I'm almost 30, and when my parents took me out, I was expected to behave, which meant staying quiet and sitting down. I used to be a barista at a coffee shop (not Starbucks, but close) in an upscale suburb. The number of kids whose parents allowed them to scream, run around, and climb on furniture shocked me. I often wondered why their parents didn't get their coffee to go, then take the kids to the park down the street.

I don't agree with banning kids from restaurants. They have to learn "restaurant manners" somewhere, and a semi-nice restaurant at lunchtime is a great training ground. Obnoxious drunks are thrown out of restaurants all the time. Families with disruptive children should be asked to leave as well.

I saw a story about the same clinic in the New York Times last month.

When I was 5, my 18-year-old cousin killed himself. Another cousin had killed himself a few years earlier, so there was a lot of talk at that year's family reunion. Everyone told me my cousins had died in accidents.

I agree with Cary- tell the kids the bare minimum (something like "Some bad people killed Cousin John. Auntie and Uncle miss him very much, and they're going to be very sad") and ask the parents not to discuss the gory details around the kids. They probably don't intend to, but grieving can do strange things to people.

Most 4-year-olds are still getting used to the idea of death, and an 8-year-old does'nt need to hear the gory details of anyone's death. Suppose your dog was hit by a car. If your kids weren't there to see it, would you tell them the gruesome details, or would you simply say the dog died?

A "family friendly" package doesn't solve the problem of being forced to buy channels you don't want to watch, whether it's the History Channel, Lifetime, or FOX news.

Why can't cable systems offer a "build-your-own" package? What would be so hard about local stations, CSPAN, the Weather Channel, 1 or 2 other news stations, 2 or 3 movie channels, and 5 or 6 other channels (BBC America, Spice, The History Channel, Fox, Lifetime, BET, etc.) for a flat fee? Or offer a bare-bones package (local channels, the Weather Channel, and CSPAN), then let consumers add networks for $5 each?

When I lived in the boondocks, we got 2 channels without cable, unless is was raining. Satellite doesn't work unless you have a clear line of sight to the southern horizon. Nothing can be in the way, not even trees. That's not likely in the mountains or the woods.

I'd gladly pay for TV without "South Park" and "Sex and the City". That's what Netflix is for.

According to the Jesuits (I think), because rape is an act of violence, a woman who has been raped has a right to minimize its effects on her, including interruption of her menstrual cycle. Theoretically, that means emergency contraception is okay.

I guess there's reason Massachusetts is something of a laughingstock in other states. The best way to encourage breastfeeding is by preventing formula companies from giving out samples? I'd like to think that a woman who chooses to bring a pregnancy to term can decide for herself whether or not she wants to breastfeed. If one 4 oz. can of formula and 3 coupons causes 1 woman to give up breastfeeding completely, the samples aren't the problem.

The freebie pack also comes wth disposable diapers, which are not recyclable. Between very vocal cloth-diaper advocates and a growing "diaper free" movement, disposable diapers are as politically incorrect as formula. Should those be banned from freebie packs, too?

Drug companies give samples to doctors all the tme. When I was uninsured, samples were the only medications I could afford. Should that be banned, and doctors be required to give patients information about homeopathic treatments instead?

Wal*Mart has its problems, but a locally-owned store isn't necessarily superior. When I lived in the boondocks, the local merchants served up overpriced crap with a snarl. My roommate had to threaten to sue the local computer store when they would not let her return a clearly mislabeled item.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of Wal*mart's labor practices, but Wal*Mart was a godsend when it came to my town. It was clean, brightly-lit, and sold a wide variety of goods. Their staff didn't treat shoppers with open contempt, even if the shoppers were obviously poor.

I ofter wonder how many Wal*Mart opponents have any experience with rural poverty. If Wal*Mart disappeared tomorow, millions of people would lose the best source available for cheap staples, clothes, and groceries.Most of the communities I've seen that fought Wal*Mart tooth and nail seemed terrified of poor people shopping nearby.

Now that I live in the big city, I don't shop at Wal*Mart, largely because I can't find one. I go to Target because they're close by, and I buy all of my coffee and cereal at Trader Joe's. I patronize a few local merchants, like a kickass local butcher and a great indie theater, because they offer great products with very good service at reasonable prices. But I'm not about to patronize a local merchant simply because they're a local merchant. I'm also not about to deny anyone a cheap source for toilet paper. Not everyone can afford to spend $3 for a bottle of shampoo.

Here in Boston, we ran into a similar problem a year ago, when a woman insisted on breast-feeding her baby while standing in a city pool, surrounded by kids. Breastfeeding is about feeding an infant. Therefore, rules against eating and drinkng in the pool area include infants, however they're being fed.

Yes, breastfeeding is natural and beautiful and healthy. Masturbation is, too, but nobody argues that they should be allowed to masturbate whenever and wherever they want to. Changing clothes is normal, but not in the middle of a parking lot or a grocery store. There's a time and a place for everything.