# NIP - Nursing in Public



## LadyFlynt

This did call for it's own thread. I'm placing this in the Family Forum as it's not just a woman's issue. Dad's should be permitted to weigh in. Also, there was a statement about feminism made in the other thread...(1) this is NOT a feminist issue, in fact, there are even feminists that are anti-breastfeeding and anti-NIP. There are liberals on both sides of the issue as well as conservatives. (2) please don't equate me with a feminist. Anyone on this board that knows me, knows that I am about as far from a feminist as you get.


Cont'd:

I'm not saying blankets are bad. I'm saying they should not be required. Just as much as some women feel more comfortable or feel the need to keep a blanket handy for nursing, there are also women for whom a blanket is uncomfortable or more of a hassle (I'm one of these latter women, but have had friends that varied on the issue, but agreed that it should be THEIR personal decision, not that of another).

From studying history, I would say that most women did not feel the need to cover themselves. Granted there were those that may have with a shawl (something they were already wearing) and that it was most likely due more to assisting their child to sleep or from distractions or even to keep them warmer (shawls used to be as large enough to double as a blanket if need me...the Welsh Nursing Shawl is an example 6ft x 6ft and folded in half triangularly).

This need to "hide away" came in Victorian era of the middle to upper classes (America) where a woman wouldn't rarely be seen if she was showing in her pregnancy. The mennonites carry some of this extremism in a book on the family that not only insists that a woman leave the room to nurse, but also that children should not be present when changing a babe's diapers.

Fast forward to the World Wars and the Depression. There are photos online (trying to refind them) that show women nursing. These were taken by photographers that were documenting these three events and the daily lives of people during. Much more breast is exposed than we are used to seeing during nursing in present day. Women didn't lift their blouses, they undid them from the top down (one picture shows a woman nursing in a train station). Others also wore traditional clothing and appropriate underpinnings that only permitted them to actually "pull out their breast" from the top and nurse. This was seen as feeding a child. Bottles weren't always available, pumps were unheard of, and formula was for the upper classes.


----------



## InevitablyReformed

Are you asking for opinions on nursing in public? 

My wife always carried her cover/blanket with her whenever we were away from home. She also made every attempt to nurse in private so that she did not have to use it as she and I were both slightly uncomfortable with it.

I saw a woman in public breastfeeding a few months back and I was absolutely shocked. I thought it was more than inappropriate. (In my humble opinion) That's what I think anyway.


----------



## TimV

I was in my young twenties when several of the young men in my Reformed Baptist church would talk about it, and we were all against doing it without blankets because the hormone surge, especially when a woman would do it in church, made it impossible for us to concentrate on the sermon. 10 years in Africa and PNG helped a little, because I'd see bare breasts all the time, but there's something about it being normally hidden in Western and even most Asian cultures that still keeps it hard not to want to watch for the wrong reasons even at my age.

So, I always made sure my wife did it with a blanket, as was indeed her feelings as well.

So there! Let's hear from some men made of sterner stuff.


----------



## nicnap

There are some women who can nurse without a blanket, and no one has a clue. My "second mom" (very good friend of the family) was one. She would often be nursing, without a blanket, and there would be many people around who did not have a clue...I was one of them, and didn't know it until years later when I was told by my mom. 

I think it is a matter of what the woman is able to do, and is comfortable with.


----------



## Pergamum

I'm glad when I see it in the West because it means that the West is moving from their fascination with the bottle and giving their kids a healthier life.


----------



## Honor

I always covered and I would go to a restroom or somewhere else if I were out in public... I would even cover if I were home and there was a chance that someone other than my husband would come in... and I would keep a large burp rag incase my son got overly interested in what I was doing with the younger son... but that is just me. I get really uncomfortable if I see a woman brestfeeding in public... it's a special time between mother and child...

just a side note.. I tripped over and almost fell when I saw a lady breastfeeding in the open at a mall.


----------



## LadyFlynt

I was in the middle of editing my post, sorry. Also, my husband is made of sterner stuff and he would take issue with anyone demanding I use a blanket (as he knows I would show more in the struggle to keep it on) or leaving the room (as it is discrimination and his wife and child should be permitted to hear the word preached).

Btw, I have been requested to remove myself to a far room of a church full of gossiping women and noisy children even when I have been covered and in a place where there were no people other than the one deacon that happened to walk by and notice me (and my back was to him). I do currently remove myself from the sanctuary, but only due to a noisy nurser, and I nurse wherever the sermon is being broadcasted and it is quietest. Many times, this has been in the foyer.


----------



## Kim G

Regardless of how breast feeding _should_ be viewed, we have to remember that we are in a sex-crazed culture that will be looking at your for the wrong reasons. We also have to remember our brothers in Christ who might consider it a major stumbling block in their thoughts (as mentioned above). Breasts in our culture are highly sexualized objects, and I'm sure it would be difficult for most men to keep their thoughts clean. (And on a personal note, I can't imagine sitting in the mall openly breastfeeding and having my pastor or an elder walk by and watch me. Eeeeeew!)

I see no problem with breast feeding in public if you are covered.


----------



## LawrenceU

As I stated in the other thread, I think that the root of this phobia over NIP is a result of our culture being removed from reality. It is the same root that will cause someone to rail against the slaughter of steers while enjoying a steak.


----------



## nicnap

Pergamum said:


> I'm glad when I see it in the West because it means that the West is moving from their fascination with the bottle and giving their kids a healthier life.



I was bottle fed, and never had any health troubles. My immune system is just fine, and I RARELY get sick. Not arguing, just saying that that notion doesn't always bear true. I know some sickly kids who were breastfed.


----------



## LadyFlynt

Honor said:


> I always covered and I would go to a restroom or somewhere else if I were out in public... I would even cover if I were home and there was a chance that someone other than my husband would come in... and I would keep a large burp rag incase my son got overly interested in what I was doing with the younger son... but that is just me. I get really uncomfortable if I see a woman brestfeeding in public... it's a special time between mother and child...



So for a child that needs to feed often and other amenities are not available (freezing cold/overly hot car and filthy bathrooms that usually have no place to sit do not count), should the mother simply not go out with her child till the child is beyond nursing? (for some, this is longer than 6mos).

-----Added 12/10/2008 at 10:30:49 EST-----



Kim G said:


> Regardless of how breast feeding _should_ be viewed, we have to remember that we are in a sex-crazed culture that will be looking at your for the wrong reasons. We also have to remember our brothers in Christ who might consider it a major stumbling block in their thoughts (as mentioned above). Breasts in our culture are highly sexualized objects, and I'm sure it would be difficult for most men to keep their thoughts clean. (And on a personal note, I can't imagine sitting in the mall openly breastfeeding and having my pastor or an elder walk by and watch me. Eeeeeew!)
> 
> I see no problem with breast feeding in public if you are covered.



How should we respond to those that are trying to sexualise breastfeeding (or compare it to urination)? Should we ban it from public or should we recognise it for what it is and normalise it back into our culture?


----------



## Pergamum

The health benefits of breastfeeding are such that there should be public/social incentives to encourage this healthful behavior...or at least the removal of obstacles to mothers trying to do the best thing for their children in a crowded world where it is hard to always escape "public space."


----------



## LadyFlynt

nicnap said:


> Pergamum said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm glad when I see it in the West because it means that the West is moving from their fascination with the bottle and giving their kids a healthier life.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was bottle fed, and never had any health troubles. My immune system is just fine, and I RARELY get sick. Not arguing, just saying that that notion doesn't always bare true. I know some sickly kids who were breastfed.
Click to expand...


There are always exceptions. Some children are sickly and their nursing may have benefited them from worse situations. Others are healthy no matter what.


----------



## Honor

> How should we respond to those that are trying to sexualise breastfeeding (or compare it to urination)? Should we ban it from public or should we recognise it for what it is and normalise it back into our culture?


I don't think we should ban it from public nor do I think we should normalize it either... I think that malls (ours here does) have a "quiet room" that is like a livingroom where mothers can go... but if you can't go anywhere, yes you should at least drape a light cloth over you and baby....you don't want some guy looking at you with dirty thoughts do you??


----------



## LadyFlynt

Honor said:


> I don't think we should ban it from public nor do I think we should normalize it either... I think that malls (ours here does) have a "quiet room" that is like a livingroom where mothers can go... but if you can't go anywhere, yes you should at least drape a light cloth over you and baby....you don't want some guy looking at you with dirty thoughts do you??



I'm not a mall person to start with. Most stores do not have such facilities. Even still, I typically have 7 children with me of both genders and there is no way I'm leaving any of them out of my sight while I go feed a babe. (because the idea would be that my eldest boy might have dirty thoughts if he was in a room with nursing mothers, right?). And typically a man that is going to have dirty thoughts because you are nursing, will have them even if you weren't nursing and just walk by him in the mall...

nursing does not equal sexual innuendo.

I do find it sad that people think nursing a babe should not be a normal thing. So the rest of the world, even Christian eras and cultures were wrong to nurse their babes as they did and where they were?


----------



## Rocketeer

nicnap said:


> Pergamum said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was bottle fed, and never had any health troubles. My immune system is just fine, and I RARELY get sick. Not arguing, just saying that that notion doesn't always bare true. I know some sickly kids who were breastfed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is no empirical proof. It has been scientifically and statistically been proven that breastfeeding is, in general, more beneficial to mother and child. Effects include a generally better resistance due to copying of the mother's antigens, notable fewer allergic reactions to substances foreign to the body, a possible boost in intelligence for the child, as well as being beneficial to the mother by helping her shed some pounds. For more information, breastfeeding studies - Google Search.
> 
> That these and more positive effects exist should not look strange to us; man designed formula, but who designed mothers?
> 
> 
> 
> LadyFlynt said:
> 
> 
> 
> How should we respond to those that are trying to sexualise breastfeeding (or compare it to urination)? Should we ban it from public or should we recognise it for what it is and normalise it back into our culture?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I may not be a father, but I think LadyFlint has a point here. Our society is clearly in error in many places. That means we should not comply to the error, but seek to abolish it. Our society, for example, views corporal punishment of any form or shape as brutal behavior (over here in The Netherlands a law was passed a few years ago forbidding a 'correcting slap'!). Does that mean Christian parents need to give in and not punish children? Heaven forbid! Same thing for breastfeeding, is it not?
> 
> Just my .
Click to expand...


----------



## Romans922

I have no problem with breastfeeding in public *as long as you are covered*.

Humm? I should talk to my wife about this since we are having a baby in May.


----------



## TsonMariytho

LadyFlynt said:


> Dad's should be permitted to weigh in.



I agree with others that measures should be taken for modesty (blanket, etc.).

However, nursing schedules, whether regular or irregular, rarely coincide with the inflexible timeline of public life. My wife's first preference isn't to nurse a baby in church or in a public setting. Not for moral reasons, but for very practical reasons, she would rather be at home in a quiet, private room. However, public feeding is sort of forced on her when the baby lets the whole world know that it is time to eat.

Our church family was very accepting and understanding with this issue for both of our children, and I think everybody was quite relieved when we got the kid to stop hollering. Nobody ever gave us a problem in other public settings either; I think many people are surprised simply because of the novelty of it.


----------



## Honor

Lady, please don't think that I am saying you shouldn't breastfeed in public at all, just if you HAVE TO you should cover with a blanket


----------



## TsonMariytho

Romans922 said:


> we are having a baby in May.



Woo hoo! :^)


----------



## LadyFlynt

Romans922 said:


> I have no problem with breastfeeding in public *as long as you are covered*.
> 
> Humm? I should talk to my wife about this since we are having a baby in May.



What do you mean by covered? If a woman is sitting there nursing a child and nothing is showing is that covered? Or are you speaking of an extra 'cover' so you can't see the babe either?


----------



## Honor

Romans922 said:


> I have no problem with breastfeeding in public *as long as you are covered*.
> 
> Humm? I should talk to my wife about this since we are having a baby in May.


Congrats!!!!!! my son was born in May... he's b-day is really cool (I think anyways)5-5-05
Boy? Girl? do you know yet? how fun!


----------



## Romans922

Honor said:


> Romans922 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have no problem with breastfeeding in public *as long as you are covered*.
> 
> Humm? I should talk to my wife about this since we are having a baby in May.
> 
> 
> 
> Congrats!!!!!! my son was born in May... he's b-day is really cool (I think anyways)5-5-05
> Boy? Girl? do you know yet? how fun!
Click to expand...


Lord-willing we will know at the end of the month if it is a boy or girl. Thanks.



LadyFlynt said:


> Romans922 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have no problem with breastfeeding in public *as long as you are covered*.
> 
> Humm? I should talk to my wife about this since we are having a baby in May.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What do you mean by covered? If a woman is sitting there nursing a child and nothing is showing is that covered? Or are you speaking of an extra 'cover' so you can't see the babe either?
Click to expand...


Covered, no breast showing. For modesty purposes. And to aid weaker brethren who easily stumble.


----------



## he beholds

I think you can breastfeed in public. I think some mothers do not need a blanket b/c they and their babies are able to "co-operate" so that mommy won't be exposed. 
BUT, I think if you aren't one of those mothers, you will need a blanket or to step away from the public. 
I have nursed in all kinds of places (Panera Bread, for example) but I was not exposed but rather hidden by a blanket. Sometimes I have my baby in a sling that hides everything, and I can nurse thusly without a blanket, but usually I go into another room or I use a blanket. 

I think nursing in public is great--it does, as you say, help to normalize it. I do not think breasts need to be normalized, though, so my vote is _they_ should be hidden.


----------



## LawrenceU

Folks, not every child will nurse with a blanket or shawl over it. It is just a reality of life. Ladies, the form of a woman can send many men over the edge sexually. I'm not speaking of form fitting spandex or snug blue jeans. I know men who will be aroused at the sight of a woman in a dress with a gathered waist. Or, other men who practically drool over the sight of women dressed in the modest dresses of the 1940's. Does that mean that since wearing these obviously (I hope) decent clothes cause some men, and a growing number I might add, to be aroused then we need to move to the coverage of the female figure similar to the Arabs?


----------



## Honor

well said


----------



## TimV

Don't get me wrong, Jamal. I defend your right to do it. Anywhere. All I meant is that a nice looking woman who does it in front of most men will without a blanket will cause them to lust, whether it should or it shouldn't. And as far as breasts being sexualized, there's great truth to that. But reading the Song of Solomon I don't think anyone would deny that at least some of that sexual attraction is hard wired into us men.


----------



## LadyFlynt

Honor said:


> Lady, please don't think that I am saying you shouldn't breastfeed in public at all, just if you HAVE TO you should cover with a blanket



I think some of my posts haven't been very clear though. *I* cannot nurse with a blanket and be modest. If it is hot out, I will not smother my child. My children usually cannot tolerate a blanket (I've only had one that did #6) and will keep knocking it down with their waving arms...particularly difficult when managing other toddlers and young children at the same time. And thus, I am more modest without a blanket than with. Some are more modest with a blanket and some without. Nursing in public does not mean that your breast is viewable  (for some yes, because of child playing around or because of lack of practice...other reasons why it should not be dictated either way).


----------



## Honor

LawrenceU said:


> Folks, not every child will nurse with a blanket or shawl over it. It is just a reality of life. Ladies, the form of a woman can send many men over the edge sexually. I'm not speaking of form fitting spandex or snug blue jeans. I know men who will be aroused at the sight of a woman in a dress with a gathered waist. Or, other men who practically drool over the sight of women dressed in the modest dresses of the 1940's. Does that mean that since wearing these obviously (I hope) decent clothes cause some men, and a growing number I might add, to be aroused then we need to move to the coverage of the female figure similar to the Arabs?



Not at all.... however we know that God made breasts to be an enjoyable sight (and to feed) so we should not let everyone or anyone who is not our husband or a doctor see our goodies.


----------



## HuguenotHelpMeet

I think it's sweet and wonderful to see a mother nursing in public. I haven't always felt so (funny how motherhood changes you!)

Nursing mothers should make every effort, in my opinion, to not cause a brother to stumble. Likewise, Christians should make every effort to not judge those who need to nurse in public. It's all about charity.

I think it's altogether appropriate to cover up for your brother's sake, while nursing in public, as much as possible. But, men ought not to be scandalized should the covering slip or if it unavailable. We should all just do our best in these situations, showing charity, and not judging.


----------



## LadyFlynt

Romans922 said:


> Covered, no breast showing. For modesty purposes. And to aid weaker brethren who easily stumble.



I'm guessing this means not necessarily an 'extra covering' like a blanket. This is how I nurse...nothing shows, but no blanket either.


----------



## Romans922

No breast at all shows? how do you cover your breast? [Can I ask these questions, seems so wrong?] I'm trying to learn here too.


----------



## Honor

LadyFlynt said:


> Honor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lady, please don't think that I am saying you shouldn't breastfeed in public at all, just if you HAVE TO you should cover with a blanket
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think some of my posts haven't been very clear though. *I* cannot nurse with a blanket and be modest. If it is hot out, I will not smother my child. My children usually cannot tolerate a blanket (I've only had one that did #6) and will keep knocking it down with their waving arms...particularly difficult when managing other toddlers and young children at the same time. And thus, I am more modest without a blanket than with. Some are more modest with a blanket and some without. Nursing in public does not mean that your breast is viewable  (for some yes, because of child playing around or because of lack of practice...other reasons why it should not be dictated either way).
Click to expand...

but unless you are covered you can not hide the area where the child attaches to the breast. plus a blanket doesn't have to be heavey and smother the child it can be a thin light and airy blanket.


----------



## LadyFlynt

HuguenotHelpMeet said:


> I think it's sweet and wonderful to see a mother nursing in public. I haven't always felt so (funny how motherhood changes you!)
> 
> Nursing mothers should make every effort, in my opinion, to not cause a brother to stumble. Likewise, Christians should make every effort to not judge those who need to nurse in public. It's all about charity.
> 
> I think it's altogether appropriate to cover up for your brother's sake, while nursing in public, as much as possible. But, men ought not to be scandalized should the covering slip or if it unavailable. We should all just do our best in these situations, showing charity, and not judging.



Nail on the head.


----------



## LawrenceU

Honor said:


> LawrenceU said:
> 
> 
> 
> Folks, not every child will nurse with a blanket or shawl over it. It is just a reality of life. Ladies, the form of a woman can send many men over the edge sexually. I'm not speaking of form fitting spandex or snug blue jeans. I know men who will be aroused at the sight of a woman in a dress with a gathered waist. Or, other men who practically drool over the sight of women dressed in the modest dresses of the 1940's. Does that mean that since wearing these obviously (I hope) decent clothes cause some men, and a growing number I might add, to be aroused then we need to move to the coverage of the female figure similar to the Arabs?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not at all.... however we know that God made breasts to be an enjoyable sight (and to feed) so we should not let everyone or anyone who is not our husband or a doctor see our goodies.
Click to expand...


I agree, but we are not talking about exposing them to the world. Nursing can be done with discretion. But, that doesn't always look the same.


----------



## he beholds

LadyFlynt said:


> I'm guessing this means not necessarily an 'extra covering' like a blanket. This is how I nurse...nothing shows, but no blanket either.



But what is your view on women who don't cover and everything shows? If it's the same as most here, then there is really no debate--at least none that I see. 

I liked Jessica's answer--be charitable on every side.


----------



## LawrenceU

HuguenotHelpMeet said:


> I think it's sweet and wonderful to see a mother nursing in public. I haven't always felt so (funny how motherhood changes you!)
> 
> Nursing mothers should make every effort, in my opinion, to not cause a brother to stumble. Likewise, Christians should make every effort to not judge those who need to nurse in public. It's all about charity.
> 
> I think it's altogether appropriate to cover up for your brother's sake, while nursing in public, as much as possible. But, men ought not to be scandalized should the covering slip or if it unavailable. We should all just do our best in these situations, showing charity, and not judging.


 
Bingo!


----------



## Notthemama1984

Honor said:


> How should we respond to those that are trying to sexualise breastfeeding (or compare it to urination)? Should we ban it from public or should we recognise it for what it is and normalise it back into our culture?
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think we should ban it from public nor do I think we should normalize it either... I think that malls (ours here does) have a "quiet room" that is like a livingroom where mothers can go... but if you can't go anywhere, yes you should at least drape a light cloth over you and baby....you don't want some guy looking at you with dirty thoughts do you??
Click to expand...


No offense, but alot of guys think dirty thoughts of every woman whether you are breast feeding or not.


----------



## he beholds

Chaplainintraining said:


> Honor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How should we respond to those that are trying to sexualise breastfeeding (or compare it to urination)? Should we ban it from public or should we recognise it for what it is and normalise it back into our culture?
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think we should ban it from public nor do I think we should normalize it either... I think that malls (ours here does) have a "quiet room" that is like a livingroom where mothers can go... but if you can't go anywhere, yes you should at least drape a light cloth over you and baby....you don't want some guy looking at you with dirty thoughts do you??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No offense, but alot of guys think dirty thoughts of every woman whether you are breast feeding or not.
Click to expand...


Or whether we're clothed...


----------



## Notthemama1984

TimV said:


> Don't get me wrong, Jamal. I defend your right to do it. Anywhere. All I meant is that a nice looking woman who does it in front of most men will without a blanket will cause them to lust, whether it should or it shouldn't. And as far as breasts being sexualized, there's great truth to that. But reading the Song of Solomon I don't think anyone would deny that at least some of that sexual attraction is hard wired into us men.




I find this argument an extreme cop out. Just because I find my wife's breast alluring does not mean that every set of boobs will cause me to sin.

Real men need to step up to the plate and say I refuse to allow my mind to wander.

I cannot control what goes on in your mind, but you can.


----------



## Honor

on that I concede but you have to admit if I were to wear a turtle neck and jacket I wouldn't tempt my brother nearly as much as if I wore a shirt to where the V of the shirt was cut down to my navel.


----------



## LadyFlynt

Romans922 said:


> No breast at all shows? how do you cover your breast? [Can I ask these questions, seems so wrong?] I'm trying to learn here too.



With modern clothing, there are a couple of options...most tops are loose enough to lift up just enough to latch a child on (even if mama bends over a bit for the initial latch) then the extra part of the shirt rests where baby and mama meet. (for those that have trouble with a bit of side waist showing, you can buy or make "bella bands" that look like you have a layered tank on underneath) 

Also, there are now many made for nursing clothes and patterns that are put together as two layers with the bottom layer having a slit or slits for nursing.

Ready made company
Motherwear's Fashion Nursing Tops for Breastfeeding in comfort and style. (click on the "how does it work" tab to see how the garments, that look like regular clothing, are made specifically for nursing)

Pattern company
Elizabeth Lee Designs

-----Added 12/10/2008 at 11:32:40 EST-----



Honor said:


> but unless you are covered you can not hide the area where the child attaches to the breast. plus a blanket doesn't have to be heavey and smother the child it can be a thin light and airy blanket.



Yes you can and many do. And my children knock down ANY blanket put over them.


----------



## Romans922

Chaplainintraining said:


> TimV said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't get me wrong, Jamal. I defend your right to do it. Anywhere. All I meant is that a nice looking woman who does it in front of most men will without a blanket will cause them to lust, whether it should or it shouldn't. And as far as breasts being sexualized, there's great truth to that. But reading the Song of Solomon I don't think anyone would deny that at least some of that sexual attraction is hard wired into us men.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I find this argument an extreme cop out. Just because I find my wife's breast alluring does not mean that every set of boobs will cause me to sin.
> 
> Real men need to step up to the plate and say I refuse to allow my mind to wander.
> 
> I cannot control what goes on in your mind, but you can.
Click to expand...


You can control what goes on in your mind? I thought we were born in sin and our thoughts are evil continually apart from Christ. And in Christ, we continue in sin, we need the Holy Spirit. Can you control (fully) your mind? I don't think so. You are responsible for it, yes. You are to call on God to grant you control over your mind, but does that mean it is automatically happens? No. Process of sanctification. Saying, "I refuse to let my mind wander." is an arminian statement. It should be "God help me because apart from you I can do nothing. A man should discipline himself. Well, yes, but He needs the Holy Spirit to work in him. And I am sorry but young men are dumb and stupid and ignorant and don't think. Yes, sinners. Yes they need to flee from their sin, well but some don't. They are weaker. Help them out. Don't be a stumbling block to another. This is 100% a woman's responsibility, to be modest, not be a stumbling block, etc. And this is 100% a man's responsibility to flee from sin and not put himself in situations that tempt him, and to turn to God and call out to Him for help.

Sorry if this seems to be in a bad tone, it was not intended.


----------



## TimV

> I find this argument an extreme cop out. Just because I find my wife's breast alluring does not mean that every set of boobs will cause me to sin.
> 
> Real men need to step up to the plate and say I refuse to allow my mind to wander.
> 
> I cannot control what goes on in your mind, but you can.



Well, at 48 it is a bit easier. But I wasn't addressing my post to superman, and the example was me and my friends in our early 20's who preferred that in particular a young, blonde, lovely of form, green-eyed Australian woman would at least have sat in the back while baring her breasts......I'm sure that there were plenty of men that didn't mind, though......


----------



## Honor

> With modern clothing, there are a couple of options...most tops are loose enough to lift up just enough to latch a child on (even if mama bends over a bit for the initial latch) then the extra part of the shirt rests where baby and mama meet. (for those that have trouble with a bit of side waist showing, you can buy or make "bella bands" that look like you have a layered tank on underneath)


I get what you are saying but.... the child can move... you can become uncovered unknowingly... plus that little bit of fabric can be fascinating to a guy... I know my husband once commented about it when I caught him staring.... he said he was watching to see if he could catch a glimpse of something.... it was tantalizing for him.like peak-a-boo
with him it was ok... but to think that a stanger would/could be thinking the same thoughts... ewww


----------



## Romans922

LadyFlynt said:


> Romans922 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No breast at all shows? how do you cover your breast? [Can I ask these questions, seems so wrong?] I'm trying to learn here too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With modern clothing, there are a couple of options...most tops are loose enough to lift up just enough to latch a child on (even if mama bends over a bit for the initial latch) then the extra part of the shirt rests where baby and mama meet. (for those that have trouble with a bit of side waist showing, you can buy or make "bella bands" that look like you have a layered tank on underneath)
> 
> Also, there are now many made for nursing clothes and patterns that are put together as two layers with the bottom layer having a slit or slits for nursing.
> 
> Ready made company
> Motherwear's Fashion Nursing Tops for Breastfeeding in comfort and style. (click on the "how does it work" tab to see how the garments, that look like regular clothing, are made specifically for nursing)
> 
> Pattern company
> Elizabeth Lee Designs
> 
> -----Added 12/10/2008 at 11:32:40 EST-----
> 
> 
> 
> Honor said:
> 
> 
> 
> but unless you are covered you can not hide the area where the child attaches to the breast. plus a blanket doesn't have to be heavey and smother the child it can be a thin light and airy blanket.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes you can and many do. And my children knock down ANY blanket put over them.
Click to expand...


Thanks, that's helpful.


----------



## Honor

> Well, at 48 it is a bit easier. But I wasn't addressing my post to superman, and the example was me and my friends in our early 20's who preferred that in particular a young, blonde, lovely of form, green-eyed Australian woman would at least have sat in the back while baring her breasts......I'm sure that there were plenty of men that didn't mind, though......



wait... are you saying that a lady in church was breatfeeding durning the sermon uncovered?


----------



## Honor

> Yes you can and many do. And my children knock down ANY blanket put over them.


and you still can stay modest??


----------



## nicnap

Rocketeer said:


> nicnap said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pergamum said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was bottle fed, and never had any health troubles. My immune system is just fine, and I RARELY get sick. Not arguing, just saying that that notion doesn't always bare true. I know some sickly kids who were breastfed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is no empirical proof. It has been scientifically and statistically been proven that breastfeeding is, in general, more beneficial to mother and child. Effects include a generally better resistance due to copying of the mother's antigens, notable fewer allergic reactions to substances foreign to the body, a possible boost in intelligence for the child, as well as being beneficial to the mother by helping her shed some pounds.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think you should read my post again...*that notion doesn't always bear true*. I am not arguing with the norms...I said as much; I said it isn't always true. I am fully aware of the benefits of it, but there are certain women who cannot breastfeed, and their children often turn out fine. There are women who can and their children have issues.
Click to expand...


----------



## Honor

i breastfed and my son has Asthma... I think its healthier and cheaper but not the be all and end all either.


----------



## TimV

> wait... are you saying that a lady in church was breatfeeding durning the sermon uncovered?



Yes, it happens fairly often. I suppose I should have clarified. I also have 7 kids, and all were nursed in church. We never used bottles for at least the first 6 months, and then only if my wife's milk dried up too soon. She used a blanket. One young woman we're friends with in a largely college age church has a blanket with like an apron string that she puts around her neck, and that frees her hands up.

I assumed the original subject dealt with a woman fully exposing herself, because as I said, it's fairly common.

Now for some humor, that Perg will get. I was 24 and in PNG straight from the US and when I got the village, most women were bare breasted. If a child was crying and wouldn't take his mom's breast, another woman would often grab the mother's breast and shake the nipple back and forth across the baby's mouth to entice the baby to feed and be quiet, even in church. I had to hide my laughter as I kept imagining what a such a scene would look like back in the States.


----------



## Spinningplates2

LadyFlynt said:


> Romans922 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No breast at all shows? how do you cover your breast? [Can I ask these questions, seems so wrong?] I'm trying to learn here too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With modern clothing, there are a couple of options.
Click to expand...


Dear Lady, I have read many of your posts and find them wonderful. I do have to question your desire to breastfeed with no concern for others privacy. Breastfeeding in public is a new habit for the Church in the United States. In the past it would be considered immodest to nurse a child in public. so can you m=name any other cultural habits that need to be changed or is it only breastfeeding? 

I guess you can tell my wife covered when necessary and fed in private when she could. Our youngest stopped feeding about 12 years ago, so I guess we just missed the modern times.


----------



## Honor

that is too funny!!!! I would die of embarrassment if another lady grabbed my boob and started shaking it..
Tim... just a question... did your wife sit in the back of the church and cover up?


----------



## LadyFlynt

Honor said:


> Yes you can and many do. And my children knock down ANY blanket put over them.
> 
> 
> 
> and you still can stay modest??
Click to expand...

Yes. I was at a church even and was nursing a babe. Another mother was taking pictures. Most people around me (found out later, it was other mothers) and the mama taking the pictures thought the babe was sleeping in my arms. She ONLY second guessed herself because she had been a nursing mother herself, stopped right about when she was going to take the picture, came over and quietly asked if I was nursing or if the babe was asleep. I signaled that I was nursing and so she moved on elsewhere for pictures. I've done the same with another mother in a church setting...same mother, more than once, I thought her child was sleeping on her lap only to be told or realise later that she was actually nursing. No blanket either time for either of us.

I am aware that not all mamas can pull this off, just as I can't pull off keeping a blanket on (the tail of a sling, sometimes works).


----------



## TimV

We sat where we wanted, but the blanket was large enough to cover everything up. I felt that was as closest to the optimum solution as a person's likely to get, as getting up to go to a nursing room can be disruptive as causing a man to hope for a glimpse, and the other issue of disrupting my wife's concentration by having to get up and step over legs in the pews.


----------



## Pergamum

*Some thoughts:*



It seems accepted by most all that breastfeeding is healthy.

Much drinking is not healthy.

If breastfeeding makes men stumble we should restrict it for the sake of a weaker brother, 

But among the same crowd, many reject the same solution for an alcohol-crazed society.


Whereas breastfeeding is a blessing to families and drunkenness and drink is often an evil to families, women should remove themselves from public view while teetotalers need to be taught that there is nothing wrong with drinking and maybe we should just better educate themso that they know better.

We have a puritan's pub here despite weak brothers; why not start a breatfeeding forum?

-----Added 12/10/2008 at 12:27:21 EST-----



TimV said:


> wait... are you saying that a lady in church was breatfeeding durning the sermon uncovered?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, it happens fairly often. I suppose I should have clarified. I also have 7 kids, and all were nursed in church. We never used bottles for at least the first 6 months, and then only if my wife's milk dried up too soon. She used a blanket. One young woman we're friends with in a largely college age church has a blanket with like an apron string that she puts around her neck, and that frees her hands up.
> 
> I assumed the original subject dealt with a woman fully exposing herself, because as I said, it's fairly common.
> 
> Now for some humor, that Perg will get. I was 24 and in PNG straight from the US and when I got the village, most women were bare breasted. If a child was crying and wouldn't take his mom's breast, another woman would often grab the mother's breast and shake the nipple back and forth across the baby's mouth to entice the baby to feed and be quiet, even in church. I had to hide my laughter as I kept imagining what a such a scene would look like back in the States.
Click to expand...



We had a church service a while back and one of the local toddlers walked up behind his topless mother and reached OVER the mother's shoulder, grabbed the boob and pulled it backwards back over the shoulder and stood there and suckled (he must have been 3 years old) while the mother sat unfazed trying to listen to the sermon.



Does modesty for breastfeeding also apply when the locals where I am at suckle their child on one breast and their piglet on the other?


----------



## Honor

> We had a church service a while back and one of the local toddlers walked up behind his topless mother and reached OVER the mother's shoulder, grabbed the boob and pulled it backwards back over the shoulder and stood there and suckled (he must have been 3 years old) while the mother sat unfazed trying to listen to the sermon.



surely you jest


----------



## LadyFlynt

Spinningplates2 said:


> LadyFlynt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Romans922 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No breast at all shows? how do you cover your breast? [Can I ask these questions, seems so wrong?] I'm trying to learn here too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With modern clothing, there are a couple of options.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dear Lady, I have read many of your posts and find them wonderful. I do have to question your desire to breastfeed with no concern for others privacy. Breastfeeding in public is a new habit for the Church in the United States. In the past it would be considered immodest to nurse a child in public. so can you m=name any other cultural habits that need to be changed or is it only breastfeeding?
> 
> I guess you can tell my wife covered when necessary and fed in private when she could. Our youngest stopped feeding about 12 years ago, so I guess we just missed the modern times.
Click to expand...


Actually, it isn't a "new habit". The "new habit" is to not nurse in church (yes, in the US). And I use the term "new" in a historical sense. Meaning that it was normal until the mid 1900's.

Again, I have no problem with a woman that wants to use/finds it easier to use a blanket. I believe it is wrong to humiliate a mother by insisting that she is being immodest to NOT use one or to say that all nursing should be done outside of the sanctuary.

It's not that I have no concern...it's that others seem to put their comfort zone before the need of a nursing child and the comfort of his/her mother. I believe it needs to go both ways. Are you aware of how often women, who are even covered with blankets, are asked to leave a store, sit in a restroom, harassed, or are publicly spoken to about how "disgusting" they are simply because they are NIPing? This is my issue.

*shrugs* I grew up with breastfeeding being normal. My stepdad would make comments to my mother while folding her laundry, but never was a comment made while nursing. My husband, grandfathers, my brothers, my sons, husbands of friends...pretty much everyone EXCEPT one grandfather...were able to separate sexual behaviour from non-sexual behaviour. One grandfather had hangups and he would walk out of the room grumbling...my mother was always covered with a blanket, but *gasp!* she was NURSING in HER living room!

With the one child that let me cover for nursing, I visited another church. I was sitting in the back, but still LEFT the sanctuary. I sat on a bench, facing a window, in an empty hallway AND was *covered* by my sling. STILL had a man from that church mention the nursery to me three times! (he saw my back from the foyer and came to "check on me") Not happening. I wanted to hear the sermon, that is why I was there, otherwise I should have just stayed home. The nursery (having been in there to change a diaper) was full of gossiping women, noisy children, and no sermon feed.

TimV, I have to ask...where in the States is it regularly happening that a mama has her full breast exposed while nursing or nursing in church? This I have not ever heard of except in a novel where it was used as a joke.

Pergy,  I have had my toddlers come up and try to do the same, thinking they were helping (not in church though, at home).


----------



## TimV

> TimV, I have to ask...where in the States is it regularly happening that a mama has her full breast exposed while nursing or nursing in church? This I have not ever heard of except in a novel where it was used as a joke.


Perhaps not regularly. In California I've seen it enough that it no longer shocks me.

Jessica, no, perg isn't jesting about women suckling pigs. Sometime if you want I'll describe sleeping in a traditional Highland PNG hut for you 

Perg, a bit off topic, but in your area do traditional women greet men by flicking their manhood with their finger?


----------



## nicnap

TimV said:


> TimV, I have to ask...where in the States is it regularly happening that a mama has her full breast exposed while nursing or nursing in church? This I have not ever heard of except in a novel where it was used as a joke.
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps not regularly. In California I've seen it enough that it no longer shocks me.
> 
> Jessica, no, perg isn't jesting about women suckling pigs. Sometime if you want I'll describe sleeping in a traditional Highland PNG hut for you
> 
> Perg, a bit off topic, but in your area do traditional women greet men by flicking their manhood with their finger?
Click to expand...


Glad my only overseas missions have been in Uganda...they do nurse openly, but there are no suckling pigs or flickings that occur.


----------



## Pergamum

In another region my friend got grabbed as a greeting. They went for me but I interposed my hand and give them a big handshake.


----------



## Wannabee

Whoa! Now that's a cross-cultural experience! 

In S. California the Hispanic women commonly breast feed in public without covering. They simply take the top down and feed. It took me by surprise, and concerned me, the first few times. But somehow it was different than a woman running around topless, or too exposed. Now, here in the U.P., there are only about 2 weeks when any woman would dare bare herself, period. Brrrrr.


----------



## TimV

> In another region my friend got grabbed as a greeting. They went for me but I interposed my hand and give them a big handshake.


You were better prepared. I set a new world record for the backwards high jump.


----------



## Honor

no I was more shocked that she could throw her breast over her shoulder....
Lady, I didn't mean to humiliate you... to me it's just ... idk


----------



## nicnap

TimV said:


> In another region my friend got grabbed as a greeting. They went for me but I interposed my hand and give them a big handshake.
> 
> 
> 
> You were better prepared. I set a new world record for the backwards high jump.
Click to expand...


----------



## TimV

> no I was more shocked that she could throw her breast over her shoulder....
> Lady, I didn't mean to humiliate you... to me it's just ... idk



I think it may have to do with years of gravity unsupported by fabric, but it's a common ability there.


----------



## Honor

wow... all I can say is wow... and thanks tim for a horrible mental pic of.... well.... think happy thoughts... happy thoughts.....think...


----------



## LadyFlynt

Honor said:


> no I was more shocked that she could throw her breast over her shoulder....
> Lady, I didn't mean to humiliate you... to me it's just ... idk



You didn't

I'm saying that it happens often to nursing mothers. Nursing mothers have been asked to leave restaurants and airplanes (in the past two years) because they needed to feed their child. Some were covered with a blanket and others were not, but still not showing breast. One lady was not even permitted to nurse in a DRESSING ROOM of a lingerie store because her breastmilk was considered "bodily fluid" that could "contaminate" the dressing rooms.

-----Added 12/10/2008 at 01:11:59 EST-----



TimV said:


> no I was more shocked that she could throw her breast over her shoulder....
> Lady, I didn't mean to humiliate you... to me it's just ... idk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think it may have to do with years of gravity unsupported by fabric, but it's a common ability there.
Click to expand...


gravity and age....wonderful things to look forward to...

this reminds me of a song we used to sing


----------



## Rocketeer

nicnap said:


> I think you should read my post again...*that notion doesn't always bear true*. I am not arguing with the norms...I said as much; I said it isn't always true. I am fully aware of the benefits of it, but there are certain women who cannot breastfeed, and their children often turn out fine. There are women who can and their children have issues.



It is not a notion, nor is it a norm, it is a fact. Just like it is not a notion, but a fact that (for example) smoking is bad for you. True, there are people who smoke and make it to a hundred years, but that does not mean that it is a wise thing to start smoking 'cause the guy next door smoked for almost a century. The same thing goes for breastfeeding. True, there are many children that turn out great when having been fed out of a bottle - I and my siblings are examples of that too. But that does not mean that, if a mother can breastfeed her child, she should not do so, just because the guy next door turned out great without it - her child will very probably turn out much better if it would be breastfed, than if it would not.

Breastfeeding is not a universal cure for children's diseases, but it will help. A child with the wrong genes will turn out sickly whether he is breastfed or not, but if he is not breastfed, it is proven to be likely that he will turn out the better for it. The other way round, a child with perfect genes will turn out wonderful on formula, but will turn out even better with breastfeeding. 

Therefore, a mother that has the choice between breastfeeding and formula, should at least heavily lean in favor of breastfeeding.


----------



## Honor

I'm sorry you have been discriminated against... I feel bad for you. I don't think that people should be mean about nursing...


----------



## nicnap

LadyFlynt said:


> Honor said:
> 
> 
> 
> no I was more shocked that she could throw her breast over her shoulder....
> Lady, I didn't mean to humiliate you... to me it's just ... idk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You didn't
> 
> I'm saying that it happens often to nursing mothers. Nursing mothers have been asked to leave restaurants and airplanes (in the past two years) because they needed to feed their child. Some were covered with a blanket and others were not, but still not showing breast. One lady was not even permitted to nurse in a DRESSING ROOM of a lingerie store because her breastmilk was considered "bodily fluid" that could "contaminate" the dressing rooms.
> 
> -----Added 12/10/2008 at 01:11:59 EST-----
> 
> 
> 
> TimV said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> no I was more shocked that she could throw her breast over her shoulder....
> Lady, I didn't mean to humiliate you... to me it's just ... idk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think it may have to do with years of gravity unsupported by fabric, but it's a common ability there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> gravity and age....wonderful things to look forward to...
> 
> this reminds me of a song we used to sing
Click to expand...



 tie 'em in a bow...  (if that was inappropriate I'll remove it) Just couldn't pass it up.


----------



## LadyFlynt

Honor said:


> I'm sorry you have been discriminated against... I feel bad for you. I don't think that people should be mean about nursing...



I've been blessed to have received very minimal discrimination compared to some. And unfortunately, some of the thoughts common in today's US society along with the difficulties that nursing brings with it all on it's own, are why so many women do not nurse or quit within weeks of birth.  Also why, when studying midwifery, my midwife requested that I strongly consider becoming a lactation consultant (more schooling required) for our area. There are many presumptions and little support.


----------



## nicnap

Rocketeer said:


> It is not a notion, nor is it a norm, it is a fact. Just like it is not a notion, but a fact that (for example) smoking is bad for you. True, there are people who smoke and make it to a hundred years, but that does not mean that it is a wise thing to start smoking 'cause the guy next door smoked for almost a century. The same thing goes for breastfeeding. True, there are many children that turn out great when having been fed out of a bottle - I and my siblings are examples of that too. But that does not mean that, if a mother can breastfeed her child, she should not do so, just because the guy next door turned out great without it - her child will very probably turn out much better if it would be breastfed, than if it would not.
> 
> Breastfeeding is not a universal cure for children's diseases, but it will help. A child with the wrong genes will turn out sickly whether he is breastfed or not, but if he is not breastfed, it is proven to be likely that he will turn out the better for it. The other way round, a child with perfect genes will turn out wonderful on formula, but will turn out even better with breastfeeding.
> 
> Therefore, a mother that has the choice between breastfeeding and formula, should at least heavily lean in favor of breastfeeding.



My point, Sir, was to say that it is not *always* the case. It is indeed a norm. It is a *FACT *that some women breastfeed. It is a *FACT *that some do not. It is the *NORM *that those who are breastfed are healthier, but it is not so in every case.


----------



## TimV

Jamal brings up another point. What do you do if you're a missionary in an area with lots of AIDS and other diseases? And it's customary for women to breast feed any kid who's hungry? She's sure she's doing you a favor by picking up your kid when you're in the other room. You come out and your maid or a neighbor woman is suckling him.


----------



## AThornquist

I would have to concur with Tim. There are two sides to this issue for me:
1) I totally understand and agree with the reality of breastfeeding and its necessity in public; likewise, I understand that many babies won't allow a blanket over them, etc. I see and agree with your many insightful points, Ladyflynt.
*But* 2) I am a young man who is fascinated by the beauty of the female body. Still, I flee situations that may be a stumbling block and struggle in the fight to maintain a good conscience and pure mind. There are times when I will walk into a room or turn a corner and see a woman free-boobin' it as they are breastfeeding (though certainly not at church) and there is no way to _not_ have the image of a woman's breast brought to mind. I mean, there one is, right in front of me! ...More often than not it doesn't bother me because I just bring my mind back to Christ. But there are times when I am weak that a woman's body can bring back old sexual thoughts and ideas from p0rnography. (I.E. seeing a child at a woman's breast would not make me think, "Wow, that is sure a precious moment of bonding" but rather, "lucky kid!"  ) But please don't get me wrong--I am not a raving pervert. I am just very aware of my weaknesses. 

Thus, when I have a wife and child (Lord willing) I hope that my child will allow a cover. If not, hopefully my wife can breastfeed discretely. Regardless, I want to avoid any situation where it may be a stumbling block to others since I _know_ how much of one it can be for some people.


----------



## LadyFlynt

TimV said:


> Jamal brings up another point. What do you do if you're a missionary in an area with lots of AIDS and other diseases? And it's customary for women to breast feed any kid who's hungry? She's sure she's doing you a favor by picking up your kid when you're in the other room. You come out and your maid or a neighbor woman is suckling him.




Sounds like the deed is done...too late. You thank them, remove the child, and pray. I'm certain a tirade would not benefit anyone in the matter.

-----Added 12/10/2008 at 01:54:20 EST-----



AThornquist said:


> I would have to concur with Tim. There are two sides to this issue for me:
> 1) I totally understand and agree with the reality of breastfeeding and its necessity in public; likewise, I understand that many babies won't allow a blanket over them, etc. I see and agree with your many insightful points, Ladyflynt.
> *But* 2) I am a young man who is fascinated by the beauty of the female body. Still, I flee situations that may be a stumbling block and struggle in the fight to maintain a good conscience and pure mind. There are times when I will walk into a room or turn a corner and see a woman free-boobin' it as they are breastfeeding (though certainly not at church) and there is no way to _not_ have the image of a woman's breast brought to mind. I mean, there one is, right in front of me! ...More often than not it doesn't bother me because I just bring my mind back to Christ. But there are times when I am weak that a woman's body can bring back old sexual thoughts and ideas from p0rnography. (I.E. seeing a child at a woman's breast would not make me think, "Wow, that is sure a precious moment of bonding" but rather, "lucky kid!"  ) But please don't get me wrong--I am not a raving pervert. I am just very aware of my weaknesses.
> 
> Thus, when I have a wife and child (Lord willing) I hope that my child will allow a cover. If not, hopefully my wife can breastfeed discretely. Regardless, I want to avoid any situation where it may be a stumbling block to others since I _know_ how much of one it can be for some people.


Thank you for this post and thank you for being willing to look at both sides.


btw, for those that may want to know: I have nursed in service (both with a blanket when able and without when not). I currently leave the sanctuary due to a babe that is noisy and not attentive to his feeding. I've also gauged situations. I make my choice based on that, because the reality is I don't want to be the cause of conflict. However, when in a very public place with strangers (restaurant or mall), I will simply sit and nurse as discreetly as possibly (I'm not a raving, in your face, haul it all out in the open to declare my stance person). I would presume a person is being well meaning if they offered me a blanket or another room to nurse in the FIRST time and they came off that way. If persistent, I'm discreet, then I would be offended that the person is making a scene over it.


----------



## Notthemama1984

Romans922 said:


> Chaplainintraining said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TimV said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't get me wrong, Jamal. I defend your right to do it. Anywhere. All I meant is that a nice looking woman who does it in front of most men will without a blanket will cause them to lust, whether it should or it shouldn't. And as far as breasts being sexualized, there's great truth to that. But reading the Song of Solomon I don't think anyone would deny that at least some of that sexual attraction is hard wired into us men.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I find this argument an extreme cop out. Just because I find my wife's breast alluring does not mean that every set of boobs will cause me to sin.
> 
> Real men need to step up to the plate and say I refuse to allow my mind to wander.
> 
> I cannot control what goes on in your mind, but you can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You can control what goes on in your mind? I thought we were born in sin and our thoughts are evil continually apart from Christ. And in Christ, we continue in sin, we need the Holy Spirit. Can you control (fully) your mind? I don't think so. You are responsible for it, yes. You are to call on God to grant you control over your mind, but does that mean it is automatically happens? No. Process of sanctification. Saying, "I refuse to let my mind wander." is an arminian statement. It should be "God help me because apart from you I can do nothing. A man should discipline himself. Well, yes, but He needs the Holy Spirit to work in him. And I am sorry but young men are dumb and stupid and ignorant and don't think. Yes, sinners. Yes they need to flee from their sin, well but some don't. They are weaker. Help them out. Don't be a stumbling block to another. This is 100% a woman's responsibility, to be modest, not be a stumbling block, etc. And this is 100% a man's responsibility to flee from sin and not put himself in situations that tempt him, and to turn to God and call out to Him for help.
> 
> Sorry if this seems to be in a bad tone, it was not intended.
Click to expand...


I did not mean that we are perfect in our minds, but blaming Eve did not work for Adam and it will not work for you.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

Chaplainintraining said:


> TimV said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't get me wrong, Jamal. I defend your right to do it. Anywhere. All I meant is that a nice looking woman who does it in front of most men will without a blanket will cause them to lust, whether it should or it shouldn't. And as far as breasts being sexualized, there's great truth to that. But reading the Song of Solomon I don't think anyone would deny that at least some of that sexual attraction is hard wired into us men.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I find this argument an extreme cop out. Just because I find my wife's breast alluring does not mean that every set of boobs will cause me to sin.
> 
> Real men need to step up to the plate and say I refuse to allow my mind to wander.
> 
> I cannot control what goes on in your mind, but you can.
Click to expand...


Not everyone is wired like you Boliver. It is not a cop out. Some have allowed such sin into their lives during youth that certain thought patterns are inevitable during certain times. As a chaplain in the military you will need to become more understanding. 

I personally wouldn't want another man to see my nakedness. My wife's breasts are mine to see and mine alone.... as much as possible. That is if I was still married.

Edit addition for clarification.

Let me clarify the as much as possible thing... I meant to communicate that a wife's and mans nakedness is to be seen between them as the situations go. Doctors need to examine and sometimes there are other situations where a persons nakedness may be revealed that is unavoidable.


----------



## Romans922

I'm not blaming anyone. I'm saying the woman breastfeeding is a sinner, and all men are sinners. There are clear commands in Scripture. We must all be modest, we must all flee from sin. 

If you notice what I said, I did not blame Eve. I called her to do her part (fulfill her responsibilities). And I called Adam too, to fulfill his responsibilities.

You cannot put the whole situation on the man, and you cannot put the whole situation on the woman. It is both/and.


----------



## Rocketeer

nicnap said:


> My point, Sir, was to say that it is not *always* the case. It is indeed a norm. It is a *FACT *that some women breastfeed. It is a *FACT *that some do not. It is the *NORM *that those who are breastfed are healthier, but it is not so in every case.



I have just spent half an hour trying to find any negative effects of breastfeeding on young children. Maybe you can find one case where it was proven that the child would have been better off without being breastfed, or a study which shows any negative effects on children? Quite frankly, I cannot. Therefore, it is a fact that the babe is equally well or better off when breastfed than when not, there being no known cases where it has had the opposite effect in the past.


----------



## LadyFlynt

The only negatives I've known have had to do with deficiencies in the child or allergies to something the mother was eating (and yes, it can be a pain to do an elimination diet to figure those things out and to eat in accordance to the child's tolerances, but some mothers are willing to do it to ensure their child also reaps the benefits of breastmilk). The deficiencies include things like a genetic issue that prevents proper breakdown of proteins, etc...these children typically have problems on formula though as well and go through a lot to figure out what they can tolerate. But they are they exceptions and rarities.


----------



## Spinningplates2

I still need to know what other "Modern" trends are going to be coming to the Church. If, as LadyFlynt says, that breast feeding became accepted/normal in the mid-1900's (I never noticed) what other things will soon be allowed? If the Puritans women would be shocked to "show an ankle" how did we get to the point where women could risk showing their breast in the middle of Worship? Yes, I know breastfeeding is natural and healthy.

So the question is what other modesty standards should we change?


----------



## nicnap

Since you wish...the burden is on you. You have to do the impossible of proving the universal negative. 

That being said, you should read what I responded to - you are still not understanding what I have said, and how I responded. It is not *always* the case that every child that is breastfed is better off. Please understand operative terms when they are used. It is *NOT* a fact that *EVERY* child is better off with breastfeeding. Some have been just as well off without being breast fed. Instead of talking past me, read what I have said.

That said, I am for breastfeeding, but it is not the "end all, be all" of the matter.


----------



## N. Eshelman

The Puritans were huge advocates of breast feeding. Read Gouge and you will see over 10 pages that cover why breast is better than animal milk or wet nurses. They were not prudes AT ALL about this! 

I ask my wife NOT to cover, because I do not think that it is a modesty issue. As long as you are not flashing things about, our culture needs to come into conformity with the biblical data. The breast and child relationship is quite common in Scripture and given as a positive image- If it were so secretive and private, why would God use it so much in Scripture?

I like the current Michigan law- A woman can breastfeed a baby anywhere that a woman could bottle feed a baby. 

Also, (tongue in cheek): I think that if a woman has to cover her baby when nursing, the other women should have to cover their babies when they use a bottle. Just to make it fair. The bottle does have a big nipple on the end, we wouldn't want to make a brother stumble because of his imagination!


----------



## LadyFlynt

Spinningplates2 said:


> I still need to know what other "Modern" trends are going to be coming to the Church. If, as LadyFlynt says, that breast feeding became accepted/normal in the mid-1900's (I never noticed) what other things will soon be allowed? If the Puritans women would be shocked to "show an ankle" how did we get to the point where women could risk showing their breast in the middle of Worship? Yes, I know breastfeeding is natural and healthy.
> 
> So the question is what other modesty standards should we change?



You totally misread me.

Nursing became UNACCEPTED by the mid 1900s. NOT nursing in church is the NEW habit.

The Puritan women that "didn't show ankle", still opened up their jackets and pulled aside their chemises to nurse a child...and not in some private backroom as there wasn't much privacy to begin with.

And as stated above: the Puritans weren't the Prudes they are oftimes portrayed to be.


----------



## Rocketeer

nicnap said:


> That being said, you should read what I responded to - you are still not understanding what I have said, and how I responded.



You responded to Pergamum's suggestion that breastfeeding was healthier for children, by saying that that was not always the case. Not healthier = unhealthier. You argued this by the fact that you yourself had not been breastfed, and that you turned out well. Fine, but that is no proof, as you do not quite know how you would have turned out if you had been.

As there is no study that is known to me, nor, apparently, to you, that shows that breastfeeding can be unhealthy for young children, I respectfully ask you why you would argue that breastfeeding is not in all cases healthy for children?

(P.S.: nicnap, if you make an other reply, you automatically carry the point. Though not convinced, I am sick of contending it. All, I hope, in a spirit of ?)


----------



## nicnap

Rocketeer said:


> nicnap said:
> 
> 
> 
> That being said, you should read what I responded to - you are still not understanding what I have said, and how I responded.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You responded to Pergamum's suggestion that breastfeeding was healthier for children, by saying that that was not always the case. Not healthier = unhealthier. You argued this by the fact that you yourself had not been breastfed, and that you turned out well. Fine, but that is no proof, as you do not quite know how you would have turned out if you had been.
> 
> As there is no study that is known to me, nor, apparently, to you, that shows that breastfeeding can be unhealthy for young children, I respectfully ask you why you would argue that breastfeeding is not in all cases healthy for children?
> 
> (P.S.: nicnap, if you make an other reply, you automatically carry the point. Though not convinced, I am sick of contending it. All, I hope, in a spirit of ?)
Click to expand...


Drat...you edited your post as I was typing mine. I was simply going to concede, as I too do not feel like contending it any longer.


----------



## Notthemama1984

PuritanCovenanter said:


> Chaplainintraining said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TimV said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't get me wrong, Jamal. I defend your right to do it. Anywhere. All I meant is that a nice looking woman who does it in front of most men will without a blanket will cause them to lust, whether it should or it shouldn't. And as far as breasts being sexualized, there's great truth to that. But reading the Song of Solomon I don't think anyone would deny that at least some of that sexual attraction is hard wired into us men.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I find this argument an extreme cop out. Just because I find my wife's breast alluring does not mean that every set of boobs will cause me to sin.
> 
> Real men need to step up to the plate and say I refuse to allow my mind to wander.
> 
> I cannot control what goes on in your mind, but you can.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not everyone is wired like you Boliver. It is not a cop out. Some have allowed such sin into their lives during youth that certain thought patterns are inevitable during certain times. As a chaplain in the military you will need to become more understanding.
> 
> I personally wouldn't want another man to see my nakedness. My wife's breasts are mine to see and mine alone.... as much as possible. That is if I was still married.
> 
> Edit addition for clarification.
> 
> Let me clarify the as much as possible thing... I meant to communicate that a wife's and mans nakedness is to be seen between them as the situations go. Doctors need to examine and sometimes there are other situations where a persons nakedness may be revealed that is unavoidable.
Click to expand...



It is a cop out to blame someone else for their sins. If I choose to think lustfully it is my fault. It is not anyone else's fault. I cannot tell God, "the devil made me do it" or "well even you had not blessed her physically...."

It just does not fly.

-----Added 12/10/2008 at 03:46:57 EST-----

I thought about this situation the entire ride home from work today and some of the thought patterns stated here are really blowing my mind.

It is the same thing as saying that it was the young lady's fault that she was raped because of what she wore. It was not her fault at all.


Also LadyFlynt was making the point a while back that society causes our reactions to nudity and I agree. To prove my point, think of your mom, sister, or even grandma buck naked. Isn't too pleasing is it? Why? because society tells us that it is wrong to be attracted to our family members. So if I can program my brain to not be sexually aroused when seeing certain women, I can program my brain to control my thoughts about other women as well.


----------



## AThornquist

...When was anyone else blamed for sins?

-----Added 12/10/2008 at 03:49:53 EST-----



Chaplainintraining said:


> So if I can program my brain to not be sexually aroused when seeing certain women, I can program my brain to control my thoughts about other women as well.



So I can just reprogram all of the areas I struggle with and be perfect... who knew it was so easy?


----------



## Honor

> So if I can program my brain to not be sexually aroused when seeing certain women, I can program my brain to control my thoughts about other women as well


. I'm sorry, not to be crude but what if you had a hot sister... I think your body would respond the same way.... it's like rape victims that have guilt if/when their bodies "react" to the assult.


----------



## LawrenceU

> I'm sorry, not to be crude but what if you had a hot sister... I think your body would respond the same way....



Mmmm. . . nope.


----------



## AThornquist

This doesn't apply to me, but there are certainly people who have been sexualized to the point of "seeing past family ties." It's like the mind disregards one's age, relationship, etc. and focuses only on sexual gratification. The same concept applies with people who struggle with pedophilia.


----------



## Notthemama1984

AThornquist said:


> ...When was anyone else blamed for sins?
> 
> -----Added 12/10/2008 at 03:49:53 EST-----
> 
> 
> 
> Chaplainintraining said:
> 
> 
> 
> So if I can program my brain to not be sexually aroused when seeing certain women, I can program my brain to control my thoughts about other women as well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So I can just reprogram all of the areas I struggle with and be perfect... who knew it was so easy?
Click to expand...


Tim said....



> Don't get me wrong, Jamal. I defend your right to do it. Anywhere. All I meant is that a nice looking woman who does it in front of most men will without a blanket will cause them to lust, whether it should or it shouldn't. And as far as breasts being sexualized, there's great truth to that. But reading the Song of Solomon I don't think anyone would deny that at least some of that sexual attraction is hard wired into us men.



If we cannot stop ourselves from sinning (not saying every time), then why would God even bother giving us moral guidelines if it is impossible to even follow at least once? 

Also what about John 8:11, "Go your way and sin no more"

If I was to post a picture of Jesus, most here would immediately attempt to delete it. Are you saying that you have the ability to not sin in one area, but not in another area? Come on. Is it a struggle? Yes. Is it hard? Yes. Are we able to overcome sin through Christ? Absolutely.

-----Added 12/10/2008 at 04:09:19 EST-----



AThornquist said:


> This doesn't apply to me, but there are certainly people who have been sexualized to the point of "seeing past family ties." It's like the mind disregards one's age, relationship, etc. and focuses only on sexual gratification. The same concept applies with people who struggle with pedophilia.



Ok. Don't think about the perverted desires of some. Think about yourself. You have decided to not lust about your mom. Why is it that you cannot decide to stop lusting about another woman?


----------



## Wannabee

Any who claim that they can't help sinning are basically throwing out the commands of God and denying Scripture. We all can resist any sin, period. We've condition ourselves not to in many instances. 

Consider 1 Corinthians 10:12-13 - all temptation is common to man. God will provide escape.

Consider 1 John - most of it - if you're God's you will habitually obey His commandments.

2 Corinthians 10:4-6
4For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, 5casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, *bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ*, 6and being ready to punish all disobedience when your obedience is fulfilled. 


To claim anything else is to subscribe to the victim mentality that psychobabble has foisted upon our society. Biblically speaking, the most sexy and gorgeous naked woman in the world should be able to walk, in a taunting manner, in front of a group of young Christian men and illicit no sinful thoughts whatsoever. What the men should be thinking is something along the lines of, "Has nobody shared Christ with her?" "Does she recognize the peril she's in?" "Is there anything I can do to help her know Christ?" "Here, you need my coat." "Gentlemen, let's pray." Or some other response that is more concerned over her soul than any hormonal surge or personal gratification. I'm not saying it's easy, I'm saying that any claim that we can't endure is a lie and "exalts itself agaisnt the knowledge of God."
Comparisons with those who stumble are useless. Our comparison is Christ; our desire is to emulate Him in all things; and our ability to do so is only found in His strength.


----------



## Notthemama1984

Honor said:


> So if I can program my brain to not be sexually aroused when seeing certain women, I can program my brain to control my thoughts about other women as well
> 
> 
> 
> . I'm sorry, not to be crude but what if you had a hot sister... I think your body would respond the same way.... it's like rape victims that have guilt if/when their bodies "react" to the assult.
Click to expand...



I sorry, but you are wrong. I accidentally saw my mom naked a few years ago. It was in no way shape or form a sexual arousal. It was quite disgusting.


----------



## TimV

> If we cannot stop ourselves from sinning (not saying every time), then why would God even bother giving us moral guidelines if it is impossible to even follow at least once?



And that's what your missing. In 1Tim 2:9 it says


> In like manner also for the women to adorn themselves in modest dress, with regard for others and sober-mindedness


because God did bother to give women moral guidelines to help us keep those He outlined for us men.


----------



## Notthemama1984

Wannabee said:


> Any who claim that they can't help sinning are basically throwing out the commands of God and denying Scripture. We all can resist any sin, period. We've condition ourselves not to in many instances.
> 
> Consider 1 Corinthians 10:12-13 - all temptation is common to man. God will provide escape.
> 
> Consider 1 John - most of it - if you're God's you will habitually obey His commandments.
> 
> 2 Corinthians 10:4-6
> 4For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, 5casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, *bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ*, 6and being ready to punish all disobedience when your obedience is fulfilled.
> 
> 
> To claim anything else is to subscribe to the victim mentality that psychobabble has foisted upon our society. Biblically speaking, the most sexy and gorgeous naked woman in the world should be able to walk, in a taunting manner, in front of a group of young Christian men and illicit no sinful thoughts whatsoever. What the men should be thinking is something along the lines of, "Has nobody shared Christ with her?" "Does she recognize the peril she's in?" "Is there anything I can do to help her know Christ?" "Here, you need my coat." "Gentlemen, let's pray." Or some other response that is more concerned over her soul than any hormonal surge or personal gratification. I'm not saying it's easy, I'm saying that any claim that we can't endure is a lie and "exalts itself agaisnt the knowledge of God."
> Comparisons with those who stumble are useless. Our comparison is Christ; our desire is to emulate Him in all things; and our ability to do so is only found in His strength.





-----Added 12/10/2008 at 04:18:43 EST-----



TimV said:


> If we cannot stop ourselves from sinning (not saying every time), then why would God even bother giving us moral guidelines if it is impossible to even follow at least once?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And that's what your missing. In 1Tim 2:9 it says
> 
> 
> 
> In like manner also for the women to adorn themselves in modest dress, with regard for others and sober-mindedness
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> because God did bother to give women moral guidelines to help us keep those He outlined for us men.
Click to expand...


I am not saying whether she is right or wrong. I am saying you cannot blame her for your thoughts.


----------



## Wannabee

We have to be careful not to place the man's sin in the lap of the woman. This is just plain wrong. It is thoroughly unbiblical. We are each individually guilty and culpable for our own sin, period. We can consider one another. We can help one another. And we can be instruments in one another's temptation. But nobody can cause another person to sin, period. The idea is foreign to Scripture.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

Chaplainintraining said:


> PuritanCovenanter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chaplainintraining said:
> 
> 
> 
> I find this argument an extreme cop out. Just because I find my wife's breast alluring does not mean that every set of boobs will cause me to sin.
> 
> Real men need to step up to the plate and say I refuse to allow my mind to wander.
> 
> I cannot control what goes on in your mind, but you can.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not everyone is wired like you Boliver. It is not a cop out. Some have allowed such sin into their lives during youth that certain thought patterns are inevitable during certain times. As a chaplain in the military you will need to become more understanding.
> 
> I personally wouldn't want another man to see my nakedness. My wife's breasts are mine to see and mine alone.... as much as possible. That is if I was still married.
> 
> Edit addition for clarification.
> 
> Let me clarify the as much as possible thing... I meant to communicate that a wife's and mans nakedness is to be seen between them as the situations go. Doctors need to examine and sometimes there are other situations where a persons nakedness may be revealed that is unavoidable.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> It is a cop out to blame someone else for their sins. If I choose to think lustfully it is my fault. It is not anyone else's fault. I cannot tell God, "the devil made me do it" or "well even you had not blessed her physically...."
> 
> It just does not fly.
> 
> -----Added 12/10/2008 at 03:46:57 EST-----
> 
> I thought about this situation the entire ride home from work today and some of the thought patterns stated here are really blowing my mind.
> 
> It is the same thing as saying that it was the young lady's fault that she was raped because of what she wore. It was not her fault at all.
> 
> 
> Also LadyFlynt was making the point a while back that society causes our reactions to nudity and I agree. To prove my point, think of your mom, sister, or even grandma buck naked. Isn't too pleasing is it? Why? because society tells us that it is wrong to be attracted to our family members. So if I can program my brain to not be sexually aroused when seeing certain women, I can program my brain to control my thoughts about other women as well.
Click to expand...


Boliver,

Scripture puts a high standard for nakedness and the revealing of it on a level that does even bring a curse. And yes, some women and men can be overly provocative and become stumbling blocks for which there is a stern warning against such. And if you think you are above this I would caution you with a warning since you stand so strong.



> (1Co 10:12) Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.
> 
> (1Co 10:13) There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.



I have seen many fall who thought they had a grip on this. Their pride brought them low. It sounds like you don't know yourself very good and that you can read your own heart. I recommend you read John Owen on Sin and Temptation. One thing a person does is stay away from things that make him stumble. And this may be one of those things. To deny this is dangerous. A young man may not be as inclined as you seem to be and have struggles in his heart. His way of escape would to be avoid any encounter such as seeing another womans breast in any situation. And this forcing of others to be in the same room with a breast feeder would be a violation of his conscience and purity. 

I would also commend you to Romans 12:1-3



> (Rom 12:1) I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.
> 
> (Rom 12:2) And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
> 
> (Rom 12:3) For I say, through the grace given unto me, *to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.*


----------



## Notthemama1984

> Boliver,
> 
> Scripture puts a high standard for nakedness and the revealing of it on a level that does even bring a curse. And yes, some women and men can be overly provocative and become stumbling blocks for which there is a stern warning against such. And if you think you are above this I would caution you with a warning since you stand so strong.
> 
> 
> Quote:
> (1Co 10:12) Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.
> 
> (1Co 10:13) There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.
> 
> I have seen many fall who thought they had a grip on this. Their pride brought them low. It sounds like you don't know yourself very good and that you can read your own heart. I recommend you read John Owen on Sin and Temptation. One thing a person does is stay away from things that make him stumble. And this may be one of those things. To deny this is dangerous. A young man may not be as inclined as you seem to be and have struggles in his heart. His way of escape would to be avoid any encounter such as seeing another womans breast in any situation. And this forcing of others to be in the same room with a breast feeder would be a violation of his conscience and purity.
> 
> I would also commend you to Romans 12:1-3
> 
> 
> Quote:
> (Rom 12:1) I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.
> 
> (Rom 12:2) And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
> 
> (Rom 12:3) For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.



Staying away from dangerous situations is a good thing. I would not deny that. But I do not know of any woman who makes sure to sit in front of other men and "pops it out." Therefore these men do not have it staring them in the face. It may be off to the side or something, but there is nothing requiring these men to look in the direction of the mother.

I have never said that I do not ever struggle with lust. I am saying that if I make a mistake, I recognize that it is I who have sinned and that I need forgiveness. I never shake my head and say, " oh well it was her fault."


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

Chaplainintraining said:


> Staying away from dangerous situations is a good thing. I would not deny that. But I do not know of any woman who makes sure to sit in front of other men and "pops it out." Therefore these men do not have it staring them in the face. It may be off to the side or something, but there is nothing requiring these men to look in the direction of the mother.
> 
> I have never said that I do not ever struggle with lust. I am saying that if I make a mistake, I recognize that it is I who have sinned and that I need forgiveness. I never shake my head and say, " oh well it was her fault."



We all own our own sin. But sometimes there are contributing factors to it. And one not need be a contributing factor. That is my point. And you as well as others would do well to understand this.


----------



## Jon Lake

My sister had a friend who was one of these natural "open" types, I was staying with her once and went to the kitchen to get cup of coffee, her friend was in there nursing, well....she simply had on a plain T-shirt (forget shirts with the flaps for her, as I said very much a natural sort) so she had it lifted where...both were uncovered! OK, friends, I looked at my coffee, I looked at the ceiling, I looked at the floor (in short I wanted to get my caffeine and escape), I almost had it when she said " Just LOOK at this little one! Have you EVER seen one so cute, or hungry!" Well the cup slipped from my fingers and I excused myself with, "Excuse Susan, I think I have a scald." I went and sent Sis to clean up she told me not to be a baby and grow up. About, 5 minutes later, she came to the media room I had escaped to with the words, "WOW! Sorry brother, that was more than I expected or wanted to see!" I guess my point is OK it is natural, yes, wonderful, but if you see a guy drop hot coffee and retreat....you might think about covering things up just a little bit more. Thats just my...


----------



## ReformedWretch

nicnap said:


> Pergamum said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm glad when I see it in the West because it means that the West is moving from their fascination with the bottle and giving their kids a healthier life.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was bottle fed, and never had any health troubles. My immune system is just fine, and I RARELY get sick. Not arguing, just saying that that notion doesn't always bear true. I know some sickly kids who were breastfed.
Click to expand...


ABSOLUTELY!! Same here.


----------



## Wannabee

PuritanCovenanter said:


> We all own our own sin. But sometimes there are contributing factors to it. And one not need be a contributing factor. That is my point. And you as well as others would do well to understand this.


I think your last point was taken Randy. But there were comments that clearly appeared to be claiming that it was a woman's fault if she wasn't discrete or considerate of a brother. That's simply not true. She is culpable before God for her sin, even if she's a stumbling block. But, from the man's perspective, his culpability is his own. What was said seemed to deny that, and elicited a reaction - what I thought was a good reaction.


----------



## Honor

Chaplainintraining said:


> Honor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So if I can program my brain to not be sexually aroused when seeing certain women, I can program my brain to control my thoughts about other women as well
> 
> 
> 
> . I'm sorry, not to be crude but what if you had a hot sister... I think your body would respond the same way.... it's like rape victims that have guilt if/when their bodies "react" to the assult.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I sorry, but you are wrong. I accidentally saw my mom naked a few years ago. It was in no way shape or form a sexual arousal. It was quite disgusting.
Click to expand...

dude I said sister not mom and if some guys didn't get their jollys' then why does the Bible have to spell it out "it is wrong to sleep with your mom" (Jessica's version)


----------



## AThornquist

Chaplainintraining said:


> Are you saying that you have the ability to not sin in one area, but not in another area? Come on. Is it a struggle? Yes. Is it hard? Yes. Are we able to overcome sin through Christ? Absolutely.



Oh, _come on_. Like I said, people struggle with certain sins more than other kinds. I'm not sure how that equates to your initial question.  Of course I have the ability to overcome sin through Christ. The difference is, I don't struggle _at all_ with not cursing, but I _do_ struggle with lust. Thus, I struggle with one sin more than another kind.



> Ok. Don't think about the perverted desires of some. Think about yourself. You have decided to not lust about your mom. Why is it that you cannot decide to stop lusting about another woman?



Sorry. I'm so used to not using myself as the standard for mankind. There _are_ people who might be different than me. And I _can_ decide to not lust about another woman. That is not the same as not lusting about my mother though, since lusting over this "other woman" wouldn't engage my gag reflex.


----------



## LadyFlynt

Jon Lake said:


> My sister had a friend who was one of these natural "open" types, I was staying with her once and went to the kitchen to get cup of coffee, her friend was in there nursing, well....she simply had on a plain T-shirt (forget shirts with the flaps for her, as I said very much a natural sort) so she had it lifted where...both were uncovered! OK, friends, I looked at my coffee, I looked at the ceiling, I looked at the floor (in short I wanted to get my caffeine and escape), I almost had it when she said " Just LOOK at this little one! Have you EVER seen one so cute, or hungry!" Well the cup slipped from my fingers and I excused myself with, "Excuse Susan, I think I have a scald." I went and sent Sis to clean up she told me not to be a baby and grow up. About, 5 minutes later, she came to the media room I had escaped to with the words, "WOW! Sorry brother, that was more than I expected or wanted to see!" I guess my point is OK it is natural, yes, wonderful, but if you see a guy drop hot coffee and retreat....you might think about covering things up just a little bit more. Thats just my...



Yikes...on behalf of crunchy mamas, I'm sorry.


----------



## Honor

what is a crunchy mamma?


----------



## LadyFlynt

I think this is why it is important that we raise our children to have the PROPER view of things...what is sexual and what is not. Unfortunately, many of us were raised with a warped mentality about things. There can be extremism both ways..."oh it's natural, I'll just pop both of them out and you deal with it" and "you might cause a man to lust, nurse in a bathroom or give the kid formula" (not saying that anyone here is saying either...just examples, folks)


----------



## Notthemama1984

AThornquist said:


> Chaplainintraining said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you saying that you have the ability to not sin in one area, but not in another area? Come on. Is it a struggle? Yes. Is it hard? Yes. Are we able to overcome sin through Christ? Absolutely.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, _come on_. Like I said, people struggle with certain sins more than other kinds. I'm not sure how that equates to your initial question.  Of course I have the ability to overcome sin through Christ. The difference is, I don't struggle _at all_ with not cursing, but I _do_ struggle with lust. Thus, I struggle with one sin more than another kind.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ok. Don't think about the perverted desires of some. Think about yourself. You have decided to not lust about your mom. Why is it that you cannot decide to stop lusting about another woman?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sorry. I'm so used to not using myself as the standard for mankind. There _are_ people who might be different than me. And I _can_ decide to not lust about another woman. That is not the same as not lusting about my mother though, since lusting over this "other woman" wouldn't engage my gag reflex.
Click to expand...



I am not asking you to be the standard for mankind. I am saying look at yourself. If you can resist temptation in one area, then you can resist in other areas as well. I said nothing about difficulty. I said we can overcome.


----------



## jwithnell

Women should be able to nurse in most places, but with some discretion. I had a somewhat early baby who couldn't go much time between feedings, and we nursed just about everywhere. Usually his head was covered with a light receiving blanket.


----------



## LadyFlynt

Honor said:


> what is a crunchy mamma?



Crunchy Mama = more of your natural, granola types. Of course there is a wide span and some are "crunchier" in certain areas than others...some are crunchy in some areas and not at all in others. But it's still the main idea of "more natural, granola type".

Here's a fun survey on it and don't take any score as an insult or as "better"...we're each different and have our different views. Also some people are unaware of certain options or issues.

How Crunchy Are you?


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

Wannabee said:


> PuritanCovenanter said:
> 
> 
> 
> We all own our own sin. But sometimes there are contributing factors to it. And one not need be a contributing factor. That is my point. And you as well as others would do well to understand this.
> 
> 
> 
> I think your last point was taken Randy. But there were comments that clearly appeared to be claiming that it was a woman's fault if she wasn't discrete or considerate of a brother. That's simply not true. She is culpable before God for her sin, even if she's a stumbling block. But, from the man's perspective, his culpability is his own. What was said seemed to deny that, and elicited a reaction - what I thought was a good reaction.
Click to expand...


Point taken but sometimes more than one persons share in a sin. And the other side of the coin wasn't being handled correctly. 



> Randy. But there were comments that clearly appeared to be claiming that it was a woman's fault if she wasn't discrete or considerate of a brother.



And a woman should be considerate of others. She should consider if she might be a stumbling block. 

We all own our own sin but sometimes it has contributing factors. And that point was being brushed under the table.


----------



## Jon Lake

LadyFlynt said:


> Jon Lake said:
> 
> 
> 
> My sister had a friend who was one of these natural "open" types, I was staying with her once and went to the kitchen to get cup of coffee, her friend was in there nursing, well....she simply had on a plain T-shirt (forget shirts with the flaps for her, as I said very much a natural sort) so she had it lifted where...both were uncovered! OK, friends, I looked at my coffee, I looked at the ceiling, I looked at the floor (in short I wanted to get my caffeine and escape), I almost had it when she said " Just LOOK at this little one! Have you EVER seen one so cute, or hungry!" Well the cup slipped from my fingers and I excused myself with, "Excuse Susan, I think I have a scald." I went and sent Sis to clean up she told me not to be a baby and grow up. About, 5 minutes later, she came to the media room I had escaped to with the words, "WOW! Sorry brother, that was more than I expected or wanted to see!" I guess my point is OK it is natural, yes, wonderful, but if you see a guy drop hot coffee and retreat....you might think about covering things up just a little bit more. Thats just my...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yikes...on behalf of crunchy mamas, I'm sorry.
Click to expand...

It's quite alright! I have pretty much recovered. I DID make the mistake of telling my wife.....who thinks it is the funniest thing that could happen to me....


----------



## LadyFlynt

Jon Lake said:


> LadyFlynt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jon Lake said:
> 
> 
> 
> My sister had a friend who was one of these natural "open" types, I was staying with her once and went to the kitchen to get cup of coffee, her friend was in there nursing, well....she simply had on a plain T-shirt (forget shirts with the flaps for her, as I said very much a natural sort) so she had it lifted where...both were uncovered! OK, friends, I looked at my coffee, I looked at the ceiling, I looked at the floor (in short I wanted to get my caffeine and escape), I almost had it when she said " Just LOOK at this little one! Have you EVER seen one so cute, or hungry!" Well the cup slipped from my fingers and I excused myself with, "Excuse Susan, I think I have a scald." I went and sent Sis to clean up she told me not to be a baby and grow up. About, 5 minutes later, she came to the media room I had escaped to with the words, "WOW! Sorry brother, that was more than I expected or wanted to see!" I guess my point is OK it is natural, yes, wonderful, but if you see a guy drop hot coffee and retreat....you might think about covering things up just a little bit more. Thats just my...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yikes...on behalf of crunchy mamas, I'm sorry.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's quite alright! I have pretty much recovered. I DID make the mistake of telling my wife.....who thinks it is the funniest thing that could happen to me....
Click to expand...


I'm afraid that one of the family jokes is something similar that I did to my BIL...but my confession includes a new nurse that gave me a double dose of demerol, having just given birth, and amnesia of the event until my MIL told me of it a week later. Yeah, that was one story she could have kept to herself, but I did call my BIL and apologise to him and reassured him that it would NEVER, EVER, EVER! happen again!


----------



## AThornquist

Chaplainintraining said:


> I am not asking you to be the standard for mankind. I am saying look at yourself. If you can resist temptation in one area, then you can resist in other areas as well. I said nothing about difficulty. I said we can overcome.



...And I agree. I haven't said anything to the contrary. It seems like you've been arguing about overcoming while I'll been arguing about difficulty; in fact, I _do_ agree with what you are saying. My entire point was that depending on how women expose themselves in the process of breastfeeding, it can be a stumbling block to some men. Yes, they can overcome the sin, but if a woman is free-boobin' it then the process of resisting sin becomes more difficult for some.


----------



## Honor

I'm sprinked with granola


----------



## LadyFlynt

Honor said:


> I'm sprinked with granola



Cool. My score has changed over the years...I put Grape Nuts to Shame.


----------



## Honor

what's up with the child led weaning??? and tandem
really???? you scored that high? so you do all that stuff???


----------



## LadyFlynt

Tandem...some women have children close together (I do). Some also nurse through pregnancy because the older child wasn't weaned yet and still under 1 or 2. Tandem can mean either nursing while pregnant or nursing both a toddler and a babe.

Child led weaning...just as it sounds. Most children will naturally wean off by age 2, some by 3. Most of mine I weaned when pregnant. This last time I nursed through most of my pregnancy (helped with the hyperemesis-morning sickness) and still she was weaned before 2yrs, but on her own.


----------



## christiana

The same principle that goes for modesty in dressing applies to being discreet and covered if and when nursing in public. Either cover or stay in a private place. My mother would have said to use good taste and not nurse in public. People continue to adapt to the ways of the culture.


----------



## peetred

I think nursing in public is great. I don't think that women should have to retreat to some secret place to nurse. I DO however, think that modesty should be observed. I think this varies from woman to woman. Some women can nurse modestly without a blanket. Some can't. 

I also don't think we should be looking at the previous cultures so much as to how we should handle these matters. It's what the scriptures say that is of upmost importance.


----------



## Spinningplates2

nleshelman said:


> The Puritans were huge advocates of breast feeding. Read Gouge and you will see over 10 pages that cover why breast is better than animal milk or wet nurses. They were not prudes AT ALL about this!
> 
> I ask my wife NOT to cover, because I do not think that it is a modesty issue.



Can i get some footnotes on the Puritans that would agree that a woman should breast feed in mixed company?


----------



## LadyFlynt

Honor said:


> you scored that high? so you do all that stuff???



Yes. Didn't start out doing ALL that stuff, but yes, I onboard with much of it.

-----Added 12/10/2008 at 05:44:15 EST-----



Spinningplates2 said:


> nleshelman said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Puritans were huge advocates of breast feeding. Read Gouge and you will see over 10 pages that cover why breast is better than animal milk or wet nurses. They were not prudes AT ALL about this!
> 
> I ask my wife NOT to cover, because I do not think that it is a modesty issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can i get some footnotes on the Puritans that would agree that a woman should breast feed in mixed company?
Click to expand...


May I ask what you think Puritan mamas did during long services in the middle of winter?


----------



## Honor

I saw a thing on tv about child led weaning... the kid was 8 and loved it...weird to say the least.. 
you do the cloth diaper thing too??
see my dr said that if I kept breastfeeding Isaac while pg with Josh that Josh wouldn't get all the nutrients that he needed... I stopped right away... which God helped alot... Bobby gave hime some pot roast and mashed potatoes and the kid never looked back he was like 7 months old I think.


----------



## LadyFlynt

Honor said:


> I saw a thing on tv about child led weaning... the kid was 8 and loved it...weird to say the least..
> you do the cloth diaper thing too??
> see my dr said that if I kept breastfeeding Isaac while pg with Josh that Josh wouldn't get all the nutrients that he needed... I stopped right away... which God helped alot... Bobby gave hime some pot roast and mashed potatoes and the kid never looked back he was like 7 months old I think.



An 8yr old I would have to say is possibly being over encourage by ma or is using ma as a binky/security blanket. Though some cultures, usually those with extreme nutritional issues, did/do nurse that long.

I do cloth diapers, but recently fell off the wagon on it when it came to family moving in and a cousin babysitting...hubby and cousin requested sposies, but cousin is gone again and hubby is going to be working more hours, so I'm hoping to go back to cloth.

I've never heard of breastfeeding taking nutrients from the babe a mother is pregnant with. If anything, it would be more a concern of you having too many nutrients taken from YOU. I've had hyperemesis. The body will always feed the child/embryo FIRST. So I would have asked for research to back it up...or rather, looked it up myself. There are cases where some women have such a strong uterine reflex to nursing that they have potential for miscarriage (not common, but can happen). This fear is why I always weaned when pregnant. Except this last time, I was finally comfortable with the idea and it actually helped my issues with hyperemesis/extreme morning sickness I get every other pregnancy. My 9mos old is now demanding regular food, but he still nurses as well.


----------



## Honor

I can see that... I had a really hard pregnacy... I was glad I did... maybe she did say it was for my health... it was a while ago..


----------



## Poimen

LadyFlynt said:


> The body will always feed the child/embryo FIRST.



I knew this is off topic but I find this very profound. I guess that is common knowledge to those who have had children, but I am going to have remember this one in light of the abortion issue and the sanctity of life.

Very cool!


----------



## moselle

*Even after nursing 5 babies...*

...I am still an awkward nurser. So I always try to have a blanket, cardigan sweater, or something that I can use to avoid over exposure in public. Just not gifted in that area of coordination, I guess. But I do know mothers/babies who are so smooth you'd never know it.


----------



## HuguenotHelpMeet

LadyFlynt said:


> Honor said:
> 
> 
> 
> what is a crunchy mamma?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's a fun survey on it and don't take any score as an insult or as "better"...we're each different and have our different views. Also some people are unaware of certain options or issues.
> 
> How Crunchy Are you?
Click to expand...


129-90 Mmm! Love that whole-grain crunch!

P.S. -- Still nursing my 2 year old for now...but ready to quit!


----------



## he beholds

LadyFlynt said:


> Tandem...some women have children close together (I do). Some also nurse through pregnancy because the older child wasn't weaned yet and still under 1 or 2. Tandem can mean either nursing while pregnant or nursing both a toddler and a babe.
> 
> Child led weaning...just as it sounds. Most children will naturally wean off by age 2, some by 3. Most of mine I weaned when pregnant. This last time I nursed through most of my pregnancy (helped with the hyperemesis-morning sickness) and still she was weaned before 2yrs, but on her own.





HuguenotHelpMeet said:


> LadyFlynt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Honor said:
> 
> 
> 
> what is a crunchy mamma?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's a fun survey on it and don't take any score as an insult or as "better"...we're each different and have our different views. Also some people are unaware of certain options or issues.
> 
> How Crunchy Are you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *129-90 Mmm! Love that whole-grain crunch!*
> 
> P.S. -- Still nursing my 2 year old for now...but ready to quit!
Click to expand...


That's what I was! We don't think that the family bed is great for the marital bed, so I scored low there and a few other places. My daughter _weaned herself two weeks before she turned one!!_ And I was a nursing while pregnant mama when I was pregnant with her.


----------



## Honor

dude my kids crawl in bed every night... I keep putting them back and they mysteriously are there in the bed when I wake up


----------



## LadyFlynt

HuguenotHelpMeet said:


> LadyFlynt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Honor said:
> 
> 
> 
> what is a crunchy mamma?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's a fun survey on it and don't take any score as an insult or as "better"...we're each different and have our different views. Also some people are unaware of certain options or issues.
> 
> How Crunchy Are you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 129-90 Mmm! Love that whole-grain crunch!
> 
> P.S. -- Still nursing my 2 year old for now...but ready to quit!
Click to expand...


That is awesome, Jessica! But totally understand the later also.


----------



## Pergamum

Wow, this OP has grown quickly! The quickest 892 posts to ever be posted perhaps!


Mention breasts and everyone comes running!


----------



## py3ak

Pergamum said:


> Wow, this OP has grown quickly! The quickest 892 posts to ever be posted perhaps!
> 
> 
> Mention breasts and everyone comes running!



Sadly, Pergamum is right. Of course, this was really like 19 threads in one.


----------



## Notthemama1984

AThornquist said:


> Chaplainintraining said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am not asking you to be the standard for mankind. I am saying look at yourself. If you can resist temptation in one area, then you can resist in other areas as well. I said nothing about difficulty. I said we can overcome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...And I agree. I haven't said anything to the contrary. It seems like you've been arguing about overcoming while I'll been arguing about difficulty; in fact, I _do_ agree with what you are saying. My entire point was that depending on how women expose themselves in the process of breastfeeding, it can be a stumbling block to some men. Yes, they can overcome the sin, but if a woman is free-boobin' it then the process of resisting sin becomes more difficult for some.
Click to expand...



My main argument was that man cannot blame his thoughts on someone else. Some were leaning towards the idea that if I saw a woman breast feeding and I lusted, then shame on her. 

I agree that NIP could be a stumbling block.


----------



## Jon Lake

Pergamum said:


> Wow, this OP has grown quickly! The quickest 892 posts to ever be posted perhaps!
> 
> 
> Mention breasts and everyone comes running!


*Chuckle* Nice one man.


----------



## peetred

LadyFlynt said:


> HuguenotHelpMeet said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LadyFlynt said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here's a fun survey on it and don't take any score as an insult or as "better"...we're each different and have our different views. Also some people are unaware of certain options or issues.
> 
> How Crunchy Are you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 129-90 Mmm! Love that whole-grain crunch!
> 
> P.S. -- Still nursing my 2 year old for now...but ready to quit!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is awesome, Jessica! But totally understand the later also.
Click to expand...


2 years, wow! We made it to 14 months with my first son and my husband was hinting it was time to wean. We were both ready and it went great. Now i'm on nursling number 2 who is 4 months and my older son calls it "mommy milk". He doesn't know that babies eat anything else


----------



## HuguenotHelpMeet

peetred said:


> LadyFlynt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HuguenotHelpMeet said:
> 
> 
> 
> 129-90 Mmm! Love that whole-grain crunch!
> 
> P.S. -- Still nursing my 2 year old for now...but ready to quit!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is awesome, Jessica! But totally understand the later also.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 2 years, wow! We made it to 14 months with my first son and my husband was hinting it was time to wean. We were both ready and it went great. Now i'm on nursling number 2 who is 4 months and my older son calls it "mommy milk". He doesn't know that babies eat anything else
Click to expand...


Yeah, I've never nursed this long either. My first two were done at about a year. We're almost done now though. He's not been two very long, but he needs a good push in the right direction. Some days he thinks he's a big boy and the next he wants to be my little baby again.

Oh, and I nursed while pregnant with my second child too. Just through the first trimester though. My first two were so easy to wean. I wish it were so easy this time. He's very attached and it's become a comfort thing.


----------



## Craig

My opinion:

If you're in church and need to nurse in public, definitely wear a head covering 

My wife says:
Having just struggled with a lot of these issues with our first baby, I am all for the concept of charity- especially in the Church!
For men who wonder how you can be modest without a blanket: As long as the bebe is cooperative, there is, like, a 3 second window where the "goodies" are exposed and then they are covered up by the bebe's head and the mama's shirt. Most nursing women I know can pull this off pretty well in public and, provided that someone isn't indecently ogling, most people are none the wiser.
I am all for withdrawing to an area that is not "high traffic"- like the foyer or narthex during worship- because a squirmy baby won't draw as much attention there. 
Finally, there are these awesome things now called "Hooter Hiderz" aka, "Bebe AuLait", "Peanut Shells" etc. that are super-lightweight (no baby smothering) and attach around the neck so that it is more difficult for babies to pull it down. Also, they have a peek through for mamas to be able to see their bebes while no one else can look! They are pretty awesomely helpful for public nursing.
*Note* Men (say your husband) CAN see down the peek through if they stick their head over the hole and look down. If any man tries that, he ought to either be your husband or be punched by your husband.


----------



## kvanlaan

Elizabeth scored 105 - loves the crunch! She actually had to have a doctor tell her to stop feeding Anneliese, because she was delivering in a couple of weeks! (Which is now only two days away.) 

Boy, any Freudians watching this thread could probably write a dissertation at this point...


----------



## HuguenotHelpMeet

Craig said:


> My opinion:
> 
> If you're in church and need to nurse in public, definitely wear a head covering
> 
> My wife says:
> Having just struggled with a lot of these issues with our first baby, I am all for the concept of charity- especially in the Church!
> For men who wonder how you can be modest without a blanket: As long as the bebe is cooperative, there is, like, a 3 second window where the "goodies" are exposed and then they are covered up by the bebe's head and the mama's shirt. Most nursing women I know can pull this off pretty well in public and, provided that someone isn't indecently ogling, most people are none the wiser.
> I am all for withdrawing to an area that is not "high traffic"- like the foyer or narthex during worship- because a squirmy baby won't draw as much attention there.
> Finally, there are these awesome things now called "Hooter Hiderz" aka, "Bebe AuLait", "Peanut Shells" etc. that are super-lightweight (no baby smothering) and attach around the neck so that it is more difficult for babies to pull it down. Also, they have a peek through for mamas to be able to see their bebes while no one else can look! They are pretty awesomely helpful for public nursing.
> *Note* Men (say your husband) CAN see down the peek through if they stick their head over the hole and look down. If any man tries that, he ought to either be your husband or be punched by your husband.



When I was expecting my first child 8 years ago, a friend of mine from church made me a nursing coverup that is almost exactly like what you are describing. I've used it for all 3 of my children and love it. Mine just goes right over my head and has a huge neck hole so I can peek in if I need to while still covering it up.

But, wearing a big coverup lets everyone know what you're doing. The 3 second latch-on you described has worked very well for me and no one was the wiser.

And  LOL  on your *note*. hee


----------



## kvanlaan

Oh, as for the child-weaning that took place at age 8, what's up with that? Wouldn't the next one have come along when (s)he was about 2 or 3?


----------



## N. Eshelman

Here's what I got (this is Nate's wife btw)

129-90 Mmm! Love that whole-grain crunch!


----------



## peetred

129-90 Mmm! Love that whole-grain crunch!


----------



## nicnap

Pergamum said:


> Wow, this OP has grown quickly! The quickest 892 posts to ever be posted perhaps!
> 
> 
> Mention breasts and everyone comes running!


----------



## jwithnell

I'm not much on child-led anything, but I do like the idea of letting a child nurse as long as it's wanted. I was afraid that would backfire on my last, since he was such a determined nurser, but at right around two, he had a cold and found nursing difficult/uncomfortable, and that was the end of that.


----------



## Jon Lake

Honor said:


> I saw a thing on tv about child led weaning... the kid was 8 and loved it...weird to say the least..
> you do the cloth diaper thing too??
> see my dr said that if I kept breastfeeding Isaac while pg with Josh that Josh wouldn't get all the nutrients that he needed... I stopped right away... which God helped alot... Bobby gave hime some pot roast and mashed potatoes and the kid never looked back he was like 7 months old I think.


Ewww...that is WAY to old, sorry that crosses the threshold into Creepy-Land.


----------



## he beholds

Pergamum said:


> Wow, this OP has grown quickly! The quickest 892 posts to ever be posted perhaps!
> 
> 
> Mention breasts and everyone comes running!



hahaha--Last night when we were going to sleep I was telling my husband about my day at home, which involved PB, of course, so I was filling him in one some of the activities on the board. 
I was sleepy-talking, if you know what that is--nothing comes out too clearly, and you are not 100% awake, but you are still wanting to talk. 
Anyway, he was very confused, to say the least, about the NIP/Nudity in art connection! It made me realize how funny these two threads were by trying to explain what different concepts came up in the discussions!



Craig said:


> My opinion:
> 
> If you're in church and need to nurse in public, definitely wear a head covering
> 
> My wife says:
> Having just struggled with a lot of these issues with our first baby, I am all for the concept of charity- especially in the Church!
> For men who wonder how you can be modest without a blanket: As long as the bebe is cooperative, there is, like, a 3 second window where the "goodies" are exposed and then they are covered up by the bebe's head and the mama's shirt. Most nursing women I know can pull this off pretty well in public and, provided that someone isn't indecently ogling, most people are none the wiser.
> I am all for withdrawing to an area that is not "high traffic"- like the foyer or narthex during worship- because a squirmy baby won't draw as much attention there.
> Finally, there are these awesome things now called "Hooter Hiderz" aka, "Bebe AuLait", "Peanut Shells" etc. that are super-lightweight (no baby smothering) and attach around the neck so that it is more difficult for babies to pull it down. Also, they have a peek through for mamas to be able to see their bebes while no one else can look! They are pretty awesomely helpful for public nursing.
> *Note* Men (say your husband) CAN see down the peek through if they stick their head over the hole and look down. If any man tries that, he ought to either be your husband or be punched by your husband.




Hahahaha @ your note!



kvanlaan said:


> Elizabeth scored 105 - loves the crunch! She actually had to have a doctor tell her to stop feeding Anneliese, because she was delivering in a couple of weeks! (Which is now only two days away.)
> 
> *Boy, any Freudians watching this thread could probably write a dissertation at this point*...



They'd have us all diagnosed!
How is your wife's health today? Is she feeling better??


----------



## LadyFlynt

Yep, understand sleepy-talk.


----------



## kvanlaan

Elizabeth is OK, but not great. The kids are dropping like flies. We're off to see the anesthesiologist this morning for the section tomorrow morning. I will post pics as soon as I have them. (Of the baby, not the operation.)


----------



## Spinningplates2

May I ask what you think Puritan mamas did during long services in the middle of winter?[/QUOTE]

I have seen pictures of what the Puritan women wore to church and do not see how you expect me to believe the breastfed during the service while sitting in the pew. I thought you said earlier this was a modern idea, popularized in the mid 1900's. I also got the idea, based on links you provided, that new designs in fashion allowed for women to feed without exposing their breast to strangers. I have provided a link to what I thought was Puritan fashion.

http://www.britishempire.co.uk/images4/puritanfashion227.jpg


----------



## LadyFlynt

Spinningplates, No, if you read back you will find that I said that what YOU considered a "new habit" is not new. The idea that one SHOULDN'T nurse in church is a NEW idea. Breastfeeding was near non-existent in church by the 1950's.

Yes, I am very familiar with historical clothing. And yes, those ladies DID nurse during service. They did not put off their child for hours while in service. They did not have a "nursery" to go to. They did not sit outside in the cold. They did not walk home just to nurse. They and their babes were required to hear the Word preached...even suckling babes! And yes, they showed more than we do now with our modern nursing designs. They had shawls...but as a nursing mother, I can guarantee you that sometimes even a shawl is difficult to keep in place at all times. However, people were expected to be paying attention to the preacher, not glancing around at the nursing mothers. Just as nowadays, regardless how many safeguards put in place, there are those few seconds, minute or two that latching on can be difficult. You offer the mother her privacy by keeping your eyes elsewhere.



And yes, newer fashions and the way clothing is now made, women can nurse more modestly. However, there are those, that feel ANY nursing or even if hidden, any nursing without a blanket, isn't appropriate.


----------



## Pergamum

First, this is the artist's idea of what the Puritans did...it's not a photograph.

Second, I see that she is banished out of doors in the winter-time and not allowed in the church building even! ha.


----------



## LadyFlynt

*Warning:*

links are to pictures showing public nursing in the presence of others and WITHOUT shawls or blankets! Most are here in America. One is a European immigrant and one is a Laplander (Christian). All are before 1950 and most have clothing that must be opened up to breastfeed. None of these women ran off to hide or even felt the need to use a blanket, even in public places, even if they were not the center of the photograph. In a couple you even have to SEARCH for the mother that is breastfeeding amoungst the group of people and still she is doing so openly). You will need to scroll down some of them to see ALL the pictures.

Infant Feeding in History: Photographs This one also discusses breastfeeding in history.
The State of Discontent: Images of Breastfeeding Before the Taboo
Jennifer James | breastfeeding in public
LIFE: A Laplander refugee mother breast feedin... - Hosted by Google
http://wwwdelivery.superstock.com/WI/223/900/PreviewComp/SuperStock_900-110755.jpg


----------



## Rocketeer

Chaplainintraining said:


> It is the same thing as saying that it was the young lady's fault that she was raped because of what she wore. It was not her fault at all.



I agree! As a side note, here in the Netherlands, practically everyone rides a bike (what does a Dutch kid learn at age three? Swimming and biking). Therefore, there is a law here, that if there is an accident between a car and a cyclist, the driver is always wrong. Always. The reason is that the damage for the car usually is virtually zero, whereas the cyclist is lucky if he survives - the cyclist needs some extra protection. Misuse is unlikely, for who gambles with his life?

I will not say that, in sexual crimes, the man is always to blame, but usually, he is the one who could have done most to prevent the crime from happening. Does not the same thing go here?



Chaplainintraining said:


> Also LadyFlynt was making the point a while back that society causes our reactions to nudity and I agree. To prove my point, think of your mom, sister, or even grandma buck naked. Isn't too pleasing is it? Why? because society tells us that it is wrong to be attracted to our family members. So if I can program my brain to not be sexually aroused when seeing certain women, I can program my brain to control my thoughts about other women as well.



I agree with LadyFlynts opininion, if that is hers, but your example is unfortunate and does not hold. The good Lord, in His wisdom, has equipped us with a mechanism to prevent sexual attraction to our near relatives: if you knew someone before you or (s)he was aged six, sexual attraction is extremely unlikely. This is called the Westermarck Effect. Quoting Wikipedia:



Wikipedia said:


> In the case of the Israeli kibbutzim (collective farms), children were reared somewhat communally in peer groups—groups based on age, not biological relation. A study of the marriage patterns of these children later in life revealed that out of the nearly 3,000 marriages that occurred across the kibbutz system, only fourteen were between children from the same peer group. Of those fourteen, none had been reared together during the first six years of life. This result provides evidence not only that the Westermarck effect is demonstrable, but that it operates during the critical period from birth to the age of six (Shepher, 1983).


 Source: Imprinting (psychology) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Therefore, in a normal situation, we are protected from such lusts by the way our brains are wired.



Chaplainintraining said:


> So if I can program my brain to not be sexually aroused when seeing certain women, I can program my brain to control my thoughts about other women as well.



If you could, yes, but this is no proof, as I have shown above. Things are not all that simple, unfortunately. Sin is rooted deep in us, and to get it out of us is the Spirits work.



Chaplainintraining said:


> So I can just reprogram all of the areas I struggle with and be perfect... who knew it was so easy?



It is not.



LawrenceU said:


> Honor said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sorry, not to be crude but what if you had a hot sister... I think your body would respond the same way....
> 
> 
> 
> Mmmm. . . nope.
Click to expand...


No, it would not, providing you were reared together. If you weren't and hadn't known eachother until you were well in your teens, sexual attraction is more likely than when you'd be unrelated, because you are much like one another. People that are genetically similar are sexually attracted to one another; this is called genetic sexual attraction (GSA), and has something to do with feromonal and hormonal structures, and also with the brain. See Genetic sexual attraction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

All this reminds me of one of Davids Psalms: "My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth." (Ps. 139:15) There is a lot we don't know about humans.



Wannabee said:


> Comparisons with those who stumble are useless. Our comparison is Christ; our desire is to emulate Him in all things; and our ability to do so is only found in His strength.



Hear, hear!



Poimen said:


> LadyFlynt said:
> 
> 
> 
> The body will always feed the child/embryo FIRST.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I knew this is off topic but I find this very profound. I guess that is common knowledge to those who have had children, but I am going to have remember this one in light of the abortion issue and the sanctity of life.
> 
> Very cool!
Click to expand...


Yeah, it is, isn't it?



LadyFlynt said:


> *Warning:*
> 
> links are to pictures showing public nursing in the presence of others and WITHOUT shawls or blankets! Most are here in America. One is a European immigrant and one is a Laplander (Christian). All are before 1950 and most have clothing that must be opened up to breastfeed. None of these women ran off to hide or even felt the need to use a blanket, even in public places, even if they were not the center of the photograph. In a couple you even have to SEARCH for the mother that is breastfeeding amoungst the group of people and still she is doing so openly). You will need to scroll down some of them to see ALL the pictures.http://wwwdelivery.superstock.com/WI/223/900/PreviewComp/SuperStock_900-110755.jpg



Some much needed evidence. Thanks!


----------



## LadyFlynt

> I will not say that, in sexual crimes, the man is always to blame,



May I ask when is a man NOT to be blame for rape? (or may I hope that this was just poorly worded?)


----------



## Pergamum

When that man lives in any Mslm society.


----------



## Rocketeer

LadyFlynt said:


> I will not say that, in sexual crimes, the man is always to blame,
> 
> 
> 
> May I ask when is a man NOT to be blame for rape? (or may I hope that this was just poorly worded?)
Click to expand...


Have you ever considered that men can also be raped? 9% of all rape victims are male, mostly male-male, though some 2-3% of the cases is female-male, with the male as the victim. This number increases if you count emotional blackmail as a form of rape. In such cases, I will uphold that the man is not to blame. Men are not to be blamed because they are men - the victim is not to carry the majority of the blame in sexual blames, and usually will carry none of it.

Example:



Moses said:


> And Lot went up out of Zoar, and dwelt in the mountain, and his two daughters with him; for he feared to dwell in Zoar: and he dwelt in a cave, he and his two daughters.
> And the firstborn said unto the younger, Our father [is] old, and [there is] not a man in the earth to come in unto us after the manner of all the earth:
> Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father.
> And they made their father drink wine that night: and the firstborn went in, and lay with her father; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose.
> And it came to pass on the morrow, that the firstborn said unto the younger, Behold, I lay yesternight with my father: let us make him drink wine this night also; and go thou in, [and] lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father.
> And they made their father drink wine that night also: and the younger arose, and lay with him; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose.
> Thus were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father.
> And the firstborn bare a son, and called his name Moab: the same [is] the father of the Moabites unto this day.
> And the younger, she also bare a son, and called his name Benammi: the same [is] the father of the children of Ammon unto this day.



What do you think, was Lot to be blamed for any of this? He was not, for he was raped. And I think you'll agree he was traumatized, just like a female rape victim.

If you mean male-female rape, then, yes, the man always carries at least the largest part of the blame, and usually all of it.

Also, please remember that rape is not the only form of sexual violence.


----------



## LadyFlynt

I am very familiar with male-male rape several people I grew up with, this happened to by a deacon of a church and military officer...he got a few years in prison and kept his retirement). I'm also aware of extreme circumstances such as Lot's.

However, given the thread and it's specifics (women/modesty/nursing...male presence) I am asking when is a FEMALE the rape victim and the MALE not to be blamed, as that was the insinuation of your post.


----------



## Rocketeer

LadyFlynt said:


> I am very familiar with male-male rape several people I grew up with, this happened to by a deacon of a church and military officer...he got a few years in prison and kept his retirement). I'm also aware of extreme circumstances such as Lot's.
> 
> However, given the thread and it's specifics (women/modesty/nursing...male presence) I am asking when is a FEMALE the rape victim and the MALE not to be blamed, as that was the insinuation of your post.



OK; the victim never carries the majority of the blame, regardless of sex. Let me just state that the victims of female-male rape (where the male is the victim) are more commonly blamed then when the crime occurs the other way round - in all cases, the victim cannot carry the majority of the responsibility for the crime, I say.


----------



## LadyFlynt

Rocketeer said:


> LadyFlynt said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am very familiar with male-male rape several people I grew up with, this happened to by a deacon of a church and military officer...he got a few years in prison and kept his retirement). I'm also aware of extreme circumstances such as Lot's.
> 
> However, given the thread and it's specifics (women/modesty/nursing...male presence) I am asking when is a FEMALE the rape victim and the MALE not to be blamed, as that was the insinuation of your post.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OK; the victim never carries the majority of the blame, regardless of sex. Let me just state that the victims of female-male rape (where the male is the victim) are more commonly blamed then when the crime occurs the other way round - in all cases, the victim cannot carry the majority of the responsibility for the crime, I say.
Click to expand...


Then I'm not certain what your point was in saying that Men can't always be blamed, when the presumption, given the thread was that the male would be the perpetrator


----------



## Pergamum

Female perpetrators of rape are an anomaly regardless of who the victim is.


----------



## Rocketeer

I said: "I will not say that, in sexual crimes, the man is always to blame"

You assumed that sexual crime equals rape; it does not. Sexual crime may, for example, include human trafficking, obscenity and indecent exposure, to name a few Wikipedia mentions. I was not even thinking of rape specifically, as that is not the sexual crime that first comes to my mind when NIP is mentioned. For me, that would be the behavior where a man looks at the nursing mother in a sinful way. In this context, the man is not always the one who carries most of the blame. The example Jon Lake mentioned is sufficient proof, for me.

That said, I should not have gone with the sexual crime = rape connection, and I'll try to stay on topic in the future. I'm sorry if I have unnecessarily offended or confused you.


----------



## LadyFlynt

Okay, I understand now. But I totally disagree with you. I do blame the man. He has wrong thinking. People can have wrong thinking about many things, the objects of their thinking are not to blame for existing. Their twisted reality is, whether it's due to personal issues or due to improper upbringing.


----------



## Rocketeer

LadyFlynt said:


> Okay, I understand now. But I totally disagree with you. I do blame the man. He has wrong thinking. People can have wrong thinking about many things, the objects of their thinking are not to blame for existing. Their twisted reality is, whether it's due to personal issues or due to improper upbringing.



Oh? So, whatever any woman does, and however she is dressed, and no matter in what spirit or setting she displays whatever type of behavior while nursing, when a man stumbles, he is always the one to blame? I find this hard to swallow, LadyFlynt. People can have wrong thinking about a very great number of things, but if the objects of their thinking knowingly go the extra mile to provoke them to those thoughts, then they carry a part of the blame for the existence of those thoughts at that moment. Male reality is as twisted as that of a great many others, Christian or not, and they do not need someone twisting it a little further.

In short, a man should, first, try to prevent any such thoughts from occurring, and secondly, fight them when they do occur. And a woman can give some help in this area as well. I will restate what I said before: the babe should in no way suffer, nor is perfection required, but a little help is welcome. If that is not so, why did God then kill animals to provide Adam and Eve with clothing, when they felt they were naked?


----------



## LadyFlynt

read up in the thread. Wrong thinking about breastfeeding is prevalent in American culture because of how men have been TAUGHT. How one is raised and taught is very much at play. We should fight against that with PROPER actions and teaching. If someone taught that hands are very sexual and that thought became prevalent, 50 years later, should we still be encouraging the hiding of hands because it is then seen as something it isn't, or go along with prevailent thought and wrong teaching?


Or maybe the rest of Christian history and human history is wrong for having not seen breastfeeding as sexual?


----------



## Honor

i think societies and cultures evolve to a certain extent... they had no qualms about breastfeeding then but then again they didn't have MTV or Cosmo to look at either... the breasts when breastfeeding wasn't sexual.. not breasts in general as they are now. Also back then they had no qualms about marriage at 12 or 13, and slavery was rampant.... we evolve so what was ok then might not be ok now.


----------



## Rocketeer

LadyFlynt said:


> read up in the thread. Wrong thinking about breastfeeding is prevalent in American culture because of how men have been TAUGHT. How one is raised and taught is very much at play. We should fight against that with PROPER actions and teaching. If someone taught that hands are very sexual and that thought became prevalent, 50 years later, should we still be encouraging the hiding of hands because it is then seen as something it isn't, or go along with prevalent thought and wrong teaching?
> 
> Or maybe the rest of Christian history and human history is wrong for having not seen breastfeeding as sexual?



Yes, Western (I'm not an American...) modern thinking on breastfeeding is wrong. Again, my original statement was that "the man is *not always* to blame." That does not mean never. As you can see for yourself if you read up in this thread and the one on nudity in sculpture, I agree entirely with what you are now saying. No, women should not stop nursing in public, merely because men are twisted. Yes, society should be reeducated. I will even argue that we should do much more to reeducate society. If you will read back to my first post containing the above sentence, you will find me arguing that men are to be blamed in such cases, because they can help themselves more easily from looking than the mother can stop the child from being hungry, _with one caveat_, which is, that there are situations, when the mother, while not making the child suffer nor inconvenience herself, could have done more to not provoke the strong sex, and therefore may carry part of the blame, and in extreme cases, even the majority. Jon Lake gave a good example. Agreed?

Edit:

Honor, for bringing slavery up. That is one very good example of where Christianity changed and reeducated society for the better, showing that it should be possible with such an in comparison relatively minor thing as NIP. Age of marriage depends on maturity of spirit, not body. Most young adults I have observed do not mature before 21-27 in Western society. And yeah, that includes me, of course. Maturity used to be reached at a younger age in the past, due to a variety of factors which I'm not going into now.


----------



## Pergamum

Honor said:


> i think societies and cultures evolve to a certain extent... QUOTE]
> 
> 
> What you like to start a new thread on this subject? Interesting. Is there such a thing as "progress" and in what fashion? Technological only or moral as well? Is the world getting better and better?


----------



## Honor

ummm sure... where would I put it?

-----Added 12/12/2008 at 12:04:43 EST-----

no wait... I'm not saying that slavery was/is wrong... it was just popular and not it's out of vogue. I mean Jesus was pro slavery


----------



## Rocketeer

Honor said:


> I mean Jesus was pro slavery



Prove it. Unless you mean slavery in the way Moses defines it, I do not believe you.


----------



## Honor

ummm.... wow.. ok hold on


----------



## Pergamum

Maybe in a "I am a slave to Christ" sense.


----------



## Honor

Mark 10:42 And Jesus called them to him and said to them, “You know that those who are considered rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. 43 But it shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, 44 and whoever would be first among you must be slave of all. 45 For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

1 Corn.7:20 Each one should remain in the condition in which he was called. 21 Were you a slave when called? Do not be concerned about it. (But if you can gain your freedom, avail yourself of the opportunity.) 22 For he who was called in the Lord as a slave is a freedman of the Lord. Likewise he who was free when called is a slave of Christ. 23 You were bought with a price; do not become slaves of men. 24 So, brothers, in whatever condition each was called, there let him remain with God.

Eph.6:5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, with a sincere heart, as you would Christ, 6 not by the way of eye-service, as people-pleasers, but as servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart, 7 rendering service with a good will as to the Lord and not to man, 8 knowing that whatever good anyone does, this he will receive back from the Lord, whether he is a slave or free. 9 Masters, do the same to them, and stop your threatening, knowing that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and that there is no partiality with him.

Colo.3:22 Slaves, obey in everything those who are your earthly masters, not by way of eye-service, as people-pleasers, but with sincerity of heart, fearing the Lord. 23 Whatever you do, work heartily, as for the Lord and not for men, 24 knowing that from the Lord you will receive the inheritance as your reward. You are serving the Lord Christ


Titus2:9 Slaves are to be submissive to their own masters in everything; they are to be well-pleasing, not argumentative.

Plus the whole book of Philemon was written by Paul to a slave owner when Paul took his slave back to him.

Is that enough?


----------



## LadyFlynt

Honor said:


> i think societies and cultures evolve to a certain extent... they had no qualms about breastfeeding then but then again they didn't have MTV or Cosmo to look at either... the breasts when breastfeeding wasn't sexual.. not breasts in general as they are now. Also back then they had no qualms about marriage at 12 or 13, and slavery was rampant.... we evolve so what was ok then might not be ok now.



Permitting marriage in the teen years is also a debate and slavery depends upon the model (the ancient Jewish model or the more modern American).


Again, re-education, not submitting to the wrong thinking. My children don't watch MTV or read Cosmo and they know we don't either. On the other hand they are being taught that breastfeeding is totally acceptable. This is also how my husband and I were raised.


----------



## he beholds

LadyFlynt said:


> Okay, I understand now. But I totally disagree with you. I do blame the man. He has wrong thinking. People can have wrong thinking about many things, the objects of their thinking are not to blame for existing. Their twisted reality is, whether it's due to personal issues or due to improper upbringing.





Honor said:


> Mark 10:42 And Jesus called them to him and said to them, “You know that those who are considered rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. 43 But it shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, 44 and whoever would be first among you must be slave of all. 45 For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”
> 
> 1 Corn.7:20 Each one should remain in the condition in which he was called. 21 Were you a slave when called? Do not be concerned about it. (But if you can gain your freedom, avail yourself of the opportunity.) 22 For he who was called in the Lord as a slave is a freedman of the Lord. Likewise he who was free when called is a slave of Christ. 23 You were bought with a price; do not become slaves of men. 24 So, brothers, in whatever condition each was called, there let him remain with God.
> 
> Eph.6:5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, with a sincere heart, as you would Christ, 6 not by the way of eye-service, as people-pleasers, but as servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart, 7 rendering service with a good will as to the Lord and not to man, 8 knowing that whatever good anyone does, this he will receive back from the Lord, whether he is a slave or free. 9 Masters, do the same to them, and stop your threatening, knowing that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and that there is no partiality with him.
> 
> Colo.3:22 Slaves, obey in everything those who are your earthly masters, not by way of eye-service, as people-pleasers, but with sincerity of heart, fearing the Lord. 23 Whatever you do, work heartily, as for the Lord and not for men, 24 knowing that from the Lord you will receive the inheritance as your reward. You are serving the Lord Christ
> 
> 
> Titus2:9 Slaves are to be submissive to their own masters in everything; they are to be well-pleasing, not argumentative.
> 
> Plus the whole book of Philemon was written by Paul to a slave owner when Paul took his slave back to him.
> 
> Is that enough?



I *think* Jesus was teaching slaves how to be good slaves, and masters how to be good masters, but I don't think that means that he was pro-slavery. 
It might mean that slavery, as handled as Jesus describes, is not sinful, but I still don't know if that means he was pro-slavery. 
I think slavery, again, if handled the way Jesus describes, could be a relationship that benefits both slave and master. 


Also notice that Paul says, "But if you can gain your freedom, avail yourself of the opportunity." He is mainly concerned in these passages with how we are to submit to authority as well as how we are to act when we are the authority. 

Ok, so, people will say this is not cultural, but headcoverings are. I wonder why one would think that in this part of the letter Paul speaks of things for all earthly time, but in the part talking about worship, it was cultural.

I do not cover my head in worship because I am still trying to learn whether I must. It's because I have never studied it (as I should), and I just assumed that my church has it right. It is not because I have personally come to the conclusion that it is cultural. 
But I do wonder why some would say that the section speaking to how we worship God is cultural, but the section speaking to how we interact in society and in our culture is not. 
I would think that the lessons about society would be more likely to change, right?

P.S. If that makes no sense, please forgive me! I had to stay up verrrrrrrrrrrry late last night waiting on my best friend and her family to get here, as they were using my house as a half-way point between their vacation in FLA and their home in PA.


----------



## Rocketeer

Honor said:


> Is that enough?



Your first text shows Jesus condemning the heathen way of ruling people. The second tells slaves to be content if they are slaves, but _*not to become slaves if they can help it!*_ The third text learns the slaves to make the best of a bad situation, and not rebel, and the masters to behave more according to the Mosaic model of slavery, which is very kind, limited and good (study it - one might advocate reintroducing it), than to the Greco-Roman or pre-Wilberforce models. The fourth verse, again, does the best thing in a bad situation, whereas the book of Philemon deals with the slave that had stolen both money and himself from his master, where the master had each and every right to have him hanged on the spot where he would meet him, under Roman law (the rights of the pater familias) - Paul does Onesimus a huge _favor_. Only the master can set the slave free, doing anything else is unlawful and would have been harmful to the Christian cause, branding Paul as a conspirator and someone who subverted the law. None of these are good arguments, and therefore, no, this is not enough.



LadyFlynt said:


> Again, re-education, not submitting to the wrong thinking. My children don't watch MTV or read Cosmo and they know we don't either. On the other hand they are being taught that breastfeeding is totally acceptable. This is also how my husband and I were raised.


----------



## he beholds

LadyFlynt said:


> Honor said:
> 
> 
> 
> i think societies and cultures evolve to a certain extent... they had no qualms about breastfeeding then but then again they didn't have MTV or Cosmo to look at either... the breasts when breastfeeding wasn't sexual.. not breasts in general as they are now. Also back then they had no qualms about marriage at 12 or 13, and slavery was rampant.... we evolve so what was ok then might not be ok now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Permitting marriage in the teen years is also a debate and slavery depends upon the model (the ancient Jewish model or the more modern American).
> We would love it if our daughter, and any future daughters (DV), marry young. Our son(s), we would permit it, if he were able to support a family.
> 
> Again, re-education, not submitting to the wrong thinking. My children don't watch MTV or read Cosmo and they know we don't either. On the other hand they are being taught that breastfeeding is totally acceptable. This is also how my husband and I were raised.
Click to expand...

I agree with you for sure! I think we should not give the culture a free pass to be wrong. I think the truth is more important than custom. And our children also do not see anyone reading/watching those things and know that breastfeeding is how we feed babies. I would not cover up in front of our two year old son when feeding his sister. I still think, though, that since our culture _does_ have one thing on its mind, we ought to be careful in mixed company. For the our own sake and the sake of our brethren. (And as we've been back-and-forth about, care *does not* have to equal blankets and back rooms, but for some women, it may.


----------



## LadyFlynt

We have a friend of the family that does have hang ups about seeing a woman nursing. He was upfront about it, but was also very kind in that (1) he said it was his issue (2) he never asked me to leave a room, instead he insisted I stay and just give him a heads up so that he may turn around and leave a room if I was nursing (3) he was very pro-breastfeeding and encouraging about it. I learned this one time after I had been already nursing and he was clueless for more than a few minutes. But when it dawned on him, he left the room then caught up with hubby and I later to let us know the above. To me, this is appropriate behaviour of someone that TRULY has personal issues. I did my part by letting him know if I was nursing if he walked in a room (this was usually during family get togethers with my in-laws.


----------



## Honor

ok I think my post got blown way out of preportion... I was saying that things that were widely accepted then can become out of vogue. Not to say they are right or wrong... and just not as "cool" as they were then... thats all


----------



## Rocketeer

Honor said:


> ok I think my post got blown way out of proportion... I was saying that things that were widely accepted then can become out of vogue. Not to say they are right or wrong... and just not as "cool" as they were then... thats all



Yeah, you were, and I don't mind you saying that, but in the process of doing so, you attributed an opinion to the Lord that I do not think you can attribute to Him - and He is important! Besides, I wonder if anyone ever thought slavery was cool... Profitable, yes, necessary, maybe, supportable, surely, but _cool?

_Interesting example, LadyFlint.


----------



## Honor

i didn't say that slavery was cool... I said it was popular... meaning the majority of people had or were one.

-----Added 12/12/2008 at 03:28:52 EST-----

and FTR when I said that Jesus was pro-slavery I mean that He was not a abolitionist that's all


----------



## Rocketeer

Honor said:


> I didn't say that slavery was cool... I said it was popular... meaning the majority of people had or were one.



Depends on the time frame; widespread possession of slaves did not last all that long - but I will not argue the point unless requested.



Honor said:


> and FTR when I said that Jesus was pro-slavery I mean that He was not a abolitionist that's all



How do you know? He never had or was a slave, nor do I recall Him ever dealing with one, except for Cornelius's. He was, and is, and will forever be opposed to our spiritual slavery, and that was why He came to earth - normal slavery is irrelevant, compared to that.


----------



## nicnap

Honor said:


> i didn't say that slavery was cool... I said it was popular... meaning the majority of people had or were one.
> 
> -----Added 12/12/2008 at 03:28:52 EST-----
> 
> and FTR when I said that Jesus was pro-slavery I mean that He was not a abolitionist that's all



Christ would not be opposed to slavery where restitution was being made...He woul be opposed to chattle slavery.

I think you and Rocketeer are near each other, as he mentioned slavery as Moses spoke of.


----------



## Honor

I know because the Bible would have spoken out against slavery at some point... but it didn't. 


> He was, and is, *and will forever be opposed to our spiritual slavery*, and that was why He came to earth - normal slavery is irrelevant, compared to that.


nope sorry, He calls us to be slaves to Christ

-----Added 12/12/2008 at 03:44:33 EST-----

look I think that we need to drop this discussion or at least move this to another thread... we have hyjacked LadyFlynts thread...


----------



## Rocketeer

nicnap said:


> Christ would not be opposed to slavery where restitution was being made...He would be opposed to chattle slavery.



Yes, He would - His Spirit gave Moses his commandments on slavery



nicnap said:


> I think you and Rocketeer are near each other, as he mentioned slavery as Moses spoke of.



We are close - not diametrically opposed, at least.



Honor said:


> I know because the Bible would have spoken out against slavery at some point... but it didn't.



You know no such thing. Can you predict what the Spirit dictates? "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." (Isaiah 55:8,9)



Honor said:


> nope sorry, He calls us to be slaves to Christ



I must firmly insist; for if salvation is merely the coming from Satans slavery into Gods, it would not be a salvation, but a transaction. There is a great difference between the service of God and that of Satan: 
"And I will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty." (2 Cor 6:18)
"For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. 
For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father." (Rom. 8:14,15)
"But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name." (John 1:12)

A son is not a slave, is he? He is subjected to his father, as we are to our Heavenly Father, but he is not a slave - he does not lose his will, to the contrary, it is this very sonship that created this will, and it is so in the spiritual as well.

Edit:

You edited while I was typing. We might move to another thread. If you wish so, start it!


----------



## py3ak

[Moderator] *The slavery sub-discussion is done on here. If you want to keep it up, please go to another thread.* [/Moderator]


----------

