agree to disagree? gray areas everywhere

[mjbaby]

I would never ever leave my kids with some ramdom person that I just met. I don't care if it is a courthouse child care etc. I just read a thread last night where people went to x amount of kennels before they would even consider leaving their dog there and yet people seem to think it is okay to just call up child care centers and drop your kids off there? Really? I guess I have snowflake kids because there is no way on earth I would ever do that. Heck if I had a dog I still wouldn't do that to the dog even.

I don't think - it's possible I missed a post here or there - that anyone's suggesting leaving a child with persons just met. Jury duty doesn't come out of the blue. There is advance notice sufficient enough to beat the bushes, check references, have a brief trial run (I, myself, won't hire a sitter until s/he has been at my house for a one- to two-hour playdate while I am home and I have rejected a few after such an experience), ask around for a mom to swap with, make a determination and so on.

Even a minimally resourceful person should not find any of that difficult in the time available.

 

[surfgirl]

I can say that I absolutely would NEVER work for your company! (I mean this in all due respect). I am disabiled with a social anxiety/phobia. I could NEVER serve in a jury. According to you I should be excuxed? what gives you the right to even say that.

And for the record - I may be a US citizen becuase I was born here, but I also don't vote - it's my RIGHT to NOT do it as much as it's your right to do it.

It is my right to not serve on a jury if I am unable to do so for medical, or other legitimate reasons.

Honestly - the first time that right is taken from me, I will move out of the USA quicker than you can blink.

I think the post you were quoting is a very different situation... an employee said he could not serve for work reasons. The court system contacted the employer to ask that and they did not back up what the employee said. I read it more as a problem that the employee was lying.

I, personally, am horrified that you are PROUD of not voting. But, as you say, that is your RIGHT.

 

[plummer925]

I think the post you were quoting is a very different situation... an employee said he could not serve for work reasons. The court system contacted the employer to ask that and they did not back up what the employee said. I read it more as a problem that the employee was lying.

I, personally, am horrified that you are PROUD of not voting. But, as you say, that is your RIGHT.

I was quoting them to say that I would never work for them.

Your "horrified" that I do not vote? Wow. I don't vote because it is unbiblical to vote (but I am not going to go into that as each persons religious beleifs are just that and I'm not about to turn this into a religious debate...the debate is crazy enough anyway!). I am not "proud" that I do not vote - I never said that (you put that word into my post - you can even see from what you quoted me that I never said that) and to emphasize that word with all caps is ridiculous. I'm not "proud" to not vote...just as I would not be "proud" to vote. Pride is another thing that I strive not to have.

 

[Mouse House Mama]

I don't think - it's possible I missed a post here or there - that anyone's suggesting leaving a child with persons just met. Jury duty doesn't come out of the blue. There is advance notice sufficient enough to beat the bushes, check references, have a brief trial run (I, myself, won't hire a sitter until s/he has been at my house for a one- to two-hour playdate while I am home and I have rejected a few after such an experience), ask around for a mom to swap with, make a determination and so on.

Even a minimally resourceful person should not find any of that difficult in the time available.

Someone mention on site childcare. That is what I was referring to.
What I would like to say though is that the price of childcare for 5 children in my area would be astronomical! I also would not expect anyone to swap childcare with me for that amount of time. An afternoon maybe. Days? No. It is simply too much for most people. In a true emergency I can find something very temporary but for the hours required for jury duty I cannot.

 

[taitai]

What I find most interesting here with all the people who will not make a sacrifice to do their duty as a juror, is what if the tables were turned. What if you or a loved one was on trial? Would you want a jury of responsible individuals or people who were just not clever enough to get out of it?

Living in the US means being part of a community. Being part of a community isn't always take, take, take. There is also some give in there. It might be a sacrifice for some but no greater sacrifice than those who serve in our military or in any other way serve our country.

Remember, if you do not participate in the government, you can not complain about it.

 

[plummer925]

Remember, if you do not participate in the government, you can not complain about it.

Just a quick comment about the above quote: I completely agree with this. I do not vote (a choice that i made after careful consideration and prayer). Because of this, I have not the right to complain about who gets voted into an office! I certainly have my opinions and hopes/desires, but in the end, it's the Lord's will on who is there and not matter who it is, I pray for that person and our government (I guess in a way that makes me a "participant" in the whole thing...). But part of being a participant in the government is our tax money - I do pay my taxes and obey laws, so I do have the 'right' to complain about government spending...just not WHO is doing the spending!

 

[Tink-aholic]

I don't vote because it is unbiblical to vote

I have studied most of the world's religions and have not found this, except in some fundamentalist sects. Since you don't want to start a debate, maybe you should consider using the terms like "your religion suggests that it is unbiblical to vote". Blanket terms of what is or is not in a particular holy book (be it the Bible, Torah, Qur'an, etc) seems to only start debates.

Good luck.

 

[nicki.momof3]

I don't vote because it is unbiblical to vote .

I have a question and I am not trying to disagree with you or start a fight I am just curious. I am a civics teacher and one thing we talk in great deal about is our role as citizens and our role in government. I am also a practicing Catholic and have attended bibical classes all through my youth studying the bible in great length. I teach in a very multi cultural school with teachers of all races and religions and we all have the same view point that we as Americans are obligated to participate in the system.

I have never heard someone use the your reason as a reason not to vote. I totally understand not wanting to praticipate in the system and the many political beliefs that way sway a person not to vote but never a bibical reason. I sat in mass on Sunday and our priest talked about our role as active catholics and the importance of voting and carefully looking at issues not just the popular vote.

Just purely a curious question but what religion do you practice that supports such a theory. I as an educator love to hear all view points that surround government and the civic process. I would love to know so in the future I can respect this populations view point better in my teachings. The last thing I want to do is offend a population because I am not aware of their view point. Now if it is only one pesons personal opinion that is a different matter but if it is a teaching of an organized common religion I would love to better understand.

Thank you

 

[jodifla]

If someone is going to make the choice to plan a vacation then they really need backup for emergencies...that is what trip insurance is for.

No, that is what the perfectly legitimate excuse that you'll be out of town is for. Most jury forms have them.

What is NOT legitimate is for SAHMs to try and claim they can't find any sitter, any place.

 

[VAfamily1998]

Just purely a curious question but what religion do you practice that supports such a theory. I as an educator love to hear all view points that surround government and the civic process. I would love to know so in the future I can respect this populations view point better in my teachings. The last thing I want to do is offend a population because I am not aware of their view point. Now if it is only one pesons personal opinion that is a different matter but if it is a teaching of an organized common religion I would love to better understand.

Thank you

I'm not the person you are addressing, but Jehovah's Witnesses do not vote

ETA: This is an interesting link explaining it a bit
http://www.slate.com/id/2194321/

 

[joybeth]

So everyone's circumstance should be based on yours? I think that everyone should serve also. But there are many many years that a person is elible. 52ish. And a few years when there might be a difficult time for childcare. And many people are never called. My thinking is that it can be worked out pretty reasonalbly.

And, I would absolutely say our local court is much more compassionate than many here.

Blessedly.

So now everyone that is 52ish has no issues with serving?? This argument just gets more and more unintelligent! First of all, I AM 52ish (well, 51 1/2). I have actually served jury duty 8 times. The first being in college and the last 2 years ago. The only time I have ever gotten a deferment was when the 2 weeks I was scheduled to serve spanned my due date with my first child. I got a deferment for 3 months and so I had to find someone to watch my new baby. EACH and EVERY time I have served it has been a hardship, inconvient and a pain in the you know what. The last time I served probably was the worst. I was in that "eligible age group" that you say should be perfect for serving. My husband had a cut in his income and I had been laid off. I had just gotten a job and we were barely hanging on. I had to serve even though I do NOT get paid for jury duty. Despite the extreme financial hardship it cost my family I served.

Don't assume that the only time that it is a hardship to deal with jury duty is when your children are small. For me it has not gotten any easier. Don't assume that your hardships are any more important than anyone elses.

jb

 

[andymattmom]

OMG...I just read through all these post! I realized how I worded my post!!! I DID NOT LEAVE MY 5 WEEK OLD SON WITH A STRANGER IN THE HALL!!! I thought I had typed in co-worker. It was my boss who watched my son as I did what I had to do in court!! I WOULD NEVER NEVER NEVER LEAVE MY CHILDREN WITH A STRANGER!!!!

I realize I sounded like the world's worst mother and I wanted to clarify that! Never ever would I endanger that or advise anyone to have a stranger watch their child. I had read through these last night...took my cold medicine as I am sick and then tonight when I got on saw all those responses. SORRY and I would never do that....love my little BIG BIG kids too much to do that!

 

[Michelle and crew]

Jb, I would never think that. life is far too crazy.

Andymom, I didn't take your post that way at all. Someone else said there was Childcare available there.

 

[mjbaby]

Someone mention on site childcare. That is what I was referring to.

Again, with advance notice is it not possible to visit, check references and then decide? Rejecting a potential solution out of hand without conducting due diligence is not productive.

What I would like to say though is that the price of childcare for 5 children in my area would be astronomical! I also would not expect anyone to swap childcare with me for that amount of time. An afternoon maybe. Days? No. It is simply too much for most people. In a true emergency I can find something very temporary but for the hours required for jury duty I cannot.

So I get that you wouldn't expect it, and what I'm hearing again is that you wouldn't even try. You've decided that there are no options and, thus, cannot participate in jury duty.

I come back to resourcefulness and life management. Very few of us relish jury duty or find it that it fills otherwise unused hours. Responsible people organize their lives so that compelling events - whether they be a summons or some once-in-a-lifetime opportunity - can be accommodated.

What I keep hearing, in general - not from any particular poster, is this: Oh, but I have no childcare! Well, here are a few sources. Oh, but I can't leave them with someone I don't know. Take the advance notice to visit and check references. Oh, but the childcare is so expensive! Perhaps your husband could cover it? Oh, but he cannot get off of work unless he asks eleventy-billion days ahead! Do you not belong to any social group whatsoever? No PTO, place of worship, garden club - you know no one who can help? Well my kids/household is unique because <insert reason here> so I couldn't possibly...

These particular corner is one into which people are willingly painting themselves and I, for one, find it ridiculous, immature and highly disingenuous.

 

[Mouse House Mama]

So now everyone that is 52ish has no issues with serving?? This argument just gets more and more unintelligent! First of all, I AM 52ish (well, 51 1/2). I have actually served jury duty 8 times. The first being in college and the last 2 years ago. The only time I have ever gotten a deferment was when the 2 weeks I was scheduled to serve spanned my due date with my first child. I got a deferment for 3 months and so I had to find someone to watch my new baby. EACH and EVERY time I have served it has been a hardship, inconvient and a pain in the you know what. The last time I served probably was the worst. I was in that "eligible age group" that you say should be perfect for serving. My husband had a cut in his income and I had been laid off. I had just gotten a job and we were barely hanging on. I had to serve even though I do NOT get paid for jury duty. Despite the extreme financial hardship it cost my family I served.

Don't assume that the only time that it is a hardship to deal with jury duty is when your children are small. For me it has not gotten any easier. Don't assume that your hardships are any more important than anyone elses.

jb

You read the post wrong. She said that we all have around 52 years of our life that we can serve as a juror. In those 52 years that you are a candidate for duty some years may be difficult and it is unreasonable that a person cannot be called at another more convenient time. She did not say that only people that are 52 should serve.

 

[Mouse House Mama]

Again, with advance notice is it not possible to visit, check references and then decide? Rejecting a potential solution out of hand without conducting due diligence is not productive.
It is very possible but what if I deem the situation innappropriate?

So I get that you wouldn't expect it, and what I'm hearing again is that you wouldn't even try. You've decided that there are no options and, thus, cannot participate in jury duty.


Wrong. I hope you don't get jury duty because that is not at all what I said. My friends and family are not capable of caring for this many children for an extended period of time. They cannot take off work and they simply cannot keep up with the kids. It is too much for them. They are awesome people but they know their limits.


I come back to resourcefulness and life management. Very few of us relish jury duty or find it that it fills otherwise unused hours. Responsible people organize their lives so that compelling events - whether they be a summons or some once-in-a-lifetime opportunity - can be accommodated.

YOU do things like that perhaps. Not everyone and it doesn't make a person irresponsible.

What I keep hearing, in general - not from any particular poster, is this: Oh, but I have no childcare! Well, here are a few sources. Oh, but I can't leave them with someone I don't know. Take the advance notice to visit and check references. Oh, but the childcare is so expensive! Perhaps your husband could cover it? Oh, but he cannot get off of work unless he asks eleventy-billion days ahead! Do you not belong to any social group whatsoever? No PTO, place of worship, garden club - you know no one who can help? Well my kids/household is unique because <insert reason here> so I couldn't possibly...

Sorry but my DH cannot take off work for days on end. I belong to plenty of social groups including some you mentioned. That doesn't mean I would leave my children with those people nor would they want me to. They have their own lives to worry about.

These particular corner is one into which people are willingly painting themselves and I, for one, find it ridiculous, immature and highly disingenuous.

Well if that is your thought then so be it. I find that line of thinking to be insulting, ignorant, inflexible, and lacking in compassion for others. YMMV.

 

[melancholywings]

you do know that not everyone lives in the city, don't you.

WHAT! Are you sure? I could have swore everyone lives in the city. Next you're going to suggest that there are people in this world who don't drive. Or that there are actually people in this world who haven't been to DisneyWorld.

Seriously though, I prefaced my comment with 'if you live in the city' no where in it did I once say 'the entire human race lives in the city'.

I live in a city of 50,000. There is no drop off childcare center. People should have some backup. It is safe and reasonable when the shtf. But even when people work hard and do their best, stuff happens. lol, "weaksauce?" Calling the difficulty of other's weaksauce is well pretty weaksauce...

Did you call every childcare center in your city? You could try the local YMCA? Some of their centers offer drop off. The greatest thing about the YMCA too is that they are public funded and can not refuse a child based on race, religion or disability. And I understand that finding child care is hard - but it's something every parent has to face and deal with. Being a SAHM isn't a special pass to get out of adult responsibilities.

You can not "buy" the no child care argument, but unless you have lived everywhere and been in everyone else's shoes, I don't understand how you can say that.

You found me out. I have indeed walked in everyone else's shoes - I wore yours last Thursday. I'm sorry I think I scuffed them up a bit. I hope they weren't your favorite pair, but what can I say. I like to dance.

My kids have never been watched by anyone that I don't personally know, and know very well.

Do they go to a public/private school? I'm just wondering how that works if you only let people you know very well watch them? Or are you home schooling them?
One of my school teachers is in jail for having child porn on his work computer. My neighbor ended up commiting murder. I'm not scared to let my kid go to school...or have neighbors. That's not to say I'm not smart and engaged with the people she interacts with. I mean I'm not some parent who'd leave their kid in a stroller outside the bar while mommy has a drink. But I'm also not going to live in fear that the world is out to gobble her up.

If you are fortunate enough to have multiple options for childcare, consider yourself lucky. Not everyone has that, for many different reasons. For some, it would be a huge problem and one that is not easily fixed without putting their children in possible harm's way. I'm not sure how so many people on this thread can judge other's situations without actually walking in their shoes.

Finding childcare is a part of being a parent - along with poopy diapers and hugs. Every parent has to deals with it - and I don't think it's ever easy for anyone. It's a lot of work and time to find a good care giver. It's a difficult situation for every parent. I have good childcare options because I worked hard to find them. So why should one parent get special civil accomidations over another parent because their job choice is a SAHM? Because they don't want to ask their husband to watch the kids during the day? Because they don't feel like working to try and find childcare? It's discrimination.

 

[Mouse House Mama]

Finding childcare is a part of being a parent - along with poopy diapers and hugs. Every parent has to deals with it - and I don't think it's ever easy for anyone. It's a lot of work and time to find a good care giver. It's a difficult situation for every parent. I have good childcare options because I worked hard to find them. So why should one parent get special civil accomidations over another parent because their job choice is a SAHM? Because they don't want to ask their husband to watch the kids during the day? Because they don't feel like working to try and find childcare? It's discrimination.

I bolded.
I disagree. My parents did not find childcare. On the extremely rare occassion that we needed to be taken care of we had a relative keep an eye on us. They had no other backup etc.

 

[jodifla]

Again, it is RARE for jury duty to go "days on end." It is a day or two normally. And any parent could be quickly taken out of commission for a day or two, so it's smart to have a network available to help you.

Edited to add: If you show up the first day and tell the judge you have 5 children under 6 or whatever, almost are going to excuse you then and there. And many states -- like Florida -- let caregivers out for preschool children.

So it seems like it would be best for everyone to check on their state's exemptions and be prepared to deal with them.

 

[Mouse House Mama]

Again, it is RARE for jury duty to go "days on end." It is a day or two normally. And any parent could be quickly taken out of commission for a day or two, so it's smart to have a network available to help you.Edited to add: If you show up the first day and tell the judge you have 5 children under 6 or whatever, almost are going to excuse you then and there. And many states -- like Florida -- let caregivers out for preschool children.

So it seems like it would be best for everyone to check on their state's exemptions and be prepared to deal with them.

I bolded. That is absolutely true. However, being sick and relying on people is different than going to jury duty. People are much more willing to help when you are ill. Oh well, at least they are willing to help for something.