Parents turned in for photos

[Anon]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,551760,00.html

This is absolutely ridiculous. Everybody's parents have taken some picture of their kid in the bath at some time or other, from the time cameras became standard equipment in the home!!!!

I hope they win their lawsuit.

[JerryNumbers]

Probably so, but I would never have taken such pictures, as for me I see no good point in taking such pictures.

[Anon]

I don't much, but Jerry, its a mom thing. haha.

I know my mom took pix of us in the bathtub, and pretty much everyone else's mom I know did it too!

[Pastor Matt]

This is absolutely ridiculous. Everybody's parents have taken some picture of their kid in the bath at some time or other, from the time cameras became standard equipment in the home!!!!

Not everybody, I never have.

[John81]

There have been other cases where parents have taken pictures of their babies in a bathtub or getting their diaper changed or some such thing and photo developers have called the police when they developed the film. I don't recall how those cases came out.

In Bible study a young couple has a 6 month old that had to have surgery to correct a circumcision problem last week. They were talking about the follow up to come and how it would be expensive to drive there, miss work and such, just for the doctor to look and see what they can see, that there is no infection and the swelling is gone. The mom jokingly said she could just take a picture and send it to the doctor and someone pointed out that these days that wouldn't be safe because that could be called child porn.

While they go after such innocent things, the American porn industry is allowed to grow and expand so that it now rakes in more dollars and is more pervasive than Hollywood.

[HappyChristian]

All the more reason to print pics at home!! Pretty soon, if you've got your child sitting on your lap, that'll be suspect.

Whenever we took photos of our son, we made sure nothing private could show. That was 22 years ago, but we knew even then that photos of naked babies in the tub (like what was quite common to be taken when I was little) could and would be used to claim abuse.

[JerryNumbers]

I don't much, but Jerry, its a mom thing. haha.

I know my mom took pix of us in the bathtub, and pretty much everyone else's mom I know did it too!

It never was a mom thing in my house, nor in my parents house, nor in my wife's parents house. I can testify at the age of 62 that I know many godly mothers who feels its ungodly to take any such picture of babies, children, unclothed.

I cannot fathom why any mother or father would want anyone to look at pictures of their children without their clothes and neither can I fathom why they would want to their self.

[Bakershalfdozen]

Oh good grief. When you're a mom and wanting pics of your babies at every stage and in lots of circumstances, that includes bathtub pics. Your baby/toddler is holding a rubber ducky or has soap bubbles on his head or they are just too cute or whatever...out comes the camera. It isn't porn.

The Wal-mart associate and social workers went overboard on this one. Straining at gnats...

[HappyChristian]

Oh good grief. When you're a mom and wanting pics of your babies at every stage and in lots of circumstances, that includes bathtub pics. Your baby/toddler is holding a rubber ducky or has soap bubbles on his head or they are just too cute or whatever...out comes the camera. It isn't porn.

The Wal-mart associate and social workers went overboard on this one. Straining at gnats...

Yep! I have a really cute pic of my son while he was in the kitchen sink bathing. He has bubbles on his head and his mouth on the tap trying to get a drink! It is so hilarious! Nothing showed, either.

[4everHis]

I think it is a generational thing. No offense to Jerry and his 62 years, and may God grant you many healthy years to serve Him on this earth, but as cameras became less expensive and more prevalent, moms and dads had the ability to chronicle their children's lives at a variety of points. Some people take pics of baby eating cake, baby with mom's high heels on, etc, none of which is anything but a parent wanting to hold on to some sweet memory. People didn't smile in pictures in the old days, either. Pictures were a formal thing, not snapshots of everyday life, which may explain the absence of those kind of action shots in your home life. Things have changed because of technology. I can find nothing wrong (or antiScriptural) with a keeper of the home wanting to keep some cherished memories. If memory serves me, Kitagrl has boys, so a boy in the bathtub covered with bubbles and only shoulders showing is hardly an ungodly breach of modesty, imho. Additionally, she is keeping them in the confines of her home for the time when they are grown and she can look back at what fine young men God allowed her to raise. So, in this case, I rejoice with them that do rejoice! Congrats on having cutie baby pics HC and Kitagrl. As to the real story as posted in the news, the people reporting this evidently are robotically applying some imagined law that is past their comprehension. Hope no one takes a picture of a baptism. They might think you are drowning children!

[Anon]

I actually don't take many bathtub pix. I'm just sticking up for the rights of those who do. haha. I do have a few baby bathtub pix.

I will say I have a few pix of Andrew that might be considered "questionable" but they were ones I took to show the dermatologist re. his terrible hive breakouts back when we were still trying to figure everything out. Luckily they are digital and I only print them out at home. Of course they are shown to the dr so obviously its nothing terrible.

[4everHis]

I don't either, but people should be able to have those memories if they wish, without their spirituality being questioned or their parenting or their morality.

[trc123]

I don't either, but people should be able to have those memories if they wish, without their spirituality being questioned or their parenting or their morality.

Don't worry, stick around here enough and some will question all three of those (after all, it is their God given mission).

[JerryNumbers]

I think it is a generational thing. No offense to Jerry and his 62 years, and may God grant you many healthy years to serve Him on this earth, but as cameras became less expensive and more prevalent, moms and dads had the ability to chronicle their children's lives at a variety of points. Some people take pics of baby eating cake, baby with mom's high heels on, etc, none of which is anything but a parent wanting to hold on to some sweet memory. People didn't smile in pictures in the old days, either. Pictures were a formal thing, not snapshots of everyday life, which may explain the absence of those kind of action shots in your home life. Things have changed because of technology. I can find nothing wrong (or antiScriptural) with a keeper of the home wanting to keep some cherished memories. If memory serves me, Kitagrl has boys, so a boy in the bathtub covered with bubbles and only shoulders showing is hardly an ungodly breach of modesty, imho. Additionally, she is keeping them in the confines of her home for the time when they are grown and she can look back at what fine young men God allowed her to raise. So, in this case, I rejoice with them that do rejoice! Congrats on having cutie baby pics HC and Kitagrl. As to the real story as posted in the news, the people reporting this evidently are robotically applying some imagined law that is past their comprehension. Hope no one takes a picture of a baptism. They might think you are drowning children!

As you said, no offense.

Yes, I fully understand everything has changed, there is not near the good morals nor judgment among Christians as there once was.

As for baptism, I surely want have to worry about that, we don't baptize infants, we leave that to the false teachers.

But to, we might need to think about this verse.

22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.
1 Thess 5:22 (KJV)

[4everHis]

Jerry, evidently I hurt your feelings. I am sorry. I did not consider that this was a sensitive area for you. Let me clarify, when I used the smiley face, I was joking. (I presumed that you would know that I am IFB and believe only in the baptism of believers and that I was referring to children who had been saved and were following the Lord in believer's baptism. I was using a silly comment as a point of commentary as to how silly I considered the reaction of the photo place people to have been.)