As a single (widowed) parent of fine outstanding socially acceptable sons,
thanks for the reality check. I thought for a moment my children should be
delinquent. My children know they are glorious expressions of life...
equal to all, equal to any religious leader or elected official and
certainly equal to any aspiration of our human knowledge of God. They also
know they are responsible for their own behavior and the consequences
thereof. Are they freewheeling?
No. My children do not have the restrictive option of reprive in the form
of religious sanctity, nor do they have government allocation to bail them
out of responsibility for their actions. The easy way out? No. They stand
tall and proud with or without socially contrived religion or government
telling them how to behave. I am proud of my children. I will always be
proud of my decision to avoid the easy way out, the one that suggests
churches or governments dictate my parenting or the way my sons should be.
For lack of humility I will say that religion and government are critical,
but only for those with no spine to exist as responsible, respectful
participants of the human race. In this regard I appreciate religion and
government, but only in this regard.
Altruism, a true consideration for others is paramount, I often find this
ideal lacking in most peoples, religions and governments... there is a
tendency to push the whole dark/light (I'm better than/worse than) issue
with little if no recognition for serious altruism. Needless to say I
have steered my children clear of these institutions for that very reason.
It has proven to be a good call.
I'm a little unnerved that this conversation even exists. I suppose as
long as people young and old continue to give up their being to one form
or another of one-up-manship, it's bound to be an issue.
In total humility,
/donna
On Sat, 21 Mar 1998, Jo Williams wrote:
> I have to take issue with several of Gary You's assumptions in the
> discussion of our area's 'troubled teenagers'.
> First, he suggests that they are all from "broken homes". There are many
> great teens whose parents are divorced- and many problem kids from homes
> where the parents haven't divorced.
> Second he makes the broad generalization that parents who don't spend
> every spare moment with their children are then to blame when those kids
> get into trouble. Does that go for the father busy spending his spare
> time finishing a graduate degree? Attending city council meetings?
> Running for county commissioner? The mother attending medical school,
> running for mayor or organizing youth outreach programs? Maybe it
> applies to parents so busy taking Johnny to basketball practice or
> football games that no one is home cooking supper for Johnny's brothers
> and sisters (who then get into trouble due to this parental neglect).
> Finally he makes the statement that the "easy" solution is to "get right
> with God". Living a religious life is not easy- and not intended to be
> easy. It's a lifelong struggle, always falling short (unless you happen
> to be a Saint). Similarly, it's not an easy solution to a communities'
> problems. There are no easy solutions. But there are a lot of difficult
> and time consuming solutions that we'll never get to if we sit around
> waiting for Utopia/Heaven, mouthing pat phrases.
> Jo Williams tajs@potlatch.com
>