Sandra Green, a Florida mother turned-in her 18-year-old son to the police. She recognized him on surveillance video in connection with a home burglary.
Clearwater police released footage showing three teenagers breaking into a home. They were stealing headphones, sports memorabilia and a pair of Michael Jordan-brand sneakers. Days later, Sandra Green saw the video and said she was “heartbroken” to see that her son was one of the three people wanted.
“I was heartbroken because I know I didn’t raise him like that,” she told a television station. “I told him, ‘Come home, take your shower, get something to eat, I am about to take you over there to Clearwater, and turn you in." Clearwater police arrested the young man and charged him with burglary and grand theft.
The mother told a judge she wanted her son to be put on probation with the requirement that he get back on the path to graduate from high school. “He is not hardcore. I feel like he will break tonight. But I want to make sure that it sinks in.”
Throughout the life of a mother, she is confronted with difficult decisions. The difficulty often increases as children grow. For career women, many abandon career ambitions and accept the new challenges of motherhood. Others surrender economic stability and opt for developing character and value in their children. Simply put, mothers make huge personal sacrifices in attempting to nurture their offspring. Sometimes that passion to produce excellence in their children forces them to make tough decisions, all in the interest of their children.
That passion for character development prompted another mother to also turn her son in to the police. Lakesha Robinson was at her son’s school for a parent-teacher conference. She noticed his attention was on a cell phone that she didn’t recognize. She said, “what are you doing with this phone? Whose phone is this?”
He told his mother that the cell phone was given to him by a friend, but she wasn’t buying his story; therefore, she conducted her own investigation and uncovered the real owner of the phone.
The owner told the mother-of-three that his car was broken into and his cellphone, wallet, and credit cards had been stolen. He went on to say that his credit cards had been used at McDonald’s and Walmart. “Since my son had the phone, it’s obvious that he knows something about this theft.” But, when she asked her son about the burglary, he denied it – that’s when she continued her investigation. A McDonald’s bag, a Walmart bag, and a receipt were found inside her home and she called the cell phone owner to see if the amounts matched his statements.
The mother arranged a meeting with the owner and returned his property. Afterward, the Florida mother didn’t hesitate to turn her son in for burglary because of her own criminal background. She did not want her son to make the same mistakes she did before changing her life. Her son was arrested and taken to a juvenile detention center for 12 hours and charged with four counts of burglary.
As I reflect on Mother’s Day 2018, I am forced to recall experiences with the mothers I know best – my own mother, my wife who mothered three, and our daughter who is mothering four. These three women, representing three different generations have taught me much. Each of these women displayed toughness in their parenting. They sacrificed much, displayed tenderness, but never surrendered toughness. Thankfully, none of these women have had to report their children to the police.
At this time of year, I salute them – I salute each of them because, in their mothering, they cared more for the character than the image of their children. I salute these women because their passion for Jesus is greater than their passion for religion. The words of the Proverbs 31 woman ably describe each of them – “Many women do noble things, but you surpass them all” (Proverbs 31:29). Happy Mother’s Day!
Showing posts with label parenting. Show all posts
Showing posts with label parenting. Show all posts
Saturday, May 12, 2018
Sunday, December 27, 2015
Happy New Year!
Respond to the following - depending on your answers, I will know if you are my colleague:
□ I used a manual typewriter
□ I used a public telephone booth
□ I used a slate in kindergarten
□ I used reel to reel audio recordings
□ I used black and white television
If you never used any of the above items, you are younger than I am. What a difference a few decades make. Today I don’t know if I can function without an iPhone or my laptop. Even words like tablets and default have new meanings.
My world has changed and I must be prepared to change with it. If I don’t, very soon I may not be able to communicate with my grandchildren. One grandson was not even four, when he explained some function on the television to my wife.
With that backdrop we say, Welcome to 2016 – a year when many jobs will disappear and be replaced by smart machines. Although wanting greater independence, many younger people will continue to depend on older folks to make ends meet.
A freshly released Pew Research Center study indicates that a larger-than-expected percentage of young people are still living with their parents rather than moving out and perhaps buying a place of their own.
Some of these young people have been referred to as the grab-and-go generation, with 29% saying that they often purchase food and drink while on the run, compared with 19% of consumers overall. Research is confirming that gas stations/ convenience stores are becoming the preferred choice for fast foods among post-millennialists.
But to whom are we referring when we talk about post-millennialists? We are talking about young people born since the late nineties – they are dubbed Generation Z, home-landers and at times, simply posts. Many posts know nothing about 9/11.
Today’s 'posts' want to be defined by being connected, both from a technological standpoint and a social standpoint. They don't think money matters much and they're not interested in taking on debt. According to one sociologist, “posts are not colossally ambitious, perhaps as a coping mechanism, but they're optimistic in the face of economic challenges.”
As they grow up and begin living on their own, posts likely will adopt a near-migrant lifestyle, zeroing in on warm cities that offer an abundance of inexpensive housing and fledgling indie (independent) scenes. They'll move constantly in an attempt to find better work, better balance and that ever-elusive happiness.
I chuckle at times when I see how my students think – at times I am looking for a notepad (note book) on which to write. While I am looking, they are recording the same information digitally, using their smart phones. They transfer notes to their smart phones. They shop using their smart phones. At church, they read their Bibles on their smart phones.
Did you know that in order to understand future trends, one can even pursue as course in Professional Foresight? This is a transdisciplinary educational program of study that seeks to improve one's ability to create, anticipate, and manage change in a variety of domains, on a variety of scales, and using a variety of specialties. Creating, anticipating, and managing change in our increasingly fast-paced and globalized technological world is an ongoing challenge, and building a global culture of foresight proficiency provides great social value.
For many of us who will not be pursuing courses in Professional Foresight, there is no need to feel useless as we look at 2016 and the years ahead. Whereas many of the courses equip students to analyze, providing solutions is another matter. Considering that habits are better caught than taught, I believe someone needs to model value-based solutions to tomorrow’s generation.
Many of us who raised children without the frequent support of grandparents, must now make ourselves available to our children and grandchildren. We need to pass on our understanding of commitment and stability, crucial in any family. Even though we faced major challenges, we understood the value of commitment in times of crisis. We resolved our differences privately, face to face, not publicly via Facebook.
We made time to eat together. At those meal tables we learned graces; we learned to appreciate community; we respected authority and valued faith. In addition, we learned to be content with what was served. This is why I intend to invite some young families to maintain this family board room - a place where nourishment and nurturing flourish – that’s my New Year resolution.
□ I used a manual typewriter
□ I used a public telephone booth
□ I used a slate in kindergarten
□ I used reel to reel audio recordings
□ I used black and white television
If you never used any of the above items, you are younger than I am. What a difference a few decades make. Today I don’t know if I can function without an iPhone or my laptop. Even words like tablets and default have new meanings.
My world has changed and I must be prepared to change with it. If I don’t, very soon I may not be able to communicate with my grandchildren. One grandson was not even four, when he explained some function on the television to my wife.
With that backdrop we say, Welcome to 2016 – a year when many jobs will disappear and be replaced by smart machines. Although wanting greater independence, many younger people will continue to depend on older folks to make ends meet.
A freshly released Pew Research Center study indicates that a larger-than-expected percentage of young people are still living with their parents rather than moving out and perhaps buying a place of their own.
Some of these young people have been referred to as the grab-and-go generation, with 29% saying that they often purchase food and drink while on the run, compared with 19% of consumers overall. Research is confirming that gas stations/ convenience stores are becoming the preferred choice for fast foods among post-millennialists.
But to whom are we referring when we talk about post-millennialists? We are talking about young people born since the late nineties – they are dubbed Generation Z, home-landers and at times, simply posts. Many posts know nothing about 9/11.
Today’s 'posts' want to be defined by being connected, both from a technological standpoint and a social standpoint. They don't think money matters much and they're not interested in taking on debt. According to one sociologist, “posts are not colossally ambitious, perhaps as a coping mechanism, but they're optimistic in the face of economic challenges.”
As they grow up and begin living on their own, posts likely will adopt a near-migrant lifestyle, zeroing in on warm cities that offer an abundance of inexpensive housing and fledgling indie (independent) scenes. They'll move constantly in an attempt to find better work, better balance and that ever-elusive happiness.
I chuckle at times when I see how my students think – at times I am looking for a notepad (note book) on which to write. While I am looking, they are recording the same information digitally, using their smart phones. They transfer notes to their smart phones. They shop using their smart phones. At church, they read their Bibles on their smart phones.
Did you know that in order to understand future trends, one can even pursue as course in Professional Foresight? This is a transdisciplinary educational program of study that seeks to improve one's ability to create, anticipate, and manage change in a variety of domains, on a variety of scales, and using a variety of specialties. Creating, anticipating, and managing change in our increasingly fast-paced and globalized technological world is an ongoing challenge, and building a global culture of foresight proficiency provides great social value.
For many of us who will not be pursuing courses in Professional Foresight, there is no need to feel useless as we look at 2016 and the years ahead. Whereas many of the courses equip students to analyze, providing solutions is another matter. Considering that habits are better caught than taught, I believe someone needs to model value-based solutions to tomorrow’s generation.
Many of us who raised children without the frequent support of grandparents, must now make ourselves available to our children and grandchildren. We need to pass on our understanding of commitment and stability, crucial in any family. Even though we faced major challenges, we understood the value of commitment in times of crisis. We resolved our differences privately, face to face, not publicly via Facebook.
We made time to eat together. At those meal tables we learned graces; we learned to appreciate community; we respected authority and valued faith. In addition, we learned to be content with what was served. This is why I intend to invite some young families to maintain this family board room - a place where nourishment and nurturing flourish – that’s my New Year resolution.
Monday, November 2, 2015
EVERY Black Life Matters
The fact that black leaders have served as President, Attorneys General, Secretaries of State and other cabinet positions does not make a difference – there are voices in America that contend, the lives of some black people do not matter. The issue concerns an ethnic group – black skinned people. People in this category are often of African descent.
As a member of this ethnic group, I am very concerned about specific behaviors in our society that suggest, black-skinned people do not matter. In response to that attitude, I contend, “Every Black Life Matters.” Here are some situations that help to shape my concerns.
ABORTION
In the United States, more black babies are killed by abortion than any other ethnic group. Black children are aborted at nearly four times the rate as white children. A black abortion rate that for years has vastly surpassed that of every other racial group. Thirty out of every 1,000 black women obtained an abortion in 2011. That rate is nearly triple that of white women and double that of Hispanic women. Put succinctly, while about 13 percent of Americans are black, more than one-third of all abortions are administered to black women. (source)
FAMILY LIFE
In black communities, more babies are born out of wedlock than any other ethnic group - preliminary data indicate that 40.7 percent of all 2012 births were out-of-wedlock, which is appalling, and there are vast differences among racial and ethnic groups. Among non-Hispanic blacks, the figure is highest, at 72.2 percent; for American Indians/Alaska Natives, it’s 66.9 percent; 53.5 percent for Hispanics; 29.4 percent for non-Hispanic whites; and a mere 17.1 percent for Asians/Pacific Islanders. (source)
CRIME
Black people in the United States are more likely to be victims of violent confrontations with police officers than whites because blacks commit more violent crimes than whites per capita.
Despite making up just 13% of the population, blacks commit around half of homicides in the United States. DOJ statistics show that between 1980 and 2008, blacks committed 52% of homicides, compared to 45% of homicides committed by whites. More up to date FBI statistics tell a similar story. In 2013, black criminals carried out 38% of murders, compared to 31.1% for whites, again despite the fact that there are five times more white people in the U.S.
UNEMPLOYMENT
The unemployment rates among blacks are higher than any other ethnic group in America. In February, the unemployment rate for African-Americans was 10.4 percent, while the comparable rates for whites, Hispanics and Asians were 4.7 percent, 6.6 percent and 4.0 percent, in that order, according to data recently released by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
MARRIAGE
The black divorcee rate has increased nearly five-fold over the last thirty years, and is double the rate of the general population. The result, according to The Decline in Marriage Among African Americans, is a greater share of family responsibilities being borne by women, an increased vulnerability to poverty and violence, and an erosion of community ties.
Were it not so painful, I could go on to provide statistics on incarceration, education and drugs. Honestly, we need a campaign where politicians, educators, religious leaders and everyone committed to human development would engage in civil conversation. We need a non-partisan approach to bring about healing within black communities.
I beg to disagree with those who argue that because of slavery the situation is hopeless. As a nation, and since slavery, America has benefited greatly from the contributions of blacks. There are many blacks who have invented a multitude of items or made discoveries in the course of their lives. These have ranged from practical everyday devices to applications and scientific discoveries in diverse fields, including physics, biology, mathematics, plus the medical, nuclear and space sciences.
I sincerely believe a big part of the solution is in the family. Stable families provide the foundation for stable communities. It is in the family we learn to respect authority structures. It is in the family we learn the value of faith and appreciate social graces.
Social experiments have invited parents to explore career opportunities, thus limiting the time parents spend nurturing their children. Electronic devices and social services cannot and should not be expected to replace parents.
Let us stop the posturing and get to the heart of the matter. Let us begin to educate and reward healthy families. We cannot continue to empower single mothers and allow irresponsible fathers to abscond. If every black life matters, we must be intentional and address the family, the nursery for stable communities.
As a member of this ethnic group, I am very concerned about specific behaviors in our society that suggest, black-skinned people do not matter. In response to that attitude, I contend, “Every Black Life Matters.” Here are some situations that help to shape my concerns.
ABORTION
In the United States, more black babies are killed by abortion than any other ethnic group. Black children are aborted at nearly four times the rate as white children. A black abortion rate that for years has vastly surpassed that of every other racial group. Thirty out of every 1,000 black women obtained an abortion in 2011. That rate is nearly triple that of white women and double that of Hispanic women. Put succinctly, while about 13 percent of Americans are black, more than one-third of all abortions are administered to black women. (source)
FAMILY LIFE
In black communities, more babies are born out of wedlock than any other ethnic group - preliminary data indicate that 40.7 percent of all 2012 births were out-of-wedlock, which is appalling, and there are vast differences among racial and ethnic groups. Among non-Hispanic blacks, the figure is highest, at 72.2 percent; for American Indians/Alaska Natives, it’s 66.9 percent; 53.5 percent for Hispanics; 29.4 percent for non-Hispanic whites; and a mere 17.1 percent for Asians/Pacific Islanders. (source)
CRIME
Black people in the United States are more likely to be victims of violent confrontations with police officers than whites because blacks commit more violent crimes than whites per capita.
Despite making up just 13% of the population, blacks commit around half of homicides in the United States. DOJ statistics show that between 1980 and 2008, blacks committed 52% of homicides, compared to 45% of homicides committed by whites. More up to date FBI statistics tell a similar story. In 2013, black criminals carried out 38% of murders, compared to 31.1% for whites, again despite the fact that there are five times more white people in the U.S.
UNEMPLOYMENT
The unemployment rates among blacks are higher than any other ethnic group in America. In February, the unemployment rate for African-Americans was 10.4 percent, while the comparable rates for whites, Hispanics and Asians were 4.7 percent, 6.6 percent and 4.0 percent, in that order, according to data recently released by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
MARRIAGE
The black divorcee rate has increased nearly five-fold over the last thirty years, and is double the rate of the general population. The result, according to The Decline in Marriage Among African Americans, is a greater share of family responsibilities being borne by women, an increased vulnerability to poverty and violence, and an erosion of community ties.
Were it not so painful, I could go on to provide statistics on incarceration, education and drugs. Honestly, we need a campaign where politicians, educators, religious leaders and everyone committed to human development would engage in civil conversation. We need a non-partisan approach to bring about healing within black communities.
I beg to disagree with those who argue that because of slavery the situation is hopeless. As a nation, and since slavery, America has benefited greatly from the contributions of blacks. There are many blacks who have invented a multitude of items or made discoveries in the course of their lives. These have ranged from practical everyday devices to applications and scientific discoveries in diverse fields, including physics, biology, mathematics, plus the medical, nuclear and space sciences.
I sincerely believe a big part of the solution is in the family. Stable families provide the foundation for stable communities. It is in the family we learn to respect authority structures. It is in the family we learn the value of faith and appreciate social graces.
Social experiments have invited parents to explore career opportunities, thus limiting the time parents spend nurturing their children. Electronic devices and social services cannot and should not be expected to replace parents.
Let us stop the posturing and get to the heart of the matter. Let us begin to educate and reward healthy families. We cannot continue to empower single mothers and allow irresponsible fathers to abscond. If every black life matters, we must be intentional and address the family, the nursery for stable communities.
Sunday, October 18, 2015
Goodnight Friend
When teenage children feel as comfortable as their parents, with their parents’ friends, something special is happening. We found that to be true after meeting Jack and Karen Mitchell almost 25 years ago.
The relationship between our families was so special that we had hoped some lifelong relationship could develop among the children.
Our friend Jack died a few days ago. Last year he was diagnosed with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Recent research suggests the disease is possibly caused by sawdust, allergies, acid reflux, all of which Jack had or was exposed to. The disease causes the lung tissue to scar, thus not allowing oxygen to get through to the cells.
We met Jack in Illinois, shortly after coming to America to pursue advanced studies in 1991. Our paths crossed frequently as I shared the pulpit at the church he pastored in Wheaton. Those engagements often included family meals and opportunities to meet other foreign students studying in the area.
After relocating, 400 miles seemed near as we travelled to surprise Jack for his fiftieth birthday. He and Karen even travelled further in order to visit us in Florida. The internet kept us together as the Mitchells moved to Budapest and later Kenya. A few months ago we travelled almost 3,000 miles to visit Jack for the last time.
It was during that visit in California we reminisced on family times, his missionary assignments in the Caribbean, Europe and Africa. We laughed, sang and remembered the Lord Jesus in the ordinance of communion.
I will miss Jack. He was an encourager and very dear friend. At times, he would be the only person to comment on my weekly commentaries. He was an astute thinker and student of the Scriptures. I will miss his insightful comments. Sometimes I wondered why he thought it necessary to get my permission to share my commentaries with his students in Kenya – he was so authentic. He just never wasted an opportunity to bless someone else.
Upon learning of his death, I am discovering that many others around the world share my sentiments.
Like Mausau Elijah, who in 2011 was leading a fellowship group in Jack’s house at Scott Christian University, Kenya. His opening remarks to the group were, "where will you be five years from now"? Among the many answers, Mausau remembers, “Jack, my mentor, friend, teacher, the disciple of righteousness said, 'I will be in heaven.’”
Jack was right, within five years he is no longer with us. What is obvious from the many tributes paid to Jack, is a sense of loss. Loss for Karen, his wife of more than 47 years. Loss for his four adult children and fourteen grandchildren. Loss for thousands of students, parishioners and friends. Much grief and great loss, but not hopelessness.
When confronted with the loss of loved ones in their church, the Thessalonians got word to the apostle Paul about their emotional and spiritual ambivalence. In his reply, he acknowledged the emotional impact of grief. However, he made a distinction between the grief one experiences when a Christian dies, as opposed to when a non-Christian dies.
Hear Paul’s actual words, “Brothers, we do not want you to be uninformed about those who fall asleep, or grieve like the rest of men, who have no hope” (1 Thessalonians 4:13). The implication is clear – Christians who die have hope. We understand that inscriptions on tombs and references in literature show that first-century non-Christians viewed death with horror. Death was the end of everything.
Paul contends, Christians should view death differently. For the Christian it is a confidence in crisis. That confidence is not in the loss of the loved one, but the outcome that results from that loss. But how is a confident outcome possible if someone is dead? Isn’t death a cessation of life?
Actually, in this context, Paul preferred the term “fall asleep” instead of death. The term “fall asleep” conveys the idea of temporariness, as opposed to permanent absence. In the following verse Paul goes on to provide a basis for his “fall asleep” idea.
He argues, “... Jesus died and rose again and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in Him” (v.14). Paul resorts to history, not philosophy to substantiate his point. As far as he was concerned, the death and resurrection of Jesus were historical realities. Similarly, Christians who die, will rise again, just as Jesus died and rose again.
In his letter to the Corinthians, Paul reinforces this point: “And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost...” (1 Corinthians 15:16-20). In other words, the Christian’s hope is not in a mere idea, but in a Person – Jesus Christ.
It is for this reason, I found it more appropriate to entitle this commentary “Goodnight Friend” – a Good Morning is anticipated when the Mitchell family and Jack will meet again.
 |
| The Mitchell and Corbin families in Wheaton, Illinois. |
 |
| Jack & Karen with our daughter, Candace at a Fountainside church picnic in Florida. |
Our friend Jack died a few days ago. Last year he was diagnosed with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Recent research suggests the disease is possibly caused by sawdust, allergies, acid reflux, all of which Jack had or was exposed to. The disease causes the lung tissue to scar, thus not allowing oxygen to get through to the cells.
We met Jack in Illinois, shortly after coming to America to pursue advanced studies in 1991. Our paths crossed frequently as I shared the pulpit at the church he pastored in Wheaton. Those engagements often included family meals and opportunities to meet other foreign students studying in the area.
After relocating, 400 miles seemed near as we travelled to surprise Jack for his fiftieth birthday. He and Karen even travelled further in order to visit us in Florida. The internet kept us together as the Mitchells moved to Budapest and later Kenya. A few months ago we travelled almost 3,000 miles to visit Jack for the last time.
It was during that visit in California we reminisced on family times, his missionary assignments in the Caribbean, Europe and Africa. We laughed, sang and remembered the Lord Jesus in the ordinance of communion.
I will miss Jack. He was an encourager and very dear friend. At times, he would be the only person to comment on my weekly commentaries. He was an astute thinker and student of the Scriptures. I will miss his insightful comments. Sometimes I wondered why he thought it necessary to get my permission to share my commentaries with his students in Kenya – he was so authentic. He just never wasted an opportunity to bless someone else.
Upon learning of his death, I am discovering that many others around the world share my sentiments.
Like Mausau Elijah, who in 2011 was leading a fellowship group in Jack’s house at Scott Christian University, Kenya. His opening remarks to the group were, "where will you be five years from now"? Among the many answers, Mausau remembers, “Jack, my mentor, friend, teacher, the disciple of righteousness said, 'I will be in heaven.’”
Jack was right, within five years he is no longer with us. What is obvious from the many tributes paid to Jack, is a sense of loss. Loss for Karen, his wife of more than 47 years. Loss for his four adult children and fourteen grandchildren. Loss for thousands of students, parishioners and friends. Much grief and great loss, but not hopelessness.
When confronted with the loss of loved ones in their church, the Thessalonians got word to the apostle Paul about their emotional and spiritual ambivalence. In his reply, he acknowledged the emotional impact of grief. However, he made a distinction between the grief one experiences when a Christian dies, as opposed to when a non-Christian dies.
Hear Paul’s actual words, “Brothers, we do not want you to be uninformed about those who fall asleep, or grieve like the rest of men, who have no hope” (1 Thessalonians 4:13). The implication is clear – Christians who die have hope. We understand that inscriptions on tombs and references in literature show that first-century non-Christians viewed death with horror. Death was the end of everything.
Paul contends, Christians should view death differently. For the Christian it is a confidence in crisis. That confidence is not in the loss of the loved one, but the outcome that results from that loss. But how is a confident outcome possible if someone is dead? Isn’t death a cessation of life?
Actually, in this context, Paul preferred the term “fall asleep” instead of death. The term “fall asleep” conveys the idea of temporariness, as opposed to permanent absence. In the following verse Paul goes on to provide a basis for his “fall asleep” idea.
He argues, “... Jesus died and rose again and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in Him” (v.14). Paul resorts to history, not philosophy to substantiate his point. As far as he was concerned, the death and resurrection of Jesus were historical realities. Similarly, Christians who die, will rise again, just as Jesus died and rose again.
In his letter to the Corinthians, Paul reinforces this point: “And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost...” (1 Corinthians 15:16-20). In other words, the Christian’s hope is not in a mere idea, but in a Person – Jesus Christ.
It is for this reason, I found it more appropriate to entitle this commentary “Goodnight Friend” – a Good Morning is anticipated when the Mitchell family and Jack will meet again.
Tuesday, August 18, 2015
Boys and Girls!
In announcing the arrival of our seventh grandchild, our son and his wife engaged in an online discussion with friends about the gender of the child. That kind of gender chatter is fast becoming outdated. The online discussion assumed two genders – male and female. However, in this evolving season of gender neutrality, some activists believe that there are many more types of genders to consider.
Gender neutrality, which incorporates gender-blindness, is opposed to distinguishing people by gender. The idea is to remove any form of gender discrimination in any form of activities and or services provided. Advocates of this view use a purple circle to symbolize gender neutrality. The colored circle is a mixture of colors traditionally used to represent males and females.
It was sensitivity to this gender neutrality culture that prompted Target Stores, the nation’s third-largest retailer, to announce that they will be joining the movement – Target has begun removing signs labeling “boy” and “girls” in multiple departments. The retailer will no longer distinguish between items for boys and items generally preferred by girls.
Target’s website states: “Right now, our teams are working across the store to identify areas where we can phase out gender-based signage to help strike a better balance. For example, in the kids’ Bedding area, signs will no longer feature suggestions for boys or girls, just kids. In the Toys aisles, we’ll also remove reference to gender, including the use of pink, blue, yellow or green paper on the back walls of our shelves. You’ll see these changes start to happen over the next few months.”
All this gender neutral rhetoric is consistent with views held by some sociologists. They contend that gender roles are based on norms or standards, created by society. For instance, masculine roles are usually associated with strength, aggression and dominance.
This school of thought contends that gender socialization begins at birth and occurs through four stages – family, education, peer groups and the media. In other words, much of the behavior we associate with gender is really learned and not inherent or naturally acquired.
Advocates believe, to think otherwise would be to entertain a sexist worldview with prejudiced beliefs that value males over females. Furthermore, advocates believe this stereotypical thinking leads to discrimination, oppression and violence for not adhering to society’s traditional gender roles.
Hogwash – why don’t we take such social theories and apply them to sporting events. For millennia we allow gender distinction in sports because we recognize the differences in strengths between male and female athletes. Such accommodation is guided by biological factors, not sociological.
I agree that some behaviors are designated as appropriate for male or female. However, one cannot ignore that hormonal differences play a significant role in gender differences. This would explain some of the aggression in men.
In her 1989 PhD dissertation at Northwestern University, Psychotherapist Charlotte Smith mapped brain electrical activity and found that women and men process information in different parts of the brain. Other studies confirm that men are naturally more curious and women more attentive to people and social relationships.
John Gray was correct when he wrote, Men Are from Mars, Women Are From Venus. Here Gray provides a practical and proven way for men and women to communicate better by understanding and respecting the differences between them. Gray believes that by pretending that men and women are from different planets can help us to deal with the opposite sex in a loving and accepting way, leading to better relationships.
Gender differences were designed, not learned. I still believe “God created man (mankind) in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them” (Genesis 1:27).
There are three different Hebrew words in this verse that help us to understand what took place – they are translated; humankind, male and female. The words are not only different, but the meaning of each word is so different that no word can be used interchangeably.
For millennia, researchers have concluded that the behavioral differences between boys and girls are inherent. The behaviors are consistent with hormonal differences. In addition, many of the learned behaviors, are consistent with the hormonal differences inherent in boys and girls.
Agreed, preferences for colors like pink and blue are learned. However, the same cannot be said of athletic prowess, the capacity to nurture and other caring or aggressive behaviors.
God made us different!
Gender neutrality, which incorporates gender-blindness, is opposed to distinguishing people by gender. The idea is to remove any form of gender discrimination in any form of activities and or services provided. Advocates of this view use a purple circle to symbolize gender neutrality. The colored circle is a mixture of colors traditionally used to represent males and females.
It was sensitivity to this gender neutrality culture that prompted Target Stores, the nation’s third-largest retailer, to announce that they will be joining the movement – Target has begun removing signs labeling “boy” and “girls” in multiple departments. The retailer will no longer distinguish between items for boys and items generally preferred by girls.
Target’s website states: “Right now, our teams are working across the store to identify areas where we can phase out gender-based signage to help strike a better balance. For example, in the kids’ Bedding area, signs will no longer feature suggestions for boys or girls, just kids. In the Toys aisles, we’ll also remove reference to gender, including the use of pink, blue, yellow or green paper on the back walls of our shelves. You’ll see these changes start to happen over the next few months.”
All this gender neutral rhetoric is consistent with views held by some sociologists. They contend that gender roles are based on norms or standards, created by society. For instance, masculine roles are usually associated with strength, aggression and dominance.
This school of thought contends that gender socialization begins at birth and occurs through four stages – family, education, peer groups and the media. In other words, much of the behavior we associate with gender is really learned and not inherent or naturally acquired.
Advocates believe, to think otherwise would be to entertain a sexist worldview with prejudiced beliefs that value males over females. Furthermore, advocates believe this stereotypical thinking leads to discrimination, oppression and violence for not adhering to society’s traditional gender roles.
Hogwash – why don’t we take such social theories and apply them to sporting events. For millennia we allow gender distinction in sports because we recognize the differences in strengths between male and female athletes. Such accommodation is guided by biological factors, not sociological.
I agree that some behaviors are designated as appropriate for male or female. However, one cannot ignore that hormonal differences play a significant role in gender differences. This would explain some of the aggression in men.
In her 1989 PhD dissertation at Northwestern University, Psychotherapist Charlotte Smith mapped brain electrical activity and found that women and men process information in different parts of the brain. Other studies confirm that men are naturally more curious and women more attentive to people and social relationships.
John Gray was correct when he wrote, Men Are from Mars, Women Are From Venus. Here Gray provides a practical and proven way for men and women to communicate better by understanding and respecting the differences between them. Gray believes that by pretending that men and women are from different planets can help us to deal with the opposite sex in a loving and accepting way, leading to better relationships.
Gender differences were designed, not learned. I still believe “God created man (mankind) in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them” (Genesis 1:27).
There are three different Hebrew words in this verse that help us to understand what took place – they are translated; humankind, male and female. The words are not only different, but the meaning of each word is so different that no word can be used interchangeably.
For millennia, researchers have concluded that the behavioral differences between boys and girls are inherent. The behaviors are consistent with hormonal differences. In addition, many of the learned behaviors, are consistent with the hormonal differences inherent in boys and girls.
Agreed, preferences for colors like pink and blue are learned. However, the same cannot be said of athletic prowess, the capacity to nurture and other caring or aggressive behaviors.
God made us different!
Monday, July 27, 2015
Planned Parenthood
A new estimate published by the National Right to Life Committee indicates that there have been an estimated 55 million abortions since the Supreme Court handed down its 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision allowing virtually unlimited abortions. This number means that there are more than 3,300 abortions daily and 140 abortions per hour, every hour in the United States.
Most of these abortions were done by Planned Parenthood Federation of America, commonly shortened to Planned Parenthood, the U.S. affiliate of the International Planned Parenthood Federation. According to its website, Planned Parenthood is “America's most trusted provider of reproductive health care.”
Unfortunately, Planned Parenthood’s history is not as impressive as its website. The vision of Margaret Sanger, one of the two founders of the movement paints a picture of a racist with clear intentions to systematically exterminate black people in America.
In an interview with the New York Times (1923), Sanger said, “Birth control is not contraception indiscriminately and thoughtlessly practiced. It means the release and cultivation of the better racial elements in our society, and the gradual suppression, elimination and eventual extirpation of defective stocks – those human weeds (blacks) which threaten the blooming of the finest flowers of American civilization.”
Sanger established her first full-service “clinic” in Harlem in 1929. Why Harlem, New York - that’s where a lot of the black people, she often referred to as “human weeds”, lived. Sanger described it as “an experimental clinic established for the benefit of the colored people.” In this case, she defined “benefit” as the overall reduction of the black population.
On average, 1,876 black babies are aborted every day in the United States. This incidence of abortion has resulted in a tremendous loss of life. It has been estimated that since 1973 Black women have had about 16 million abortions – 30% of abortions done.
Although this information is known by civil rights leaders and politicians, no one attempts to abort the largest abortion provider in this country. Instead, Planned Parenthood receives more than $500 million annually from tax payers – that means it receives an average of $1.5 million a day to conduct its business.
In order to augment its income as a not-for-profit organization, Planned Parenthood now sells body parts from babies.
Recently, Planned Parenthood was caught in a firestorm of well-deserved controversy after two undercover videos, released by the Center for Medical Progress, seem to implicate them in horrific crimes against the unborn. The videos show two top Planned Parenthood executives discussing the best methods to extract baby body parts intact, and haggling with undercover investigators over the prices of these body parts – how disgusting.
Whereas Planned Parenthood calls the organs of murdered babies “fetal tissue,” they call unborn babies “clumps of cells” until labeling their organs as “human” helps their bottom line. And they call their murder of millions “quality family planning.”
Most the body parts are sold to Stem Express, a California-based biomedical company that provides “qualified research laboratories with human cells, fluids, blood and tissue products for the pursuit of disease detection and cure.”
There are a number of things that upset me about the disgusting practices of Planned Parenthood. From its inception, the founder showed a disregard for a group of persons, seen as “defective stocks and human weeds which threaten the blooming of the finest flowers of American civilization.” That racist premise was the foundation of the movement.
In responding to the recent sale of body parts, Planned Parenthood wants us to believe that this is a good business practice. No, this is repulsive, sickening and ghastly. After looking at the Consolidated Balance Sheets for 2014, Planned Parenthood does not need to sell body parts to augment income. The company is a victim of its gruesome practices.
Thankfully, the company’s attitude to abortion is not the same to a wide variety of human services. I would love to see many of those services retained, but under a different banner. The stench and the sigma of a sordid history must be removed. Until that happens, I will support the move to defund Planned Parenthood.
In attempting to close the door on disgusting practices, Christians must ensure that we do not close our compassion to “the least of these”, to whom Jesus referred.
Most of these abortions were done by Planned Parenthood Federation of America, commonly shortened to Planned Parenthood, the U.S. affiliate of the International Planned Parenthood Federation. According to its website, Planned Parenthood is “America's most trusted provider of reproductive health care.”
Unfortunately, Planned Parenthood’s history is not as impressive as its website. The vision of Margaret Sanger, one of the two founders of the movement paints a picture of a racist with clear intentions to systematically exterminate black people in America.
In an interview with the New York Times (1923), Sanger said, “Birth control is not contraception indiscriminately and thoughtlessly practiced. It means the release and cultivation of the better racial elements in our society, and the gradual suppression, elimination and eventual extirpation of defective stocks – those human weeds (blacks) which threaten the blooming of the finest flowers of American civilization.”
Sanger established her first full-service “clinic” in Harlem in 1929. Why Harlem, New York - that’s where a lot of the black people, she often referred to as “human weeds”, lived. Sanger described it as “an experimental clinic established for the benefit of the colored people.” In this case, she defined “benefit” as the overall reduction of the black population.
On average, 1,876 black babies are aborted every day in the United States. This incidence of abortion has resulted in a tremendous loss of life. It has been estimated that since 1973 Black women have had about 16 million abortions – 30% of abortions done.
Although this information is known by civil rights leaders and politicians, no one attempts to abort the largest abortion provider in this country. Instead, Planned Parenthood receives more than $500 million annually from tax payers – that means it receives an average of $1.5 million a day to conduct its business.
In order to augment its income as a not-for-profit organization, Planned Parenthood now sells body parts from babies.
Recently, Planned Parenthood was caught in a firestorm of well-deserved controversy after two undercover videos, released by the Center for Medical Progress, seem to implicate them in horrific crimes against the unborn. The videos show two top Planned Parenthood executives discussing the best methods to extract baby body parts intact, and haggling with undercover investigators over the prices of these body parts – how disgusting.
Whereas Planned Parenthood calls the organs of murdered babies “fetal tissue,” they call unborn babies “clumps of cells” until labeling their organs as “human” helps their bottom line. And they call their murder of millions “quality family planning.”
Most the body parts are sold to Stem Express, a California-based biomedical company that provides “qualified research laboratories with human cells, fluids, blood and tissue products for the pursuit of disease detection and cure.”
There are a number of things that upset me about the disgusting practices of Planned Parenthood. From its inception, the founder showed a disregard for a group of persons, seen as “defective stocks and human weeds which threaten the blooming of the finest flowers of American civilization.” That racist premise was the foundation of the movement.
In responding to the recent sale of body parts, Planned Parenthood wants us to believe that this is a good business practice. No, this is repulsive, sickening and ghastly. After looking at the Consolidated Balance Sheets for 2014, Planned Parenthood does not need to sell body parts to augment income. The company is a victim of its gruesome practices.
Thankfully, the company’s attitude to abortion is not the same to a wide variety of human services. I would love to see many of those services retained, but under a different banner. The stench and the sigma of a sordid history must be removed. Until that happens, I will support the move to defund Planned Parenthood.
In attempting to close the door on disgusting practices, Christians must ensure that we do not close our compassion to “the least of these”, to whom Jesus referred.
Monday, December 30, 2013
I Agree With President Obama
A few days ago comedian Steve Harvey and President Obama had a non-political interview at the White House. It was refreshing to see the President in a non-combative mood.
In discussing his family, the President said he trusts his daughters to have good judgment when it comes to men. “What I’ve told them before is, as long as that young man is showing you respect, and is kind to you, then I’m not going to be hovering over every second. But, I’m counting on you to have the self-respect to make sure that anybody who you’re going out with comes correct. And hopefully they’ve seen how I treat Michelle.”
Mr. President, I strongly agree with you. Actually, I am so much more sensitive to the President’s desire for his daughters as I write this commentary from the home of my daughter in Nashville, hundreds of miles away from my home. My wife and I feel so honored to be hosted by a young woman who we love, very much like the President loves his own daughters, Malia (15 years old) and Sasha (12).
The President’s desire to want the very best for his daughters is most evident. He is concerned about their security. In the interview with Harvey, he quipped that he ran for a second term partly to keep his teenage daughters under constant supervision. “I’ve got men with guns following them around all the time. Hey, this is the main reason I ran for re-election - you know I’m gonna have ‘em covered for most of high school.”
In addition, the President would hope that any suitors would have “seen how I treat Michelle.” The President believes he models a loving relationship before his daughters. Actually, one of the best gifts we as parents can give to our children is the display of a loving relationship.
When parents spend time with each other, nurturing their relationship, resolving conflicts, investing in one another in practical ways, and enjoying one another, children see that they truly love and value one another. This security will increase the peace and joy in the home.
In this and in previous interviews, President Obama naturally refers to potential suitors for his daughters as “young men who show respect and kindness.” Here again, the President must be congratulated on his desire to see his daughters engage in relationships that are natural and are best for their development.
In expressing his desire for what’s best for his daughters, the President was expressing a sensitivity to issues of gender. One’s gender identity is the sense of one’s self as male or female. Gender role refers to the behaviors and desires to act in certain ways that are viewed as masculine and feminine in a particular culture. His position is consistent with history, with nature and science.
The President’s desire for what is best for his daughters is not readily accepted by some social scientists in today’s culture. Such scholars believe our culture labels behaviors as masculine and feminine, “but these behaviors are not necessarily a direct component of gender or gender identity.”
For me, gender and the accompanying behaviors are not determined by society. Gender is a biological, not a sociological construct. The President spoke with logical clarity, so unlike the ambiguity that’s apparent in gender experiments. Under the guise of accommodating bisexualism, some in our culture are confused and vacillate in affirming their own masculinity or femininity. I believe Malia and Sasha are in good hands if their parents continue to expect behaviors that are consistent with their femininity.
The President is correct to want heterosexual relationships for his daughters. Such relationships have always been about bringing men and women together in permanent, exclusive domestic and sexual relationships.
In their volume, Marriage on Trial, Stanton and Maier make the point: “No human society-not one-has ever embraced homosexual marriage. It is not a part of the tradition of any human culture” (page 22). Such unions have never been regarded as a normal, morally equal part of any society. Non heterosexual unions have been tolerated in some cultures, however, it is historically accurate to say that they have never been taken to be morally equivalent to natural marriage.
So, the President is on the right side of history to want natural relationships for his daughters. The President’s desire for his daughters is seeking to regulate sexuality, bringing gender balance to their relationships and offspring. This arrangement is consistent with the biblical position on family. Different genders allow for complementarity, a critical and historically proven component of healthy families.
In discussing his family, the President said he trusts his daughters to have good judgment when it comes to men. “What I’ve told them before is, as long as that young man is showing you respect, and is kind to you, then I’m not going to be hovering over every second. But, I’m counting on you to have the self-respect to make sure that anybody who you’re going out with comes correct. And hopefully they’ve seen how I treat Michelle.”
Mr. President, I strongly agree with you. Actually, I am so much more sensitive to the President’s desire for his daughters as I write this commentary from the home of my daughter in Nashville, hundreds of miles away from my home. My wife and I feel so honored to be hosted by a young woman who we love, very much like the President loves his own daughters, Malia (15 years old) and Sasha (12).
The President’s desire to want the very best for his daughters is most evident. He is concerned about their security. In the interview with Harvey, he quipped that he ran for a second term partly to keep his teenage daughters under constant supervision. “I’ve got men with guns following them around all the time. Hey, this is the main reason I ran for re-election - you know I’m gonna have ‘em covered for most of high school.”
In addition, the President would hope that any suitors would have “seen how I treat Michelle.” The President believes he models a loving relationship before his daughters. Actually, one of the best gifts we as parents can give to our children is the display of a loving relationship.
When parents spend time with each other, nurturing their relationship, resolving conflicts, investing in one another in practical ways, and enjoying one another, children see that they truly love and value one another. This security will increase the peace and joy in the home.
In this and in previous interviews, President Obama naturally refers to potential suitors for his daughters as “young men who show respect and kindness.” Here again, the President must be congratulated on his desire to see his daughters engage in relationships that are natural and are best for their development.
In expressing his desire for what’s best for his daughters, the President was expressing a sensitivity to issues of gender. One’s gender identity is the sense of one’s self as male or female. Gender role refers to the behaviors and desires to act in certain ways that are viewed as masculine and feminine in a particular culture. His position is consistent with history, with nature and science.
The President’s desire for what is best for his daughters is not readily accepted by some social scientists in today’s culture. Such scholars believe our culture labels behaviors as masculine and feminine, “but these behaviors are not necessarily a direct component of gender or gender identity.”
For me, gender and the accompanying behaviors are not determined by society. Gender is a biological, not a sociological construct. The President spoke with logical clarity, so unlike the ambiguity that’s apparent in gender experiments. Under the guise of accommodating bisexualism, some in our culture are confused and vacillate in affirming their own masculinity or femininity. I believe Malia and Sasha are in good hands if their parents continue to expect behaviors that are consistent with their femininity.
The President is correct to want heterosexual relationships for his daughters. Such relationships have always been about bringing men and women together in permanent, exclusive domestic and sexual relationships.
In their volume, Marriage on Trial, Stanton and Maier make the point: “No human society-not one-has ever embraced homosexual marriage. It is not a part of the tradition of any human culture” (page 22). Such unions have never been regarded as a normal, morally equal part of any society. Non heterosexual unions have been tolerated in some cultures, however, it is historically accurate to say that they have never been taken to be morally equivalent to natural marriage.
So, the President is on the right side of history to want natural relationships for his daughters. The President’s desire for his daughters is seeking to regulate sexuality, bringing gender balance to their relationships and offspring. This arrangement is consistent with the biblical position on family. Different genders allow for complementarity, a critical and historically proven component of healthy families.
Monday, September 2, 2013
50 years
My daughter Candace and her husband Louis have four young children. As a former professional, mother and homeschooler she has a vested interest in the future that is laid for her children. I have asked her to be my guest for this week’s commentary.
To think back fifty years in this country is to think back to a time before I was born. Since then, I have lived outside of and within different parts of this great nation, each time gleaning racial experiences – good and bad.
I want to say we have come so far – desegregation of schools and places of employment, integrated neighborhoods and families, a black President in office, the list could go on and on.
But as far a step as we have made, I fear we have taken many steps backwards – and not for the popular reasons being floated out there in the blogosphere, in newsrooms or even at last week’s 50-year Memorial of 'The March on Washington' that took place on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial.
In the past fifty years, we have stepped away from some of the fundamentals that Dr. King held dearly, choosing to excuse or embrace the demise of the black family; the 70% of black babies born out of wedlock; the 1,800 black babies killed daily through abortion; the almost 50% unemployment among black youth and a bloody summer that highlighted the continuing problem of black on black homicides.
I am not willing to sit back and play along with those claiming that Rev. Martin Luther King would be proud of our accomplishments today. Unlike those who flash the ‘Reverend’ title for political and monetary gain, Rev. Martin Luther King actually tried to live a life that sought to center around hard work, faith and family.
Dr. King’s mission taxed his marriage and family life, but of his wife he said “I am indebted to my wife Coretta, without whose love, sacrifices, and loyalty neither life nor work would bring fulfillment."
In addition to being the pastor of the Dexter Avenue Baptist Church of Montgomery, Alabama, Dr. King completed his Ph.D. and was awarded his degree in 1955. King was only 25 years old.
At the age of 35, Martin Luther King, Jr., was the youngest man to have receive the Nobel Peace Prize. When notified of his selection, he announced that he would turn over the prize money of $54,123 to the furtherance of the civil rights movement.
The ideals of faith, family and diligent work used to be encouraged in the black community at large. For all the accomplishments we have acquired as a community, I think Dr. King would ask – Is this really what we suffered for fifty years ago?
Jaime Foxx graced the steps of the Lincoln Memorial last Wednesday, naming our present civil rights leaders as Jay Z, Will Smith, Kanye West and others.
The list of invited speakers at the fifty-year Memorial Celebration of Dr. King’s ‘I Have A Dream’ speech did not include pioneers in some of the highest offices or areas of accomplishments by African Americans. The nation’s first black and first black female Secretaries of State were not invited to speak. The nation’s only black Senator was not invited to speak. The nation’s first and (at the time) youngest black neurosurgeon was not invited to speak. While entertainers of all sorts were well represented and tickled our ears with words of grandeur, I guess the former were all associated with the wrong side of the aisle (and by that I don’t mean the church aisle).
Sometimes I can only wonder – what kind of vision have we cast for our youth for the next fifty years?
We have strayed so far from the words of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. that we no longer know what it means to judge a man by the caliber or content of his character, his labor or his legacy. Instead, we have bought into the culture that says the opposite: embrace racial and social lines above character, above goals, above ambition.
Fifty years ago The March on Washington was filled with people of all sorts: black, white; male, female; rich, poor; Republican, Democrat – they were willing and able to work together because above their comfort or agendas they found it important to be unified, not as one group above another, but as Americans under God.
The messages of today towards our children seem to shout of entitlements. But is that what the Bible encourages for us? As parents, my husband and I have been teaching our children the word diligent – a word that fueled the civil rights movement. Colossians 3:23 says “Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for men.” Such commitments lead to discipline, perseverance and character.
I have four children, and like Dr. King I still dream. “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character” (Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.).
To think back fifty years in this country is to think back to a time before I was born. Since then, I have lived outside of and within different parts of this great nation, each time gleaning racial experiences – good and bad.
I want to say we have come so far – desegregation of schools and places of employment, integrated neighborhoods and families, a black President in office, the list could go on and on.
But as far a step as we have made, I fear we have taken many steps backwards – and not for the popular reasons being floated out there in the blogosphere, in newsrooms or even at last week’s 50-year Memorial of 'The March on Washington' that took place on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial.
In the past fifty years, we have stepped away from some of the fundamentals that Dr. King held dearly, choosing to excuse or embrace the demise of the black family; the 70% of black babies born out of wedlock; the 1,800 black babies killed daily through abortion; the almost 50% unemployment among black youth and a bloody summer that highlighted the continuing problem of black on black homicides.
I am not willing to sit back and play along with those claiming that Rev. Martin Luther King would be proud of our accomplishments today. Unlike those who flash the ‘Reverend’ title for political and monetary gain, Rev. Martin Luther King actually tried to live a life that sought to center around hard work, faith and family.
Dr. King’s mission taxed his marriage and family life, but of his wife he said “I am indebted to my wife Coretta, without whose love, sacrifices, and loyalty neither life nor work would bring fulfillment."
In addition to being the pastor of the Dexter Avenue Baptist Church of Montgomery, Alabama, Dr. King completed his Ph.D. and was awarded his degree in 1955. King was only 25 years old.
At the age of 35, Martin Luther King, Jr., was the youngest man to have receive the Nobel Peace Prize. When notified of his selection, he announced that he would turn over the prize money of $54,123 to the furtherance of the civil rights movement.
The ideals of faith, family and diligent work used to be encouraged in the black community at large. For all the accomplishments we have acquired as a community, I think Dr. King would ask – Is this really what we suffered for fifty years ago?
Jaime Foxx graced the steps of the Lincoln Memorial last Wednesday, naming our present civil rights leaders as Jay Z, Will Smith, Kanye West and others.
The list of invited speakers at the fifty-year Memorial Celebration of Dr. King’s ‘I Have A Dream’ speech did not include pioneers in some of the highest offices or areas of accomplishments by African Americans. The nation’s first black and first black female Secretaries of State were not invited to speak. The nation’s only black Senator was not invited to speak. The nation’s first and (at the time) youngest black neurosurgeon was not invited to speak. While entertainers of all sorts were well represented and tickled our ears with words of grandeur, I guess the former were all associated with the wrong side of the aisle (and by that I don’t mean the church aisle).
Sometimes I can only wonder – what kind of vision have we cast for our youth for the next fifty years?
We have strayed so far from the words of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. that we no longer know what it means to judge a man by the caliber or content of his character, his labor or his legacy. Instead, we have bought into the culture that says the opposite: embrace racial and social lines above character, above goals, above ambition.
Fifty years ago The March on Washington was filled with people of all sorts: black, white; male, female; rich, poor; Republican, Democrat – they were willing and able to work together because above their comfort or agendas they found it important to be unified, not as one group above another, but as Americans under God.
The messages of today towards our children seem to shout of entitlements. But is that what the Bible encourages for us? As parents, my husband and I have been teaching our children the word diligent – a word that fueled the civil rights movement. Colossians 3:23 says “Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for men.” Such commitments lead to discipline, perseverance and character.
I have four children, and like Dr. King I still dream. “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character” (Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.).
Monday, August 12, 2013
Should Dads Get Paternity Leave?
As a helicopter pilot in the Royal Air Force, Prince William was the first senior member of the royal family to take paternity leave. Following the recent birth of his son, Prince George, he took two weeks leave with pay, a benefit to which he was entitled.
According to Ken Matos, director of research at the Families and Work Institute, a New York City-based nonprofit organization, the decision of Prince William sends a powerful message to the public. “Not only does it seem like William genuinely wants to be a present father, the royal couple knows that everything they do is aspirational.” It is possible that Prince William may be trying to set an example for fathers to take advantage of any paternity leave their company offers.
While the U.S. does not federally mandate paid paternity leave - as is practiced in England, increasingly companies are moving to offer men more time off with pay. For instance, earlier this year Yahoo extended its parental-leave policy to provide up to eight weeks of fully paid leave for both mothers and fathers.
In the United States, the only mandate for parental leave is the Family Medical Leave Act, which ensures that men and women receive twelve weeks of job-protected unpaid leave. Paternity leave isn't even an option for most American workers. According to a story published in Forbes recently, only 13% of American employers offer paternity leave.
I am an advocate for fathers getting paternity leave, when responsibly administered. Just by perusing David Popenoe’s classic on Life Without Father, one cannot help but be convinced that fathers need to spend more time with their children.
Popenoe contends that “even from birth, children who have an involved father are more likely to be emotionally secure, be confident to explore their surroundings, and, as they grow older, have better social connections with peers.”
In addition, these children also are less likely to get in trouble at home, school, or in the neighborhood. Infants who receive high levels of affection from their fathers (e.g., babies whose fathers respond quickly to their cries and who play together) are more securely attached; that is, they can explore their environment comfortably when a parent is nearby and can readily accept comfort from their parent after a brief separation. A number of studies suggest they also are more sociable and popular with other children throughout early childhood.
One would expect that with such positive outcomes, many would welcome the idea of dads spending structured time with their children. Countries around the world, such as Sweden and Portugal, have mandated leave for fathers, but leave in America remains stubbornly short—if it is taken at all.
One study published in the Journal of Social Issues found that caregiving men get treated more disrespectfully at work than men who adhere to traditional gender roles. Maybe that's why, following the birth of a child, less than 5% of American dads took one month off, and 16% took no time at all, according to data released by the Center for Work and Family at Boston College.
Many men who openly identify with their parental role at work face pressure or resentment from co-workers. Recent research from the University of Toronto's Rottman School of Management found that men who are active caregivers get teased and insulted at work more than so-called traditional fathers and men without children. Active fathers are seen as distracted and less dedicated to their work. According to Jennifer Berdhal, the author of this study, “active fathers are accused of being wimpy or henpecked by their wives.”
When one combines the impact of these findings with the declining role of fathers in the wider society – no wonder our children are so directionless. Today’s children are victims of decades of social experiments in free sex, women’s liberation and divorce.
Interestingly, with the growth of biblical illiteracy, we are witnessing the decline and demise of social institutions. Frequently, the Psalms introduced God as the Father of the fatherless. The inference is clear – the absence of a father’s influence required divine intervention.
The problems posed by absent fathers in the days of the psalmists, are no different from today. Our social experiments to remove fathers from family life are doomed to fail. The apostle Paul was correct, “let God be true and everyman a liar” (Romans 3:4).
As far as I am concerned, paternity leave ensures that fathers can be clearly identified and be given opportunities to function responsibly in the interest of the child and the wider community.
According to Ken Matos, director of research at the Families and Work Institute, a New York City-based nonprofit organization, the decision of Prince William sends a powerful message to the public. “Not only does it seem like William genuinely wants to be a present father, the royal couple knows that everything they do is aspirational.” It is possible that Prince William may be trying to set an example for fathers to take advantage of any paternity leave their company offers.
While the U.S. does not federally mandate paid paternity leave - as is practiced in England, increasingly companies are moving to offer men more time off with pay. For instance, earlier this year Yahoo extended its parental-leave policy to provide up to eight weeks of fully paid leave for both mothers and fathers.
In the United States, the only mandate for parental leave is the Family Medical Leave Act, which ensures that men and women receive twelve weeks of job-protected unpaid leave. Paternity leave isn't even an option for most American workers. According to a story published in Forbes recently, only 13% of American employers offer paternity leave.
I am an advocate for fathers getting paternity leave, when responsibly administered. Just by perusing David Popenoe’s classic on Life Without Father, one cannot help but be convinced that fathers need to spend more time with their children.
Popenoe contends that “even from birth, children who have an involved father are more likely to be emotionally secure, be confident to explore their surroundings, and, as they grow older, have better social connections with peers.”
In addition, these children also are less likely to get in trouble at home, school, or in the neighborhood. Infants who receive high levels of affection from their fathers (e.g., babies whose fathers respond quickly to their cries and who play together) are more securely attached; that is, they can explore their environment comfortably when a parent is nearby and can readily accept comfort from their parent after a brief separation. A number of studies suggest they also are more sociable and popular with other children throughout early childhood.
One would expect that with such positive outcomes, many would welcome the idea of dads spending structured time with their children. Countries around the world, such as Sweden and Portugal, have mandated leave for fathers, but leave in America remains stubbornly short—if it is taken at all.
One study published in the Journal of Social Issues found that caregiving men get treated more disrespectfully at work than men who adhere to traditional gender roles. Maybe that's why, following the birth of a child, less than 5% of American dads took one month off, and 16% took no time at all, according to data released by the Center for Work and Family at Boston College.
Many men who openly identify with their parental role at work face pressure or resentment from co-workers. Recent research from the University of Toronto's Rottman School of Management found that men who are active caregivers get teased and insulted at work more than so-called traditional fathers and men without children. Active fathers are seen as distracted and less dedicated to their work. According to Jennifer Berdhal, the author of this study, “active fathers are accused of being wimpy or henpecked by their wives.”
When one combines the impact of these findings with the declining role of fathers in the wider society – no wonder our children are so directionless. Today’s children are victims of decades of social experiments in free sex, women’s liberation and divorce.
Interestingly, with the growth of biblical illiteracy, we are witnessing the decline and demise of social institutions. Frequently, the Psalms introduced God as the Father of the fatherless. The inference is clear – the absence of a father’s influence required divine intervention.
The problems posed by absent fathers in the days of the psalmists, are no different from today. Our social experiments to remove fathers from family life are doomed to fail. The apostle Paul was correct, “let God be true and everyman a liar” (Romans 3:4).
As far as I am concerned, paternity leave ensures that fathers can be clearly identified and be given opportunities to function responsibly in the interest of the child and the wider community.
Monday, August 5, 2013
Who Needs Daddy?
Shortly after giving birth, my daughter felt a hospital social worker was suggesting to her that it was better not to have the child’s father around. “If you do not have a husband with you, we will pay for the baby’s diapers and formula.” My daughter declined the offer. The social worker offered again, at which point our son-in-law walked into the room. “Do you want him in here?” was the daring question that came from the social worker.
I wish I could say that that interaction at a suburban hospital was exceptional – it was not. The interaction represented an attitude to the role of fathers in the lives of their children. He is merely viewed as a bank, both for sperms and financial support. If he is absent, the government will provide the funding. There are situations where it would seem more economically profitable for mothers, if fathers would simply be absent.
However, the economic cost of absent fathers is staggering. In his book, Life Without Father, sociologist David Popenoe contends that “the decline of fatherhood is a major force behind many of the most disturbing problems that plague us.” He further contends that "child-rearing encourages men to develop those habits of character - including prudence, cooperativeness, honesty, trust and self-sacrifice - that can lead to achievement as an economic provider." Poor women and their children are more likely to escape poverty in a stable relationship with a man who is an active father of the children.
Edward Kruk, writing about father absence, father deficit and father hunger in “Psychology Today” produced a list of woes: children without fathers actively in their lives have diminished self-concept, and compromised physical and emotional security. These children consistently report feeling abandoned when their fathers are not involved in their lives, struggling with their emotions and bouts of self-loathing.
Kruk also underlines the behavioral problems - fatherless children have more difficulties with social adjustment, and are more likely to report problems with friendships. Many develop a swaggering, intimidating persona in an attempt to disguise their underlying fears, resentments, anxieties and unhappiness. Gangs and violence and the adoration of the gun as power spring out of this condition.
Fatherless children show greater truancy from school and poorer academic performance. Kruk points out that some 71% of high-school dropouts are fatherless. Fatherless children have more trouble academically, scoring poorly on tests of reading, mathematics, and thinking skills.
Fatherlessness is a driver for delinquency and youth crime, including violent crime, Kruk notes, with 85% of youth in prison having an absent father.
The above statistics explain why I become so incensed with social workers like the one my daughter met in the hospital. She, like many in our society, would be willing to affirm the worth of mothers. But fathers? that is another matter. With such persons, fatherhood is viewed merely as a social role. And if merely a social role, then perhaps anyone is capable of playing that role. Players could include mothers, partners, stepfathers, uncles, aunts or grandparents. In essence, biological fathers are dispensable.
Miami Heat basketball superstar Dwayne Wade would disagree with that view. In a recent article, the single father said, “being a father is the most important and rewarding thing I will ever do, and I strongly encourage all fathers to love and take responsibility for their children.”
Last year, Wade wrote a book about his experience and the importance of all fathers being present in their children's lives. Addressing the fatherlessness issue across the country, he also teamed up with President Obama to support his Fatherhood & Mentoring Initiative.
One of the better books I’ve come across on the subject of fatherhood is Kyle Pruett’s, Fatherneed: Why Father Care Is as Essential as Mother Care for Your Child. According to Publishers Weekly, Pruett’s book is “thoughtful, inspiring, and eminently practical, [it] belongs at the top of the ‘must have’ list for every father.”
Interestingly, after relegating the Bible to the archives of ancient literature, many are now finding themselves going back to its teachings. Even a casual reading of the book of Proverbs will highlight the importance of fatherhood. In the New Testament book of Ephesians, fathers are encouraged to nurture and encourage their children in Christian values. Fathers are charged not to abuse their influence and exasperate their children (Ephesians 6:4).
Personally, I wish I had known this stuff when I became a father 36 years ago. I believe I would have been a much better father to our three children.
I wish I could say that that interaction at a suburban hospital was exceptional – it was not. The interaction represented an attitude to the role of fathers in the lives of their children. He is merely viewed as a bank, both for sperms and financial support. If he is absent, the government will provide the funding. There are situations where it would seem more economically profitable for mothers, if fathers would simply be absent.
However, the economic cost of absent fathers is staggering. In his book, Life Without Father, sociologist David Popenoe contends that “the decline of fatherhood is a major force behind many of the most disturbing problems that plague us.” He further contends that "child-rearing encourages men to develop those habits of character - including prudence, cooperativeness, honesty, trust and self-sacrifice - that can lead to achievement as an economic provider." Poor women and their children are more likely to escape poverty in a stable relationship with a man who is an active father of the children.
Edward Kruk, writing about father absence, father deficit and father hunger in “Psychology Today” produced a list of woes: children without fathers actively in their lives have diminished self-concept, and compromised physical and emotional security. These children consistently report feeling abandoned when their fathers are not involved in their lives, struggling with their emotions and bouts of self-loathing.
Kruk also underlines the behavioral problems - fatherless children have more difficulties with social adjustment, and are more likely to report problems with friendships. Many develop a swaggering, intimidating persona in an attempt to disguise their underlying fears, resentments, anxieties and unhappiness. Gangs and violence and the adoration of the gun as power spring out of this condition.
Fatherless children show greater truancy from school and poorer academic performance. Kruk points out that some 71% of high-school dropouts are fatherless. Fatherless children have more trouble academically, scoring poorly on tests of reading, mathematics, and thinking skills.
Fatherlessness is a driver for delinquency and youth crime, including violent crime, Kruk notes, with 85% of youth in prison having an absent father.
The above statistics explain why I become so incensed with social workers like the one my daughter met in the hospital. She, like many in our society, would be willing to affirm the worth of mothers. But fathers? that is another matter. With such persons, fatherhood is viewed merely as a social role. And if merely a social role, then perhaps anyone is capable of playing that role. Players could include mothers, partners, stepfathers, uncles, aunts or grandparents. In essence, biological fathers are dispensable.
Miami Heat basketball superstar Dwayne Wade would disagree with that view. In a recent article, the single father said, “being a father is the most important and rewarding thing I will ever do, and I strongly encourage all fathers to love and take responsibility for their children.”
Last year, Wade wrote a book about his experience and the importance of all fathers being present in their children's lives. Addressing the fatherlessness issue across the country, he also teamed up with President Obama to support his Fatherhood & Mentoring Initiative.
One of the better books I’ve come across on the subject of fatherhood is Kyle Pruett’s, Fatherneed: Why Father Care Is as Essential as Mother Care for Your Child. According to Publishers Weekly, Pruett’s book is “thoughtful, inspiring, and eminently practical, [it] belongs at the top of the ‘must have’ list for every father.”
Interestingly, after relegating the Bible to the archives of ancient literature, many are now finding themselves going back to its teachings. Even a casual reading of the book of Proverbs will highlight the importance of fatherhood. In the New Testament book of Ephesians, fathers are encouraged to nurture and encourage their children in Christian values. Fathers are charged not to abuse their influence and exasperate their children (Ephesians 6:4).
Personally, I wish I had known this stuff when I became a father 36 years ago. I believe I would have been a much better father to our three children.
Saturday, June 15, 2013
Lessons for Dad from the Kids
When invited to have breakfast with me some ten years ago, my son replied, “Me and you alone? What is there to talk about?” However, some years later, after having breakfast with him alone, he phoned his mother to report that he had just experienced the best two hours of his life.
A few weeks ago, another invitation was extended to my son – he was asked to be my associate in a team-teaching experiment for the Father’s Day service at church – to this invitation he eagerly answered in the affirmative. What made the difference ten years later? Many things, and this Father’s Day weekend affords me the opportunity to reflect on some of them. In other words, here are some lessons to a father from a son.
Much of the literature available on fathers, deal with the impact of fathers on children. One of the few resources that challenge us to hear from the children was written by Yale University researcher, Dr. Kyle Pruett. In his book Fatherneed, Pruett addresses the reciprocal benefits of father-child relationships.
Pruett contends that “research from the child’s side of the aisle shows that kids yearn deeply for dads. Infants in the first months of life can tell the differences between a mother’s and a father’s style of care. Furthermore, children thrive when they experience those different styles throughout all the developmental stages of life. Children and fathers hunger for each other early, often, and for a very long time.”
Much of this I took for granted until I read this recent birthday card from my son: “You are the only example of a godly man I’ve ever been able to follow my whole life. You’ve consistently been a source of encouragement, support, honesty and more to me and that’s something I can’t replace.”
“I still remember,” he wrote, “how you’d sneak-in to my games to support me, and though I wasn’t mature enough at the time to appreciate it, your coming meant the world to me.”
Interestingly, my son’s reflections were not based on the sermons and speeches he heard, but rather the visible acts he saw. Although frightening, it is true, our audiences remember more of who we are than what we say.
I pray that my son will continue to be aware of this as he fathers his two-year old son. Although there are areas of similarity, fathers make a different impact on children than mothers do. Studies confirm that as early as eight weeks of age, kids can anticipate the complex differences in their mother’s and father’s caretaking and handling styles.
In addressing the subject of adaptive and problem-solving abilities of children, Dr. Pruett argued that “infants who have been well fathered during the first eighteen to twenty-four months of life, are more secure than those who were not in exploring the world around them, and they do so with vigor and interest.”
That interest to explore I already see with my two-year old grandson. I believe much of it comes from the hours my son invests playing and working with him. Interestingly, in displaying his language skills, one of the first words our grandson attempted was “ball”. He is not intimidated by electronic gadgets – he handles controls just like his dad. As we attempt to child-proof our home we are having to secure many of the items his dad uses.
We often wondered though, about our grandson’s eagerness to care and participate in projects around the house. At his age, these skills would not have been overtly taught. However, researchers are now telling us that “the strongest predictor of a child’s empathic concern for others in adult life is a high level of paternal child care.”
Ross Parke, a preeminent fatherhood researcher from California, studied how a child’s physical development responds to involved fathering. “An infant’s scores on assessments of intellectual and motor, or physical competencies are higher if fathers are actively involved during the first six months of the child’s life. The father’s tendency to activate his child in their interactions encourages and supports the child’s pleasurable discovery of his own body.”
Although much of this commentary is on the father-son relationship, one should not think that that is the extent of a father’s influence. Because of space limitations and the occasion of Father’s Day, the father-son emphasis becomes obvious.
However, what is also obvious and frightening, is the great impact fathers have on their children. The apostle Paul was correct, Fathers should not exasperate their children, “instead, bring them up in the training and instruction of the Lord” (Ephesians 6:4). When viewed positively, the biblical text is acknowledging the extent of the father’s influence to encourage and empower children. What an awesome responsibility.
On this Father’s Day, it is my prayer that God would bless every man who has had the opportunity to play the role of father in another’s life.
A few weeks ago, another invitation was extended to my son – he was asked to be my associate in a team-teaching experiment for the Father’s Day service at church – to this invitation he eagerly answered in the affirmative. What made the difference ten years later? Many things, and this Father’s Day weekend affords me the opportunity to reflect on some of them. In other words, here are some lessons to a father from a son.
Much of the literature available on fathers, deal with the impact of fathers on children. One of the few resources that challenge us to hear from the children was written by Yale University researcher, Dr. Kyle Pruett. In his book Fatherneed, Pruett addresses the reciprocal benefits of father-child relationships.
Pruett contends that “research from the child’s side of the aisle shows that kids yearn deeply for dads. Infants in the first months of life can tell the differences between a mother’s and a father’s style of care. Furthermore, children thrive when they experience those different styles throughout all the developmental stages of life. Children and fathers hunger for each other early, often, and for a very long time.”
Much of this I took for granted until I read this recent birthday card from my son: “You are the only example of a godly man I’ve ever been able to follow my whole life. You’ve consistently been a source of encouragement, support, honesty and more to me and that’s something I can’t replace.”
“I still remember,” he wrote, “how you’d sneak-in to my games to support me, and though I wasn’t mature enough at the time to appreciate it, your coming meant the world to me.”
Interestingly, my son’s reflections were not based on the sermons and speeches he heard, but rather the visible acts he saw. Although frightening, it is true, our audiences remember more of who we are than what we say.
I pray that my son will continue to be aware of this as he fathers his two-year old son. Although there are areas of similarity, fathers make a different impact on children than mothers do. Studies confirm that as early as eight weeks of age, kids can anticipate the complex differences in their mother’s and father’s caretaking and handling styles.
In addressing the subject of adaptive and problem-solving abilities of children, Dr. Pruett argued that “infants who have been well fathered during the first eighteen to twenty-four months of life, are more secure than those who were not in exploring the world around them, and they do so with vigor and interest.”
That interest to explore I already see with my two-year old grandson. I believe much of it comes from the hours my son invests playing and working with him. Interestingly, in displaying his language skills, one of the first words our grandson attempted was “ball”. He is not intimidated by electronic gadgets – he handles controls just like his dad. As we attempt to child-proof our home we are having to secure many of the items his dad uses.
We often wondered though, about our grandson’s eagerness to care and participate in projects around the house. At his age, these skills would not have been overtly taught. However, researchers are now telling us that “the strongest predictor of a child’s empathic concern for others in adult life is a high level of paternal child care.”
Ross Parke, a preeminent fatherhood researcher from California, studied how a child’s physical development responds to involved fathering. “An infant’s scores on assessments of intellectual and motor, or physical competencies are higher if fathers are actively involved during the first six months of the child’s life. The father’s tendency to activate his child in their interactions encourages and supports the child’s pleasurable discovery of his own body.”
Although much of this commentary is on the father-son relationship, one should not think that that is the extent of a father’s influence. Because of space limitations and the occasion of Father’s Day, the father-son emphasis becomes obvious.
However, what is also obvious and frightening, is the great impact fathers have on their children. The apostle Paul was correct, Fathers should not exasperate their children, “instead, bring them up in the training and instruction of the Lord” (Ephesians 6:4). When viewed positively, the biblical text is acknowledging the extent of the father’s influence to encourage and empower children. What an awesome responsibility.
On this Father’s Day, it is my prayer that God would bless every man who has had the opportunity to play the role of father in another’s life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)