LACTNET Archives

Lactation Information and Discussion

LACTNET@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Dick Copeland <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 5 Dec 1995 20:51:22 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (32 lines)
Kathleen, I think we need to see bf in church  as one more item in a
continium of social events where bf is considered unacceptable. I know the
transformation of this misconception is very important to us all. Help in
one social situation often generates ideas about how to handle others. A
request please -- if we keep the thread focused  around the issue of bf in
public could we please keep it going? I think we can all learn a lot about
the public's mindset through exchanges like these.

As for the religious content,  to be honest I'm not sure I could get
theological concensus even among my own clan, much less 600+ Lactnetters.  I
hit a real quandry the other evening (grin) when I couldn't decide whether
to put a certain posting in my mailbox named Lacnet or into my box labeled
National (where I store my religious articles of national interest.) I
thought at the time we might be getting our boundries blurred.  I think most
of our folks are separating the two, because the  vast majority of the
responses I've been getting about the religious (more appropriately called
'theological') side of things have been private e-mail.
I'm pretty sure  our MD's respond to a lot of private e-mail out of a
beginning posting like this. In that spirit,  I'll be glad to respond to any
private e-mail about theological issues related to birthing, church
ettiquete, etc. as best I can from my experience.

To our concerned friend; thanks for sharing your discomfort. That makes me
even more proud of the dignity with which this net is handled, and the fact
that it's an incredible mix of wonderful people.


At 02:20 PM 12/5/95 -0500, you wrote:
>This note came from one of our members....food for thought.
Richard G."Dick" Copeland
[log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2