Dr. Laura
Dr. Laura, America's #1 Relationship Talk Radio Host
On: SiriusXM Triumph Channel 111
Call 1-800-DR LAURA (1-800-375-2872) 11am - 2pm PT
Character-Courage-Conscience
Tags: CharacterCharacter-Courage-ConscienceMarriageSexSexualityValues
PERMALINK | EMAIL | PRINT | RSS  Subscribe
05/13/2010
IconWhen President Obama spoke to school children last week, he gave the kind of speech I would have given:' he emphasized that personal responsibility is the ticket to a life of success and a strong country.' He mentioned that all the equipment, books, and desks were all well and good, but useful only if students took the responsibility to work hard at their studies.I wish our courts (and the rest of the President's agenda) followed that concept of personal responsibility.' Not so.An Indiana court has ruled that a pizza shop must pay for a 340 pound employee's weight loss surgery in order to ensure the success of another operation for a back injury he suffered at work when he was accidentally struck in the back by a freezer door.' I wonder how much his girth was responsible for the accident.' I don't wonder how much his girth is responsible for the fact that the surgery for his back won't be undertaken until he reduces his weight first - no kidding!' But making the pizza shop employer responsible for paying for that weight loss surgery is not in keeping with the President's message of personal responsibility.The man was obese before he was hired.' If he hadn't been hired because of his weight, that would have been discrimination, and would have been illegal.' Employers are screwed no matter what they do to run a business and make a reasonable profit.This is not the only such case.' The most recent was in Oregon, where the state's Supreme Court ruled on August 27 that the state workers' compensation insurance must pay for gastric bypass surgery to ensure that a man's knee replacement surgery was effective.Businesses will definitely and understandably be much more careful about whom they hire.' While they can't not hire a fat person because he or she is fat, they are not obligated to hire the first person who shows up for the job, and they can and should come up with some other reason to protect themselves from unreasonable financial demands because they hired a person who eats more and moves less.'Obviously, this situation is anti-personal responsibility and anti-business.' This ruling will have repercussions beyond obesity and weight-loss surgery.' Employers will be wary of hiring people who have other conditions that expose them to workplace injury.' Developmental and physical limitations of some applicants will likely keep potential employers from being as compassionate as they've been in the past.'This is really sad, because ultimately, it's the individual with some challenges who will suffer. More >>

Tags: Character, Courage, ConscienceCharacter-Courage-ConsciencemarriagePersonal ResponsibilitySocial IssuesValues
PERMALINK | EMAIL | PRINT | RSS  Subscribe
05/13/2010
IconI'm a female and a Jew.' I personally know something about bias, bigotry, prejudice, and discrimination.' There is no doubt in my mind that I have experienced some (shall we say) "bad luck" in my life because I fall into these two categories, but there is probably not a person on the face of the earth who doesn't have a similar (and probably worse) story to tell with respect to the natural tendency of people to band together based on commonality, from ethnicity to gender to nationalism.' Nonetheless, we have a black President with a Jewish chief-of-staff, and a female Secretary of State.I'm seriously tired of people pulling the race or gender card to explain away their bad behavior.' Ultimately, we are responsible for our own actions.' This brings me to Serena Williams in the U.S. Open.' Serena was losing badly in the semi-finals to unseeded, unranked Kim Clijsters, and Clijsters had just beaten Serena's sister, Venus.' The match was at the point where Clijsters was but one point from victory, and it was Serena's serve.' She faulted on her first serve.' Instead of just going back to the baseline to serve again, she menacingly walked toward the judge, shouting and cursing her, pointing the ball and then the racket at her, as though she were going to strike the woman.' Allegedly, she said, "If I could, I would take this [expletive deleted] ball and shove it down your [expletive deleted] throat." The line judge went over to the chair umpire and tournament referee as the crowd was booing.' According to news reports, Serena said, "Sorry, but there're a lot of people who've said worse.' I didn't say I would kill you.' Are you serious?' I didn't say that." But the line judge said she did say that, and that with the crowd noise, it was difficult for others to hear the specifics.'I saw that video, and having someone with that venomous rage coming at me, screaming and cursing, shaking a racket in my face (especially since Serena had already smashed a racket earlier in the game when she committed an unforced error) would have scared me too.Serena was only penalized a point, which, by destiny of timing, turned out to be the match point.' Clijsters would have won anyway - she was playing an amazing game, and she did go on to win the U.S. Open.So, here's a young woman, used to success, who couldn't handle being humbled, and she robbed Clijsters of the good feeling of trumping a tennis goddess.' This is obviously bad behavior - very bad.' The bad boys of tennis games past were also known to behave badly, but, according to news sources, they never threatened the life or well-being of a judge.' This was scary and horrendous behavior.'The first reaction of some was to scream "racism!"' Oh puleeze.' Was anyone saying she behaved badly because she was black?' NO.' Was anyone saying she was penalized for her behavior because she was black?' YES, and that is downright annoying and dumb.'Online, someone posted a comment after the news item, which I think is "right on."' Here's an excerpt: There are reasons for rules in competitive sports or banking or finance or education or society.' The reasons [for the rules] always have to do with participants being unwilling or unable to manage or discipline their emotions when under duress of any kind.' This duress...almost always manifests poorly, but often successfully.' Serena...lost her composure in the early stages of this match, played poorly, got behind, and faced almost certain defeat.' The foot fault (which many say was correct, many say "iffy," and some say false) was critical, but not pivotal for Serena.' She could have played through it.' She had the serve. But she had first-serve faulted many times, and had lost every second serve point to her opponent.' So, she gave in to panic, which led her to say some astoundingly aggressive things to the line judge, who, to her credit, stayed calm, objective, and within the rules.' The referee made the proper call, and Serena lost, and then lost again by backpedaling after the match, with cover-up comments and lame excuses. But this is an era when elites in all walks of life take the liberty of exposing their true selves without much consequence.' It's called "privilege," and it is, in my mind, the downfall of the American personality, and with it, the downfall of the nation - a little microcosm on a big stage.' Pride comes before a fall. Truth is, she knew she had lost this match, even if that one linesman's call was bad.' Instead of letting her opponent savor the victory point, she surrendered early.' Clijster swamped her and her sister, and Williams acted like a classless brat.' And classless brats come in all colors, genders and religions.' Point...game...match. More >>

Tags: BehaviorCharacterCharacter, Courage, ConscienceCharacter-Courage-ConscienceChildrenCivilityMorals, Ethics, ValuesParentingValues
PERMALINK | EMAIL | PRINT | RSS  Subscribe
05/13/2010
IconI have some comments to make about Ashley Dupre, the highly-paid prostitute who notoriously humped disgraced ex-New York State Governor Eliot Spitzer.Angry about the negative perception of her, Ms. Dupre wrote on a blog post: 'Let me say this:' most girls, to varying degrees, of course, want to be pampered and have nice shoes, designer handbags and gorgeous clothes.' I know many women who target guys with money and use them to get these things.' They toy with them, flirt, go on dates, have sex and then drop hints about that new dress...or being short on rent money ' and the guys deliver it.' Whoa, missy!' Trying to make yourself look better by making comparisons to other devious skanks just doesn't work that well.' Everyone in the universe would like 'nice things,' but some people are satisfied with richer things in life ' like love and family ' while others simply work hard at a legitimate job that doesn't exploit or damage other people's families to get those things.One comment listed on the New York Post website in response to this story was quite interesting: 'She's a cheap trick trying to cover the fact that she sold her body for a few thousand bucks.' There IS a BIG difference.' Implying that a relationship is like prostitution is like implying that hunting and killing game is no [different from] hunting and killing people.' She's trying to spin the simple fact that relationships are give-and-take to say that all that are give-and-take in any way are the same, but giving and taking in a long-term social and intimate relationship is NOT the same as a business transaction for sex. She would have done better to say that a piece of ham in a supermarket is 'no better' than she is being the more closer comparison to buying a piece of meat for consumption.' I have a simple question to ask women who are defensive about their behaviors:' would you teach your daughters to do this?' It is amazing how the answer to this will definitely be a quick and disgusted 'NO,' but then, these women are quick to rationalize.Ashley Dupre is a disgusting creature, not only for being a 'paid-for' sex machine, but mostly for being an unrepentant destroyer of some other woman's family.' It is the unrepentant part that really gets me, and should get you, too.' As a foolish young woman with warped values, we could all 'get' (i.e., understand) her behavior, but here she is, older and after the fact, and she still has no conscience about her actions.It is the lack of conscience in this woman that ultimately judges her. More >>

Tags: AdulteryBullyingCharacter, Courage, ConscienceCharacter-Courage-ConscienceEthicsInfidelityInternet-MediaInternet/MediaMoralsMorals, Ethics, ValuesParenting
PERMALINK | EMAIL | PRINT | RSS  Subscribe
Tags: Character, Courage, ConscienceCharacter-Courage-ConscienceValues
PERMALINK | EMAIL | PRINT | RSS  Subscribe
05/13/2010
IconMice kept on a diet that is healthy (but absolutely no fun at all) in which their caloric intake was restricted to only 70% of what's considered "normal" lived 30 to 40% longer than the usual lifespan.' The only downside of this restriction was that the mice were less fertile than their non-restricted counterparts.'Most people can't restrict calories for long, so, according to the New York Times , scientists are trying to find a drug that tricks the body into thinking it's eating fewer calories.' The problem is that all of these restricted calorie experiments are done on captive mice, who are selected for quick breeding and who are fed on rich diets.' A low-calorie diet could be much closer to the diet that mice are adapted to in the wild, extending their life simply because it is much healthier for them.' Mice don't live that long, anyway.' Humans have a longer life span, and that extended duration of time on the planet leaves us more vulnerable to cancers.So, after 20 years of experimenting with caloric restriction on monkeys in captivity, studies found the monkeys were healthier (i.e., they had fewer incidents of diabetes, cancer, and heart disease), but their life span was not significantly longer.' Eating more prudently than we generally do, therefore, was good for quality of life, but not for quantity of life.And that's the point of my taking on this issue in the first place.' People call my radio program knowing they're probably going to die of some particular terminal disease they have.' They call me, because they're spending each day suffering emotionally over the realization that they will soon be dead.' My response to one woman in this situation was to wake up each morning and yell out loud: "Damn - I'm not dead!' Today, I'm gonna LIVE OUT LOUD!!!" The point of our being upset about death is the realization that we've lost all we value in life.' So, take each day that you're not dead to live life to the fullest.' Enjoy that day you're not dead.' Don't waste one precious moment of it.Come to think of it, that's good advice for everyone, since at different times, and at different rates, we're all terminal.' Don't waste one minute of life. More >>

Tags: AttitudeCharacter, Courage, ConscienceCharacter-Courage-ConscienceCommon SenseHealthMorals, Ethics, ValuesPersonal ResponsibilityPurposeValues
PERMALINK | EMAIL | PRINT | RSS  Subscribe
Tags: AttitudeCharacter, Courage, ConscienceCharacter-Courage-ConscienceCommon SenseHealthMorals, Ethics, ValuesPersonal ResponsibilityPurposeValues
PERMALINK | EMAIL | PRINT | RSS  Subscribe
05/13/2010
IconA female professor from Oxford University in England, in an article published in the Journal of Population Economics, has decided that American and British men (who don't mind lending a hand when it comes to housework), make the best husbands, while Australian men are the worst.' She's also "decided" that Norway, Sweden, and Northern Ireland, where men "lend a hand in housework," are egalitarian countries which produce better husbands.I say: unbelievable feminista hogwash!! The professor's definition of a good husband is ridiculous.' Men who are sexually faithful, who work hard to provide for and protect their families, who take care of the plumbing and the lawn are not good husbands, because they don't do what used to be called "women's work."' This is just one more salvo in the war against masculinity, in which men are completely emasculated because they're told that they're neither good men nor good husbands unless they fold the laundry.When women call me complaining about such things (usually women who are at home), I ask them if they drive their husband's route in traffic every day, or if they deal with difficult bosses or co-workers, or if they aren't able to take breaks whenever they choose or take care of all the car and house repair issues.' They say "no," but expect him to do housework in addition to all his other responsibilities.In those situations where both husband and wife have full-time jobs, and there's a "war" about who's going to take care of household chores, I say they should budget and pay for part-time housecleaning help, or one of them ought to reassess their life and decide if having no one at home to make a nest is worth the money they both make.There are biological and psychological imperatives in females for nesting/child care, and in males for conquering/protecting.' When these are turned inside out, there is usually (but not always) a reaction in the female to feel less respectful and sexual toward her mate.' Women don't stare at skinny guys with spectacles when they walk by, but they do stare at Bowflex-toned commercial male actors with huge pecs and biceps.' Why?' It's the animal attraction of a male who, potentially, is sexually healthy enough to produce offspring and then provide and protect.Women who want emasculated men generally have huge hostility issues with masculinity (which they got from their mothers or the feminist teachers of their women's studies courses), and want to be able to control the man (never as much as their mother could) or are just too scared of their normal natural dependency on a real man.A better study would be to find out what household situations make MEN happiest, because those are the ones which, overall, are going to attract the men who make the best husbands.' Happy husbands spend more time with their families, and would swim through shark-infested waters for them.' This particular study?'' Just another piece of feminist propaganda flotsam. More >>

Tags: Character, Courage, ConscienceCharacter-Courage-ConscienceFamilyFamily/Relationships - FamilyFeminismMarriageMen's Point of ViewRelativesSocial IssuesValues
PERMALINK | EMAIL | PRINT | RSS  Subscribe
05/13/2010
IconRomantically, beauty may be in the eyes of the beholder, but according to a new report from research done in Helsinki and London, girls are getting prettier, and guys are...well... not getting more handsome. "Scientists have found that evolution is driving women to become ever more beautiful, while men remain as aesthetically unappealing as their caveman ancestors," reports The London Times .' Evidently, beautiful women have more children than their plainer counterparts, and a higher proportion of those children are females who tend to be attractive.' A researcher at the University of Helsinki found beautiful women had up to 16% more children than plain women.' An evolutionary psychologist at the London School of Economics proclaimed that good-looking parents were far more likely to conceive daughters.' The most attractive parents (out of 15,000 Americans who were "judged") were 26% less likely to have sons. "Physical attractiveness is a highly heritable trait, which disproportionately increases the reproductive success of daughters much more than of sons.' If more attractive parents have more daughters, and if physical attractiveness is heritable, it logically follows that women over many generations gradually become more physically attractive on average than men," the researcher said.Well, here's my take.' I don't really know if any of this holds water, but let's assume for a moment that it does.' This means that a lot of beautiful women are marrying plain men because they are less into "beauty" and more into other qualities (like loyalty, fidelity, ability to provide and protect, sexual prowess, and status), while men want women who are beautiful because their beauty is a source of status for the male and a measure of her overall health for child-bearing.Nonetheless, I was quite impressed with the beyond gorgeous hunk Tom Selleck, when I learned that he married a rather plain-looking woman, and quite put off with Bruce Willis, when he married some hottie almost half his age.' To me, these choices told me the character and maturity of each man, with Selleck winning out.All of these "soft science" reports are amusing, if not generally nonsense, and it is amazing how differently you feel about a person's good looks after you meet and interact with them as opposed to just viewing a two-dimensional photograph.My main point here is this:' it's a fact that we are first attracted or repelled by looks (no kidding).' However, I suggest you try MY experiment:' walk through a mall or a flower garden, and look at the people paired up and holding hands or talking softly to one another.'' It's rare that one or both is "beautiful," but it is not rare that they are happy with the depth of compassion, attention, affection, support, fun, and happiness that they obviously share.The moral to this story?' Have good hygiene, make the most of the physical qualities you have, and don't focus at all on your looks (or anyone else's for that matter).' Put your best behavioral foot forward, and be open to meeting friends and a possible life partner based, instead, on how you make each other feel. More >>

Tags: Character, Courage, ConscienceCharacter-Courage-ConscienceValues
PERMALINK | EMAIL | PRINT | RSS  Subscribe
05/13/2010
IconA now 17-year-old boy from Thousand Oaks, California recently sailed, by himself, some 28,000 miles in one year on a 36-foot sailboat.' Zac Sunderland was 16 when he left Marina del Rey harbor in June, 2008.The Associated Press writer was a bit snarky, I think, when writing: "But the shaggy-haired Thousand Oaks native might not hold the record of being the youngest person to sail around the world alone for long.' British sailor Mike Perham is a few months younger than Sunderland, and is sailing a bigger, faster boat." If I were Zac's mother, this would have annoyed me.' I'm not his mother, but it annoys me .' Assuming she or he wants to keep a scrapbook commemorating his sailing exploits, what a snarky thing to have included. "A few months...a bigger, faster boat." So what?Here is a 16 (now 17) year old kid who, instead of partying, abusing drugs, alcohol or hanging out with silly girls, instead of spending hours on Facebook, MySpace, Twitter or whatever, instead of hanging in his room sullen, instead of causing trouble at school, instead of driving too fast in the car he shouldn't have been given in the first place, instead of a lot of typical teenage boy activities, took on a challenge that was to test his ability to discipline himself, live austerely, deal with unpredictable weather and seas, survive loneliness and fear, and fix equipment failures when warranted.Shoving up his nose in print that someone else trying it is younger and has a better boat, shows, in my opinion, a complete ignorance of the difficulties and challenges he had to face.' It is remarkable for such a young person to brave all the elements of wind and sea to take an incredible journey on his own.' I am sure he now has a healthy respect for nature, life and himself.' I am sure he won't hesitate to face many other challenges on land.' I am sure he won't be abusing himself or substances to get a "rush."' I am sure he's a fine young man who should be an inspiration to other teens.' You are never too young to have a dream and go for it.I'm sure his mom is very proud.' She should be! More >>

Tags: Character, Courage, ConscienceCharacter-Courage-ConscienceCourageFamily/Relationships - TeensHobbiesPersonal ResponsibilitySailingTeensValues
PERMALINK | EMAIL | PRINT | RSS  Subscribe
Make an Appointment
Stay Connected
or connect at a place below
Normal Gear
Latest Poll
How often is work stressful?
Archives  |  Results
Programs
About Dr. Laura
Letters
E-mail of the Day
From Listeners
Audio & Video
YouTube Videos
Stay at Home
Parenting
Relationships
Simple Savings
Work at Home
Tip of the Week
Subscription
Membership
Help & Support
Family Premium Help Center
Podcast Help
Contact Us
Legal
Terms of Use
© 2019 DrLaura.com. Take on the Day, LLC
Dr. Laura is a registered trademark of Take On The Day, LLC.
Terms & Conditions  |  Privacy Policy
Powered By Nox Solutions