JSmitty2005:
By the way that you defined “closeness” then I *would * say that I am close to my mother. And, yes, she was a SAHM.
Well, that’s good to hear, and I’m sure will be a blessing for you in years to come as well.
However, as to this whole discussion, I looked back, and I’m a little confused as to what your original point was, and what exactly was being argued. From the beginning you seemed to advocate that woman should stay at home, unless they are forced to by economic neccessity.
What measurable criteria of womanhood/motherhood are you posing as the ideal?
Can you concretely define in a few testable statements what these ideals entail.
for example:
A woman should be a fitting helpmeet…would not be a testable criteria, because “fitting” and “helpmeet” are undefined and the first can only be defined subjectively.
On the other hand:
a woman should commit as few grave sins as possible as defined by the catechism…would be a
more testable criteria provided that some study had actually been conducted to measure # of sins (although the definition problem would still plague us here because of our inability to measure interior conditions such as knowledge of right and wrong.)
Similarly, an untestable ideal motherhood criteria might be:
a good mother is loving
a testable one would be:
*a good mother will be one who’s kids attend church as adults (defined as past age 18).
So, lay it on us. What testable criteria for womanhood and mother hood are referring to when you say that woman “should” be a certain way. What objective studies are you refering to that support your arguements? What is the social science outcome you are drawing from. Do you have on hand a comprehensive study linking stay at home motherhood with low truancy for example?
*hint, philosophical essays are not the same as scientifically tested studies.