From: rks@cscns.com (Dancing With synergy)
Subject: Re: Donahue: Options for Kids
Organization: Community_News_Service
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 08:16:36 GMT

gray,david l (smile1@dancer.cc.bellcore.com) wrote:

(deletia regarding religious beliefs...)

: is how he made things.  I strongly disagree with those who would say I support
: parents owning their child and that they can do anything they want because
: they kind of own them.  I do not feel that men own their wives either.  

I understand that you have those religious beliefs and perhaps use a 
Biblical premise for your statements. And in an ideal universe, perhaps
that philosophy would work. If it works for you and you are not harming
any others -- then live it and go in peace. 

My argument comes in when you make blaket statements about *the way things
are* like your religion has a cornerstone on the *way things are*. It is
the way things are for *you*. Personally, I find the idea that I should
submit to a man repugnant. I believe that we are all born with divine 
power within us. The problem with abusive parents is that they try to 
*steal* that divinity. 

One of the problems with fundamentalism is that there is no respect for 
individualism. There is no respect for the needs, the path or the 
wants of an individual. It is a structured, organized way of looking
at the world with little area for the various shades of grey that make
up the complex universe we live in. 

Religiosity seeks to control. It flies in the face of intellect, 
preferring that its adherents remain ignorant. 

Spirituality is another issue entirely. 


: So don't bother saying so because I don't feel that way.  But in
: the order of things, parents and adults are responsible for children.

Yes. Response-able. And if the parent is not being responsible then
children need a recourse. And it is certainly not within the system which
has failed children for years and years. It gave them no power over 
their own lives. 


: I find that society has been trying to settle out social ills
: by reversing everything and it is not working well.  Men and women are 
: responsibile for the welfare of our children.  If they don't do their job,,
: we don't ask the 10 year old what to do.  We, as adults, with values step in

It depends entirely on the 10-year-old. Some are better able to take 
care of themselves than others. I think the one thing that is certain
is that children don't like change. They are not going to throw their
lives into upheaval for no reason. 

: and do something!!!  I would never trust the welfare of a child to a lawyer.
: Never!!!  Their only goal is to take a case and win.

Painting all lawyers with the same brush is no different than painting
all children with the same brush. Or all races or all religions. There
are lawyers who *are* concerned with justice. 


: I can understand if you have been abused that you will not feel this way.
: You will want to see the child with their own choices.  You may be right
: to feel that way because society did not step in for you when you needed
: them.  I just feel real strong about society stepping up to their 

I didn't expect *society* to step in for me. I learned at a very young age
that I had to take care of myself. Abused children have a different 
way of looking at the world -- and if you haven't been there -- it is 
not wise to make judgements. The real issue is one of protection on
*all* levels. 

The best way to protect children is to teach them that they *do* have
power in their lives -- within their range of ability. Feeding thwem
full of philosophy will not do it. Especially a philosophy that 
states that we are the worms of the earth. 

I don't have any investment in debating you about your religious 
beliefs or the validity of them. It obviously works for you and 
makes you happy. I honor that. BUT -- just because it works for 
you doesn't mean that it will work for me or society at large. We 
all have our own mythologies. My concern is that *all* people have
freedom (balanced with responsibility) and that *all* people have
a sense of worth. I am concerned about the attitude toward children
in general. They are *people* not pawns. 

: responsibility.  Protect our children now and in the future should not
: be shuffled off onto our children.  They have enough to worry about without
: trying to decide if they need a divorce or need to hang in..

And is protection the same as powerlessness? Believe me, survival is 
not a difficult decision to make and I hardly think that kids need
to be 'protected' from their right to have a healthy, nurturing 
environment in which to grow up. 

namaste

//gisle