Anonymous
Post 11/15/2024 19:59     Subject: So what do we think about the New Yorker article with the Cheverly moms?
What is a realignment conservative?
Anonymous
Post 11/15/2024 19:57     Subject: So what do we think about the New Yorker article with the Cheverly moms?
Anonymous wrote:I dont understand why the article keeps bringing up Vance and his wife, when they live in........Virginia.


Ironically, he is very unliked amongst his Del Ray neighbors.
Anonymous
Post 11/15/2024 19:56     Subject: Re:So what do we think about the New Yorker article with the Cheverly moms?
You think conservatives—-the party that wants to deport people, take away women’s rights to reproductive care, wants to take away healthcare for millions, supports gun ownership even though gun violence kills more kids than any other cause in this country—is pro family and pro kids?

Think again.
Anonymous
Post 11/15/2024 19:39     Subject: So what do we think about the New Yorker article with the Cheverly moms?
It sounds like these parents are neglectful - leaving their baby home alone and giving a neighbor the baby monitor??? WTF?
Anonymous
Post 11/15/2024 19:37     Subject: So what do we think about the New Yorker article with the Cheverly moms?
This article was propaganda.
Anonymous
Post 11/15/2024 19:35     Subject: Re:So what do we think about the New Yorker article with the Cheverly moms?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:PP made a great point about motherhood making one vulnerable to conservative propaganda.

Being a SAHM for 8 years in this area has definitely moved me rightward. Not enough to join this group or party (I'm also an atheist...). But Dems have been shortsighted in totally ignoring parents who want to stay home while Vance (someone I deplore!) embraces us. Found this article fascinating.


Huh, I’m a SAHM in the area and it has moved me leftward, and sort of more opposed to religion generally. I see all those St Jerome’s kids running around and I feel terrible about the ones who are inevitably gay or trans. Like even if the church doesn’t do anything “wrong” like on the level of their history of child abuse, it’s going to be awful for those kids. And their families, honestly. I just don’t see the Catholic Church as being pro-family at all.


Churches are pro "in-group" family. That is, they will support pro-family policies if you fit the mold of what they deem to be an "acceptable" family. Families at congregations have always turned their nose up at single mother households, families with the "sensitive" boy (aka he will be gay), families that have a problematic or disabled child, inter-racial families, etc.


Depends on the church’s. My Episcopal church in NOVA is very accepting of all kinds of families (same sex parents, single parent by choice, divorced, interracial, international. etc), has done gay marriages for almost 2 decades and has gay ministers. It definitely is no where near one size fits all. Please stop spreading this narrative.


I doubt your church is crawling with MAGAs and realignment conservatives. Sorry, but Episcopalian is where the outcast Christians go after they got bullied at Catholic, Baptist, Lutheran and Evangelical churches. I love the Episcopalians for that reason. But the Episcopalians are hemorrhaging congregants.


I believe Virginia has one of the largest populations of Episcopalians in the country. I was baptized, raised, confirmed and married in an Episcopal church. We didn’t come from somewhere else. I’m confused because it sounds like you don’t know much about the religion. All are welcome. I go to St Paul’s in OT. We aren’t hemorrhaging. It is a very nice community for anyone.
Anonymous
Post 11/15/2024 19:20     Subject: So what do we think about the New Yorker article with the Cheverly moms?

Abortion should always be available, otherwise women can die or be so injured as to never be able to have children again.

So yes, abortion is something that's necessary in a family-friendly set of policies. It makes more healthy, wanted children!



Anonymous
Post 11/15/2024 19:16     Subject: Re:So what do we think about the New Yorker article with the Cheverly moms?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:PP made a great point about motherhood making one vulnerable to conservative propaganda.

Being a SAHM for 8 years in this area has definitely moved me rightward. Not enough to join this group or party (I'm also an atheist...). But Dems have been shortsighted in totally ignoring parents who want to stay home while Vance (someone I deplore!) embraces us. Found this article fascinating.


Huh, I’m a SAHM in the area and it has moved me leftward, and sort of more opposed to religion generally. I see all those St Jerome’s kids running around and I feel terrible about the ones who are inevitably gay or trans. Like even if the church doesn’t do anything “wrong” like on the level of their history of child abuse, it’s going to be awful for those kids. And their families, honestly. I just don’t see the Catholic Church as being pro-family at all.


Churches are pro "in-group" family. That is, they will support pro-family policies if you fit the mold of what they deem to be an "acceptable" family. Families at congregations have always turned their nose up at single mother households, families with the "sensitive" boy (aka he will be gay), families that have a problematic or disabled child, inter-racial families, etc.


Depends on the church’s. My Episcopal church in NOVA is very accepting of all kinds of families (same sex parents, single parent by choice, divorced, interracial, international. etc), has done gay marriages for almost 2 decades and has gay ministers. It definitely is no where near one size fits all. Please stop spreading this narrative.


I doubt your church is crawling with MAGAs and realignment conservatives. Sorry, but Episcopalian is where the outcast Christians go after they got bullied at Catholic, Baptist, Lutheran and Evangelical churches. I love the Episcopalians for that reason. But the Episcopalians are hemorrhaging congregants.
Anonymous
Post 11/15/2024 16:52     Subject: Re:So what do we think about the New Yorker article with the Cheverly moms?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:PP made a great point about motherhood making one vulnerable to conservative propaganda.

Being a SAHM for 8 years in this area has definitely moved me rightward. Not enough to join this group or party (I'm also an atheist...). But Dems have been shortsighted in totally ignoring parents who want to stay home while Vance (someone I deplore!) embraces us. Found this article fascinating.


Huh, I’m a SAHM in the area and it has moved me leftward, and sort of more opposed to religion generally. I see all those St Jerome’s kids running around and I feel terrible about the ones who are inevitably gay or trans. Like even if the church doesn’t do anything “wrong” like on the level of their history of child abuse, it’s going to be awful for those kids. And their families, honestly. I just don’t see the Catholic Church as being pro-family at all.


Churches are pro "in-group" family. That is, they will support pro-family policies if you fit the mold of what they deem to be an "acceptable" family. Families at congregations have always turned their nose up at single mother households, families with the "sensitive" boy (aka he will be gay), families that have a problematic or disabled child, inter-racial families, etc.


Depends on the church’s. My Episcopal church in NOVA is very accepting of all kinds of families (same sex parents, single parent by choice, divorced, interracial, international. etc), has done gay marriages for almost 2 decades and has gay ministers. It definitely is no where near one size fits all. Please stop spreading this narrative.
Anonymous
Post 11/15/2024 15:40     Subject: So what do we think about the New Yorker article with the Cheverly moms?
Anonymous wrote:A five year pool waitlist is chump change.
-Mt Rainier


The exact drop-in that my out-of-state parents would latch on to as a sign of popularity/demand and I scoff at as relatively weak.

- PG Pool Member (expected 2038)
Anonymous
Post 11/15/2024 15:17     Subject: So what do we think about the New Yorker article with the Cheverly moms?
Anonymous wrote:This is probably not a good place to have this discussion, but this article underscores something I've been thinking about quite a bit.

Conservatives are offering community in a way that progressives have not, and that's doubly true for people with young kids.

I've never been more vulnerable to conservative "marketing" as I was as a new mother.


It's hard to square this with the bigger picture on conservative values. I wonder how you'll view this when they begin deporting immigrants who have lived here and made a life here with their children for many years. Or the fact that, because of their support for gun rights, your kids might get blown up in school, because individual gun rates are more important than broader societal stability and safety. Is that community?

Also, is it community that girls who are raped or simply do not want to have a baby have to go to great lengths and risk prison to have an abortion?

But sure, if you are willing to stomach all of this and look the other way, then there's community to be found.
Anonymous
Post 11/15/2024 15:13     Subject: So what do we think about the New Yorker article with the Cheverly moms?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:So leaving aside the fact that I don’t buy for a minute that the GOP is going to meaningfully support families, what do we think about the depiction of Cheverly moms? Are they really raising their kids in an “alternative” way or are they just self-important?


https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/11/18/the-pro-life-movements-new-playbook

I think you should stop being so cynical and judgmental.

It wasn’t that long ago that the Christian conservatives were the judgmental trying to dictate to people and the Progressive mantra was live and let live.

That article and your response confirms to me that the two groups have flipped.


I mean the GOP in many states continues to refuse to expand Medicaid. Most conservatives are adamantly against any expansion of social welfare. How is it “cynical and judgmental” to point out the basic fact that the GOP is against social welfare spending?
Anonymous
Post 11/15/2024 15:11     Subject: Re:So what do we think about the New Yorker article with the Cheverly moms?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:PP made a great point about motherhood making one vulnerable to conservative propaganda.

Being a SAHM for 8 years in this area has definitely moved me rightward. Not enough to join this group or party (I'm also an atheist...). But Dems have been shortsighted in totally ignoring parents who want to stay home while Vance (someone I deplore!) embraces us. Found this article fascinating.


Huh, I’m a SAHM in the area and it has moved me leftward, and sort of more opposed to religion generally. I see all those St Jerome’s kids running around and I feel terrible about the ones who are inevitably gay or trans. Like even if the church doesn’t do anything “wrong” like on the level of their history of child abuse, it’s going to be awful for those kids. And their families, honestly. I just don’t see the Catholic Church as being pro-family at all.


+100. Pressuring women to have more kids than they want or can care for is NOT pro family.
Anonymous
Post 11/15/2024 15:10     Subject: Re:So what do we think about the New Yorker article with the Cheverly moms?
Anonymous wrote:I am fully pro-choice. I understand the circumstances behind rare 3rd-trimester terminations. But I hate, hate the path abortion activism has taken in the past 10 years.

Pro-life young people have been savvier and more nimble. "Love the mother, love the child" / support families is the new direction they're taking, while we've got bizarre "shout your abortion" and Chelsea Handler-types making us look like heartless villains who are afraid to admit we mourn our own miscarriages. All this while viability gets earlier and earlier. Pro-choice women need to wake up and moderate their message before we lose an entire generation!

Obama was of the "safe, legal and rare" ethos that's so out of fashion now. When will progressives admit the average American woman was much safer back then?


If you think the GOP is going to pivot to actually supporting families, gl with that …
Anonymous
Post 11/15/2024 15:08     Subject: Re:So what do we think about the New Yorker article with the Cheverly moms?
Anonymous wrote:PP made a great point about motherhood making one vulnerable to conservative propaganda.

Being a SAHM for 8 years in this area has definitely moved me rightward. Not enough to join this group or party (I'm also an atheist...). But Dems have been shortsighted in totally ignoring parents who want to stay home while Vance (someone I deplore!) embraces us. Found this article fascinating.


How does GOP *policy* better support SAHM or even families at all? This article was written specifically because it is very new for anyone in the GOP to support any social welfare policy.