We have something called “Liberty”, bought and paid for by the blood of the patriots


by Ted Grant

Free Range Kids is a new parenting blog, arguing against the over-protective urges many contemporary parents display.

So, as is usual whenever anyone thinks of the “the children” things get a bit…interesting.

Perhaps an additional point can be made that our kids are vulnerable (parents too!) because we no longer have the ability to defend ourselves from an attack, and because we cannot have a cop everywhere at once. Of course our society is not as gentle as it once was; thank the deliberate suppression of the Judeo-Christian ethic for that one! We don’t like to get involved because a) we might get sued or b), we don’t really care.

Maybe it’s time for us to take another good, hard look at the purpose of the Second Amendment.

Cathy wrote: “We parents live in a police state. We have no choice but to keep our kids prisoner.”

THAT’S NOT TRUE!!!!!

We have something called “Liberty”, bought and paid for by the blood of the patriots, and enshrined in the Constitution. It’s like anything else: Use it or lose it!

In some states, leaving a child under 12 unattended could get you in trouble with the police — neglect, I believe. This isn’t the 60’s or 50’s. Ask Adam Walsh’s family. His mom left him playing video games in a Sear’s store while she shopped in another department. John Walsh is the star of America’s Most Wanted TV show. Young Adam was kidnapped and murdered.

I just wanted to send a little note.

When I called the police department they said they couldn’t take your child into protective custody without a home address.

Would you be so kind as to provide it for me?

I wonder where you live. Upper West Side? How about living in the Bronx, or maybe Brownsville?

You think you are some type of fucking iconoclast - but please keep in mind of where the hell you LIVE.

Why don’t you go move to Hollis, and let your kid go FREE RANGE there?

Ah, yes…it all comes down to being scared of the black people sometimes, doesn’t it.



That needs to be clarified in a letter to People. and I think I am too annoyed to write it.


by evilolive

The folks at mothering.com weigh in on J-Lo’s Lack of Lactivism:

On Celebrity Babies there is part of the interview from People magazine posted and she says that she isn’t breastfeeding because her mother didn’t breastfeed. Then in the comments there are a bunch of people saying good for her for admitting she didn’t want to do it. The most brilliant comment is the one that says that if you are going to breastfeed you should do it because you enjoy it. Yeah, I know that is my reasoning in all my parenting decisions. How about breastfeeding because it’s best for the baby? Nah, too selfless.

Even if she doesn’t want to she could easily hire a wet nurse or buy BM.

You read my mind. She can hire me to wet nurse lol. At least she was honest. However, my parents made poor choices, that doesn’t mean I have to do the same. ETA: I’m just thinking about all the women who’d love to nurse but can’t or have great difficulty with it b/c they have to work. There Jennifer is, with all the money in the world doesn’t have to work another day in her life and won’t even give it a shot.

So maybe I should only change DS’s diapers if I enjoy it, huh? Then again, changing diapers “just isn’t for me,” so maybe I won’t. Unless there’s a real barrier to BF’ing, I just have a hard time seeing it as optional.

So who is going to write to People about this? Fine, she chose to FF, but what it ridiculous about her comment was “best for them”. that is the most asinine reason I have ever heard for not ffing. why doesn’t she just say she doesn’t want to use her breasts? or that she can’t stand the thought of it? or some other real reason. not because its best for *them*. its best for *HER*. duh. that needs to be clarified in a letter to People. and I think I am too annoyed to write it.