There are inconsistencies. I would love to get the truth. If he is a full-time dad, then I'd have no problem. But there's also stories that he still works for BP AND works at salmon fishing in season. That's not even a half-time stay at home parent, with those jobs.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson