This week, I'm turning over my blog to a guest.' A few weeks ago, after a comment I made on-the-air regarding civility, I got an e-mail from Joe Hanlon, whose message I could not improve upon.' So, with his permission, I've decided to share his words with you.' Welcome, Joe, our first guest blogger: Hi, Dr. Laura! Long-time listener, first time emailer.' Well, I try to listen as much as I can, but as a math teacher, I'm usually a tad busy when you are on the air.' I catch the last ten minutes of your show on XM a lot. I caught those last ten minutes today, and heard your comments on civility.' As usual, my reaction to your commentary was "Right on!"' The Internet IS ruining civility by allowing people to say the rudest things under the cover of anonymity and just because they can.' Programs like "The View" foster incivility because rudeness garners ratings and makes money.' The problem is that incivility is oozing out from television and the Internet into everyday discourse, often resulting in harsher, and sometimes physical, incivility. I tried to stem this tide.' I stuck my finger in this Internet dike by creating a site called, appropriately to this subject, "Civility."' Previously, I had been posting on a sports team site on topics ranging from the team to baseball in general to politics to religion.' Unfortunately, it is impossible to discuss any of these topics on the Internet without being verbally assaulted with rudeness, name-calling, and vulgarity.' Unfortunately, my reaction was often in kind (or should I say in "Unkind?"). I didn't like my Internet persona.' It was very different from my live personality.' In real life, I have very strong opinions and often state them matter-of-factly, but am always careful not to rudely attack the person I am talking to, nor to use profanity.' I naively thought that changing my Internet personality would keep me out of "flame wars" and allow me to participate in heated, but civil, debates.' Wrong. So, I tried to start a message board whose goal was to promote strong debate while remaining civil.' It worked to the extent that we had several debates in which disagreements were profound, but incivility was kept to an unheard-of minimum.' It failed in the sense that I couldn't keep it going.' Over time, I had more members joining trying to sell Viagra and pornography than I had members who wanted to debate the hot topics of the day.' I had to move the site to lose the trolls, but the few remaining members didn't follow.' The site still exists, but has nothing recent posted.' If you'd like to check it out, it's at www.civility.eye95.org . The point is that civility doesn't sell.' Sadly, incivility does. I still post on the sports site.' I liberally use the "ignore" feature (which means that over half the posts are invisible to me), and I try to remain civil at all times.' I have less [of a] problem with people being uncivil to me; they now know that I won't fight back (often referred to as "defending" oneself) and that I will simply ignore them. People who want to be civil have to learn how to live in an uncivil world without becoming infected.' It is hard.' Unfortunately, changing the rest of the world does not seem to be an option.' I keep trying to have some small effect, though.' But, being an idealist is hard, too. Keep changing the world, one listener at a time. Joe More >>

What a conundrum for liberals who support any and all abortions at any time for any reason under the rubric of "pro-choice" freedoms.' Liberals are also supposedly for diversity.' Well, here's the problem:' If a woman is free to abort the human being developing in her body for any whim, shouldn't she be able to abort the baby if it has been genetically tested and the results are not "pleasing?"The New York Times' "Week in Review" "Prenatal Tests + Abortion = ???" (May 13, 2007) dealt with this growing concern about pro-choice abortion morality and ethics: "Abortion rights supporters - who believe that a woman has the right to make decisions about her own body-have had to grapple with the reality that the right to choose may well be used selectively to abort fetuses deemed genetically undesirable.' And many are finding that, while they support a woman's right to have an abortion if she does not want to have a baby, they are less comfortable when abortion is used by women who don't want to have a particular baby." Two "liberal values" are on a collision course.' The first is, of course, the right to terminate fetal life at will.' The second is the freedom to abort children on the basis of gender, sexual orientation, disabilities, intelligence, and future illnesses (certain cancers and arthritis) when the liberal mantra is supposedly "pro diversity." "Kirsten Moore [the article continues], president of the pro-choice Reproductive Health Technologies Project, said that when members of her staff recently discussed whether to recommend that any prenatal tests be banned, they found it impossible to draw a line - even at sex selection, which almost all found morally repugnant.' 'We all had our own zones of discomfort, but still couldn't quite bring ourselves to say 'here's the line, firm and clear' because that is the core of the pro-choice philosophy,' she said.' 'You can never make that decision for someone else." This puts pro-abortion liberals in a quandary.' As more pre-natal genetic testing becomes available, more folks will have the ability to "design" a baby.' They will probably choose against much of the core constituency that political liberals have worked hard on to fortify their ideological base.'Very interesting. More >>

On Friday, May 11th, I was in Salt Lake City doing my radio program at Fort Douglas to honor Military Moms for Mother's Day.' Just before the three-hour live broadcast, I was interviewed by Matthew D. LaPlante for the Salt Lake Tribune; ostensibly about Military Moms.' I don't remember him asking me even one question about that.'''' His article was published the next day with the headline, " Dr. Laura to G.I. wives: No Whining ."' Although this interview went over one-half hour, and I covered a wide range of subjects pertinent to military families and the war, he chose a comment, one that I've made before many times on the air, to make the primary focus of his article - and, he took it out of the entire context of my remarks.'''' I am so deeply sad and disappointed that this out of context comment appears to have caused hurt and pain to military spouses - people that I've spent so much time helping.' I am frustrated that people who haven't heard my program would be misled as to my attitude and intent.'''' I am a military mom.' I whine to my husband every day about how scared I am for my son and how helpless I feel to protect his body and soul.' However, I never whine to my son when he is able to call between missions.'''' That, and only that, is my point.' Of course military spouses endure fear and domestic burdens.' Of course they often need emotional support and practical assistance.' As I said to the reporter, and many times on my program, family services, clergy, family, friends, and the camaraderie of other military spouses are available outlets.' However, burdening one's warrior spouse with your fears, upsets, loneliness, etc., is a huge mistake as it demoralizes the warrior and thereby undermines their concentration while they are in life-death situations.'''' It is also true that when a soldier is in combat, his family must remember that anything they are going through needs to be perceived in the context of the fact that they are not dodging bullets and tip-toeing around IEDs.' I know that when I get upset about things in my life, I think about my son and what he is facing that he can't walk away from, then I have a cup of coffee and go for a relaxing sail.' It puts me back into a less "poor me" perspective.' And that is what I have conveyed to millions of folks on my radio program.'''' Warrior wives, as I refer to them, need to be independent, compassionate, mature, selfless, strong, competent, supportive and well-connected to family, friends, and church - because their men are in daily life-and-death situations and need the reassurance of their woman's loyalty, love, and strength to survive.'''' I have been a major cheerleader for all the members of military families.' That's why I have raised over $500,000. for Operation Family Fund (which provides financial assistance to families of fallen or severely injured military) as well as trips such as this last one to Salt Lake City to support Military Moms before Mother's Day.'''' I have met Blue, Silver and Gold Star Moms.' It is humbling to see them all proud and mutually supportive, even when suffering.' I am inspired by family members who lovingly and patriotically sacrifice to support one of their own who volunteered for service to their country and families.' Military folks and their families are a breed apart as they live with the threat of death, for the promise of freedom for complete strangers.'''' We should all be respectful and very grateful. More >>

As I've written in a prior blog, I agreed with the firing of Imus.' His decades of uncivil remarks for "entertainment" (his word) needed to come to a close.'' I hope this is just the beginning of firing folks for hateful remarks.' Let's go to that peace and groovy love group, "Rage Against the Machine."' In a recent concert in the Coachella Valley in California, lead singer-rapper Zack de la Rocha shouted, "This current administration....should be tried and hung and shot."' He also likened President Bush to a Nazi war criminal.'I don't think Zack ever walked through Dachau concentration camp while it was in operation or since.' I did.' I realized that as a half-Jew I would have died in one of the ovens and my body thrown in a pit, had it not been for an accident of my birth coming after the war. That comparison as well as the death declaration should be enough to fire Zack.' He meant it - Imus was just being a righteous jerk.Another individual ripe for firing should be Sheik Ahmad Bahr, acting Speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council.' He is reported to have declared during a Friday sermon at a Sudan mosque that America and Israel will be annihilated, and "called upon Allah to kill Jews and Americans 'to the very last one.'' He meant that.' Imus was just being a righteous jerk. More >>

I just about lost it reading Linda P. Campbell's syndicated column ( www.realcities.com/mld/dfw/news/columnists/linda_campbell/17137857/17137857.htm ) about the Supreme Court's abortion decision not being simple or neat. Let me take some of her points one by one, as she explains her abhorrence of any controls over any abortion, in addition to the barbaric sucking out of a baby's brain after the head emerges from the birth canal (partial birth abortion).'First, she says " And of course, a woman who's about to undergo an abortion ought to understand the details, risks and implications just as much as she should before a tummy tuck, hip replacement, or appendectomy ."All those procedures require an office visit and an explanation of the process, and then a new appointment for the procedure.' Call any Planned Parenthood you like - or walk in, and you can get an abortion right then and there, as long as it isn't too busy.' Planned Parenthood, NOW (the National Organization of "I don't know what kind of " Women) and other "feminist" organizations have always been against the waiting period, a sonogram to show the baby's level of development, or a discussion about the benefits of giving life and finding a suitable two-parent, married mom and dad family for adoption.Second, she says, " I can't imagine the circumstances that would cause a woman to choose abortion.' But I can appreciate that each one who does has reasons that only she can reconcile with her conscience ."I have been on radio taking calls from slightly more than 50% women for 32 years.'' I know why women have abortions, because they've called.' It is rarely because of severe anomalies or life-threatening circumstances.' It is generally because of "circumstances," usually meaning the one-night stand, casual boyfriend, fianc', or sometimes husband doesn't want a child or else dumps them.Ms. Campbell continues: "It's all too tempting to make judgments about which motives we consider justified and which we don't.' But then we risk wandering into scary territory.' How far do we want to let lawmakers and zealots reach into our most personal and private decisions when they haven't a clue about what's best for us?" What?? We should make no judgments about motivations to kill another human being?' Self-defense in an armed robbery deserves the same respect as the intentional murder of innocents by a suicide-bombing?' A woman who keeps having casual sex and uses abortion as birth control can't be judged differently from a pregnant woman with a serious heart problem who might die if the pregnancy goes to term?I, for one, am sick and tired with the "nothing should be judged" nonsense.' Of course we judge - that's how we make decisions and choices every day.' To judge is to discern good from evil, right from wrong, and selfish from selfless.' Without that, we are just lower animals.Abortions out of shame, embarrassment, or inconvenience are a horrible, despicable disaster.' An Abortion to save the life of the mother is self-defense.'There.' I dared to judge. More >>

I am "the proud mother of a deployed American paratrooper," and because of that fact I have, perhaps, a unique perspective on the massacre at Virginia Tech.'''''''As a mother I, of course, thought about how horrendous this whole nightmare is to the families of the victims as well as all the emotional damage to the survivors.' From listening to the reports on this heinous occurrence, I heard repeatedly that the shooter had to reload several times and went from classroom to classroom.' As a military mom, I immediately wished that our young people had the same obligation and experience that all young folks in Israel have: two years of military training and service.' Those reloading and trolling periods were windows of opportunity that only young folks trained militarily would have been able to use to subdue or terminate the perp and save many lives.'''' Just in case you're saying, "Well, this doesn't happen that often and is not a substantial reason for universal 2-year training," I've got a further reason to support such training.'''' Radical Islamists and jihadists are already here in the United States.' While we have, for better or worse, focused their attention on Iraq and Afghanistan... they will be using their tactics of mass murdering of innocents right here next.' It is going to be important that our civilian population have sufficient training and know-how to protect their homes and communities.''' The following quote came from an Associated Press (April 17, 2007) article entitled, "Taliban Using Indiscriminate, Iraq-style Tactics, Killing civilians, Rights Group Says." "I lost my son, brother and nephew because of the Taliban. They say that they are fighting for God and Islam, but they are not; they are killing good and innocent Muslims and Afghans who have done nothing wrong," one man was quoted as saying.'''' I believe every household should have at least one person trained and certified to shoot a gun.' I believe every young person between 18 and 20 years of age should be required to receive compulsory military training.' Over 70 nations in the world require some level of compulsory military service on the part of their young citizens including countries such as Austria, Brazil, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Israel, Mexico, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland.' Why shouldn't the United States be as prepared as these countries?' I believe we as Americans should be equipped mentally and physically to protect ourselves, our family, and our Country. More >>

I recently got an email from a first time "mom to be" about her experiences online as she attempted to find support and information from others in the same situation.' She was quite disturbed by what she found, and I offered her the opportunity to be this week's "Guest Blogger" and share her comments with you:
Dr. Laura:
I cannot thank you enough for being a voice of reason these days.' It has recently hit home pretty hard about how "turned around" people have become in their thinking and the decisions they make.
I'm 6+ months pregnant with my first child, and was excited to join an online pregnancy club for my birth month.' I quickly became sickened as I read the threads that were being posted by other soon-to-be mothers.' I read thread after thread of mothers whose boyfriends were cheating on them, and they'd just complain and get sympathy from other soon-to-be mothers (and I use that word very lightly).
The overall sympathetic message that kept reverberating was that it is never the woman's fault, and they can't help it that their child's "sperm donor" is such a deadbeat.' They encourage each other with strong words and big talk about how they have more than enough love for their child and have absolutely NO need for a father.' They even have their own lovely support group for single/unwed mothers, to provide emotional support for these poor unwitting victims of sex.
I tried to combat some of these women's comments to no avail.' No matter what I posted about how life can be better, and we can make good decisions for our children and that there are other alternatives to give our children what they deserve (i.e., a two parent home), I kept getting absolutely lambasted from every direction:' attacked on all sides, called every name, my words twisted and distorted to make it seem like I was the most uncaring, unfeeling person in the world, and had nothing of value to say regarding families.' These women didn't
need
a father to influence their children, period!' They certainly didn't need me advocating the importance of fathers or pointing out that we are old enough to make good decisions - for example, not bed-hopping from one creep to another, hurting our children.' When I used my own wonderful husband as an example of the great guys that are out there, I was told to give my marriage more time, because it was certain not to last, and boy, then wouldn't I feel stupid for my words!
This
coming from the future mothers of America.
When did we all become victims?' When did we give up on making good decisions and become bodies just used for sex and ruining children's lives?' I am sickened and disheartened, and I cannot wipe these "threads" from my mind.' I couldn't imagine living the kind of lives they live - not out of self-righteousness, as they accuse me of and for which they spit on my ideals - but because life would be devoid of anything decent or holy.' I did not realize there was really that kind of emptiness and deprivation in our wonderful country.' I thank my parents for keeping me from that kind of a life.' Thank you, Dr. Laura, for being a beacon shining through the haze of this new America.' The "sperm donors" aren't the ones who are really ruining our society.' The single/unwed mother club of America is robbing our future generations of life's purpose, meaning, and love.
Elisabeth More >>

It is understandable that I have received a lot of inquiries about my reaction to Don Imus' problem, as I am also a radio talk show host (32 years) who has taken flack for "objections" to my point of view.The main problem with Imus' comments is that they were in no way taken out of context - they were a direct assault on a group of women for whom the words did not match the reality.' In fact, as a woman, and as a woman often under public attack, I am so very proud of the statement given by one of the Rutgers University basketball players:'"'I am a woman, and I'm someone's child,' said Kia Vaughn.' 'I achieve'a lot.' And unless they've given this name, a 'ho, a new definition, then'that is not what I am.'' She stood with her teammates, a row of unbowed,'confident women. ( Time, April 12, 2007 )Now that's impressive.However, someone will have to tell me when it was that Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson apologized for their verbal assaults on the Duke lacrosse players who were wrongly accused of rape and battery.' When will music stores stop selling Eminem's music, filled with violent, ugly commentary about women and homosexuals?' I want also to know when Rosie O'Donnell will get her last paycheck after commentary declaring that America killed its own on 9/11?' I'm also curious about all the demeaning, misogynistic, crude and violent lyrics in rap music which flourish in music stores and on television.' And gosh, if the ACLU can come out in force to stand behind the Ku Klux Klan and the Aryan Nation, why no peep about Imus?' How is it that [Howard] Stern's career can survive to the hundreds of millions in compensation after his wondering out loud why the Columbine murderers did not rape the girls before killing them?Note:' There are no problems in the African-American community caused by Imus.' Not one.'' Perhaps black leaders might take note of that and focus in on what is really important:' gangs, drugs, and out-of-wedlock children.As for Imus, it would seem his arrogance caught up with him.' His remark was insulting, stupid, mean and ugly.' It was so seemingly "off-the-cuff," that it felt too casually familiar a thing for him to say. More >>

"But why should I have to do 'X' when I don't feel like it?"That is by far the single most expressed sentiment to excuse oneself from fulfilling obligations to others. Feelings have been elevated from the mercurial and temporary to positions of absolute truth and power. "I feel that..." is most always used when one actually is expressing thoughts, beliefs, opinions, guesses, and concerns.One of the most typical problems in marriages is not religion, politics or finances - it's the issue of sexuality. For the most part, the pattern is that a man and woman have a great out-of-wedlock sexual relationship, full of passion and spontaneity. Once married, and especially once children come on the scene, too many women "feel" less and less like being their husband's lover and girlfriend. I have talked to hundreds, if not thousands, of women over the more than thirty years I've been on radio, and the story is always the same: "I'm just too tired...or...annoyed to feel like having sex." I ask them what they expect their husbands to do. "Be understanding," they say.I then ask these wives if they would suggest their husbands take advantage of a hooker, Internet porn, or a girlfriend on the side to fulfill their needs for affection and sexual activity. Once I get their attention...I move on to several points: 1. If there is "too much on your plate," cut stuff out. You cannot properly maintain a marital relationship when you leave almost no time and energy for it. That means that full-time jobs, children, a home, and your parents and friends take up your life and leave no room for the man who would give his life for you. This is also a breach of your vows to love and honor. 2. There are lots of things you don't feel like doing - but you do them anyway because you have obligations to others. Your husband doesn't feel like visiting your mother, taking you shopping, listening to your repetitive stories and gripes about your sister, going out for tampons, and so forth - but he does it anyway because he loves you . Imagine a world where everybody only did what they felt like doing??? 3. I never wake up feeling like working out, but I get up anyway. I put on my workout clothes, get some water, and start pumping weights. Once I get started, I feel very good about what I'm doing and how it is impacting my body. Well, once you get into foreplay, you'll probably start getting into it too! That means you need to take a nice shower or bath, use some sweet-smelling perfume or body powder, put on something adorable and start flirting with your man - it won't take long for you TO FEEL LIKE IT! 4. Life is short - never turn down a perfectly good orgasm- on your death bed, you'll regret it. There is hardly a better way to reconnect and reaffirm your love and attachment - this is the ultimate bonding technique. 5. You made vows to "love and cherish," so do it or don't expect much in return. That means, don't call me complaining about no Valentine's or Anniversary present when you haven't treated your man like your man and your lover . If you don't make the effort to make him feel special to you - don't expect it in return. More >>

First, full disclosure. Years ago, a journalist from Vanity Fair called me. She was supposedly friends for 20 years with my then-chief of staff, and wanted to interview me. And having some brains in my head (I don't trust this stuff), I asked my associate about her, and she said "Y'know, she's been a friend of mine; I'll vouch for her." So, I said 'OK, I'll call her, feel it out, and then make a decision.'I called her, and she gave me a line of lies (that I found out later were a line of lies) about how I was a cultural phenomenon and she wanted to study this sociologically, and understand the points of view about how they became popular (but they weren't), and she gave me this whole line, and I thought "OK, I like the point of view; she's supposedly friends with my chief-of-staff who has known her and says she's a decent person," and I agreed to do it.Meanwhile, my editor at HarperCollins said "Don't. Trust me on this. Don't. Trust me on this. Don't. Trust me on this. Don't." Turns out (I'm going to go back and forth in history a little bit), after the article was out, my editor, who was protecting her source who was a dear friend who worked at Vanity Fair , said "I couldn't tell you because I promised " - don't you hate those? --- I couldn't tell you, because I promised, but that Vanity Fair , according to my source (a male who works there, whose name I do not know, or I'd give it right now) said that they actually had a planning meeting to set me up and do a hatchet piece. I'm telling you this because I want clarity that what I'm about to say is not vengeance. You've heard me say I love vengeance....I love it. Justice, vengeance - all one thing to me. I love it! And you've also heard how I want you to go get it, usually by being really nice ('cause that kills the bad guys) and being happy and successful.That woman from Vanity Fair came for the first meeting with me and I knew I was in trouble, when I came in and sat down, and she took a look at my figure and disdainfully asked me if I was a size zero, while she was somewhere between fat and obese, and I was trying to get her an appropriate sandwich, but she wanted to eat something with a lot of mayonnaise - I knew there was a problem from that point on, to be honest with you. And I was right. It was just a nasty hatchet piece of people saying gossipy stupid things and it was really mean. The writer's name is Leslie Bennetts. Really mean . But I found out way too late that that was Vanity Fair 's plan - it was their little editorial meeting, according to my editor at HarperCollins who's not there anymore and not related to this. But she didn't tell me in time. She said, "Well, I warned you!" A little more information would have been more helpful.The reason I'm bringing this up as disclosure, is that this same person is coming out with a book pretty much telling women not to stay home with their kids. Now, let me say something about women's magazines. By and large, women's magazines completely ignore me. "I am my kid's mom." You'd think one year in 31 years that I've been in the media - that one year I would have been made "Mother of the Year" in one woman's magazine. A couple of years ago, we tried to have a women's magazine "editor and publisher" luncheon with me when one of my new books came out. HarperCollins was going to pay for the lunch, I was going to appear...everybody eats, and I'd do a Q&A. They had to cancel it - nobody would come. Whenever they do articles like on mothers staying home, who do you think in the entire United States you would really think they'd ask for a quote, besides me? It doesn't happen. Okay?So, I want you to know that I've been getting e-mails from you folks about Ladies Home Journal and Glamour magazine doing a little one-page on this book which is encouraging women to do the wrong thing and be paranoid. Let me just share with you two of these letters. This one is from Christie: I was appalled today when a friend e-mailed this to me from Glamour magazine. The article tells stay-at-home moms that they will become dependent financially and lose themselves. I'm a stay-at-home mom to a beautiful six month old baby girl. I am a wife to a Navy officer (my warrior!), and I am dependent on him. Yet, I know that my family is dependent on me! My husband and child NEED me to do the tasks that make our home run smoothly in order to feel safe, secure and loved! I thank you for reminding your listeners on a daily basis the importance of being dependent on your spouse in your marriage both ways, and to be your kids' parents. Yes! That's the part Leslie doesn't seem to get! I don't know what her home life is like, but mutual dependency is a good marriage. This is from Jennifer: I was appalled at coming across an article in Ladies Home Journal (like a rabbit, it keeps multiplying!) . It's entitled "Why Moms Should Work." For women who have quit their jobs to stay home with the kids full-time, here's a reason to think twice. There's a whole page article she writes about why you shouldn't stay home with your kids. You have to read this! I will only tell you the last paragraph of the article. It says: "There's stress attached to everything we do. Women need to accept that it's fine to be a good-enough parent, a good-enough homemaker, a good-enough wife. We have richer, more satisfying lives when we do a reasonably good job at a multiple of tasks, than when we strive for this insane perfectionism in a single, limited role." I was crushed that she called staying at home with your children a limited role. I'm my 7 year old son's mom and the wife of my husband of 10 years. I'm certainly proud of that and firmly believe the reason my life is so good is because of women like you, Dr. Laura. You believe in us, and we praise you for that. I can't thank you enough for your voice, what you do for your country, and thank you for the tools for a happy home. And that includes staying home with our children. By the way, across the country, young women are jettisoning careers to stay home with their kids. According to The Wall Street Journal (printing information from the US Census Bureau), an estimated almost 6 million mothers stayed home to care for their families in 2005 - 1.2 million more than a decade ago. The trend of opting-out has been broader than previously believed, with women at all income levels taking job breaks. Meanwhile, Leslie Bennetts is paranoid about divorce, your spouse losing a job, and widowhood, as though the only answer to that was across-the-board "do not be at home, do not take care of your kids, do not be your husband's girlfriend"....get your job, be secure, just in case something horrible happens. Well, my answer to something horrible happening is find another way to deal with it if and when it does, rather than knee-jerking, giving up on your family.Last but not least, I'm going to close with this letter from Yvette: Thank you so much for your hard-hitting, yet Godly (if I may say so) advice. I had considered divorcing my husband, pursuing a Vice President job within a Fortune 500 Top 50 company, until I recently took your words to heart. My dear and understanding (for the most part) husband and I have been married for over 13 years, and we have a phenomenal 10 year old son. Although I had read many of your insightful books, I still worked 60 or so hours a week. I claim only stupidity, selfish desires and adhering to the current social norm. I have recently been available to listen to your daily broadcast, which is a godsend. Dr. Laura, I am so self-centered, that I was focusing solely on my career, impressing my boss, scoring myself the bigger paycheck, and securing the coveted VP slot, that I put my marriage and motherhood on the back burner. I must say, you have reminded me of my true calling. Thank you so much. I am now about to become my son's mom and my husband's wife. Thank you for helping me realize that no paycheck, no status can take the place of my true calling. For the first time I can remember, I actually apologized to my dear husband for not listening. Dr. Laura, it finally occurred to me that if I don't listen to my husband (who is, by the way, the most selfless person in the world and only has our family's best at heart) I'll never be blessed in the way that God desires. Of course, this occurred while I work. So I have a journey ahead. I know that sometimes we all need something from another person, therefore, please remember that, in reciprocation, I am ready to be of service to you in any way I can. You go home and take care of your babies. That's how you'll be of service to all the world - a better chance of raising good kids to be decent citizens, to go out and do wonderful things in the world.So, my comments about Leslie Bennetts' book are not vengeance. I have gone on to be happy, functional, secure, and continue with my career. That's my vengeance on what she tried to do. But warning you that women's magazines, and this sort of book, do not function in the best interests of families, children, or women is important to me. Encouraging women to do the wrong thing by making them paranoid about disasters, so they should only strive to be good-enough moms when they're around, good-enough wives if they have the time, but the work is everything, is exactly what for decades and decades women complained their men were doing. And paranoid feminists like Leslie Bennetts are telling you to go backwards in history and hurt the family... just like men who were never home and never involved did. More >>