Watch your baby sitter!!

[Greta]

I love how people assume that if one church goer kills, drinks, steals, or anything else for that matter, lumps all religous people in the same boat.

... and I love how people assume that if one doesn't go to church, they can't be trusted around children. Both generalizations are just as ridiculous. THAT was my point... sorry you missed it.

 

[cratz2]

... and I love how people assume that if one doesn't go to church, they can't be trusted around children. Both generalizations are just as ridiculous. THAT was my point... sorry you missed it.

I got your point and I completely agree with it. Having said that, since somewhere between 65% and 93% of America identifies as Christian (whether practicing or non-practicing), I'd imagine if you asked every single parent in the country if they had to choose a babysitter that attended church regularly or a babysitter that hadn't been to churcn in 10 years, a pretty overwhelming majority would probably prefer those that attend church.

Having said that, Ted Bundy and John Gacy likely attended church more regularly than I do.

I think the idea is that you never really know someone. I think most people that identify with Christianity would tend to prefer an unknown babysitter that also identifies with Christianity vs an unknown babysitter that is completely against Christianity. I know a handful of people that have attended church almost every Wednesday and Sunday for the last 20 years that I wouldn't trust with my kids and I know a couple that practices Wicca that I would trust 100% with anything including my kids.

 

[benchmade_boy]

... and I love how people assume that if one doesn't go to church, they can't be trusted around children. Both generalizations are just as ridiculous. THAT was my point... sorry you missed it.

+1

and i hate when that is the first question people ask is if you do to church.

well i see this one getting closed, as we have gone a ways off topic.

 

[benchmade_boy]

Having said that, Ted Bundy and John Gacy likely attended church more regularly than I do.

Dennis Rader AKA BTK was the leader in a Church in Wichita Kansas.

 

[Nitroz]

... and I love how people assume that if one doesn't go to church, they can't be trusted around children. Both generalizations are just as ridiculous. THAT was my point... sorry you missed it.

Guess I did miss that one, owell.

About the only person I trust with my kids is my mother-in-law.

 

[greenlight]

doesn't sound like a BABY sitter to me.

And my younger brother goes to church with his parents, but he's still trouble.

 

[LiteBrite]

I don't think children should be entrusted to any teenager. There are many situations they are not ready for. If you can't find someone responsible and trusting, stay home.

I am lucky enough to also have both sets of grandparents within 5 miles.

 

[ringzero]

What would you think of a female running a corporation, or simply earning as much as an equally-qualified male in any position? Would you let your kids pet a pit bull?

You're inquiring as to whether a female babysitter should earn the same as a male babysitter?

Rate of pay is negotiatied between babysitter and employer. I'd pay more to get a female babysitter, rather than rely on a cheaper male babysitter.

If Carly Fiorina offered to babysit, I'd consider it although I doubt that I could afford her hourly rate.

Pit bull - what's that have to do with the topic? Maybe, if I was familiar with the dog and its owner.

.

 

[NAW]

Just so there is no confusion, I wasn't in any way trying to imply in my earlier postings that personal belongings are more important than the child(s)

 

[chrwe]

scary... i wouldn't let a male watch my kids.... only females... only Christian females that go to church on a regular basis and have a love for the Lord that is obvious to mult. people...

Do you have any empirical evidence to substantiate your decision, i.e. "christian females visiting church on a regular basis and having a love for the lord" being "better suited to watch your kids" than any other random person offering that service?

A few questions:

1. Please define "regular basis".
2. How do you measure "having a love for the lord"? Is it a binary variable? If yes, what criteria have to be met for it to be 1?
3. Please define "christian".

I would really like to know, 'cause if there is such evidence I would like to take it into consideration should I have to make such a decision.

 

[chrwe]

How is posting something like this keeping things respectful?

It is very respectful, as it uses slight irony to show jar3ds decision might be completely unsubstantiated. Slight irony imo is a much friendlier way to point out some possible error in reasoning than harshly calling out the person in error.

I am really interested if it can be substantiated by some data jar3ds might know but I haven't heard about. We'll see.

 

[TigerhawkT3]

You're inquiring as to whether a female babysitter should earn the same as a male babysitter?

Rate of pay is negotiatied between babysitter and employer. I'd pay more to get a female babysitter, rather than rely on a cheaper male babysitter.

If Carly Fiorina offered to babysit, I'd consider it although I doubt that I could afford her hourly rate.

Pit bull - what's that have to do with the topic? Maybe, if I was familiar with the dog and its owner.

.

Since my first effort went over your head, I'll try again.

Believing that female teens are more trustworthy than male teens is an unfair prejudice. This is similar to the reason that females usually earn less money than a male would in the same position: prejudice. It's also similar to the stigma against pit bulls. These are all examples of people believing, for whatever reason, that some group or culture is somehow less trustworthy, capable, intelligent, etc. than another.

Like chrwe, I would be a lot more receptive to the "untrustworthy male teen" idea if there was something more than, well, NOTHING posted to back it up.

 

[ringzero]

Since my first effort went over your head, I'll try again.

You need to be more careful TigerhawkT3.

A guy with such a high IQ as yours will often go over the heads of people of more modest IQ.

Believing that female teens are more trustworthy than male teens is an unfair prejudice.

Believing that reality is based on some absurd PC nonsense you picked up somewhere doesn't change objective reality.

This is similar to the reason that females usually earn less money than a male would in the same position: prejudice.

Prejudice exists because it is valuable for survival. If prejudice didn't enhance survival, it would have long ago disappeared from the human race.

If I were to step out my front door and encounter a tiger in the yard, I could stop and think: "Wow, where did this tiger come from? Could be a tame, well-fed tiger just recently escaped from a circus or zoo. On the other hand, maybe it's a hungry, ill-tempered tiger with a resentment of humans. Should I approach, retreat, or just stand still?"

Better for my survival if I rely on my instant prejudice about tigers, "Tiger: deadly and fast. Get away now."

These are all examples of people believing, for whatever reason, that some group or culture is somehow less trustworthy, capable, intelligent, etc. than another.

People may believe these things because of prejudice. However, that doesn't mean that these things aren't true.

In fact, most prejudice reflects reality at some level.

If prejudice didn't correspond closely with reality, prejudice would work against survival, instead of for survival as it usually does.

People may also believe these things because they have made a study of the scientific literature and available data.


.

 

[Empath]

Tigerhawk and Ringzero, drop your feud.

 

[MicroE]

Back on topic.

We're quite lucky. We have never paid for babysitting. My in-laws live within walking distance and my parents are a 45-minute drive from our house.

The warning about babysitters also applies to contractors that have to come into the house. We don't discriminate and we don't tempt people.
Put away valuables and keep honest people honest.

 

[JimmyM]

... and I love how people assume that if one doesn't go to church, they can't be trusted around children. Both generalizations are just as ridiculous. THAT was my point... sorry you missed it.

I'm a little late to this one, but, so far whatever Sasha has said. DITTO.
The method or manner in which one worships or does not worship their God is immaterial to their moral character. I'm not going to really perticipate in this thread beyond this post. But when Sasha posts in this thread imagine me there too saysing "yeah, me too".
I'm not "Rah Rah"ing Sasha, it just seems from her other posts here, we're on the same page.

 

[TigerhawkT3]

Okey-doke.

 

[chesterqw]

"trust" works theoretically.

in real life, trust doesn't work.

 

[chrwe]

in real life, trust doesn't work.

You might like rule #147 on this page.

 

[Glen C]

I owned a childcare centre with both electronic supervision of staff and many observation windows into every room. I learnt it is impossible and inappropriate to generalise. I have examples of good and bad which do not fit their stereotype. Individuals who do stereotype often shortchange themselves and the person they are sterotyping.