Sleeping on shelving??

[Patsy]

No, it wasn't addressed to her. It was addressed to Kim the-shoe-lady because I thought that's who we were discussing re: sleeping on shelving. I can hardly address a comment to a person I didn't even know I was talking to. I have never heard of this EllaJac person before. Yes, it was pointed out later that this was a different (random) person, and several of us expressed our confusion, because all along we thought we were talking about/to Kim. That's why I was surprised to hear that Kim had a 2800 sf house (she doesn't). Why would I refer to three kids as a "bazillion kids"?

And I don't know who she was supposed to think it was about. If I drop into a conversation that has nothing to do with me, why would I assume it was about me?

You're right, re-reading the conversation, she did just show up and assume all comments were about her, not just the ones... you know, about her. Sorry, obviously not reading well tonight, I thought you had assumed she was Kim when she showed up and directly challenged her, rather than her commenting on something you said that never referenced her. S-m-r-t. That's my third reading comprehension fail for the night, I believe, so off to bed :S

[Austin]

All of it x2 and the bolded part x a bazillion.

Except for the part about not saying that talking to Ellejac is depressing. I do find her comments depressing.

Especially this:

This is the cult of fertility over humanity, laid bare. The fact that she finds family planning and vaccination to be mutually contradictory reveals the moral retardation of this worldview so starkly that I find it depressing.

OMG, that is depressing. And revealing.

[EllaJac]

Ladies, this will be my last post here, I hope. :clap:

Your willful misunderstanding is astonishing, and your close-mindedness deserves no further attempts at discourse.

A few things first - I will take into consideration the fire-risk comments. I *am* surprised at your fireman friend; ours has had to find children *purposely* hiding in places like that... But I will still consider it.

I came here because YOU linked to my blog. My 15-hit-per-day site metered about 500, when you all decided to add another victim to your feeding-frenzy against large families (and since when is 4 kids large?? Not really, here).

I am not Kim, have never met her, and have very differing views from her.

My kids have far more place to play. The smallest bedroom is our tv room, and the 18' square (former tv room) is where they have toys, books, crafts, games, paint, etc. etc. A good portion of our home is devoted to them.

Lastly I'm fascinated that of all the controversy a person like myself might generate, it came about from unconventional beds. Wow!

I'll leave you to your fulfilling lives, tearing apart those who differ from you. Tolerance indeed. :lol:

[demgirl]

Aaaaaaaaand... Flounce.

Although, I will say this:

Lastly I'm fascinated that of all the controversy a person like myself might generate, it came about from unconventional beds. Wow!

is a pretty astounding example of willful misinterpretation itself. Both about the real concerns, but also because a lot of us, including me, were even more appalled by her willful misunderstanding of Bill Gates' goals.

[apple1]

By all means, FLOUNCE!

FTR The internet is a public thing. Don't put your life out there if you don't want comments.

PS Judge much?

[Guest Anonymous]

most women don't have children so they can see them to adulthood.

What in the hell do you think women have kids for, then? Why did you have kids? Because you thought it would be a lark to watch them die horribly of preventable diseases?

Dollars to doughnuts this whack-a-doodle calls herself pro-life. There's nothing pro-life about her. Hell, there's no basic human decency. I guess this is the end result of telling people that they have to procreate no matter what - and surprise! It's vile.

[Burris]

Ladies, this will be my last post here, I hope.

I hope so too. If I want to read blatant stupidity, I'll go to the FARK politics tab. You don't need to spatter it all over this board, too.

'Third world parents don't produce kids for the sake of having them survive into adulthood' - BONK! Your views on that subject are among the most brain-dead I've ever seen, and that's definitely saying something.

Your willful misunderstanding is astonishing, and your close-mindedness deserves no further attempts at discourse.

You dare conclude with this after all the horseshit you posted? Don't let the door hit you on the ass when you leave, you fatuous idiot.

Lastly I'm fascinated that of all the controversy a person like myself might generate, it came about from unconventional beds. Wow!

Amid the posters who actually liked your bed idea, a few people pointed out safety concerns, and so suddenly you've been victimized. Oh, alas.

I'll leave you to your fulfilling lives, tearing apart those who differ from you. Tolerance indeed. :lol:

"Oh, woe is me! If you're so tolerant, how come you can't tolerate my intolerance?"

Crack a dictionary: Tolerance means we put up with you, not that we agree with you or kiss your ass.

Is there anyone here trying to close down you blog? No.

Have you been banned? No.

So yeah, you're being tolerated.

[Witsec1]

"I get to say what I want and people who disagree with me should just shut up."

Wow, I never heard that interpretation of free speech and tolerance before.

[thoughtful]

Both use the excuse their kids 'begged', asked for it, love it, whatever.

When I was a kid I wanted to sleep in a tent in the basement. I loved camping. My mom did not remove my bedroom so I could make that basement tent my bedroom. She knew better than to give a child what she wants when it is dangerous.

Interesting, isn't it, in light of the constant barrage of "the Worldly spoil their children, but we do not" that most of them spout.

Make up your minds, folks. Either your kids get every dangerous whim fulfilled, or are strictly disciplined -- which is it?

[Hane]

To coin a lovely new phrase, God Bess.

[Austin]

Flouncity-flounce-flounce-flounce!

We need a flounce emoticon - lol

[Witsec1]

To coin a lovely new phrase, God Bess.

I prefer to think of God Bess as an actual imaginary deity; the feminine face of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, perhaps. I picture her as a beneficent matronly figure, holding a plate of pasta in one hand, sphaghetti serving tongs in the other hand, a shaker of parmesan cheese in another hand, etc.

[emmiedahl]

It's funny that y'all are against large families. I mean, I somehow missed that in all the responses to my posts about my large family. :roll:

[formergothardite]

Well, another one flounces. She is kind of bitchy so I thought she might hang around awhile, but I guess when the stupidity of her "logic" was pointed out she had to run and hide.

Firemen around here are trained to look in closets, but they also tell children to never, ever, ever get into a closet during a fire because it is so hard to find the kids like that in all the smoke and stuff. And really, if they walked into a room with just toys and no beds, they would probably go check out the other rooms for beds first because nobody is going to think to check the closets of what appears to be a playroom first. You would check the bedrooms first and the closets in a playroom later on, and by that time your kids could be dead.

[MonkeyMomma]

'Third world parents don't produce kids for the sake of having them survive into adulthood' - BONK! Your views on that subject are among the most brain-dead I've ever seen, and that's definitely saying something.

Yeah, that's the one. Listen, I slept in a weird cubby that was built into my room through my teen years (granted, much larger than the closet bunks). I don't care as long as everyone's safe. In fact, I thought it was a cute idea, maybe needed a little help on the execution.

But that Gates/vaccine/population post ... gah! And the willingness to spout off that batshit nonsense and not even try to defend it. Very well then.

(There, the closest I could find to a flounce smiley!)

[tabitha2]

I wish the real slim shad-er,Kim Coghlan would show up...If you haven't gathered she is my pet fundie so to speak ;) But she won't.

[Guest Anonymous]

It's funny that y'all are against large families. I mean, I somehow missed that in all the responses to my posts about my large family. :roll:

I don't know about everyone else, but I shake a pitchfork at my monitor when I read your posts! ... Oh wait, no I don't. Because you love and care for your children and don't beat the crap out of them or store them in vacuum bags in the closet.

[formergothardite]

I wish the real slim shad-er,Kim Coghlan would show up...If you haven't gathered she is my pet fundie so to speak ;) But she won't.

She is way too busy losing weight by doing things like getting her own glass of water. That amount of work leaves little time to be on the internet.

[fundiefan]

Well, another one flounces. She is kind of bitchy so I thought she might hang around awhile, but I guess when the stupidity of her "logic" was pointed out she had to run and hide.

Firemen around here are trained to look in closets, but they also tell children to never, ever, ever get into a closet during a fire because it is so hard to find the kids like that in all the smoke and stuff. And really, if they walked into a room with just toys and no beds, they would probably go check out the other rooms for beds first because nobody is going to think to check the closets of what appears to be a playroom first. You would check the bedrooms first and the closets in a playroom later on, and by that time your kids could be dead.

There are also a thousand and one factors that are evaluated when firefighters enter a burning house/structure. They are trained to make assessments within seconds. The intensity and speed of a fire are among factors that determine how they look for people inside. If it's raging and they determine minutes before explosion or something (I am generalizing because I don't know all the factors or elements of these decisions, since I am not the one trained) they will give a much less thorough search. If a house has ten rooms, they will give a set amount of time to the search of those rooms in order for them to get out safely. Conditions could possibly dictate maybe ten seconds per room. That ten seconds is taken up by an overview of the room, not looking in closets.

While people make the choices that could potentially put lives at risk, I wonder what these same people would do if a child was lost in a fire/emergency situation? I can't help but think they'd be complaining about the evil, terrible firefighters who didn't 'bother' to help their child trapped on the top bunk of a closet of bunk beds. The firefighters would be responsible and demonized for not exploring every single nook and cranny of a house about to crash around his/her head. The firefighters would be selfish for making sure they get out instead of dying trying to find a child sleeping in a bed in a closet.

There are no guarantees in any aspect of life. Why make the possibility of tragedy more likely?

Then, I suppose if she didn't have those kids to see them grow to be adults, she wouldn't really care.

I have tremendous sympathy for the children born to such willfully ignorant people.

[Kaylee]

Firemen around here are trained to look in closets, but they also tell children to never, ever, ever get into a closet during a fire because it is so hard to find the kids like that in all the smoke and stuff. And really, if they walked into a room with just toys and no beds, they would probably go check out the other rooms for beds first because nobody is going to think to check the closets of what appears to be a playroom first. You would check the bedrooms first and the closets in a playroom later on, and by that time your kids could be dead.

This. With no beds, it would look like a playroom. Also, seeing shelving in a smoke-filled closet would not make me think that it was bedding, it would make it look even more like a storage closet or built-in bookshelf. I'd be looking for the room with the beds, assuming the children may be hiding in there under them or in the bedroom (ie, room with beds in it) closet, not that they would run into the playroom and lay on the shelves during a fire in the night. Also, if looking for children in a closet, I would be feeling around the bottom and corners, not up on shelves - there is usually little or no visibility in areas like that.

eta: I'm not a firefighter currently, but was constrained when I volunteered with the rescue squad as an EMT, so I am certified as a Firefighter II & Rescue Tech and have responded to several house fires.

[formergothardite]

I hope to God she is serious when she said she would rethink the closet bed idea, because it is a disaster waiting to happen. She may think we are awful people, but she should be greatful that we care enough about her kids to warn her. If children are a gift from God, then treat them that way.

[Guest Anonymous]

I hope to God she is serious when she said she would rethink the closet bed idea, because it is a disaster waiting to happen. She may think we are awful people, but she should be greatful that we care enough about her kids to warn her. If children are a gift from God, then treat them that way.

Exactly. By all means, make a play space or clubhouse in the closet - there are some really cute ideas out there on making little reading nooks with seating and pillows in closets. But sleeping in there? Overnight? Every night? Probably not a great idea.

[Brainsample]

Lastly I'm fascinated that of all the controversy a person like myself might generate, it came about from unconventional beds. Wow!

I'll leave you to your fulfilling lives, tearing apart those who differ from you. Tolerance indeed. :lol:

Zoinks! I thought I was quite supportive in my comments, almost defending the bed thing to some extent.

And lot of people who read and post here have large families, interested in the subject matter, either because we were in the lifestyle, religious and otherwise, or because they identify with many aspects of the Duggars. Think of Hopewell's commentaries on the Duggars here, on her blog, and over at NLQ -- all of which are very affirming of the large family concept. It was Hopewell that started this thread.

I'm glad that the fire hazard issue was taken under consideration, too. (That's far more consideration than Kim in a Shoe would have given to her children and situation.)

[bananacat]

I know I'm a horrible bitch for saying this and if Hell exists I'll probably end up there, but I really don't think these women care about the safety of their children. They have too many babies so they can brag about how holy they are, but if one of them dies, there are plenty more where that one came from, plus they will get to revel in the sympathy of having lost a child. There's really no way to reconcile people who have as many babies as possible but don't provide for them.

[Olivia]

The closet beds are cute, but I would never in a million years do that with my children. I've been in a burning building before. Not only do I want to facilitate rescue in the case of a fire -- because there are beds to tell them there are children to look for and where -- but I don't expect a fireman to search every imaginable corner in the heat and complete darkness and risk their lives because I thought I was so cool. Seriously? You expect a fireman to search the shelves in the closet of what appears to be a play room where there's no reason for them to expect to find children? How self-centered and foolish can you be?

Oh right, the same kind of self-centered and foolish that thinks having fewer children and having more kids, but a bunch of them die of preventable illnesses, are essentially the same.

The fundies I grew up with were never stupid like this. Where are these people coming from and why are they attaching themselves to my God?