Jump to content
  • Sky
  • Blueberry
  • Slate
  • Blackcurrant
  • Watermelon
  • Strawberry
  • Orange
  • Banana
  • Apple
  • Emerald
  • Chocolate
  • Charcoal

Baby Thor

  • entries
    102
  • comments
    776
  • views
    10,848

A Thor Kitty Christmas

Sign in to follow this  
Imrlgoddess

588 views

The tree lasted 3 days. 3. The Girl was home that morning & said she heard the crash down the hallway. She ran into the living room to find the tree & table both on their sides, the tree leaning precariously on the couch. Thor was freaked out enough to not try his move again but he's still horribly curious and I know he's going to go after the gifts. During tree clean up we found a bunch of his stashed toys.... he guarded them well. 

I made bath bombs the other day & thought I baracaded them well enough to dry.....apparently not. He did some strength & QA testing for me during the night. 

He helped me get my gifts wrapped this evening. Ribbon really is his speciality. He's also partial to carefully adding appropriate pre-wrinkles to tissue paper. Totally the helpfullest helper that ever helped.

20171213_183101.jpg

20171217_183110.jpg

20171217_180525.jpg

  • Upvote 4
  • Love 6
Sign in to follow this  


2 Comments


Recommended Comments

feministxtian

Posted

He just LOVES helping his mama!!! The problem is communication between kitty and mama...but...that's why we don't have a tree...death & destruction would see it ruined in probably just hours. 

Share this comment


Link to comment
Mela99

Posted

Our Sonny decided he needed to protect us from the shiny ribbon on one gift under the tree. He subdued it, ate it, and barfed it up for all to see. 

Share this comment


Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Posts

    • Koala

      Posted

      1 hour ago, Palimpsest said:

      The last thing this family needs right now is donations of "clothes, canned goods and toiletries."  If any of them had watched Andrea's channel they would know that there is literally nowhere to store those things in that tiny hoarded up house.  And I am not being mean.  It is tiny.  And it is hoarded up up to the rafters with stuff and children, albeit in an "organised" way. 

      Yeah, that's just crazy talk.  They lost their mom, not their house.  They already had clothes, and this hasn't changed that.  I'm sure whoever asked means well, but it's going to create an unnecessary burden for the family.

      The sad thing that I was thinking about, is that for a long time they will probably be eating things that Andrea made and froze, and using items (laundry pods and the like) that she made with her own hands. When they get to the bottom of that supply, it's probably going to be crushing.  Or an odd mix- crushing to have it, and crushing to run out of it.  

      It's not like she was sick for a long time, and had relinquished control of the home- she was keeping house as recently as last week, from the sounds of things.  She is still everywhere they turn, and that has to be something else... I can't imagine.

      I have no shortage of sympathy for those children.  Not many things sadder, than a group of little ones losing a parent.  I'm glad Tom's planning to spend some time off work to be with them and figure things out.  It's hard to think of a workable solution for many of the problems they now face.

      • Love 1
    • picklepizzas

      Posted (edited)

      8 minutes ago, justmy2cents said:

      Interesting @picklepizzas. I guess when they said they’d be leaving it up to God when they got married that included birth control. Does that mean that Derick lied on the questionnaire? 

      I don’t give him enough credit for that kind of deception. I feel like it’s more likely he didn’t lie but was new to the idea of no bc, taken in by the perfect Duggar family and was ready to go all-in on their wacky beliefs, and has slowly drifted back to his original starting point (conservative but secular Christian) and dragged Jill with him. 

      Reversion to the mean. 

      Edited by picklepizzas
    • SusanAtTheLastBattle

      Posted

      21 hours ago, Georgiana said:

      Lesbianism itself is never mentioned in the Bible.  A woman attracted to other women would only be sinning on two counts for her attraction:

      Lusting after someone they are not married to
      Engaging in intercourse with someone they are not (religiously) married to

      This last point may or may not be valid depending on how you define intercourse or who has the authority to marry folks under God.  The Bible seems to center intercourse around the male appendage, so there's an argument to be made that lesbians would be safe.  
      
      In any case, they are no more sinful than anyone else who looks upon another with lust or engages in pre-marital intercourse.  And since that describes a whole heckin lot of boldly proclaimed Christian couples, they are just as saved as many other men and women who every day profess salvation through Christ.  

      The ancient rabbis (in the Sifra, a 4th century CE commentary) were sure they found a prohibition on lesbianism in the Bible. Here it is, guys:

      Leviticus 18:3 "You shall not do as they do in the land of Egypt, where you lived, and you shall not do as they do in the land of Canaan, to which I am bringing you. You shall not follow their statutes."

      And what were they doing in Egypt and Canaan? LESBIANISM, obviously.

      I'm... not fully convinced by this interpretation.

    • justmy2cents

      Posted (edited)

      Interesting @picklepizzas. I guess when they said they’d be leaving it up to God when they got married that included birth control. Does that mean that Derick lied on the questionnaire? 

      Edited by justmy2cents
    • formergothardite

      Posted

      Just now, unsafetydancer said:

      The views on things like 9/11 definitely not harmless but I still think they deserve sympathy over the loss of Andrea and the uncertainty they now face.

      I don't think anyone is saying they don't deserve sympathy. We just shouldn't make Andrea into someone she wasn't.  There is no sense in turning her into some sort of a kind, harmless soul when that wasn't who she was. 

      • Upvote 1
      • I Agree 2


×