• Stay out of it. Even if it's a mistake, it's none of your business.
• Stay out of it, because you won't change what they are going to do, and they'll just get angry at you for voicing disapproval.
• Speak your peace, regardless of whether it is wanted or well-received, because friends don't watch friends make large mistakes without saying anything about it.

Now, I'm not agreeing that Jamie and Nate are making a mistake. But I believe that everybody who has posted in that thread is motivated by genuine good wishes for both people, and I'm not repudiating any of them, either.
 

---

Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
 
in the first post in that thread, Nathan brought up the idea that many people can or do think this decision is a bad decision. He brought it up, and I don't see how it's inappropriate for others to comment on it themselves.

edit: I disagree with what I wrote there. Nathan didn't ask for advice -- the decision has already been made, and he was just explaining himself. I was in the wrong.

[ December 28, 2004, 03:54 PM: Message edited by: mr_porteiro_head ]
 

---

Posted by Theca (Member # 1629) on :
 
Porter, the only comment I remember disliking was ...yours, actually. Backhanded was a pretty good word for it. But I see that now it's gone, anyway.
 

---

Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
 
Well, it wasn't meant to be offensive or backhanded.

It was meant to be open and straightforward.

But now that I think about it, I realize my words were inappropriate for the time and place.

Nate, Mack: I apologize.

[ December 28, 2004, 03:55 PM: Message edited by: mr_porteiro_head ]
 

---

Posted by Trisha the Severe Hottie (Member # 6000) on :
 
I used to think nothing should be edited if it had been replied to. But I don't think that anymore.
 

---

Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
 
I think not just saying it but even feeling it is wrong. All individuals are in charge of their own lives. Major life decisions simply cannot be made by others, because a person is a complex and unknowable mystery, even to themselves, and certainly nobody else has any idea what it's like being them. People of any age are barely (if even) qualified to make their own life choices. The old people I know are not generally wiser or happier or more joyful than the young. It's an objective fact that nobody can possibly be qualified to make big decisions for anyone else.

All choices in life are fraught with peril. Every love, every profession chosen, every marriage, every child conceived, every move to another city or a new job is a difficult and dangerous undertaking. There is no guarantee that any of these things will work out well, yet with luck and grace, with humility, and persistence, and with the love and support of our family and friends, we all know that much joy can be found.

Beginnings are delicate things. The most unpropitious circumstances have been known to give rise to the greatest results. What do you suppose Mary and Joseph's friends thought of their marriage, and of their new baby, born in a barn?

When people are announcing major life moves, they have passed the point at which they are deciding. Their decision is already made... by the ones God placed in charge of their lives, (if you like), by themselves. If other input was needed it would be from their closest most trusted family and friends, and it would have been requested much earlier.

If someone has dire predictions about someone else's choices, then why would they feel the need to voice them, unwanted and unheeded? So in case it doesn't work out, they can have the satisfaction of saying, "I told you so"? Are such comments really motivated by love and concern? I have a hard time feeling that some of them are. A very few seem to come from close and caring people. Much more often they seem to be made by people who've evidenced, up to that point, little to no interest in the parties involved.

I feel it's far better always that we should celebrate engagements, marriages, and births, and give our full love and support to those who announce them. When people make these announcements on hatrack, they're inviting us to share their joy. It is a privilege of friendship which they extend to us. How well do we repay them for that privilege of joy, if in return we do our best to squelch it?

[ December 28, 2004, 05:19 PM: Message edited by: Tatiana ]
 

---

Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
 
You can't really win sometimes, so, one might as well support a person no matter what they do and help them no matter what happens without snarky comments. People should elevated each other at all times, not tear each other down........
*hopes that does not sound wrong*
 

---

Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
 
I think a more important question about singling out 'Rackers is why Bob and Dana get so much sappieness leeway when I get slapped down for so much as mentioning that I like the way Annie looks.

OK so maybe it's not more important, but I don't really have any input on the orginal question.

Hobbes
 

---

Posted by eslaine (Member # 5433) on :
 
It's not that so much as the sloppy tiger kisses!

The horror... the horror...

*shudders*
 

---

Posted by jeniwren (Member # 2002) on :
 
I think Icky-chirops is right....it is rooted in a spirit of friendship.

Personally, I wish someone had been willing to take me aside and tell me what a mistake I was making in marrying my first husband. Instead, there was a pool among my "friends" for how long they thought it would last. I should have had them give me the money to defray the cost of the divorce.

Thus, when true friends *did* say some cautionary words to my now-husband and I about marrying, I took it in the manner it was meant, ended up taking a lot of it to heart -- we took some extra pre-marriage counselling as a result.

And I don't think anyone would think to say anything to ScottR about having his 12th child because we all know he's LDS and have no reason to worry over his marriage. If Magson, OTOH, said he was considering having another with his stbx-wife, I'd imagine there would be some cautionary posts.
 

---

Posted by eslaine (Member # 5433) on :
 

quote:

---

stbx-wife

---

quote:

---

why [do] Bob and Dana get so much sappieness leeway when I get slapped down for so much as mentioning that I like the way Annie looks. [Grumble]

---

That's easy to answer. Their sappiness is contained. They start new threads for their sappiness that are easy to avoid. You, on the other hand, tend to ooze sappiness that gets all over almost any thread you visit.
 

---

Posted by jeniwren (Member # 2002) on :
 
erik: soon-to-be-ex-wife.
 

---

Posted by Annie (Member # 295) on :
 
I often get offended at frank advice from friends, even when it is couched in well-wishing. The mere thought that they don't agree with me irritates me.

That said, I have often looked back on such advice with gratitude, and consider my real friends the ones who told me what they thought I needed to hear, rather than what they thought I wanted to hear. Even when I disagreed with their advice, I appreciated the fact that they'd cared enough to share it.

My grandmother is a curmudgeony old lady who has never been happy with one of my mother's pregnancies. My mom's had six kids and has put up with a lot. Grandma now has discussions with me about what I need to be doing with my life - why I should consider a career and not run off and get married like my mom did. I don't agree with many of her offered opinions, but I understand that she gives them out of love and concern for me.

It's possible to wish someone well and congratulate them on a happy event and at the same time be concerned or cautionary. I don't see it as backhanded or mean; I see it as concerned and compassionate.
 

---

Posted by eslaine (Member # 5433) on :
 
Thanks jeni.
 

---

Posted by Lisha-princess (Member # 6966) on :
 
I agree. I appreciated, recently, when a friend took the time to tell me what he thought of a situation I was in, and then proceeded to tell me what he thought I ought to do about it. Others had told me similar things, but no one had pushed it. Indeed, some very dear friends appeared to not want to upset me, and therefore did not tell me things I "did not want to hear", which, though nice, was not very helpful. Sometimes the caring frankness is the only way.
 

---

Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
 
I agree that the time and place for open disapprovel has passed. Mack and Nathan already know who disapproves, now it is time to celebrate, period. I appreciated the frank advice/words of caution in the other thread, and thought they were received by both in a very mature way. Now, they are announcing they are getting married in a few days. Do they need to hear it all over again? It makes me feel sad for them. If it were me, I would be hurt.
 

---

Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
 
I like ribbing people who have kids because I GET ribbed for not having them. It's that thing where neither lifestyle is right or wrong, more or less rewarding (necessarily) and yet everyone has an opinion on it. Ribbing people about it sort of cushions the topic in my mind.

That said, I would think it just as offensive to truly criticize someone else's decision to have more children as I would take offense at criticism for not having kids. There are, like, five people on planet who I would feel comfortable butting into their personal business. Everyone else is just doing their thang, man.

(I think I might be a closet hippy.)
 

---

Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
 
I have a good friend who got married to a guy she met over the internet and had met in person once. She had never been in a dating relationship before. He was divorced and had recently had a child out of wedlock with another woman.

Needless to say, I was concerned.

I told her I was concerned, but that more importantly, I was her friend and always would be there for her no matter what. I think she really appreciated that. As far as I know, their marriage has been fine over the last year and a half. You never know.
 

---

Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
 
As long as people can take care of their kids, I don't object. I feel irratated towards people who have kids before they are ready or have enough money, but mainly because I am concerned about the kids.
That sort of thing isn't even amusing on sitcoms.
 

---

Posted by Megachirops (Member # 4325) on :
 

quote:

---

I think not just saying it but even feeling it is wrong.

---

quote:

---

I think not just saying it but even feeling it is wrong.

---

Help! It's the thought police!
 

---

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
 
Hide your emoticons...quickly!
 

---

Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
 
I guess I meant I would consider it wrong for me to think that about someone. Wrong as in a mistake.... like getting the wrong answer to a math problem, you know?
 

---

Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
 


twinky, I heard what you just thought. I'm going to have to write you up for that, you know. *shakes head sadly*
 

---

Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
 

 

---

Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
 
Icky, I was speaking in general and not really about Jamie and Nate. This is only the latest in a long series of such things on hatrack, where someone shares their joy and then receives a lot of negative comments and unwanted unheeded and highly impertinent advice and opinions.
 

---

Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
 
That thread is hardly an outpouring of cynicism. It might not be a full-on lovefest, but there's plenty of support and good vibes.
 

---

Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
 
When I announced my impending marriage here, I got a bit of that, too. It didn't change my mind. But then I also got that from friends IRL thinking I was being a fool for moving halfway around the world to marry someone I didn't know. But it was comments like that that was part of my decision to elope. I didn't want the negativeness to interfere with my happiness.
 

---

Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
 
Would you have preferred they lied and said they thought it was a great idea, though? Or just that they simply offered congratulations and best wishes, keeping their opinions to themselves? Because those two options differ significantly.
 

---

Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
 
There is also the option that the friends have to realize that quid knows what she's doing, that she is qualified (more qualified than they) to make decisions for her own life, that they respect her choices, and that she's their friend and they love her and wish her the very best outcome possible. Don't forget that option.

[ December 28, 2004, 10:35 PM: Message edited by: Tatiana ]
 

---

Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
 
That's equivalent to my option two, as far as I can tell.
 

---

Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
 
I see it as being totally different. I feel with both your options that the friends seem sure they know better than quid herself what is right for her to choose. I guess what I'm advocating is a healthy dose of humility and respect for people exercising their own free agency.

[ December 28, 2004, 10:38 PM: Message edited by: Tatiana ]
 

---

Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
 
How does having an opinion of your own about the decision conflict with that in any way? I never said that the congratulations and best wishes should be anything other than heartfelt.
 

---

Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
 
And I could throw in the fact that my life has always been odd, so why would it suddenly become normal? Plus I'm old.

I don't know what I would have preferred. I think I personally would have preferred all nice and happy - I get enough negativity as it is. It felt like they were raining on my parade, so to speak. Like my decisions weren't good enough for them. But then, I'm over-sensitive on such things, much more so than they realize. The fact that I chose to elope has to say volumes - I chose to not subject myself to the negativity. I didn't allow it any further opportunity to take place.

And having said all that, I could have been more sensitive on the other thread.
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 
I think the issue is that our opinion in such a situation is almost guaranteed to be based on incomplete data - much more incomplete than the couple's information.

Now, in cases where one person knows something about the friend's spouse-to-be that the friend needs to know to make a decision, speaking up might be warranted. But even then, one wouldn't be forming an opinion so much as providing additional information.

Dagonee
 

---

Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
 
Hobbes, was that kamakazi IM just now your way of telling me you think I'm all wrong about this? <laughs>

For the record, I think you're super cool too. And I like the Hobbes brand™ rampant leakingintoeverythread sappiness. It's obviously quite sincere so I think it's really sweet.

The kamakazi ims often puzzle me, though.
 

---

Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
 
In my view, option two (the friends keep their opinions to themselves and wish you all the best) is fine. Option one, however (the friends lie and say they think you're making a good decision) is not cool.
 

---

Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
 
I think bringing anything up at Hatrack is opening it up for debate, whether you mean to or not. Not that debating it is always the right thing to do, but that it always happens. I don't recall a thread where something like this wasn't debated when the thread starter didn't want it to be.
 

---

Posted by Suneun (Member # 3247) on :
 
I just try to avoid the "ganging up" mentality. If I know people have voiced appropriate concerns, then I feel free to only offer encouragement and excitement. It'll make the object that much happier. But if I don't think anyone's mentioned the concerns I have, then I'd rather bring them up quietly, privately, and briefly. It's a duty as a friend to mention it, but it's a duty as a friend not to embarass or shame them.
 

---

Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
 
Absolutely. I don't think I would mention it in public. And having misgivings certainly wouldn't conflict with my wishing my friend(s) the very best. They're my friends. Of course I want everything to work out well for them.
 

---

Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
 
Beautifully said, Suneun.
 

---

Posted by Dead_Horse (Member # 3027) on :
 
I am a couple of pages behind in keeping up with the Nate and Jamie thread, just so you know. I decided after reading this thread that I would reply without reading the other. So, don't take offense where none is intended.

I really love the title of Nate's thread. It is Nate and Jamie who are responsible for making Nate and Jamie's choices, and no one else's. It is me who gets to decide things about my life. It is you who gets to decide things about yours.

What Nate and Jamie are doing is honorable. People get married. Some sooner than later, for whatever reasons. It is not up to anyone in an online forum, no matter how good friends they consider themselves, to judge anyone's decision to get married.

An announcement of impending marriage is a thing to rejoice over, not to criticize. It is rude and tactless to try to convince two perfectly nice people who are of legal age and in love, that their marriage will be a mistake, or that they should have chosen a different line of action. I think this comes from our own life's experiences. By stating your objections to someone's happy announcement, you are really exposing your own experience with regret and bad choices.

The reaction driven by love and concern is congratulations, and support. No less.

If the shoe fits....
 

---

Posted by Suneun (Member # 3247) on :
 
Oooh, ElJay liked my post
 

---

Posted by Megachirops (Member # 4325) on :
 

quote:

---

I think this comes from our own life's experiences. By stating your objections to someone's happy announcement, you are really exposing your own experience with regret and bad choices.

---

Well, of course. Did you think this was some debate-killing insight?

People may certainly want to prevent their friends from having the same regrets they do.

Or people may regret not having tried to stop somebody from making a mistake a time in the past when it did not turn out well.

Their attempts may or may not be misguided, but I haven't seen malice.

[ December 29, 2004, 12:23 AM: Message edited by: Megachirops ]
 

---

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
 
Suneun, that is what I was trying for, but much better phrased.

I hope that that is how I have acted though.

Kwea

[ December 29, 2004, 01:03 AM: Message edited by: Kwea ]
 

---

Posted by Anti-Chris (Member # 4452) on :
 
Ok... um...

::scratches head::

I actually am very much appreciative of everyone who has given me and Jamie advice, or voiced their concerns, both now and in the engagement part of it. I feel very fortunate to have friends who can impart of thier wisdom to me.

I feel very fortunate also, to be able to share my life with good people.

If anyone is to give me more critisism than Scott R (just to further the example), let me just say that I understand why, and I am not offended by that. Again, thank you all for the words.
 

---

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
 
Also I would like to chime in on Space Opera's behalf about something that was discussed...if you want to use that term...before.

When SO mentioned marriage and kids, the point wasn't that she was against large families, or that she should criticize anyones family...in fact her point as I saw it was that such critisims were not in good taste because family size is a personal decision.

Much like choosing to get married.

Some people might have an objection to large families, and that is fine...they are free to not have one of their own. What isn't ok is if they they mention their dislike of large families (keep in mind that you can substitute anything personal for large families here) to anyone who is considering having another child.

Concerns were raised before, and Jamie and Nate have decided to go forward despite them. I think that people have pretty much said all that can be said here about it, and that if either one of them were asking for advice then the person raising objections would have a point.

But at this point they are just looking to celebrate, and I think that Nate's first post made that clear.

But SO got mugged a bit for making a point...and that point wasn't a point against large families, or against having children. It was against anyone interfering with personal decisions between a man and a woman.....whether that choice is a marriage partner or a decision to have umpteen children.

Enough said.

Now back to our regular scheduled love-fest...

Kwea

[ December 29, 2004, 01:17 AM: Message edited by: Kwea ]
 

---

Posted by Megachirops (Member # 4325) on :
 
erm . . . I hope I didn't mug SO. Can't we all just get along?
 

---

Posted by imogen (Member # 5485) on :
 
Bad Icky-mugger! Bad!
 

---

Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
 

quote:

---

Scott R. is having his fourth child - has anyone grilled him

---

We're not sure if it's a boy or a girl yet, but you can be sure that if we decide to eat the child, we will grill him. Or her. Whatever. I've got this great marinade I've been dying to try out.

Oh. . . wait. Did you mean grill ME?

That's disgusting. I'm an ADULT! You don't grill ADULTS.

You roast them.

Duh.
 

---

Posted by Sara Sasse (Member # 6804) on :
 
Cannibal slow-stews a priest over a low flame. Serves it to his friend, who scowls at him.

"Hey! That doesn't taste right ...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
... oh, I see your problem. Long brown robe with a hood, right? That was a friar."
 

---

Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
 
In all fairness, Anne Kate, you did stop speaking to someone once because you disapproved of the way they handled a stray cat. So don't pretend that you don't do it, yourself.
 

---

Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
 
I'll answer seriously now.

I don't know mack and T. If I did know them, through Real Life interaction, I might voice my concerns.

But I don't. Alas. So, I trust that they know what's best for them, and what God wants of them. And I offer my congratulations-- they seem to sincerely believe that what they are doing is the Right Thing.

And I have nothing in my hands that says anything contrary.
 

---

Posted by Wendybird (Member # 84) on :
 

quote:

---

I feel irratated towards people who have kids before they are ready or have enough money, but mainly because I am concerned about the kids.

---

See this is where I have a problem with anyone making a judgment about someone else's decision. Someone easily, and probally did, look at my dh and I when we were pg with our first and said "They are so not ready, they have no money" etc etc. It bothers me that people think they can look at a situation that they are not intimately familiar with (or placed in jurisdiction over such a a judge or court advocate or something like that) and make a judgment as to readiness or financial responsibility. If we waited until we could afford to have kids we would still have no children. Do my kids suffer and live in squalor? No. We don't live in a fancy house, we don't drive nice cars, we shop at thrift stores and live on hand me downs a lot of the time. But those things are not important. They are fed, clothed, housed and more importantly loved.

I've just never understood why we as human beings feel the need to judge someone's decision to have children, get married etc etc.

(This was NOT a direct reply to Syn... her post was just the easiest to quote so please don't jump on me)
 

---

Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
 
"I've just never understood why we as human beings feel the need to judge someone's decision to have children, get married etc etc."

The alternative is to not judge anyone's decisions. How comfortable are you with drug abuse, abortion, and the sexual revolution?
 

---

Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
 
I agree Wendy, especially because "they don't have enough money" in the United States normally means "they can't get a widescreen TV and surrond sound in a big, over-morgated house and still have kids". It like they're either assuming that you're going to try and do it anyways and then the kid will suffer when you can't get toothpaste because you wanted a new Jaguar instead, or they think that not having all of life's modern conviences is depriving the child of things that are actually important instead of, well, convientent.

Now I know no one is actually thinking this, especially you Hatrackers who've said this, but think of your own life, don't you think there's areas of materialism you could cut back on that would save money? Cheaper food, different transportation, smaller apartment, no TV, no cable, wait a little longer to replace things that aren't working to their full potential. I'm not saying it's a moral imparitive for someone to do this, I'm saying for almost everone living in the US, it's more than possible to cut back enough to afford taking care of a child. Third world nations still manage to have kids, and I don't think they would ever meet any of these qualifications for "rich enough" when they have them.

Hobbes
 

---

Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
 

quote:

---

The alternative is to not judge anyone's decisions. How comfortable are you with drug abuse, abortion, and the sexual revolution?

---

I'm pretty comfortable with that last one since, depending on which revolution you're talking about, it allowed girls to wear jeans, and Annie looks darn sexy in jeans.

Hobbes
 

---

Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
 
You know, we very nearly had a whole thread in which Hobbes posted without commenting on how sexy Annie is. Thank God; disaster was averted!
 

---

Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
 
Well back home they call me the problem solver.

(I'm not at Scotty's level yet, but I'm still growing and I've got my eyes on the prize).

Hobbes
 

---

Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
 
My mind is, sadly, too dirty for Hobbes' last post. Someone else is going to have to read it.
 

---

Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
 
It was a perfectly funny, perfectly clean joke about Star Trek TOS, and there was at no point, sex involved with the joke. Shame Tom Davidson, shame.

Hobbes
 

---

Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
 
Well file me next to Tom and call me dirty, then...
 

---

Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
 
I would like to say that I feel I've been on exceptionally good behavior ever since Christy started posting by not indulging in my shameless whoring for Tom's attention. I totally had a response for ElJay's post, and I totally didn't post it.

I demand recognition for my goodness.

[ December 29, 2004, 02:36 PM: Message edited by: Ralphie ]
 

---

Posted by Mrs.M (Member # 2943) on :
 
Hobbes and Wendybird, I have to disagree somewhat about the money and children issue. I grew up with no money and it was rough. I never want my children to go through that - I don't want them to worry about where the money for rent and electricity and food will come from and I don't want them to be the scholarship kids or poor relations. No, there isn't any shame in it and I'm not ashamed of my upbringing, but I don't want it for my children.

Also, the cost of raising children is skyrocketing. It's not just keeping them fed and clothed. Day care is unbelievably expensive, as are doctor and dentist bills. Even extracurricular activities add up - soccer uniforms and equipment and league fees and snack money can really make a dent in your wallet.

For me personally, I feel that I owe certain things to my children. I plan to pay for their entire education, through graduate school, to whichever school they choose. I feel that I have a duty to nurture their interests, which includes things like musical instruments, specialized summer programs, and sporting equipment. And I feel that they should have a full-time mother, which is why I am not going to work. Understand that this is what I feel is right for my future children specifically - I am not saying that anyone is a bad parent or person if they don't agree with me.
 

---

Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
 
Ralphie darlin', I will always recognize your goodness. :waggleseyebrows:

[ December 29, 2004, 02:45 PM: Message edited by: ElJay ]
 

---

Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
 
"I demand recognition for my goodness."

If you really want us to recognize you, Ralphie, you're going to have to stop being so good all the time. It's better than a fake nose and a moustache.

-------

"I don't want them to be the scholarship kids or poor relations."

While I sympathize with this, I thought about it for a second and realized that most of the people I could tolerate in college were scholarship kids, and most of the family I like are our poorer relations.

[ December 29, 2004, 02:46 PM: Message edited by: TomDavidson ]
 

---

Posted by eslaine (Member # 5433) on :
 
*recognizes Toni for her enlightened self-interest*


 

---

Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
 
Exactly Mrs. M, I have no problem with you position, in the sense that I know you're doing what you think is best for you children, and Wendybird's position (and mine) is that everyone should do what they think is best for their children, and at least when it comes to issues like how much money you should have when having kids, judging the what other people think is best is just plain a bad idea.

Hobbes
 

---

Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
 

quote:

---

If you really want us to recognize you, Ralphie, you're going to have to stop being so good all the time. It's better than a fake nose and a moustache.

---

So, what you're saying is... When I'm good, I'm good. But when I'm bad, I'm even better?

I really believe that Mae West hid all the answers to the mysteries of life on a little piece of paper within her cleavage.

Erik - What you said sounds smart and made my brains hurt.

ElJay - You almost make me want to come back to Hatrack full-time. We would have blast, you and I.

[ December 29, 2004, 02:51 PM: Message edited by: Ralphie ]
 

---

Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
 
So we'll have a blast when we're both around. I'm cool with that.

But I really wanna hear the comment you didn't make...
 

---

Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
 
She just had a baby, ElJay. Have some respect!


 

---

Posted by eslaine (Member # 5433) on :
 
You've been around quite a bit in the last few days.

I thought you were back.
 

---

Posted by Space Opera (Member # 6504) on :
 
Ooh! I like this thread de-railment. Like Hobbes, I think most Americans can afford to cut some stuff out. I'm always amazed at how much we as a country spend on things that don't really matter. I see as I get older that material things have gotten much less important to me. But everyone just seems to want "more." A friend of mine and her husband just built a 3200 square foot home. They have no children, it's just them and a dog. Who needs that much space?

I've really been trying to move away from that in the last several years. Right now I drive a car that's got over 100,000 miles and faux wood interior. We don't have cable because I don't see the sense in paying over $30 a month to watch TV. But we still have very nice things and live in a wonderful house. Our decisions to let go of some of the "luxuries" have allowed me to stay home full time and plan for a third child.

What's really funny is that my husband makes darn good money. We don't have to sweat the bills at all, but we have had to make choices. And I'd much rather live in a less than 3000 square foot house and drive an older car in exchange for the time we get as a family.

space opera
 

---

Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
 
That was months ago.
 

---

Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
 

quote:

---

You've been around quite a bit in the last few days.

I thought you were back.

---