Kristina of Keepsakes pregnant and due #4 in March

[nelliebelle1197]

Kristina, ask your mom about Tallula Belle. She needs to know and cut this person off.

[3_and_counting]

Kristina, ask your mom about Tallula Belle. She needs to know and cut this person off.

She doesn't recognize the description either. No one fits.

[nelliebelle1197]

I believe you. Why on earth would you lie about something like this? The woman's descriptions of herself were too random to be made up. She also claimed someone sent her here. I wonder who that was? I can only speculate, but perhaps she is a relative of Jessica's?

[PrairieGirl]

Wow, I have a migraine and am gone for the day and BAM! Just wow!

Way too many questions to answer but, I'll do my best.

Yes, Michelle and her family are still in church, is that a bad thing?

We all know where I stand on abortion, that has not changed.

My beliefs on dress have not changed. Back when I had this discussion years ago I believe I said that it was something that I believe God has to open your eyes to and convict you of, some people never have their eyes opened to it. That has not changed. I have NEVER stated that a woman would go to hell for wearing pants.

I've never had issues with women getting an education, I just said through correspondences. I see a female Dr because of the fact that I do not judge others for their decisions and choices and because I find it very uncomfortable to show all to a male I do not know.

Someone, I can't remember who, asked how we make it financially. Saying there was no way we pay for our insurance and making the assumption we are on government assistance. They said something about how they bring in $200,000 annually and can manage to afford the one child they have. I believe you said you live in Australia. The cost of living is much, much higher there. We do pay for our own insurance for the entire family. Our kids are well taken care of and are pretty spoiled actually. We are on no sort of government assistance. We hold our own and are doing it quite well.

As for Tallula Belle, I still have no clue who she is, that doesn't sound like ANY of my mom's friends. Not that we personally know anyways.

I would love for Tashia to come and have a conversation here. I have not said anything about her other than to respond about what she has said about us. I will not share anything personal about her unless she brings it up. And to say that "all three of us" have attacked her over all this...I never did. I messaged her to ask if she was going to let you guys know some facts and she never responded.

I think I covered everything...

Thanks for coming back, Kristina. I was premature when I stated above that you were not going to be. I apologize for that. As for Michelle staying in church, I was saying that as a joke about a statement your mom made years ago about her new husband "keeping her in church". Many of us here questioned that type of wording and if he actually forced her and her son to go.

I cannot comment much on your abortion blog since I never went there to read it, and many people here have spoken much more eloquently than I have regarding it.

Would you be so kind as to respond in more detail regarding the post you made years ago regarding education? I believe it was Jessica who posted it a few pages ago. You stated plainly that you would never need a job once you found a husband and would need never one before that either, since you would be under the authority of your father. We have all seen what has happened to Jessica. How is she supposed to now support FOUR children with no education and no job experience whatsoever? Do you really want one of your sweet daughters to have to go through something like this? Or yourself for that matter? And Kristina, it is fine if your preference is to see only female doctors but even you know that you cannot get an MD through correspondence courses.

I hope your migraine is better. I suffer from them as well, and they are hell to get through.

ETA: I too believe you about Tallula. No matter what your family is going through and who is right or wrong, it is absolutely horrid that someone who claims to be a friend of your mom would do this. I hope she can weed this cancer out. :doh: :doh:

[3_and_counting]

Thanks for coming back, Kristina. I was premature when I stated above that you were not going to be. I apologize for that. As for Michelle staying in church, I was saying that as a joke about a statement your mom made years ago about her new husband "keeping her in church". Many of us here questioned that type of wording and if he actually forced her and her son to go.

I cannot comment much on your abortion blog since I never went there to read it, and many people here have spoken much more eloquently than I have regarding it.

Would you be so kind as to respond in more detail regarding the post you made years ago regarding education? I believe it was Jessica who posted it a few pages ago. You stated plainly that you would never need a job once you found a husband and would need never one before that either, since you would be under the authority of your father. We have all seen what has happened to Jessica. How is she supposed to now support FOUR children with no education and no job experience whatsoever? Do you really want one of your sweet daughters to have to go through something like this? Or yourself for that matter? And Kristina, it is fine if your preference is to see only female doctors but even you know that you cannot get an MD through correspondence courses.

I hope your migraine is better. I suffer from them as well, and they are hell to get through.

ETA: I too believe you about Tallula. No matter what your family is going through and who is right or wrong, it is absolutely horrid that someone who claims to be a friend of your mom would do this. I hope she can weed this cancer out. :doh: :doh:

What I don't think a lot of people know is that Jessica has a college education, she's working on her bachelors degree if I'm not mistaken. I know she has her associates.

When I said I would never need a job once I got married is because I'm a believer in being a SAHW&M. If something were to ever happen to Josh, of course I would have to go get a job so that I could take care of my children. I understood this even as I lived at home with my parents. I would probably have to get a job that the labor would be difficult but it would be a way of providing.

I want my children to have an education. I plan to encourage my girls to get an education, not go off to college but, to get an education through correspondences. My parents couldn't afford it, so I didn't.

[PrairieGirl]

What I don't think a lot of people know is that Jessica has a college education, she's working on her bachelors degree if I'm not mistaken. I know she has her associates.

When I said I would never need a job once I got married is because I'm a believer in being a SAHW&M. If something were to ever happen to Josh, of course I would have to go get a job so that I could take care of my children. I understood this even as I lived at home with my parents. I would probably have to get a job that the labor would be difficult but it would be a way of providing.

I want my children to have an education. I plan to encourage my girls to get an education, not go off to college but, to get an education through correspondences. My parents couldn't afford it, so I didn't.

Kristina, do you know why your parents did not do a better job of preparing you or your sister for the work force in the event that you would have a large family to provide for and no man to support you? From reading your blog, it just did not seem that education was all that important to them. And I am not talking about financially.

Glad to hear that Jessica is working on her education. I wish her and her girls the best.

Edited because apparently words are not all that important to sentence structure today.

[3_and_counting]

Kristina, do you know why your parents did not do a better job of preparing you or your sister for the work force in the event that you would have a large family to provide for and no man to support you? From reading your blog, it just did not seem that education was all that important to them. And I am not talking about financially.

Glad to hear that Jessica is working on her education. I wish her and her girls the best.

Edited because apparently words are not all that important to sentence structure today.

They've said within the last year or so that they know they didn't give us the education we needed and the regret that now. Education wasn't in the the forefront with them for us girls and as I said, they realize that should have been different.

[eh02]

I want my children to have an education. I plan to encourage my girls to get an education, not go off to college but, to get an education through correspondences. My parents couldn't afford it, so I didn't.

I know none of us will probably change your mind, but I do hope college could at least be an option to consider for your kids, both the girls and boys. There is so much value in the experience as a whole for those who want it. And many people in college are serious about their faith, participate in religious groups and activities with likeminded people etc. so there is truly a "support group" for every type of person you can imagine.

The reason I specify "for those who want it" is that college definitely isn't for everyone, and it's not a worthwhile investment if you're not willing to really "do it right." I think it is great for most people, but I don't agree that it's great for everyone, and it definitely is not worth investing (or wasting) large amounts of money in if you are not ready or pick a school that is not financially feasible for you. BUT, if your children were interested in it (and who knows if they will be, they have plenty of time!) it can be very difficult to look back as an adult with regret that you didn't at least try to go.

I'd urge you to at least let them consider it as an option that is open to them even if you maybe personally advise them against it. No doubt, your children all have unique skills and gifts, and just as I'm sure you do all you can to help them hone those skills at home, some peoples' gifts really need input of experts or professionals in the field, usually in an academic setting, to reach their full potential. Say one of your kids could be a chemistry genius, a doctor, or a brilliant engineer - those simply aren't skills you can learn from home to any extent that will be acceptable if they try to pursue them professionally. If God happened to give your daughters a brilliant gift like that, it just seems like a shame not to use it - why else would they have it? Anyway, that's just my opinions as an outsider. :D

[ViolaSebastian]

They've said within the last year or so that they know they didn't give us the education we needed and the regret that now. Education wasn't in the the forefront with them for us girls and as I said, they realize that should have been different.

I'm curious, are you still planning on homeschooling your children, given this information?

[3_and_counting]

I'm curious, are you still planning on homeschooling your children, given this information?

I plan to homeschool them for as long as I can teach them. There will come a time where I won't be able to do that anymore...but I would like to for as long as I can.

[Childless]

TB,

Like Treemom, I've also had an abortion (although mine was in the first trimester). I did it to save my life and my fertility. I do not regret my decision at all. Because I had the abortion, my husband still has his wife and we both have two beautiful little boys who would not have been here otherwise (even if I had managed to survive without the abortion, I would most certainly have lost my fertility).

If you're really interested in lowering the abortion rate, you should support cheap and easy access to birth control and comprehensive sex education in schools. These things are the reason why Europe has a significantly lower abortion rate than the U.S. Education is key. Less unplanned pregnancies equals less abortion. Outlawing abortion will do nothing to prevent it from happening. This is why I think the pro-life movement is full of shit. They don't care about saving babies. They care about controlling women. Otherwise, they'd be supporting the things that actually lower the amount of abortions instead of trying to tell women what they can and can't do with their own bodies.

[thoughtful]

Wow, I have a migraine and am gone for the day and BAM! Just wow!

Sorry to hear that -- I used to have them, and they are awful.

I've never had issues with women getting an education, I just said through correspondences.

I'm not sure what you mean by the second half of that sentence, but the first is good to hear -- mostly because it is good to hear it is your current belief.

I must say, though, that the people who are remembering that is wasn't always your belief have a long history of good memories and good research, so I can't help feeling they got that impression for a reason.

Again, if your beliefs have changed, that's great, and normal. I don't know why insisting that you always believed as you do now is so important to you. Think it through -- it's like saying "I never mature." I can't imagine that's what you want people to think of you.

Even when you admit to change, it is with odd wording. For example:

My beliefs on dress have not changed. Back when I had this discussion years ago I believe I said that it was something that I believe God has to open your eyes to and convict you of, some people never have their eyes opened to it. That has not changed.

Saying someone has never had their eyes opened to someone God wants is not exactly approving. And now you are wearing pants -- does that mean your eyes are closed to God's wishes?

You seem to squirm so at any hint that you ever disapproved of anyone else, or made universal statements about what people should do. Why?

edited because I didn't realize there was another page to the thread, and the question I'd asked had finally been answered.

[PrairieGirl]

I plan to homeschool them for as long as I can teach them. There will come a time where I won't be able to do that anymore...but I would like to for as long as I can.

Good for you for realizing that. Thank you for answering some questions.

[Curious]

I would love for Tashia to come and have a conversation here. I have not said anything about her other than to respond about what she has said about us. I will not share anything personal about her unless she brings it up. And to say that "all three of us" have attacked her over all this...I never did. I messaged her to ask if she was going to let you guys know some facts and she never responded.

I think I covered everything...

Just for the record, neither Tashia nor I by proxy said anyone "attacked" her. My exact word (which was a paraphrase of her words) was "nastygrams."

People can be mean without it being an attack. I think it tends to be a fundie (and sometimes far right, in general) mind set that any kind of disagreement or mean words etc is an ATTACK, but that is not necessarily the case. Since Tashia didn't use the word attack, I am guessing she didn't feel like she was being attacked, just that the family was not being nice (ie: nasty) to her in their communications.

She seems to have a pretty good grip of language and use it plainly from our communications, so I think if she felt like she was being attacked, she would have said that vs using the language that she did.

[formergothardite]

She doesn't recognize the description either. No one fits.

Probably because TB is lying when describing herself to throw you off. This is most likely a person you would absolutely never suspect. It is probably a person your family knows and trusts and wouldn't think to unfriend on FB. She probably appears to be sweet, godly, and supportive of you. She might have even expresses outrage at things said on Free Jinger. If you haven't already, you are probably going to go unfriend people that you don't know that well on FB and it probably isn't going to work to cut her out of your life, you are just going to end up suspecting innocent people, which is one of the worst parts of this. You are going to end up distrusting people who have done absolutely nothing. Tallula Belle has no moral high ground here. I may be completely godless, but not even I would do this to the fundie friends I have. She is an especially nasty person, but she is not ever going to let you see that side of her. I may disagree with you on almost everything, but I am sorry you have a person like this in your life. If you ever discover who it is, be sure that she will probably deny like crazy and try to make you feel bad for accusing her.

Kristina, words have meanings.(We need to have this displayed somewhere. It seems to be an issue for many fundamentalists. :lol: ) They really do. And to claim that when you said:

I am not going out and getting a job, so I really don't have to depend upon having a college education

Thanks for your question. In the King James Bible when you read about the virtuous woman it says in verse 24-

"She maketh fine linen, and selleth it; and delivereth girdles unto the merchant."

What she does is she doesn't work "outside" the home, but "out" of the home.

Actually means you are totally fine with going out and getting a job outside the home is very Ken Alexander like. And trust me, you do not want to be like Ken but he constantly claims that words don't mean what they say, especially when people quote his words back to him. I can't find it now, but when discussing women doctors you said over and over that women should not work outside the home.

Did anyone here say that you said wearing pants sent women to hell? I don't think they did. What we said was that you used to claim the Bible said women should only wear dresses and that it is a Biblical commandment that some women have not opened their eyes to seeing. But once a woman has seen this, it is a sin for her to wear pants. None of us are dumb, and that includes you, so it is down right silly to pretend that these words don't really mean what they say.

I believe that pants and shorts are immodest due to the fact that it out lines and shapes the legs of a woman and her private area. I have studied this topic personally as has several other woman I know that I have great respect for

In regards to dresses only:

I believe that it is the way God wants all women to dress

On why ALL pants "pertaineth to men" and women wearing them is in violation of that verse:

Pants or "breeches" are a mans garment no matter what title (i.e. women's pants) they may have in today's society

And Yuku is impossible to search, but at one point you wrote that wearing dresses was both a Biblical commandment and a conviction. It was a commandment in that is how God wants all women to dress, but God hasn't opened everyone's eyes yet(you were vague on why God would close a person's eyes to a Biblical commandment), but once their eyes have been opened to these verses(like yours were) it was a sin for them to wear pants.

So here we have you wearing pants after claiming that shows your private parts and saying that it would be a sin for you to do so after having your eyes opened to these verses AND at the same time you are claiming your opinion hasn't changed. So which is it? Do you serve a God who closes your eyes to His commandments so that you go walking about revealing your private areas? Do you know that this is a biblical commandment, yet you choose to disobey? Or have you actually changed your mind about pants on women?

I am very sorry that your parents failed you when it came to providing you with an education. Stories like yours are why I am very much a fan of strict homeschool laws. I'm glad that you do realize that there are limits to how much you can teach your children. There is no shame in that. I have a college degree and I know that I could not provide my children with the education they need. Why are you opposed to your children physically going to a college? I'm not talking about living at a college, I'm thinking more like a community college.

[3_and_counting]

Just for the record, neither Tashia nor I by proxy said anyone "attacked" her. My exact word (which was a paraphrase of her words) was "nastygrams."

People can be mean without it being an attack. I think it tends to be a fundie (and sometimes far right, in general) mind set that any kind of disagreement or mean words etc is an ATTACK, but that is not necessarily the case. Since Tashia didn't use the word attack, I am guessing she didn't feel like she was being attacked, just that the family was not being nice (ie: nasty) to her in their communications.

She seems to have a pretty good grip of language and use it plainly from our communications, so I think if she felt like she was being attacked, she would have said that vs using the language that she did.

I apologize, I shouldn't have used the word attacked. I would show everyone what I sent her but it had some person stuff in it. It was not nasty or rude. Just wanted to know if she was going to share some facts with y'all.

[3_and_counting]

Probably because TB is lying when describing herself to throw you off. This is most likely a person you would absolutely never suspect. It is probably a person your family knows and trusts and wouldn't think to unfriend on FB. She probably appears to be sweet, godly, and supportive of you. She might have even expresses outrage at things said on Free Jinger. If you haven't already, you are probably going to go unfriend people that you don't know that well on FB and it probably isn't going to work to cut her out of your life, you are just going to end up suspecting innocent people, which is one of the worst parts of this. You are going to end up distrusting people who have done absolutely nothing. Tallula Belle has no moral high ground here. I may be completely godless, but not even I would do this to the fundie friends I have. She is an especially nasty person, but she is not ever going to let you see that side of her. I may disagree with you on almost everything, but I am sorry you have a person like this in your life. If you ever discover who it is, be sure that she will probably deny like crazy and try to make you feel bad for accusing her.

Kristina, words have meanings.(We need to have this displayed somewhere. It seems to be an issue for many fundamentalists. :lol: ) They really do. And to claim that when you said:

I am not going out and getting a job, so I really don't have to depend upon having a college education

Thanks for your question. In the King James Bible when you read about the virtuous woman it says in verse 24-

"She maketh fine linen, and selleth it; and delivereth girdles unto the merchant."

What she does is she doesn't work "outside" the home, but "out" of the home.

Actually means you are totally fine with going out and getting a job outside the home is very Ken Alexander like. And trust me, you do not want to be like Ken but he constantly claims that words don't mean what they say, especially when people quote his words back to him. I can't find it now, but when discussing women doctors you said over and over that women should not work outside the home.

Did anyone here say that you said wearing pants sent women to hell? I don't think they did. What we said was that you used to claim the Bible said women should only wear dresses and that it is a Biblical commandment that some women have not opened their eyes to seeing. But once a woman has seen this, it is a sin for her to wear pants. None of us are dumb, and that includes you, so it is down right silly to pretend that these words don't really mean what they say.

I believe that pants and shorts are immodest due to the fact that it out lines and shapes the legs of a woman and her private area. I have studied this topic personally as has several other woman I know that I have great respect for

In regards to dresses only:

I believe that it is the way God wants all women to dress

On why ALL pants "pertaineth to men" and women wearing them is in violation of that verse:

Pants or "breeches" are a mans garment no matter what title (i.e. women's pants) they may have in today's society

And Yuku is impossible to search, but at one point you wrote that wearing dresses was both a Biblical commandment and a conviction. It was a commandment in that is how God wants all women to dress, but God hasn't opened everyone's eyes yet(you were vague on why God would close a person's eyes to a Biblical commandment), but once their eyes have been opened to these verses(like yours were) it was a sin for them to wear pants.

So here we have you wearing pants after claiming that shows your private parts and saying that it would be a sin for you to do so after having your eyes opened to these verses AND at the same time you are claiming your opinion hasn't changed. So which is it? Do you serve a God who closes your eyes to His commandments so that you go walking about revealing your private areas? Do you know that this is a biblical commandment, yet you choose to disobey? Or have you actually changed your mind about pants on women?

I am very sorry that your parents failed you when it came to providing you with an education. Stories like yours are why I am very much a fan of strict homeschool laws. I'm glad that you do realize that there are limits to how much you can teach your children. There is no shame in that. I have a college degree and I know that I could not provide my children with the education they need. Why are you opposed to your children physically going to a college? I'm not talking about living at a college, I'm thinking more like a community college.

I still believe it to be a conviction, that has not changed. What changed is me realizing that it wasn't mine. I had carried it over from my parents and battled it for a really long time.

I wouldn't be opposed to a local college. I don't believe it to be okay to go away to college.

[formergothardite]

Kristina, you have changed your beliefs on women working and wearing pants. It is pretty clear skimming those old threads that you were not believing that women can work outside the home and wear pants. Sure you said it was a conviction, but you also said it was a commandment and that women who wore pants were revealing their private areas.

~Do you still believe that pants reveal a woman's private areas?

~ Do you still believe that it is both a conviction and commandment that women wear pants?

~Do you still believe that you have no need of a college education because you "are not going to go out and getting a job"(your exact words)?

~Do you still believe that the Bible says women should work out of the home, but not outside the home?

~Do you still not approve of women working outside the home(you mentioned this several times on one of the old thread)?

If you are saying now that pants don't reveal a woman's private areas, aren't a commandment, that you would go get a job if needed, and that women working outside the home is biblical, then you have changed your beliefs on these subjects a great deal. Perhaps more than you originally thought. Change is normal, pretending that you didn't change isn't.

[thoughtful]

While we are talking about convictions, kept or changed, do you still stand behind these statements of yours, about spanking and CIO, which you made when the three children you had at the time were still babies? Do you still think that spanking and popping are somehow magically not the same as hitting?

I've started the CIO method with with twins, while it is heartbreaking to hear them cry...I actually got some sleep last night! I think they slept a whole lot better as well. Its the first time in 3 months that I've gotten more than 1 to 2 hours of sleep in a night.

I do talk to them and tell them what they did wrong. What's wrong with America today is that too many parents "talked" to their kids insted of spanking them. If they would have been taught that there is a price to pay for doing wrong maybe we wouldn't have all the wild teens that we have

Jesus wasn't popped because He was perfect. Completely sinless, therefore he didn't disopbey his parents and they had no need to pop him.

Just a note to those who are accusing us of "hitting" our children...we love our kids with all of our hearts and we would NEVER hit them. We are teaching them to obey and respect others, and when they do no listen to us they do get a spanking on their rear end...but they have never been hit in an abusive manner and never will be.

I made an error in my earlier post, and I now admit I was wrong (see how easy that was?). I just realized that some of my questions earlier in this thread were not answered. So I will re-state them.

Early in your relationship with FJ, you proudly linked to your blog post criticizing Debi Pearl's Created to Be His Helpmeet. You were roundly praised for it:

http://freejinger.yuku.com/topic/1427#.VGer28mf2-c

So, I ask again, are you submissive in your marriage? If so, how does it differ from Debi's definition of submission?

Do you think that courtship and/or submissiveness are what has made your marriage work?

I'm not asking you to make or deny statements about what is right for all, just for you.

Oh, and a new one -- do you agree with your husband's opinions of gay people and the President? If not, do you hold back from discussing those things, or do you argue with him?

[Palimpsest]

Thanks, Thoughtful. I was just going to re-ask the question about disciplining children too.

So far, Kristina seems to be saying that she hasn't changed any of her views, except over wearing pants, but that we just misinterpret what she said back on yuku. It seems to be going in circles with all this comparing and contrasting with things she wrote in the past.

I find it strange that she claims she hasn't changed or modified more of her beliefs in the last 3 years. It is unusual given her age, all the changes in her life with more children, and the family difficulties of her parents and brother.

Kristina do you think your views on anything have changed? If so, what? Do you have any regrets over anything you have written? Looking back, do you think you could have phrased things differently to better explain your beliefs?

[formergothardite]

Another question I thought of:

~Do you still think that it takes two to break a marriage? Why? Is it not possible that one spouse could do everything right and the other could still break off the marriage?

[nelliebelle1197]

I wonder if we have a language issue here? Is Kristina saying that no job and skirts only are fine beliefs with merit and she still feels others who find these "convictions" important are on the right path for them, but that she is no longer one of those people?

Hence, she still believes in those things being right, but right for others, not herself at this point?

[Rebelwife]

I wonder if we have a language issue here? Is Kristina saying that no job and skirts only are fine beliefs with merit and she still feels others who find these "convictions" important are on the right path for them, but that she is no longer one of those people?

Hence, she still believes in those things being right, but right for others, not herself at this point?

I gave up trying to figure it out when I was told "conviction means what it means." As best I can tell, it's only a sin if God tells you personally to do it and you decide not to. Once you decide God really didn't mean for you to do it, it's totes OK. ...I think. :think:

[formergothardite]

I wonder if we have a language issue here? Is Kristina saying that no job and skirts only are fine beliefs with merit and she still feels others who find these "convictions" important are on the right path for them, but that she is no longer one of those people?

Hence, she still believes in those things being right, but right for others, not herself at this point?

The thing is, she is now claiming that she never felt for herself that it was a biblical commandment to wear skirts and she is saying that she never said she wouldn't work outside the home. I can't find the quote again(it was in one of those Yuku threads but I am having no luck finding it again) but she did write that God wants women to wear skirts, it a biblical commandment that some women haven't had their eyes opened by God to see, and that once a person's eyes were opened, it was a sin for them to start wearing pants. She claims her beliefs on the subjects haven't changed, when they clearly have.

I realize it isn't a big deal, it just annoys me that she bounced in here and started claiming she never believed she wouldn't ever have to work outside the home, when can quote her saying that she wasn't going out to get a job and the Bible said women can't work outside the home. I can't find it but I swear at one point people ask her about what she would do if Josh got sick and she said her family would help so she wouldn't have to get a job. Am I making that up or confusing her with another fundie who felt there was no need for an education because they aren't going to work?

[treemom]

FG,

That is what I recall as well.