And from the same blog where I found the list of 10 things breastfeeding mothers don't need to buy, here is another article on breastfeeding in Jewish tradition!  Fascinating!!

The Torah doesn’t talk much about breastfeeding, as it was taken for granted in ancient times. Moses’ mother doesn’t put bottles into the ark of bulrushes she sends down the Nile to save him from Pharaoh’s evil decree (Exodus 2).

According to the midrashic commentary Moses refused to nurse from an Egyptian nursemaid, so the biblical text has Pharaoh’s daughter sending for a Jewish one. The nursemaid turns out to be none other than Yocheved, Moses’ own mother.

If the Torah and Midrash saw breastfeeding as merely a feeding method, Moses would have nursed from an Egyptian woman and the story would have ended. The rabbis recognized that without the early influence of Yocheved, Moses could not grow up to become the modest, compassionate, and dedicated leader who rescued the Jews from slavery and turned them into a nation that rejected Egyptian immorality.

...

The Talmud also emphasizes the importance of breastfeeding. A mother is considered a “meineket,” or nursing mother, until her child reaches 24 months. Even if a baby has weaned, he or she can return to nurse at any time until the age of two. Between the ages of two and four years, or five if the baby is unhealthy, a child who has weaned for longer than 72 hours may not return to the breast, and age five is considered the upper limit for nursing in Jewish law. The mother is advised to begin on the left side, “close to the heart.”

The rest talks about modern cultural attitudes that emphasize premature independence and whether the old breastfeeding "rules" still apply to Jewish practice.  It also talks about the value of emotional bonding through breastfeeding - it's very interesting.  Read the whole thing!!

NFP:  The Complete Approach

I see the Steelers won the Super Bowl. 

Wow.  They must have really scored a lot of home runs. Or was that hole-in-ones?

Good article on all the things mothers may THINK they will need even if they plan to breastfeed, but WON'T!

Readers won't be surprised to see that my favorite item is:

9. Contraceptives and feminine hygiene products. Some people believe that you can’t get pregnant while nursing, while others insist it doesn’t make a difference. The truth lies somewhere in between. Mothers can learn which factors delay the return of periods, and when and when not to rely on breastfeeding for birth control.

To learn "which factors delay the return of periods", see this handbook on ecological breastfeeding!!

Argh.

"You speak because the price of silence is betrayal."

Apparently betrayal of the truth about marriage is just fine.

... on whether to do second-trimester abortions at University of Wisconsin surgery center.

The board's vote will be on Thursday. "The consensus appears to be that the vote is very close."

Oh, Pam: That's "strikes."

The rest of the weekend was good too. I was with Kim, as usual. Did some work. Made about three gallons of turkey soup (our second use of the Mother Of All Stock Pots [MOASP]), from the (frozen) carcass and leftover meat from Thanksgiving (we'd been too busy to deal with it till now).

More on the chickenpox vaccine (and shingles), and vaccines in general (and perhaps other topics too), tomorrow.

Rachel - I am doing copycat posts - and am even eating your menus from the Joy Fit club to try to catch up with your great weight loss!!  You're just my hero this year.  (But I doubt I will catch up to your 11 children...but it would be okay with me if God would bless us just another time or two before I get too old - I'm 41).

Anyway, I want to thank your daughters specially for their prayers for my mother, and son, during their cancer battles.  It has been a special comfort to me and my mother, and both patients are doing better.   The comfort of having consecrated women dedicated to praying for our needs and the needs of the whole Church is a huge gift.

Rachel - I can't imagine having 5 kids in a row with chickenpox!  And having had shingles, I can say it is very painful.

The question I have about the chickenpox vaccine is about giving early in life, and not giving enough boosters.  What I had read about it was that if a girl gets the vaccine, its immunity wears off by the time she is in her childbearing years, and then she is unable to confer passive immunity (which she would be able to do if she had the permanent immunity from actually having the disease) to her newborn (who is at high risk of complications and is too young to be vaccinated). 

It would seem important to know this about all vaccines - if waning immunity as we get older requires boosters to keep the passive immunity system going through mothers to their newborns.  What are the risks and benefits of having all these vaccines again as adults?

Kevin - what do you know about this issue?  Readers?

Read about it in this morning's WP.

has been posted!

"If Nancy Pelosi wants to save the American economy some money she needs to stop investing in irresponsible sex."

Quite right.

Also, from the NRLC this afternoon: "Abortion No Stimulus for Economy"

Maybe so, according to an article in today's Pittsburgh paper. But does "ride it out" have to be the only alternative? Can't a bad marriage be improved?

Read Greg's book!

In today's Federal Register, CDC has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget their desire to do a follow-up survey of breastfeeding maternity care at hospitals and birth centers.  Th einitial survey was done in 2007 an dthis follow-up is to see if improvements have occurred.  Interestingly enough the notice says:

A reader emails:

That PG article was dreary. Perhaps we really have become homo economicus. Consider:

"They are looking at marriage more today from a financial prospective. Younger people today want to be financially secure and have financial independence before getting married."

"Years ago, people divorced to find peace. Now they are more pressed to fix a marriage than end it because they don't want to give up their lifestyle."

"With marriage, people are now looking at it from a business point of view."

How long until the "How to Divorce-Proof Your Marriage" books describe how to make it too expensive to divorce?

On the other hand, the housing mess does provide a helpful analogy, perhaps. Last year we heard many stories about people out West who simply walked away from their interest-only loans, simply mailing in the keys to the house. With nothing invested in the house, there was nothing to lose by walking out.

Similarly, when a couple does not invest emotionally in their marriage there is little incentive to stick around when the "mortgage" becomes onerous. Just as conventional loans required a substantial down payment before taking possession of the house, a good marriage should be preceded by a substantial emotional investment before meeting at the altar.

It strikes me that the same analogy could be applied to a woman protecting her purity as well.

in this CNS article.

May the soul of Michael Dubruiel, and the souls of all the faithful departed, through the mercy of God, rest in peace.

May Perpetual Light shine upon him.

What a horrible shock. May God grant eternal rest to him, and consolation to all who mourn him.

"Gay Partner Entitled to Inherit Dead Spouse's Estate"

"The judge said marriages are recognized in New York if they are valid elsewhere and not specifically prohibited by state law or by 'natural law,' such as polygamy and incest. She found the Leiby-Ranftle marriage fell under neither exception."

That's almost backwards. "Gay marriage" is even more obviously and radically at odds with natural law than are polygamy and incest.

Meanwhile: "Lesbians Who Led Mass. Gay Marriage Fight to Divorce"

This is definitely a mistake. As Greg and I have noted, the problem is very clearly not that kids don't know about condoms and the like.

The story: "Mothers can pass along their experiences to their children without even trying, researchers reported in a surprising study on Tuesday that showed baby mice could inherit the benefits of 'education' that their mothers received before they became pregnant. ..."

Wow. I've only been there once - in August '07, when I was in downtown Chicago to give a paper at a conference.

It's called Snark: It's Mean, It's Personal, and It's Ruining Our Conversation. To be featured on Book TV this weekend.

It's been a busy couple of days - I've only had time for "linking" posts, rather than "thinking" ones. Two points for now. First, the reader who suggested that the chickenpox vaccine might increase the risk of shingles followed up by sending me word of this 2005 NYT article. Please note that the article does not suggest that people who've received the chickenpox vaccine will be at increased risk for shingles. (Rather, as I said, anything that prevents chickenpox will by definition also prevent shingles.) Rather, it reports a concern that the widespread use of the vaccine will increase the shingles risk in those who weren't vaccinated and got chickenpox. The theory is that such people depend on regular exposure to the chickenpox virus (from contact with people who are coming down with or have the disease) to keep their immune system on the lookout for the virus and thereby able to suppress shingles. I don't think that's much of an argument against vaccination. Once chickenpox is no longer going around (because of the vaccine), there won't be any more people at risk for shingles at all. And there is a new shingles vaccine for people who've had chickenpox - though relying on it, rather than the chickenpox vaccine, isn't an efficient long-term solution to the shingles problem (and besides, again, chickenpox itself can occasionally be serious - it's worth preventing even apart from the shingles risk).

Another reader - the one who sent the email that began this recent serious of posts - also followed up, with a long list of worries about vaccines more generally. I'm going to post tomorrow (I promise) responding more specifically to those, as well as to some related ones that have been expressed here by my fellow bloggers. But for now, everyone should check this out. It explains a number of important things - for instance, why the claim (occasionally encountered on anti-vaccine sites, with graphs to illustrate) that serious illnesses were already disappearing before vaccines (and vaccines didn't speed up the trend) is dishonest.

From the NRLC: "Delivered February 2, the letter referenced three of pro-abortion President Barack Obama's nominations, and was sent to Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), ranking member Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), and the committee's remaining ten Democrats and seven Republicans."

Specter and Leahy are, of course, both pro-aborts.

One of the three mentioned is David Ogden. Turns out Ogden is into porn as well as abortion.

... and in fact I think it's a slight reworking of the Administratium joke (and I see that last month was the 20th anniversary of the publication of that joke).

This seems like good news:

A three-year award from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Office of Population Affairs to Georgetown University's Institute for Reproductive Health will enable federally supported programs in California and Massachusetts to offer the Standard Days Method®, a highly effective, easy-to-use natural family planning method developed by Institute researchers.

In addition to making scientifically based natural family planning methods developed by the Georgetown researchers available to Title X clients, the $600,000 award will enable the researchers to test strategies to overcome barriers that limit the availability and use of natural family planning methods by individuals who get their heath care through this government-funded program. ...

From the USCCB: "Cardinal Rigali to Congress: Keep Existing Pro-Life Laws"

... "While an extreme proposal like FOCA would overturn hundreds of pro-life laws at once, we are equally concerned that such laws may be overturned one at a time during Congress's appropriations process."

The prelate's letter highlighted several pro-life provisions ...

From the AP: "Lawsuit: Florida Clinic Botched Abortion, Threw Out Live Baby"

I was just making an observation.

Don't mind Kevin.  It's still a good joke and I'd never seen it before.

Kevin - don't make me send you to time out.

What is your point?

I got this in an e-mail today:

Subject: New Element Discovered Lawrence Livermore Laboratories has discovered the heaviest element yet known to science.

The new element, Governmentium (Gv), has one neutron, 25 assistant neutrons, 88 deputy neutrons, and 198 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it an atomic mass of 312. These 312 particles are held together by forces called morons, which are surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles , called peons.

Since Governmentium has no electrons, it is inert; however, it can be detected, because it impedes every reaction with which it comes into contact. A tiny amount of Governmentium can cause a reaction that would normally take less than a second, to take from four days to four years to complete!

Governmentium has a normal half-life of 2- 6 years; It does not decay, but instead undergoes a reorganization in which a portion of the assistant neutrons and deputy neutrons exchange places. In fact, Governmentium's mass will actually increase over time, since each reorganization will cause more morons to become neutrons, forming isodopes. This characteristic of moron promotion leads some scientists to believe that Governmentium is formed whenever morons reach a critical concentration. This hypothetical quantity is referred to as critical morass.

When catalyzed with money, Governmentium becomes Administratium, an element that radiates just as much energy as Governmentium since it has half as many peons but twice as many morons.

may this will!

Robert - I go with C.  I think Obama will have a negative effect in terms of not only tolerating but promoting abortion and contraception and population control.  I think the secular femininst anti-mother, anti-child ideology will take hold and will do damage in the end to mothers and babies and their (unified, not adversarial) interests.  However, I think in other fields he will likely do some good, and I do think his influence will be limited by the realities that always face parties that have been out of power for a long time.  They learn quickly that GOVERNING is a lot different from just OPPOSING everything, and I think that will be Obama's lesson.

Of course, I do hope he can solve many of the nation's problems, and our family just prays for him to have a change of heart on the life issues every night.

While I'm posting, I do have a question.  Do you think that the Obama presidency, even if it only lasts 4 years, will:

a) Have a devastating effect on the world

b) Have a significant negative effect on the world

c) Have some negative effect on the world, but not as much as most people are afraid of--the world is already in a pretty big mess and the U.S. President isn't going to make that much difference, even in the U.S.

d) Isn't going to make that much difference one way or the other--see "c".

d) Is going to have a net positive effect on the world, despite the obvious problems he has on some important issues.

e) Is going to be pretty good all-in-all, setting aside life issue.

f) Really is the One.

This is a serious question and I'll post responses without comment.

...says Obama.  And get this amazing (ironic?!?) quote:

President Barack Obama is telling the National Prayer Breakfast that even though faith too often has been used "as a tool to divide us from one another," there is no religion in the world that is based on hatred.

Obama, in prepared remarks, said, "There is no God who condones taking the life of an innocent human being."

Indeed!! 

Sorry, everyone. I've been working all morning, and I now need to have a little lunch and then work all afternoon. And last night I got yet another long email on the topic from a reader who'd already sent two - which means that composing a response will take even longer than I'd originally planned. I'll get to it next week. I hope.

We went very often when I was a kid - once or twice a week in the summer, and not infrequently during the school year. (Our grade-school class would also go to the school library once a week.) And during my last two years of high school and first two of college, I worked part-time at the public library, in the children's department - first shelving books, then staffing the circulation desk. Yes - every family should take their children to the library regularly. The web is nice, but it's no substitute.

Here, for instance, is a picture of me with the Greater Milwaukee Catholic Home Educators delegration to the Wisconsin Junior Classical League convention in Madison last week (original source, the Studeo blog of Love2LearnMom.  We took second place in the qualitative sweepstakes, out of 17 teams. This is pretty good consider most of our delegates are all but self-taught in Latin. 

Oh, and if you are wondering about the "biker" look, it has to do with one of the spirit competitions at the convention. 

My gosh! I've got to change my whole theology!

... More seriously, while I wouldn't put it the way he did, I also wouldn't put it quite the way the woman in the article did. I'd go with the way St. Paul put it.

But I love this quote...

"What doesn't kill me does not make me stronger. It makes me anxious, bitchy, and vulnerable...but nobody wants to see that embroidered on a pillow."

How true is that?

My library is pretty great.  We have a wonderful children's section and my little ones are regular storytime attendees.  I'm a part of one of the book clubs, if the title is of interest to me.  My 7 yr. old has been been practicing writing his name very small so he can finally get his own library card.  It is not easy for a big-fisted boy.

Libraries are so important to our family that I was amazed to recently discover that some families never go to the library.  NEVER.  I've heard several pretty amazing reasons - they don't think it is important, their kids are hooked into the internet, their kids do 'enough' reading for school, they use the computer for homework help so why bother and this - it's not free anymore w/ all the fines so why bother??

WHAT???!!!  As a huge, huge fan our library system - hats off to Ben Franklin (granted his system was a subscription system, but still), I couldn't believe my ears.  As a homeschooler who couldn't survive without a library it was like hearing that you didn't have much use for oxygen! 

I'm not saying you have to be a library nut like me, but every child should have the joy of seeing racks and racks of books they can take home - for free, unless they're late and then there's the fine.  Every adult for that matter. 

Haven't been to yours in awhile?  Consider it as a great location for a break in the February blues and winter doldrums.  It's warm!

Okay.  I've gotten one so far:

... is that the one joke seems to be a reworking of the other.

for his letter to "pro-life" (1, 2) Sen. Casey.

As I mentioned last week, the World Day for Consecrated Life was last Monday, and it is being observed this Sunday in the United States. Our Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI mentioned it at the end of his Angelus address last Sunday. He gave another address specifically for the occasion on Monday, in which he spoke of St. Paul's missionary life as inspired by the same evangelical counsels that are professed by those entering the consecrated life. I would like to take the pope's words about St. Paul as the starting point for my brief reflection on this Sunday's Mass readings.

As I consider our second reading, from 1 Corinthians, it strikes me that Paul's decision to "offer the Gospel free of charge," to refrain from "making full use of his right in the Gospel" - indeed, to "make himself a slave to all," to "become weak" - is closely linked with his practice of the counsels, especially of poverty. And we can see that this is also an entering into Christ's own saving mission and work. In our first reading, from Job, we are reminded of the consequences of sin, namely, loss and suffering. In our Gospel reading, we hear how Christ had and exercised divine power over the devil, sin, and the illness and death that are consequences of sin. But we cannot help but remember that Christ exercised this power not only through his healings and exorcisms, but also, and above all, through his entering into solidarity with sinners by his own suffering and death.

In an analogous fashion, all those who would truly and effectively preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and thus participate in and extend his saving work, must enter, in very concrete and practical ways, into solidarity with the poor, the weak, the suffering. This is not to deny that the words of the Gospel are important, indeed, essential. St. Francis of Assisi is often quoted as having said something like, "Preach the Gospel always; use words when necessary." He did not, in fact, say this. He knew that the use of the "words" of the Gospel is far more than an occasional afterthought. But he did recognize - as did his contemporary, St. Dominic - that witness to, and explicit preaching of, the Gospel needs to be accompanied by a Gospel way of life, and sometimes a very radical living of the Gospel way of life, through the practice of the counsels, including even the apostolic poverty that Francis and Dominic embraced and that was even more radical than the poverty practiced by monks.

As I said last week, not all - indeed, not many - are given the grace of a call to one or another form of the consecrated life. But all are given the grace of, somehow, genuinely living and preaching the Gospel. Like St. Paul, like Sts. Francis and Dominic, like St. Benedict and St. Ignatius of Loyola and many others, may we each cooperate fully with the grace we have received, for the glory of God and the salvation of men and women.

The HMS Meteorologist emails:

"Since Robert shared a joke he received by email. I thought you would enjoy the attached photo I received with the subject line, 'Thousands gather to protest global warming.'

"To connect Robert's joke to his earlier question, I think the more inert this government is, the better off we will be."

There isn't anything all that surprising about this, although I somewhat expect that the DOMA will eventually be challenged and struck in a lawsuit against a state on "Full Faith and Credit" grounds, rather than in a lawsuit against the Federal government on discrimination grounds.

From the NRLC: "Wisconsin Health Clinic May Become Site of Second-Trimester Abortions; Pro-Lifers Vow to Continue Fight"

Excellent editorial on childbirth:

Our magnificent female bodies are designed to give birth. Physically, it is our mission. Once our menstrual cycles kick in when we are young women, our bodies yearn to be pregnant, even if our minds do not. Our reproductive systems, like the workings of a clock, are precise and predictable. Each month’s pattern of ovulation is a glorious tribute to the intricate blueprint for procreation.

While I know that most women are not in the mood to sing praises to the Creator during their periods, I nevertheless believe that the more we learn about how our bodies work, the more we respect, and are even awed by, their efficiency and power. My point is that, left to their own devices, our bodies know exactly what to do. ...

The proof of the flawless inner workings of women is exhibited in childbirth. After growing a fetus for precisely the right amount of time, our bodies begin the process of propelling the baby toward the beginning of independent life. Every pregnancy is different, of course, but the average time needed in the womb is pretty constant: about 40 weeks. But we seem to think we can mess with the system.

A study published recently in The New England Journal of Medicine found that babies whose mothers elected to have C-sections performed in the 37th or 38th week of pregnancy experienced up to four times the risk of complications compared to those born after the 39th week. We needed a study to tell us this?

Seriously?

Our bodies know what they are doing, but we must trust them.  More...

I read this morning about 2 states (so far) with legislation pending to protect the right of breastfeeding mothers to nurse their babies in public wherever they have a right to be.  Please support this legislation if it is coming up in your state.

I must take issue with the headline on the Washington bill - the law doesn't HAVE to "OK" breastfeeding.   We don't breastfeed at the pleasure of the state - breastfeeding is just the normal and natural way that babies are nourished and comforted by the way we are designed as human beings.  The state doesn't have to give us permission to do this in order for it to be o.k.  We don't have to have state permission to breathe or digest food, either, just so ya know. 

However, the breastfeeding protection laws are there to make explicit the natural law that entitles babies to be breastfed whenever and wherever they need to be.  It's worth having a law on the books that says that a mother cannot be harassed for nursing in public, so that mothers have something concrete to point to in their own defense if challenged.  Therefore, these are worthwhile laws (mostly - sometimes when we start codifying natural rights, we end up limiting them, such as in laws that purport to permit only "discreet" breastfeeding - fine to encourage modesty, but who decides what is "discreet" enough and should it be a state bureaucrat?)

Anyway - here's the link to Washington's info, and here's the link to Wisconsin's.

If you are in the Roanoke, Virginia area you should check this out - or try to get Misty to come and speak in YOUR area!!

Dialoging with the Monologues: Discovering a Feminism that Redeems

The Vagina Monologues has been criticized by everyone from social conservatives to liberal feminists. But this wildly popular play contains much truth about female sexuality, and highlights key problems facing modern
women. Is there an antidote to the sexual shame and violence that so often plague women? The answer may surprise you. Join Misty Mealey on Sunday,
February 8 at 6:30 PM at Averett University's Jutt Cafe for a discussion of The Vagina Monologues, feminism, and the Catholic message on the true dignity of women.

For more info, contact Josh Johnson at CCM@averett.edu or 540-728-3335. Sponsored by Averett Catholic Campus Ministry

From the NRLC: "Ultrasounds Major Pro-Life Priority"

From CNS: "Ministry supports couples facing troubled pregnancies"