Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (81136)	8/31/2008 2:15:11 PM
From: Oeconomicus	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 542139

Look, I fully understand and sympathize with the dilemma some women face. But whatever their choice is - if they even have a choice - I would not presume to judge them for it. Or even make generalizations like the assertion that one can't do both well. There are 80 hour a week professionals who are great parents and stay-at-home parents who are demonstrably lousy ones. It is no one's business to say a woman must choose one path or the other, and never both. And certainly not to assert that one who chooses a career must be a bad mother. It's plainly insulting.

To: Lane3 who wrote (81136)	8/31/2008 4:06:10 PM
From: J. C. Dithers	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542139

There is no way I could have been an adequate mom concurrently let alone give kids what they deserve. I haven't read all the posts on this sub-topic, and I'm not picking on you -- but whatever happened to Mom and Dad equality in sharing child-rearing? The current theme here seems to be that children are cheated if they don't have stay-at-home Moms (Stay-at-home Dads just don't cut it) Moreover, what do you suppose is today's liberal talking point when it comes to two Gay men adopting and rearing a child?