Little Man

Okay I think Xanga is officially dead.  It has been replaced by the infinitely superior Facebook but I know a few people not on Facebook who might still read this on very rare occasions.  So here is an update...

We welcomed Jonathan Peter into the world at 1:56 AM on September 28, 2007.  He weighed 7 lbs., 3 oz. and was 19 3/4 inches long.  We call him Peter though, which was our compromise.  He gets the superhero name as his middle name in case he hates it (and he will). In my last entry I had said his due date was September 30; it actually later got moved to October 4 and then my doctor decided to keep my original October 10 since I was sure of the conception date.  So yes, he was a bit early, but I don't know how I would have managed to go any longer!  He had dropped so low that my bladder capacity was reduced to about 15 minutes (lying down).  And I am not exaggerating!  It wasn't so much an issue during the day but at night I couldn't sleep! 

When we went to the hospital my labor was not progressing but I had been in early labor for over a day.  It turned out to be a blessing that we went when we did.  I was not in active labor and was not dilating further (had been at 4 cm for a week already) but my blood pressure was elevating dangerously high so my labor was accelerated via a Pitocin IV.  Getting the IV was pretty much the worse part.  The nurse drew some blood before hooking up the IV and ended up "blowing" my vein which sent my dramatic self into hyperventilation almost (really).  Anyway, got the Pitocin hooked up to the IV at about 8:00 PM and had my water artificially broken at around 9:00.  Weirdest sensation EVER.  The contractions got a lot worse after that and even though I had grand plans of doing this naturally, once I started screaming in pain I was ready for the epidural.  At that point, I didn't care if it did go wrong and paralyze me.  But of course the chance of that happening is so low, probably not any higher than the chance of dying in childbirth (16 out of 10,000 in the US - yes I looked in it).  The epidural was beautiful.  I had a wonderfully easy and pain-free delivery.  The only sad thing was that the placenta refused to deliver and I was not allowed to hold my little angel until that happened.  (I had to keep my arms down... it has something to do with getting it out.)  Of course Daddy and Grandma were more than happy to do the holding.  Finally after 45 minutes the placenta was forcibly removed by the doctor.  Let's just say it was a good thing I the epidural was still hooked up.

And that is the story of the birth!

PS - Since I was lamenting the number of boys (and I have since had two more friends have boys), I feel like I should mention that I cannot imagine little Peter being a girl!  He is such a cunning little man-child.  However, my sister-in-law Jen is now carrying the first Parker girl in two generations, so I am looking forward to having a niece in April!

We now maintain a photo blog at: www.eddieandchristi.blogspot.com

The Button is...

A BOY CHILD

I think there's either something in Kentucky water or air that makes boys.

I'm very happy... as long as I can convince Eddie to not name the innocent dear after Spiderman. That was my main reason for hoping for a girl.

Eddie wanted a boy mainly so he could buy pee-pee teepees. I'll leave that to your imagination. :D

PS - The due date got moved. Button Boy's growth puts him at 19 1/2 weeks instead of 18, so he is due September 30 instead of October 10

Of babies and jobs...

The time has come for me to resume my job.  It is with great sadness that I give up my current lifestyle of watching crime dramas every night to actually work.  But I timidly requested that I resume work as a cashier only, instead of working the evil misses or junior clothing department (which are evil because of the evil people that leave their evil clothes on the evil floor) and surprisingly, my boss was completely fine with that.  So I'm happy. 

And I have now been feeling Button kick for over a week now, every day.  I'm really in for it though... s/he apparently sleeps during the day and enjoys the night life.  I feel the kicking (I actually call them thumplets, because they feel like little thumps) every night as I try to fall asleep.  It's not a big deal now but I know I'm not going to be liking this in a few months.  Tomorrow is the big day where we find out if Button is a he or she!  I'm totally convince Button is a she... our friends who are due a week before us just found out that they are expecting a boy.  That makes three pregnant friends expecting boys and zero expecting girls.  Obviously it is my duty to humanity to produce a female to balance the population. 

Because Facebook is so much easier to use and update people with, I forget to post updates here.   I am now officially wearing some maternity tops, although many of my non-maternity clothes still fit.   I actually have some low-rise jeans and skirts that I think will fit for most of the pregnancy.  (And they tried to tell me low-rise was evil! )  I am also no longer deathly ill... and for anyone who didn't know that I was deathly ill... basically I was in the hospital for dehydration, throwing up constantly, and lost 15 pounds within a 4 week period. 

We will have our ultrasound on May 10, at which point we will find out the gender!  But until then, we decided that instead of referring to the baby as "it," we should give...um it... a name.  So for the time being, the baby is called Button.  (The background on that is: some friends of ours call their unborn baby Herbie as a nickname, so Eddie suggested something gender neutral like Jamie, but I didn't like that name -- no offense to anyone with it -- because "I want something that sounds cute."  To which he replied, "Cute as a button?"  So then and there it  - oops - was christened Button.) 

Button is most likely a girl because the last several people in our Sunday school class that are having (or have had) babies are having (or have had) boys.  As in for the past three years.  So I figure that long a stretch of just boys, odds are we've got to have a girl.  I am so scientific in my reasoning!

Serious blog post.  I want to briefly (at least that's the intention) explain why I've watched four movies and read six books of something I used to be quite opposed to.  That which I refer to is none other than one of evangelical Christianity's modern controveries: Harry Potter. 

I must confess that after having finally read/seen Harry Potter for myself, I'm rather disturbed at the misconceptions that Christians perpetuate in an effort to discredit it.  Now I'm not necessarily saying that these are the best movies/books for everyone to watch, but it certainly isn't the sum of all evil as we have been led to believe.

My perception of Harry Potter before hearing about it from friends and finally seeing it, was that it was about kids being trained to become wizards/witches.  It was also my understanding that the author had incorporated actual Satanic witch spells into the book.  Critics have claimed that the difference between the beloved fantasies of Lord of the Rings and Chronicles of Narnia, is that they are fantasy while Harry Potter is set in the real world.  Imagine my surprise when I found that none of this is true!

First, the kids are not trained to become witches; they are actually born as wizards/witches.  You either are one or you are not one.  There is no way they choose to become a wizard, as it is an inate ability.  This is demonstrated by the three types of people in the book: Muggles, Witches/Wizards, and Squibs.  A Muggle is an ordinary person who is usually unaware that Wizards even exist, but may actually give birth to a Wizard child.  A Squib is a child of Wizard parents that is born a non-Wizard (ie, without magical ability).  There is nothing they can do to become a Wizard, because they were not born a Wizard. 

Second, the spells are so clearly fake, a child could have invented them.  For example, in order to freeze something in place, they use the spell "immobilus" which if you break it down... immobile... not moving... yeah you get the picture.  It's basic Latin. 

As for the question of whether Harry Potter is set in the real world or is a fantasy, my personal view is that it qualifies more as a fantasy.  It's basically a fantasy set in the real world.  It has real world elements, but so many aspects that are clearly not in our world.  The story is full of imaginary creatures (dragons, unicorns, giants, goblins, ogres, etc), places, and things.  For example, their school is reached by a special train that runs out of a normal English train station, but in order to reach it they have to run through a ordinary solid brick wall at the station.  Once they run through it, they are standing on Platform 9 3/4 in front of their special train.  Sound familiar, anyone?  Reminds me of a certain wardrobe.  And honestly people, do you really think witches in the real world have secret trains that they access by running through bricks?   

Also worth noting is that the "magic" in HP is not derived from a spiritual source (unlike Lord of the Rings).  Within the fantasy Rowling has created, the characters have no control over whether they are a wizard or not and their power is more like a skill that they are born with, like being a really good football player.  Actually the only element in HP that bears resemblance to Satanic power that could actually be found in our world is divination (forseeing the future by means of tea leaves, crystal balls, astrology, etc).  But in the books, divination is mocked as being fake.  There are not actually any characters that have this ability, although there are a few that pretend to.

Now, the wisdom of allowing children to read or watch this series is not something that I am here to address.  Obviously, children are impressionable and may lack the discernment to differentiate between fantasy magic and real magic.  The point of this post is to address whether this series is acceptable for Christian adults in general.  I respect those that feel like they should avoid anything pertaining to the word magic.  There are Christians who feel this way and carry it out to its logical conclusion.  My parents used to believe this and they did not allow us to watch "Mary Poppins," "The Wizard of Oz," "The Chronicles of Narnia," or "The Lord of the Rings."  This seems logical to me.  I also think it doesn't have to be logical for people to determine that some things violate their personal conscience and other things don't.  But it crosses the line when people who accept some fictional stories that contain supernatural elements (and yes, Marry Poppins IS supernatural) condemn the Christians who accept Harry Potter.  (Especially when the vast majority of them haven't even read a single sentence written by Rowling... how irresponsible is that?)

The question of whether Harry Potter is acceptable for Christian basically boils down to this: does Harry Potter contain the sorcery that the Bible condemns?  The answer to that is based on invidual opinion.  In my opinion, the magic of Lord of the Rings comes closer to Biblical sorcery than the magic of Harry Potter.  None of the attributes of sorcery found in the Bible are present in HP.  There is no spiritual source for the power.  They do not serve a deity.  They cannot choose to become or stop being a wizard.  They cannot divine the future. They cannot contact the dead.  Even those today who practice real witchcraft deny any connection to Harry Potter. "The amusing portrayal of magic in the Harry Potter film... bears little resemblance to the religious and spiritual practices of modern witchcraft." (Witchcraft: A Secret History, Michael Streeter, pg. 182)

These books are not for everyone.  We are all different and if these books are a stumbling block for someone, they should not read them.  But for many others, they are an enjoyable and riveting read.  Don't discount them just because "everyone" else does.