Over the following week, I looked around on the internet to see if I could find the costume for less and I also wanted to make sure she didn’t change her mind… again. We took her to Party City one night and had her look at the giant board with all the costumes on it. She could have picked out any costume she wanted. She picked Dorothy… again. We said she could try it on but that she could also pick another costume to try on as well. Nope, she didn’t want to try on anything else. She wanted to be Dorothy. So we tried it on and she loved it. And, I had a coupon! Yippee! And, this Dorothy costume was very sparkly. Super cute and totally her. Complete with two braids in her hair and ruby red sparkly shoes from Target which she now wears everywhere. Great choice Maddie!

First of all, let me say I’ve very much enjoyed the conversation that has developed from my original post.

@Lia:
It’s more than apparent that this is an emotional issue for you. Your initial comments (which you’ve since deleted) threw the other definitions under “marriage” from the pages I referenced at me and accused me of being selective. Obviously you hadn’t read my entire post which later included the other definitions and decided to react quickly and defensively. Kudos to you for continuing on and correcting yourself.

However, in your first comment that is still posted here at the time of this writing, you accuse my arguments of being logical fallacies and then immediately retort with non-sequiturs.

While I know you believe in your heart you’ve argued this until you’re blue in the face making emotional appeal upon emotional appeal, I still find that my original claims still stand. None of the followups I’ve seen have been able to tear down the arguments presented. As such, I hope at some point the idea might fire in your mind (as well as others who have taken issue with my argument) that it’s possible your ideas on this are not solidly grounded and perhaps deserve some re-thought. If so, I’m more than willing to talk it out.

Further on you state you’re tired of “working around this type of logic”. Why is it you feel you must “work around” it? You claim your linked discussion contains “true logic”, but your own rationality within the scope of this issue is already suspect given the non-sequiturs you led off with in the comments. As Alex states, throwing out stop-words like “racism”, “sexism”, and “antisemitism” makes it seem as if you’re attempting to deflect head on debate about the issues at hand and would rather machine-gun me with red herrings.

@Amy:
Agreed that more dialog is good. I do have ideas for you. Unfortunately, I don’t write quickly, have a 3 year old at home, a baby due in a month and am in a high-stress job that doesn’t allow me to spend my days responding to stuff like this. Obviously as it took a few days to get this follow-up together…

Your questions lend themselves toward answers in the realm of morality. I think before we jump there, we need to address what the 1st Amendment actually means as some here appear to be confused on the matter. I do this below…

@Mark Urich:
Despite the fact that you don’t know me, it’s very important to me that you really read and think through these things as you wield influence on someone I care about very much. It’s very clear that your thinking here has been manipulated into equating claims against same-sex “marriage” as being discriminatory against homosexuals. This is precisely the way that opponents of Prop 8 want people to think. The two are not the same any more than being brothers is discriminatory against women. With this in mind, re-read what you wrote and I think the logical mistakes in your statements will become apparent. I address your claims below also, so please, keep reading.

Claim:
Prop 8 boils down to a “rights” issue.

Refutation:
The text of the proposed amendment does nothing to alter any existing rights of same-sex couples. For your reference, here is the text of California Family code, section 297.5 (a):

Registered domestic partners shall have the same rights, protections, and benefits, and shall be subject to the same responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law, whether they derive from statutes, administrative regulations, court rules, government policies, common law, or any other provisions or sources of law, as are granted to and imposed upon spouses.

This is not changed by the passage of Proposition 8. No need to wave the magic wand, Ricky. There is no argument that can be made against Prop 8 based on “rights”. It’s readily apparent that same-sex couples can already enjoy all of the “same rights, protections, and benefits” as married couples. The claim Prop 8 boils down to rights is patently and absurdly false.

Claim:
“the general population … is basing their definition by what they were taught on Sunday.”

Counterclaim:
Please reference one of the last paragraphs in the post:

“Please note here folks, there’s nothing here you can claim as a religious argument. An atheist, a Christian and anyone else from any other walk of life could have come up with this stuff. It’s just a matter of stopping to think through what’s actually being said before you get wrapped up in any impassioned dogma.”

The definitions provided in the post referenced their sources and are not from any religious texts. Perhaps you did not mean to lump me in with “the general population”. But if what the general population learns about what “marriage” is on Sunday happens to be the same as what marriage is in reality, what’s wrong with this?

Claim:
“the first amendment declares religions are equal”

Refutation:
The text of the 1st amendment:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

This claim is a non-sequitur. Perhaps I’m missing it here, but I don’t see any part of this statement that could remotely be spun as to say that “religions are equal”. Rather, after reviewing this text and the responses I received, I wonder if the forced acceptance of same-sex “marriage” would continue to allow the people “the free exercise thereof”?

Claim:
“So we have a legal defintion determined by the morality of judeo-christian religious law”

Refutation:
False. There are much earlier examples of non-judeo-christian religious and secular law showing marriage to clearly be between a man and a woman. For example, the code of Hammurabi. (Nod @Inger for supporting refutation.)

Claim:
“Since times have changed such that judeo-christian moral code is only one aspect of our society and inheritance is no longer tied to paternal lines…one would think our concept of marriage should change as well.”

Refutation:
This is also a non-sequitur. This doesn’t make any more sense than saying “Since times have changed such that judeo-christian moral code is only one aspect of our society and slavery is no longer tolerated…one would think our concept of freedom should change as well.”

However on this note, let it be said then that the burden of proof that the definition of marriage should change lies with those who wish to change it. It is not a requirement that those who are in favor of the historically valid definition present a defense as to why it should remain such as it has for millennia.

Claim:
“in any case, the mere act of specifing a legal relationship between two individuals inherently creates inequality and denies liberty..therefore unconstitutional.”

Refutation:
Having already shown that no argument against Prop 8 can be made on the basis of “rights”, this claim is a red herring. (I have also shown that passage of prop 8 would not deny anyone the libery of getting married to anyone of the opposite sex that they choose.)

Claim:
“If same-sex couples want to self-identify as married because they live in a culture that values marriage, who are we to impose another term on them, just so we can feel special?”

Refutation:
Now knowing how marriage has been defined for millennia, who are you to say same-sex couples should be allowed to identify themselves as “married”? This claim reeks of relativism for which I have great distaste. I could just as easily say I wish to self-identify as “rich” because I live in a culture that values material wealth. This desire, however, does not change reality.

Claim:
Wikipedia is an authoritative source for the definition of marriage.

Counterclaim:
Wikipedia authoritative? 60 seconds of googling should resolve his question for everyone.

Claim:
“Mostly everyone saying yes” to Prop 8 is driven by monetary issues.

Refutation:
A case in favor of Prop 8 that does not mention money anywhere has been presented. While there may be litigious action triggered by passage of Prop 8, there is obviously a case to be made that does not center around monetary issues. This claim is a red herring.

Claim:
Same-sex couples deserve respect.

Counterclaim:
I agree that homosexuals deserve (and have my) respect on the basis of their humanity. However, homosexuals as individuals are clearly distinct from the relationship between same-sex couples. I don’t understand the claim as to why same-sex “couplehood” or any constructed social institution recognizing it deserves respect. No supporting statements are given for this claim so it can be dismissed out of hand.

Claim:
Claiming that allowing same-sex unions to be called “marriage” undermines the value of marriage is discriminatory against homosexuals.

Refutation:
My argument does not discriminate against homosexuals, nor does the one from protectmarriage.com. I clearly state that homosexuals are allowed to get married to anyone of the opposite sex that they choose. Homosexuals are certainly worthy of having a marriage.

Claim:
“Same-sex marriage itself is undermined by being referred to as Domestic Partnership instead of a marriage.”

Refutation:
I have presented an apparently clear argument claiming there is no such thing as “same-sex marriage”. I have not seen this argument torn down by any counter-arguments so far so my argument still stands. This claim ignores this fact. Something that does not exist cannot be undermined.

Claim:
“as law currently stands same-sex marriage is equal with heterosexual marriage”

Clarification:
As law currently stands, same-sex domestic partnerships have the same rights, protections, and benefits as married couples.

Claim:
“Your reasons for voting are however on a moral issue. One, that seems, would rather lower homosexuals and label them as not equals than it would support equality among all people. A moral value that is shared across religion and legislation.”

Counterclaim:
Again, there is no discrimination against homosexuals in prop 8 any more than there is discrimination against two female siblings who would want to be called brothers. Seems we have yet another case of ignoratio elenchi.

Great conversation people! I hope I’ve been able to get some of you to think hard about this. I sure wish I had more time to write! And honestly, if anyone does have a solid argument as to why same-sex unions should be called marriages, I’d very much like to hear it. I don’t feel anyone has really presented any refutation of my arguments that has been able to stand.

The slogan on the noonprop8.com website says “Don’t eliminate marriage for anyone.” This statement displays ignorance of what marriage is. Let’s consult webster:

From www.merriam-webster.com:

“the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law”

From dictionary.reference.com:

“the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc.”

Now, let’s contrast this with the text of the amendment proposed by Prop 8:

“Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid and recognized in California.”

I’m at a loss to understand how the text of this proposed amendment would eliminate marriage for anyone.

Let me re-state some words from the above definitions: “recognized by law”, “social institution”. These definitions are clearly speaking in legal terms regarding what marriage is. This is clearly the qualified definition in the scope of this discussion.

Now I know what some of you are saying…. “Wait! There are *other* definitions on those websites! What about those?” Ok, let’s take a look:

From www.merriam-webster.com:

“the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage”

From dictionary.reference.com:

“a relationship in which two people have pledged themselves to each other in the manner of a husband and wife, without legal sanction”

Now again, let’s look at some key phrases. “like that of traditional marriage”, “in the manner of a husband and wife”. While the committed relationships of same-sex couples does have an entry under the word “marriage” in both of the quoted sources, the definitions clearly denote that those relationships are not the same thing as the committed relationship between a man and woman known as marriage. Two people of the same sex can not by definition be “married” any more than two male siblings can be called sisters or two female siblings be brothers. That’s just not what the English word means.

The tagline “Don’t eliminate marriage for anyone.” is the first thing the campaign opposed to Prop 8 hits people with when they see their material. Given this has not been clearly researched or thought through, it immediately makes the rest of their propaganda suspect. It appears they didn’t even bother to take the time to research the definition of the very word they are fighting to change.

But, just for fun, let’s hear them out and see what else they have to say…

Prop 8 maintains equality of same-sex unions.

I have a neighbor who, much to my chagrin, has one of the Prop 8 opposition’s signs in his front yard. The tagline on this sign reads: “equality for all”. This tagline is also visible in other areas of the noonprop8.com website. Again, either this has not been clearly thought out, or people subscribing to this line are being manipulated.

Saying passage of Prop 8 denies “equality for all” turns this into a civil rights argument. (This is really starting to smell of activism.) But wait…. same-sex couples already have the same rights as married couples by establishing a civil union / domestic partnership. In the eyes of the state the two are already equal.

(Yes, I saw the page on the noonprop8.com website claiming “Domestic Partnerships are NOT the same as marriage” because they can’t “automatically make life or death decisions for each other”. They seem to have missed the easily located Assembly Bill 25 of 2001 that gives partners in a civil union “the right to make health care decisions for an incapacitated partner”. Clearly they must have written this stuff prior to 2001. Wait a minute here…)

In the eyes of the state (the scope in which Prop 8 is applicable), Prop 8 passage would maintain the equality of civil unions. The text of the proposed amendment says nothing of civil unions and they would therefore be unaffected. Prop 8 maintains this equality.

The opposition to Prop 8 is clearly spinning this as an anti-homosexual measure to rile anti-conservative sentiment. Don’t be roped in by this manipulation. Don’t we all have better things to do?

Prop 8 does not promote intolerance or discrimination any more than any other law.

Some people I know like to throw out the word intolerant when issues like this come up. Haven’t we all learned when we call someone intolerant, all we’re doing is being intolerant of their view? The opposition also claims Prop 8 is discriminatory against homosexuals. Keep in mind we presently have laws that are discriminatory. Ever known a 20 year old that would like to buy a beer? Discrimination on the basis of age seems perfectly acceptible. However, in the text of Prop 8, I don’t read any desire to discriminate against homosexuals or promote intolerance of them or what they do. Rather, Prop 8 keeps people from debasing the English word “marriage” to suit their whims.

The fact of the matter is, Prop 8 does not say that homosexual individuals cannot be married. They are free to be married to anyone of the opposite sex that they wish. If they don’t choose to do this, they effectively choose not to be married.

Proposition 8 in short:

• Does not deny marriage to anyone.
• Maintains equality of same-sex unions
• Does not promote intolerance or discrimination.

Also… speaking of strange, why would the Prop 8 opposition:

• Use a picture of an (apparent) male/female couple on their page detailing why people should not pass Prop 8? They are talking about trying to claim same-sex couples in committed relationships as being “married”, but using imagery of an apparently heterosexual couple? Are the opposition’s arguments so weak that they must appeal to the likeness of traditional marriage to make their case? It seems they are not able to walk the walk here…
• Use the imagery of a female bride being thwarted at every turn to get to her wedding to a male groom in one of their commercials? Manipulation perhaps?

Some other thoughts:

Some people I’ve heard claim that Prop 8 stifles their potential for happiness. To those, I would say it’s clear that what’s being fought for is a change of definition for an English word. (Since when has it been within the state’s jurisdiction to re-define English words?) If you’re one of these people and your happiness hinges on changing the definition of an English word, you have deeper seated issues than I am prepared to address.

The Prop 8 opposition website claims “It’s not the government’s place to tell couples who have been together for years whether or not they are allowed to marry.” I couldn’t agree with that more. Marriage has been around since long before California, the United States, and most of civilization. Marriage has proven to be the transcendent building block upon which society and cultures are made. Marriage is more fundamental than government and it’s certainly not within the government’s jurisdiction to start monkeying with its definition.

The overturning of Prop 22 by the activist judges this year was just wrong. Those of you who oppose Prop 8, let me ask this: if a group of conservative judges were seated on the supreme court and overturned Roe v. Wade, how would you feel about that? I bet similar to how those of us who believe democracy had already prevailed with Prop 22.

Please note here folks, there’s nothing here you can claim as a religious argument. An atheist, a Christian and anyone else from any other walk of life could have come up with this stuff. It’s just a matter of stopping to think through what’s actually being said before you get wrapped up in any impassioned dogma.

Think before you vote.

Vote YES on Prop 8.

Now… anyone want to talk about Obama?

The warm up day was pretty short (1.5 hours compared to 3 hours of a normal day). She remembered the school from the open house last week and immediately went over to the play kitchen area. She took out almost all of the food and set it up at the table there (which was set with a lace tablecloth, a candle, and some flowers in a vase). She was having a little party. Then she discovered a basket filled with various dress up items. On that stuff went. She put on a dress, then a tulle skirt with flowers over the dress, a boa, princess slippers, and a tall pointy princess hat that had tulle and ribbons hanging down. She had that on for about an hour while she was having her little party at the table. So cute. A few kids would come over and check it out, but they never stayed for long. I have never seen her so focused on one thing before. Other kids were painted, playing with blocks, trucks, beans, etc., but not Maddie! So her.

Then the teacher asked that they come sit in a circle to hear a story and sing songs. Maddie has never really been one to voluntarily participate in a song where as the other kids were totally into it. Maybe that is because she had not heard the song before. It was something about a beanbag and the kids were supposed to put the beanbag on various body parts. Maddie just held hers with a “what the heck are these people doing” look on her face. Then the teacher asked if they knew any songs. Oh yes Maddie did and she wanted everyone to know. She started to sing a song from Cinderella: “Cinderellee, Cinderellee, we can help our Cinderelle. Make her dress so pretty. Nothing to it really.” It was hilarious! I think the teacher was hoping for something that everyone could sing along to. Then they started to sing ‘Jesus Loves Me’ and Maddie said very loudly, “I don’t like that song”. Well, at least she isn’t afraid of voicing her opinions! Needless to say, the warm up day went well!

So on to today. I had been telling Maddie that I would drop her off at preschool, not stay with her like I did during the warm up day, and them come back later to pick her up. She was a little hesitant about this idea at first (this was when I first told her on Tuesday) but by the end up the day on Tuesday she knew what to expect for today. I woke her up at about 7:15 this morning and the first words out of her mouth every morning are, “Were we going today mommy?”. Today she asked the same question and immediately followed it up with, “Preschool!” She was already excited. Oh good.

So we eat breakfast and put on our pretty new dress and put a ponytail in her hair with a red ribbon (she is totally into accessorizing). Then she saw her cherry ponytail holder and was trying to rip out the pretty ponytail I had just put in her hair. It took a little bit to calm her down and then she said, “Actually, I like the red ribbon. I do mommy. I like it.” Oh good. Crisis over.

I, as any mommy would do and as someone who takes way too many pictures, had to do a ‘mini’ photo session before we left for preschool. She was so cute and so excited. We took pictures outside by the front door and she was all smiles and giggles and games. So silly. I ended up taking about 130 pictures! Hee hee.

I have to admit that I was holding back the tears a little bit as we were driving to preschool. I didn’t want Maddie to see me getting all chocked up. Don’t laugh people. It is a bitter sweet day when your daughter has her first day of preschool (or any school) and you have to leave them with someone else and you just know they are growing up. So we get to preschool and of course I had to take more pictures outside.

We got to her classroom and she immediately wanted to show the teachers her pictures that she brought. The kids all had to bring a baby picture of themselves, a picture of their family, and a current picture of themselves for their cubby. It all went into her little princess backpack. So cute. Then, she pulled me around her classroom continually saying, “I want to show you something” as if I had not been there with her all the previous times. She was just so excited. And of course she ended up right back at the play kitchen and with the dress up items. I tried to take a few pictures of that too but she just wouldn’t hold still so they are a bit blurry. You can check out all the pics in the gallery.

So there she was, all dressed up in princess clothes, at the little table with the lace tablecloth, feeding a baby a bottle, and then I told her that it was time for me to leave. She looked at me with a straight face and said, “Bye mommy” then looked back at her baby doll. That was it? No meltdown? No catastrophe? No crying? I was able to at least get a hug and a kiss. Then I went to my car, took a deep breath, and tried not to cry.

I now had three hours to myself!

When I went to pick her up from preschool, she was busy using large tweezers to pull rubber snakes out of a bin of sand. She was so excited to show me that, then again proceeded to lead me around the classroom so that I could check things out. She had made a very pretty colorful macaroni necklace which she was wearing. She also used a toy car to paint on paper. And apparently they played outside and she picked up a broom and began to sweep… and told the teacher that the ground was dirty and it needed to be cleaned up and handed her a broom as well. I was told that Maddie has the broom in her hands for the entire 50 minutes of outside play. Now, if I could only get her to clean up around the house!

After I saw everything again in the preschool room again it was time to go. I about had to drag her out of there. Then we met daddy for lunch at Daphne’s (per Maddie’s request) so that she could share her very fist day of preschool with us. So cute. I love her.

My dad had bought Maddie a princess fishing pole for her birthday in June. It is all pink (her favorite color) and girly. We were all together tonight and talking about taking her fishing for the first time. Maddie randomly says that she wants a Darth Vader fishing pole even though she has been so excited about her princess pole up until tonight. And today her favorite color is black… like Darth Vader. She is so wacky.

And speaking of wacky, when she woke up from her nap today she did not want to go to the bathroom. She started a huge crying (whining) fit about how she didn’t want to go. When we asked her why, her reason was because she didn’t like the floor in the bathroom. I was trying so hard not to laugh because she was clearly upset. The floor? The floor hasn’t changed in her three years of existence! She cracks me up!

First it was Alice (from Alice in Wonderland). I almost looked for a costume on ebay but decided to wait just in case she changed her mind.
Then came Dinah (Alice’s cat). Then she wanted to be the Cheshire Cat.
Then it was a pirate with a hook, but she was very specific that she did not want to wear hat or bandanna. This one came on very randomly one day. She was in the middle of a sentence and switched her thought part way through to tell me she wanted to be a pirate for Halloween. This was back in May. There were no pirates around anywhere. She is so funny… and random.
Then I believe it was a tulip fairy, which she was for her second Halloween at 1.5 years old.
And the latest desire for a costume….. a band-aid. Yes, a band-aid. But she wants to be a band-aid with characters on it.

I am sure there will be a new desire for a costume next week. Stay tuned.

Maddie had her 3yr wellness checkup today. She was very excited to go and was telling me all morning that she wanted to get a band aid while she was there. I am sure that could be arranged!

So it came time to go to the doctors and she was so excited that she tripped and fell about 3 inches from the front door to the office. There we were outside, she was crying, her knee was bleeding, and I was trying not to laugh. I felt bad for her and wiped up the little speck of blood that was there. It was very ironic. She recovers and we go inside and she is immediately distracted with toys.

Then we go back and start with the eye exam. They do this at every wellness checkup until they are 4. They put three sticker probes on their head and a patch over their eye and make them watch a TV screen. It checks for lazy eye. Maddie didn’t pass which was strange since she has passed all the other times. We did notice that she kept looking away during part of the test… maybe she was too bored with it because it wasn’t a Dora cartoon… it is more like watching the static snow on a TV screen only it changes a little bit here and there.

Then we went to get weighed and measured and have our blood pressure taken. So far, she has barely made a peep. She just keeps asking, “What are we going to do next?” She came in at 28 pounds (12%) and 35.25 inches (13%). Still a little peanut, but on the charts! When the nurse put the blood pressure cuff on her arm, she told Maddie that it would give her a little hug. Maddie thought that was pretty funny.

We went back to the exam room and the nurse came into see us. She wanted a urine sample! Are you kidding me? She said it is routine once they are potty trained. This aught to be interesting. So we go in the bathroom and fortunately they post instructions on how to do this. I know how to do my own, just not anybody else’s! Maddie was really excited over the idea of peeing in a cup! I sit her on the toilet backwards (so she is facing the tank and spread eagle) then ask her to start peeing a bit. Then I make her stop (which she did) so I can stick the cup in the stream. She starts peeing again but it was coming out so fast I had to say, “Stop stop stop!” because the cup was about to overflow! Then I take the cup away and she finishes up! Holy smokes! This girl can hold her pee in like there is no tomorrow. She is obviously really good at stopping midway through. I had to dump some of the pee out because there was just so much in there. She was so excited!

Then we went back into the room to wait a bit. Oh… and she had gotten some stickers from doing the eye exam and proceeded to put them on her body. Mind you she is just in her undies at this point (which is her favorite way to be). That is how she was walking around the doctors since they do the weight and height in another room. So cute.

So then the doc comes in and tells me she is perplexed that Maddie didn’t pass the eye exam. She was going to refer me to an eye doctor but decided to have her repeat the eye test just to make sure since Maddie was looking away at times during the test.

The doc proceeds with the routine exam (not the eye exam since that is done in a different room) and everything comes out fine. I asked about the scabby stuff on her knees and elbows and she thinks it is a mild form of eczema and recommended hydrocortisone cream. She said it is going to take a long time for the discoloration to go away. She asked if psoriasis runs in the family which I didn’t think it did. I forgot to ask how often to put the cream on, but I will just do it a few times a day at this point. And she said to keep sunscreen on those parts too… I am guessing so it doesn’t scar. Great… it probably already has!

Then we go back to do the eye test again. Maddie was excited because it meant she got to watch the cartoon again. Really… it is like watching snow on TV with a quick flash of an animal at times. This time she got to wear a pirate patch over one eye instead of just a cotton patch. Arg! How exciting since this week she wants to be a pirate for Halloween… with a hook hand… and no hat on her head. And, she passed the test this time. Yeah!

Back to the room we go waiting for our shot! Yippee! Maddie held my hand while the nurse gave her a shot in the leg. She cried at first but then stopped when she saw the pink snoopy band aid go on! She couldn’t give Maddie a shot in her right leg because there was a giant sticker there! Then the nurse walked out of the room and Maddie broke down. There were huge crocodile tears streaming down her face. I couldn’t understand a word she was saying. Then she took a breath and said, “It hurts! It hurts!” I asked her what hurt, and she pointed to her knee… the one that had the speck of blood on it from falling outside the doctor’s office. I almost started laughing again. She told me she wanted a band aid for her knee, but the nurse had already left the room. She was so sad that the nurse put the band aid where she got the shot and not on her knee. She started to take the band aid off and I asked her if she wanted me to put it on her knee. Then she saw the blood under the band aid (from where she got the shot) and didn’t know what to do. So we put the band aid back over her shot and I told her that if we saw the nurse again she could ask her for another band aid. It took about 5 minutes to calm her down. I didn’t realize she had her heart set on getting a band aid for her knee. I just thought she wanted one in general… which she got… for her shot! She even had little circle princess stickers (from the second eye exam) and I asked her if we should put that on her knee. Nope. Oh well.

At this point it was about 2:00 and she normally goes down for her nap around 1:30. So we go to the car and her thumb went in her mouth and she clutched her blanket.

Oh… and the most traumatic part (for me and soon to be for her) is the doctor could tell she is a thumb sucker. We have a dentist appointment next week and the doc is guessing that the dentist will try to have us wean her from her thumb. She is growing up. But it was so cute to see her in the car with her thumb in her mouth and holding her blanket. So cute… I don’t want to give that up. But her teeth are a bit crooked from where they rub her thumb, so I am sure it is time. Did I mention I am sad! I mentioned something to her in the car (while she was sucking her thumb) that we won’t be able to suck our thumb for very much longer because it is hurting our teeth. She took her thumb out of her mouth and started crying again. I told her she could suck her thumb now, but not very much longer. The crying immediately stopped and the thumb went back in. It will be a sad day for both of us when we start that weening.

And now she is sleeping.