So I butted into a Facebook conversation last night with a former student and wrestler of mine. Good kid. The conversation was on atheists vs. Christians and what he perceives as Christians being closed minded. This, of course, is a very common accusation toward anyone involved in any religion. I think it stems from religious folk trying to impose their "morals" and "ideals" (or God's, depending on perspective I suppose) onto non-religious folk through legislation, evangelism, and even through discourse. Well, this conversation has me thinking. I will try to present my scattered thoughts on the subject in an organized manner.
1) If I don't believe as you do and I emphatically tell you why, how, etc., and in this discussion also try to "win" the argument or debate, does that mean I am trying to change your way of life or just best you at verbal fisticuffs? Can one not just debate for the sake of debate? It seems to be human nature (all people, not just religious or non-religious) to take comments personally due to our preconceived notions of the other side and also due to our personal, limited ability to stretch our minds outside of our own little worlds. No one is really immune to this unless you purposefully train yourself to see outside of yourself.
2) Is it such a bad thing to try to change someone's mind or way of life if I perceive their way of life as detrimental to them and I care about them? If I knew your house was on fire and you couldn't see it, would I be a bad person if I didn't warn you? What if I believed your house was going to catch on fire due to previous experience and circumstantial evidence, should I tell you? I mean, the temperature has not risen yet and there are no measurable data I can point to but I know that there are danger signs. Should I tell you? What if I am wrong? Should I never try to tell you again if there is even stronger evidence? My point is, if I care about someone and believe they are in danger of any sort, I should tell them. It is my obligation as a human being.
3) Do the mistakes, misinterpretations, abuses and generally evil deeds of people in the past justify the hatred of people in the present? I see this all the time. Christianity must be bad because people used it to justify slavery, genocide, etc. Islam must be evil because people blew up buildings. Those people were not right. Those people committed atrocities. I have not. There are bad people in every circle. You don't hate the circle because of the bad members. I am really sorry if some Christian was hateful or mean to you. You won't get that from all of them, I promise.
4) Finally, is it really so bad to be closed minded? Doesn't that just mean you have made a decision? Can't that be synonymous with "principled" and "disciplined" and "focused"? Perhaps one of the greatest "problems" in this modern age of enlightenment is that people never close their minds and thus never really move forward. Multi-tasking is a sure fire way to actually get NOTHING done. I am not approaching this from an "ignorance is bliss" perspective, more from a "make a decision and move on" perspective. You can always re-evaluate if something shifts your paradigm, but stop waffling. Look at our congress. As an entity, congress is the most open minded unit in the country. All they do is debate and discuss all the possibilities ad nauseum. They get nothing done. Is it closed minded of me to have made a decision, to stick to it and to move forward down that path? I don't think it is, I think it is called being decisive.
My 2 cents. The topic is now open for debate with all my open minded, enlightened waffler and my closed minded, mean, friends.
Showing posts with label debate. Show all posts
Showing posts with label debate. Show all posts
Thursday, July 18, 2013
Wednesday, August 29, 2012
ONE Answer
People are funny creatures. I say that a lot but it is true. We do things all the time that we know are wrong. This particular blog is about that phenomenon. We are constantly looking for the "right" answer. I know this could go into deep religious discussion but please try to refrain from steering it that way. We don't even have to get that philosophical. Look at politics, marriages, game shows, our obsession with science, etc. Humans constantly bicker over whose answer is "the right one".
Take politics, we are, for all intents and purposes, right now, a two party system. I know there are groups outside those two parties that have tremendous influence and may eventually become major players, but for now, we have two main parties. Both parties point fingers at the other party saying how they are "wrong". The parties insist that they have the answer to fix everything. Neither party can admit that it is possible both could be right, both could be wrong or there is somewhere in between. And it doesn't even matter which particular stump they are standing on!
Looking at marriages, we tend to want to mold our spouse into carbon copies of ourselves on certain issues because we are right and they are wrong. We leave out the possibility that they are right too, just raised differently.
Why do we do this? I think it is because we want verification of our own insecurities. In other words, if I can make you see the light that I was correct and you were wrong, I must, in fact, ACTUALLY be right. I think I am right, but if I win the debate, I have PROVEN I am right and I feel good about myself. It makes us uncomfortable to think we could be wrong, or worse yet, the other side could be right ALSO.
What do we do? I think the first thing we do is accept that FACT that we can be wrong. We also accept the fact that, just because we were taught something growing up, doesn't make it infallible. This is a hard lesson for folks. We also need to constantly seek the company of people older, wiser and more intelligent than ourselves so that we can stay humble and continue to grow. Don't surround yourself constantly with people just like you!!!
That's all I have today. Go Blue and be nice to each other.
Take politics, we are, for all intents and purposes, right now, a two party system. I know there are groups outside those two parties that have tremendous influence and may eventually become major players, but for now, we have two main parties. Both parties point fingers at the other party saying how they are "wrong". The parties insist that they have the answer to fix everything. Neither party can admit that it is possible both could be right, both could be wrong or there is somewhere in between. And it doesn't even matter which particular stump they are standing on!
Looking at marriages, we tend to want to mold our spouse into carbon copies of ourselves on certain issues because we are right and they are wrong. We leave out the possibility that they are right too, just raised differently.
Why do we do this? I think it is because we want verification of our own insecurities. In other words, if I can make you see the light that I was correct and you were wrong, I must, in fact, ACTUALLY be right. I think I am right, but if I win the debate, I have PROVEN I am right and I feel good about myself. It makes us uncomfortable to think we could be wrong, or worse yet, the other side could be right ALSO.
What do we do? I think the first thing we do is accept that FACT that we can be wrong. We also accept the fact that, just because we were taught something growing up, doesn't make it infallible. This is a hard lesson for folks. We also need to constantly seek the company of people older, wiser and more intelligent than ourselves so that we can stay humble and continue to grow. Don't surround yourself constantly with people just like you!!!
That's all I have today. Go Blue and be nice to each other.
Wednesday, December 7, 2011
School Uniforms
Ok, so this isn't so much a lie as it is an age old debate in public schools. I have a bit of a different perspective on uniforms and want to share it. See what you think.
I used to have my students debate on this issue to practice debating. It was an easy enough topic to debate, did not require too much hard core research and gave them all the chance to work on the process of putting together coherent arguments and speaking intelligently. Here is the topic as I see it:
Why you wouldn't have uniforms in public high schools: The main reasons people are opposed to uniforms include the perceived "added cost" and the limitations of expression.
Some think that the student would have to have, essentially, 2 complete wardrobes--one wardrobe of uniforms and one wardrobe of "normal" clothes. My argument to this is to keep it simple. Most uniform policies would call for something along the lines of khaki pants (a wardrobe staple anyway) and a specific color, solid polo type shirt. Since the uniform would call for consistency in the color of shirt, it would be simple to purchase 2-3 pairs of pants and 3-5 shirts. This purchase would cover the uniform for the whole year (assuming wear and tear was not severe). Additionally, there are tons of ways to purchase the shirts in bulk and further reduce the cost.
I am going to address some of the benefits before I address the second major argument.
Uniforms greatly reduce the stress on the teachers caused by enforcement of an arbitrary dress code. Dress codes typically have things in them like "can't be too revealing" and "can't have offensive imagery". Both of these are, at best, uncomfortable to enforce. Imagine being a male teacher and being charged with approaching a 16 year old girl to send her to the office for a dress code violation for being "too revealing." How many times would this have to happen before the teacher is in trouble for gawking at students. It's not a stretch at all. On the other item, what is offensive? I am offended by far less than some people and far more than other people. Who decides?
Another benefit is the reduction of stress on parents and on students. There is no "what am I going to wear today" discussion. There is no "what if ___________ doesn't like this outfit." There is no "OH NO! __________ has the same shirt on as me, my life is ruined!" There is no, "oh look at this guy, he is such a thug/nerd/jock/hick/etc." This brings me to the second argument against uniforms--they limit freedom of expression. I would contend that uniforms actually do the opposite--they FOSTER freedom of expression. If you can't hide behind your clothes, you have to learn how to present yourself verbally. How many youth do you know that dress a certain way to either elicit some kind of reaction or to keep people from talking to them. I know LOTS. You have the kid that wears black makeup, chains, studs, all black, etc. just so the "popular kids" won't mess with them. That same kid will probably never speak with the kid that wears baggy pants and a huge tshirt.
We judge people on a whim based solely on their dress. This is magnified in high schools as kids are trying to find their identities and place an even greater emphasis on clothing. How much better would it be if students started out on a level playing field without pre-judgement based on clothes? This would mean they would have to talk. They would have to discuss their identities and have to express themselves. They could no longer hide behind their clothes.
I know this isn't a "hot topic" or anything that will change the world. It is a topic though that comes up periodically. I don't think it will turn around the school system nationwide or anything. I do think it is an easy change that will promote respect, promote learning and will minimize distractions and minimize some other outside influences, allowing everyone to focus on learning instead of what Suzy or Billy Bob is wearing.
I used to have my students debate on this issue to practice debating. It was an easy enough topic to debate, did not require too much hard core research and gave them all the chance to work on the process of putting together coherent arguments and speaking intelligently. Here is the topic as I see it:
Why you wouldn't have uniforms in public high schools: The main reasons people are opposed to uniforms include the perceived "added cost" and the limitations of expression.
Some think that the student would have to have, essentially, 2 complete wardrobes--one wardrobe of uniforms and one wardrobe of "normal" clothes. My argument to this is to keep it simple. Most uniform policies would call for something along the lines of khaki pants (a wardrobe staple anyway) and a specific color, solid polo type shirt. Since the uniform would call for consistency in the color of shirt, it would be simple to purchase 2-3 pairs of pants and 3-5 shirts. This purchase would cover the uniform for the whole year (assuming wear and tear was not severe). Additionally, there are tons of ways to purchase the shirts in bulk and further reduce the cost.
I am going to address some of the benefits before I address the second major argument.
Uniforms greatly reduce the stress on the teachers caused by enforcement of an arbitrary dress code. Dress codes typically have things in them like "can't be too revealing" and "can't have offensive imagery". Both of these are, at best, uncomfortable to enforce. Imagine being a male teacher and being charged with approaching a 16 year old girl to send her to the office for a dress code violation for being "too revealing." How many times would this have to happen before the teacher is in trouble for gawking at students. It's not a stretch at all. On the other item, what is offensive? I am offended by far less than some people and far more than other people. Who decides?
Another benefit is the reduction of stress on parents and on students. There is no "what am I going to wear today" discussion. There is no "what if ___________ doesn't like this outfit." There is no "OH NO! __________ has the same shirt on as me, my life is ruined!" There is no, "oh look at this guy, he is such a thug/nerd/jock/hick/etc." This brings me to the second argument against uniforms--they limit freedom of expression. I would contend that uniforms actually do the opposite--they FOSTER freedom of expression. If you can't hide behind your clothes, you have to learn how to present yourself verbally. How many youth do you know that dress a certain way to either elicit some kind of reaction or to keep people from talking to them. I know LOTS. You have the kid that wears black makeup, chains, studs, all black, etc. just so the "popular kids" won't mess with them. That same kid will probably never speak with the kid that wears baggy pants and a huge tshirt.
We judge people on a whim based solely on their dress. This is magnified in high schools as kids are trying to find their identities and place an even greater emphasis on clothing. How much better would it be if students started out on a level playing field without pre-judgement based on clothes? This would mean they would have to talk. They would have to discuss their identities and have to express themselves. They could no longer hide behind their clothes.
I know this isn't a "hot topic" or anything that will change the world. It is a topic though that comes up periodically. I don't think it will turn around the school system nationwide or anything. I do think it is an easy change that will promote respect, promote learning and will minimize distractions and minimize some other outside influences, allowing everyone to focus on learning instead of what Suzy or Billy Bob is wearing.
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
The Lie--Discipline Will Damage a Kid
Ok parents, this one is for you. This lie is not overtly spoken in our culture. It is more of a lie that is OBVIOUSLY present when I interact with or see you and your kids in public. I don't know if all of the perpetrators of this lie believe it exactly as I have written it, but there is SOME reason they don't discipline their children. I don't know if they think they will damage the kid or if they think it is better to spoil the child or if they are too tired or lazy to discipline or if they are purposely creating kids with no discipline as a means of retaliating against a society they feel has given them a raw deal. Either way, I would challenge that parent by saying that discipline of your children is actually HOW you love them and not disciplining them is actually hurting them and may even be a form of neglect.
The first time your kid throws a fit in the cereal aisle because he or she wants the super sugar fruity yum yums, that child is testing your reaction. If you bend to their will because you don't want to make a scene, they won. They now know that anytime they want something (and they will ALWAYS want something), they just have to make enough of a scene to make you cave in. This habit will stick with them for a very long time. This will be crippling to them later in life. Children crave discipline and order and routine. They are still trying to figure out how things work. As babies, they cried, you fed them (or changed them, or rocked them or burped them). As kids, they will try the same tactics because they think it will work. It is our job as parents to help them grow past this stage.
Kids are not pleasure delay-ers. They want something and they want it now. One vital skill that parents should teach is that life does not always bend in your direction. If you want something, you have to plan for it, save for it, budget for it. NOT doing so leads to overspending, debt and financial hardship. Many adults would have greatly benefited from this lesson early in life (including me). This is where my theory that discipline is a form of love comes in. As a parent, I want my child to be happy, healthy and successful. I see my most important job (after being a strong Christian and a great husband) to be raising my kids with integrity, work ethic, compassion, and discipline. That discipline is what will get them through their studies when they would rather party. That discipline is what will give them the strength to turn down the drugs when someone offers them (and someone will). That discipline is what will help them excel at whatever extra pursuits they choose (music, athletics, academics, etc.). That discipline is what will allow them to focus at their work and excel there. It is essential. God views discipline as a form of love. He disciplines his followers when they don't obey (look at the Israelites). Discipline in the Bible is what sharpens God's people to be better Christians. Not giving them the discipline, is, therefore, neglect.
So what kind of discipline am I talking about.
NUMBER 1 is the word "NO." Kids MUST hear the word "no". They absolutely must not get everything their heart desires. I don't care how rich you are. You must not give your kid everything--period. Being able to deal with "No" is the hardest lesson to learn. It is also the most important. Kids that never hear "No" do not deal with rejection in relationships well. They will, at some point in their lives, be turned down. If you want to make that first rejection absolutely devastating, never tell your kid no.
NUMBER 2 is teach your kid to prioritize and to make "either/or" choices. Life is full of trade offs. I can either go here or here, not both. I can either have the Super Sugar Fruity Yum Yums or the pack of Tic Tacs. Not both. Learning to make a choice and stick with it very early (like 1 year old) is so important. They learn to be decisive. They learn to be who they are. They learn to prioritize. They, by the nature of choice, learn "NO".
NUMBER 3 is to have REAL consequences for bad choices. Jonas has learned real early that life is nothing but a series of choices. Sometimes he makes good choices, sometimes he makes bad choices. Good choices are pleasurable. Bad choices have unpleasurable repercussions. If he jumps off something too high, it hurts--bad choice. If I tell him not to do something and he does it, he gets spanked. It hurts--bad choice. One time he tore a book at the baby sitter's house. He had been saving his little commission for many weeks so he could go to Toys R Us and pick something out. He had to spend all of his money on a new book. It hurt that he could not get what he wanted--bad choice. He has thrown a fit in the middle of restaurants. He knows that the result of a fit is a spanking--period. In the middle of dinner, he throws a fit, I take him immediately to the restroom and give him the consequence of his bad choice. I tell him that I am not giving him the spanking, he chose the action that led to it.
NUMBER 4 is to model the discipline. This can't be left out. If you don't act with discipline, how in the world can you expect them to. If you don't want them to cuss, then YOU shouldn't cuss. If you don't want them to throw fits when they don't get what they want, then YOU can't throw fits if you don't get what you want.
NUMBER 5--and this is probably the most important part to counter the lie--You MUST reassure them that no matter what, no matter what they do, you still love them. I know my discipline does not damage my child because I know that they know that I love them. I tell him every single day, several times a day, that he is important, he is smart, he is good, and I love him. After I discipline him, I ask him to tell my why he got in trouble and then I spend a good bit of time hugging him and telling him I love him no matter what. This reinforces the idea that discipline is love. I tell him that his actions have consequences but those consequences will never be that I don't love him.
Listen, I am not the worlds greatest dad. I'm probably not even in the top 100 greatest dads. But, I love my kids. I want them to be productive, contributing members of society and I am trying to equip them with the core principles to help them succeed at whatever they choose. Will they always be successful, no. I actually pray that every now and then (rarely), they fall on their face. It builds character and makes the successes that much more sweet. This ability to succeed starts with discipline. Don't be afraid to do it. Your kids will thank you for it later. I know I am thankful for my parents having the guts and the intestinal fortitude to discipline me.
One last thing, I DO NOT think that spanking is the only, or even the best, form of discipline. You have to figure out what works for your kids with each situation. For example, grounding Jonas from the TV or IPad sometimes works MUCH better than spanking because he is reminded of it every single time he wants to watch something. Other times, spanking is the better choice. Some people don't spank. Ok, fine. They still MUST discipline and it MUST be meaningful to the kid.
The first time your kid throws a fit in the cereal aisle because he or she wants the super sugar fruity yum yums, that child is testing your reaction. If you bend to their will because you don't want to make a scene, they won. They now know that anytime they want something (and they will ALWAYS want something), they just have to make enough of a scene to make you cave in. This habit will stick with them for a very long time. This will be crippling to them later in life. Children crave discipline and order and routine. They are still trying to figure out how things work. As babies, they cried, you fed them (or changed them, or rocked them or burped them). As kids, they will try the same tactics because they think it will work. It is our job as parents to help them grow past this stage.
Kids are not pleasure delay-ers. They want something and they want it now. One vital skill that parents should teach is that life does not always bend in your direction. If you want something, you have to plan for it, save for it, budget for it. NOT doing so leads to overspending, debt and financial hardship. Many adults would have greatly benefited from this lesson early in life (including me). This is where my theory that discipline is a form of love comes in. As a parent, I want my child to be happy, healthy and successful. I see my most important job (after being a strong Christian and a great husband) to be raising my kids with integrity, work ethic, compassion, and discipline. That discipline is what will get them through their studies when they would rather party. That discipline is what will give them the strength to turn down the drugs when someone offers them (and someone will). That discipline is what will help them excel at whatever extra pursuits they choose (music, athletics, academics, etc.). That discipline is what will allow them to focus at their work and excel there. It is essential. God views discipline as a form of love. He disciplines his followers when they don't obey (look at the Israelites). Discipline in the Bible is what sharpens God's people to be better Christians. Not giving them the discipline, is, therefore, neglect.
So what kind of discipline am I talking about.
NUMBER 1 is the word "NO." Kids MUST hear the word "no". They absolutely must not get everything their heart desires. I don't care how rich you are. You must not give your kid everything--period. Being able to deal with "No" is the hardest lesson to learn. It is also the most important. Kids that never hear "No" do not deal with rejection in relationships well. They will, at some point in their lives, be turned down. If you want to make that first rejection absolutely devastating, never tell your kid no.
NUMBER 2 is teach your kid to prioritize and to make "either/or" choices. Life is full of trade offs. I can either go here or here, not both. I can either have the Super Sugar Fruity Yum Yums or the pack of Tic Tacs. Not both. Learning to make a choice and stick with it very early (like 1 year old) is so important. They learn to be decisive. They learn to be who they are. They learn to prioritize. They, by the nature of choice, learn "NO".
NUMBER 3 is to have REAL consequences for bad choices. Jonas has learned real early that life is nothing but a series of choices. Sometimes he makes good choices, sometimes he makes bad choices. Good choices are pleasurable. Bad choices have unpleasurable repercussions. If he jumps off something too high, it hurts--bad choice. If I tell him not to do something and he does it, he gets spanked. It hurts--bad choice. One time he tore a book at the baby sitter's house. He had been saving his little commission for many weeks so he could go to Toys R Us and pick something out. He had to spend all of his money on a new book. It hurt that he could not get what he wanted--bad choice. He has thrown a fit in the middle of restaurants. He knows that the result of a fit is a spanking--period. In the middle of dinner, he throws a fit, I take him immediately to the restroom and give him the consequence of his bad choice. I tell him that I am not giving him the spanking, he chose the action that led to it.
NUMBER 4 is to model the discipline. This can't be left out. If you don't act with discipline, how in the world can you expect them to. If you don't want them to cuss, then YOU shouldn't cuss. If you don't want them to throw fits when they don't get what they want, then YOU can't throw fits if you don't get what you want.
NUMBER 5--and this is probably the most important part to counter the lie--You MUST reassure them that no matter what, no matter what they do, you still love them. I know my discipline does not damage my child because I know that they know that I love them. I tell him every single day, several times a day, that he is important, he is smart, he is good, and I love him. After I discipline him, I ask him to tell my why he got in trouble and then I spend a good bit of time hugging him and telling him I love him no matter what. This reinforces the idea that discipline is love. I tell him that his actions have consequences but those consequences will never be that I don't love him.
Listen, I am not the worlds greatest dad. I'm probably not even in the top 100 greatest dads. But, I love my kids. I want them to be productive, contributing members of society and I am trying to equip them with the core principles to help them succeed at whatever they choose. Will they always be successful, no. I actually pray that every now and then (rarely), they fall on their face. It builds character and makes the successes that much more sweet. This ability to succeed starts with discipline. Don't be afraid to do it. Your kids will thank you for it later. I know I am thankful for my parents having the guts and the intestinal fortitude to discipline me.
One last thing, I DO NOT think that spanking is the only, or even the best, form of discipline. You have to figure out what works for your kids with each situation. For example, grounding Jonas from the TV or IPad sometimes works MUCH better than spanking because he is reminded of it every single time he wants to watch something. Other times, spanking is the better choice. Some people don't spank. Ok, fine. They still MUST discipline and it MUST be meaningful to the kid.
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
The Lie: Fathers are not important if a strong mother is present...
Ok, this one could get a little dicey. Remember the rules--debate and discuss but do not belittle or swear or be mean to each other. Let's start by saying this, I am pointing the above statement out as a lie in the general sense. There are DEFINITELY exceptions to the rule. Those exceptions (the minority) are most likely what caused the lie to be propagated. That said, if you are an exception to the rule, then I applaud you. Even so, there is overwhelming evidence that it is a lie to think that an active father (papa, dad or daddy) is not important. Oh yeah, I do tend to write in a sort of stream of consciousness style. It all makes sense to me though.
Let's start with how I know this is a pervasive thought. Turn on any modern sitcom that features a father figure. There is a really good chance that the father is the comic relief in the show. He is portrayed as insensitive, bumbling, weak and a buffoon. I can not think of one show in over 10 years where there was a strong, intelligent, active, true father figure. Now think of the modern women's movement. There are countless shirts, pinterest sayings, facebook posts, etc that espouse the virtues of kicking out the dad and going with mom only. Let me stop here and say that, unfortunately, the lion's share of the blame rides on the so called "fathers." I know that. I know that many, many, many males in our culture are deadbeats. They create a child and then squander their opportunity to be a father. I also know there are many that are or become abusive--whether it is chemically induced or some latent defect in that male's upbringing finally coming to the surface. My blog is not meant to chastise the moms for protecting themselves and their families. My intent is to try to discuss why it is important for a good father to be present instead of bowing to the cultural viewpoint that says, "well he was an idiot, oh well, dads aren't that important anyway."
I understand that this is a common direction to take if your dad/husband/father of your child ditches you. It is normal to say that it is their loss and they don't really matter. It is a defense mechanism to try to talk you out of any guilt, depression, fear, etc.
Now, I would of course adopt the view that you should never create the baby outside of a strong marriage covenant relationship. The most important things a child gains from its parents is the model of relationship. The child needs to see healthy spousal interaction, healthy conflict resolution (yes, healthy spouses still disagree), healthy relationships with friends and healthy leadership out of the father. I do realize that babies are created outside of these relationships. So, if you help create a baby, it is your responsibility to care for that child. It is your responsibility to provide direction, support and love for that child. The child needs you, no matter what the mom says, the child needs you. You have a different viewpoint from the mother. You provide balance in that child's life.
My parents are still married to each other. They got married at 19 years old and have been married for 32 years now. When they married each other, they made a covenant and have not broken it. I believe I am who I am now because of this. I learned from my father how to be a husband, how to be a father, how to be a man. WAY too many kids grow up without these lessons. Was he perfect--far from it. Am I perfect--far from it. Did he do things I swore I would never do--of course. Part of the lesson was to see how not to do things. Its a constant evolution. That said, he was present, supportive, and loved my mom. Those are the most important things. Those are what I am imploring my fellow males to become--men.
Here are just a very few statistics (collected on innocentdads.org) to drive my point home:
Let's start with how I know this is a pervasive thought. Turn on any modern sitcom that features a father figure. There is a really good chance that the father is the comic relief in the show. He is portrayed as insensitive, bumbling, weak and a buffoon. I can not think of one show in over 10 years where there was a strong, intelligent, active, true father figure. Now think of the modern women's movement. There are countless shirts, pinterest sayings, facebook posts, etc that espouse the virtues of kicking out the dad and going with mom only. Let me stop here and say that, unfortunately, the lion's share of the blame rides on the so called "fathers." I know that. I know that many, many, many males in our culture are deadbeats. They create a child and then squander their opportunity to be a father. I also know there are many that are or become abusive--whether it is chemically induced or some latent defect in that male's upbringing finally coming to the surface. My blog is not meant to chastise the moms for protecting themselves and their families. My intent is to try to discuss why it is important for a good father to be present instead of bowing to the cultural viewpoint that says, "well he was an idiot, oh well, dads aren't that important anyway."
I understand that this is a common direction to take if your dad/husband/father of your child ditches you. It is normal to say that it is their loss and they don't really matter. It is a defense mechanism to try to talk you out of any guilt, depression, fear, etc.
Now, I would of course adopt the view that you should never create the baby outside of a strong marriage covenant relationship. The most important things a child gains from its parents is the model of relationship. The child needs to see healthy spousal interaction, healthy conflict resolution (yes, healthy spouses still disagree), healthy relationships with friends and healthy leadership out of the father. I do realize that babies are created outside of these relationships. So, if you help create a baby, it is your responsibility to care for that child. It is your responsibility to provide direction, support and love for that child. The child needs you, no matter what the mom says, the child needs you. You have a different viewpoint from the mother. You provide balance in that child's life.
My parents are still married to each other. They got married at 19 years old and have been married for 32 years now. When they married each other, they made a covenant and have not broken it. I believe I am who I am now because of this. I learned from my father how to be a husband, how to be a father, how to be a man. WAY too many kids grow up without these lessons. Was he perfect--far from it. Am I perfect--far from it. Did he do things I swore I would never do--of course. Part of the lesson was to see how not to do things. Its a constant evolution. That said, he was present, supportive, and loved my mom. Those are the most important things. Those are what I am imploring my fellow males to become--men.
Here are just a very few statistics (collected on innocentdads.org) to drive my point home:
1) 43% of US children live without their father [US Department
of Census]
2) 90% of homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes. [US
D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
3) 80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes. [Criminal Justice & Behaviour, Vol 14, pp. 403-26, 1978]
4) 71% of pregnant teenagers lack a father. [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services press release, Friday, March 26, 1999]
5) 63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
6) 85% of children who exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. [Center for Disease Control]
7) 90% of adolescent repeat arsonists live with only their mother. [Wray Herbert, “Dousing the Kindlers,” Psychology Today, January, 1985, p. 28]
8) 71% of high school dropouts come from fatherless homes. [National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools]
9) 75% of adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes. [Rainbows f for all God’s Children]
10) 70% of juveniles in state operated institutions have no father. [US Department of Justice, Special Report, Sept. 1988]
11) 85% of youths in prisons grew up in a fatherless home. [Fulton County Georgia jail populations, Texas Department of Corrections, 1992]
12) Fatherless boys and girls are: twice as likely to drop out of high school; twice as likely to end up in jail; four times more likely to need help for emotional or behavioral problems. [US D.H.H.S. news release, March 26, 1999]
If these don't speak to you, I don't know what will. Dads, do whatever you can to be present in your child's life. Moms, allow the dad to be present. If this is just not possible, purposely find a positive male figure for your child--grandfather, uncle, youth minister, someone that can show the child that not every man is a buffoon. EVERYONE--think before you create that child. Don't do it if you aren't serious about being with each other for the rest of your lives. Marriage and parenting is HARD WORK. It is NOT something to be taken lightly. It is NOT something for the frivolous and flighty. Remember what is at stake--read these statistics again.
3) 80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes. [Criminal Justice & Behaviour, Vol 14, pp. 403-26, 1978]
4) 71% of pregnant teenagers lack a father. [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services press release, Friday, March 26, 1999]
5) 63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
6) 85% of children who exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. [Center for Disease Control]
7) 90% of adolescent repeat arsonists live with only their mother. [Wray Herbert, “Dousing the Kindlers,” Psychology Today, January, 1985, p. 28]
8) 71% of high school dropouts come from fatherless homes. [National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools]
9) 75% of adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes. [Rainbows f for all God’s Children]
10) 70% of juveniles in state operated institutions have no father. [US Department of Justice, Special Report, Sept. 1988]
11) 85% of youths in prisons grew up in a fatherless home. [Fulton County Georgia jail populations, Texas Department of Corrections, 1992]
12) Fatherless boys and girls are: twice as likely to drop out of high school; twice as likely to end up in jail; four times more likely to need help for emotional or behavioral problems. [US D.H.H.S. news release, March 26, 1999]
If these don't speak to you, I don't know what will. Dads, do whatever you can to be present in your child's life. Moms, allow the dad to be present. If this is just not possible, purposely find a positive male figure for your child--grandfather, uncle, youth minister, someone that can show the child that not every man is a buffoon. EVERYONE--think before you create that child. Don't do it if you aren't serious about being with each other for the rest of your lives. Marriage and parenting is HARD WORK. It is NOT something to be taken lightly. It is NOT something for the frivolous and flighty. Remember what is at stake--read these statistics again.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)