<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Lucy love</title>
	<atom:link href="http://boydsnest.org/news/2006/lucy-love/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://boydsnest.org/news/2006/lucy-love/</link>
	<description>All Boyds, all the time.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 08 Jan 2012 03:14:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Uncle Jim</title>
		<link>http://boydsnest.org/news/2006/lucy-love/comment-page-1/#comment-331</link>
		<dc:creator>Uncle Jim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jun 2006 16:38:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boydsnest.org/news/2006/lucy-love/#comment-331</guid>
		<description>For her many fans who -- I can assure you -- unconditionally love the little gumdrop...MORE PHOTOS!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For her many fans who &#8212; I can assure you &#8212; unconditionally love the little gumdrop&#8230;MORE <span class="caps">PHOTOS</span>!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kelly</title>
		<link>http://boydsnest.org/news/2006/lucy-love/comment-page-1/#comment-330</link>
		<dc:creator>kelly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jun 2006 13:42:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boydsnest.org/news/2006/lucy-love/#comment-330</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the thoughts.  that&#039;s such a positive reason for the first six weeks of non-smiling, non-interactive baby.  Almost makes me want another baby so I can &quot;try out&quot; your theory myself.  :o)  My take on it was that a newborn had a face and an attitude &quot;only a mother could love&quot; so that doting grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, siblings, and friends could possibly be persuaded sometimes to hand the baby back to the mom and dad.  But I like your reason much better.  :o)

the rest of your thoughts are bittersweet for me to contemplate.  I&#039;ve failed so miserably and so often at displaying unconditional love for my children.  And often the times where I do &quot;succeed&quot; at showing love in the midst of discipline and correction, are the times where they refuse to believe or accept that I love them, and they go off in the woods or hole up in their room, wailing or angry, bitter or heartbroken, and my pursuing them drives them further away because they still refuse to accept my love.  Which is perhaps unsurprising... since that&#039;s often how I behave with God.  sigh.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the thoughts.  that&#8217;s such a positive reason for the first six weeks of non-smiling, non-interactive baby.  Almost makes me want another baby so I can &#8220;try out&#8221; your theory myself.  :o)  My take on it was that a newborn had a face and an attitude &#8220;only a mother could love&#8221; so that doting grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, siblings, and friends could possibly be persuaded sometimes to hand the baby back to the mom and dad.  But I like your reason much better.  :o)</p>
<p>the rest of your thoughts are bittersweet for me to contemplate.  I&#8217;ve failed so miserably and so often at displaying unconditional love for my children.  And often the times where I do &#8220;succeed&#8221; at showing love in the midst of discipline and correction, are the times where they refuse to believe or accept that I love them, and they go off in the woods or hole up in their room, wailing or angry, bitter or heartbroken, and my pursuing them drives them further away because they still refuse to accept my love.  Which is perhaps unsurprising&#8230; since that&#8217;s often how I behave with God.  sigh.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

