(8/06/97)
Last month we discussed the situation of children in various societies, past and present. This time we’ll focus on the future.
Regarding America’s troubled youth, "get tough" responses have dominated, from the Federal government right on down to local School Boards. "Zero Tolerance" policies are being implemented everywhere. The results have not been pretty.
Violence plagues the schools-and kids have been arrested for bringing a cheese knife in their lunch box. Drugs are a terrible menace, and students are getting busted for handing out aspirin tablets. Sexual harassment is (finally!) against the law. And six year-olds are getting suspended for pecking a schoolmate on the cheek.
Meanwhile, the schools themselves are pushing drugs like Ritalin and Zoloft. Many involved in this are cashing in big time, thanks to government payments directed towards allegedly "disabled" children. (Thus shorting the truly disabled.)
In California, a school teacher was revealed to be an X-rated movie star-and he, a union member, could not easily be fired. He was openly defended!
A recent Surgeon General made several bizarre suggestions in proposing "sex education" for little kids.
Such venal contradictions pile up whenever our clueless government "tries to help." (Refer to The Death of Common Sense by Philip K. Howard-if your stomach can handle it.) Confusion, hypocrisy, rigidity: all send an extremely confusing message to our children.
Scientific Input
Modern science has had its say in child rearing, beginning with the "soft" sciences like Psychology. Doctors Skinner and Spock have come and gone, along with their ridiculous theories, the former coldly mechanistic and the latter warmly over-indulgent.
Now "hard" science is also stepping in. Parents can buy home-use drug testing kits. A do-it-yourself "fatherhood DNA test" has just come on the market.
All too often, these tests will be the harbingers of Bad News. If drugs are being used, it is vital for the parents to know. On the other hand, some experts advise against the use of the DNA test. Radio’s popular Dr. Laura asks callers, "What will happen if you find out you’re not the father?"
In most situations, she explains, confirming past infidelities would only shatter an already shaky marriage, and completely estrange the child. Any man can be a "sperm donor," and it doesn’t require much time or effort. But supporting one’s family, and fulfilling the lifelong position of a father, is a precious and challenging role. Even if the genes don’t quite match. (For Unificationists the standards are much higher.)
Lawyers have sensed an opportunity here. Many men are now learning of the consequences of a one-night fling they’d had, dimly remembered, often years before. It happens when they’re dragged to a laboratory for a court-ordered DNA test. At best, these men learn that they have a "new" family to nurture. At worst, they end up trying to evade a gigantic bill for unpaid child support.
Science isn’t finished with the family yet. Frozen human embryos have become the objects of ferocious court battles, especially where the parents had since divorced. Children have been born to hormone-treated elderly women. Surrogate mothers have birthed the child of a parent who had already died.
Some human tissues can live for several hours beyond the point of "legal death." Sperm cells have been extracted from men who had already died, and their ladies have sought to bear their children anyway. In one case, the distraught parents (of an unmarried son) advertised for a woman who would bear them a "posthumous grandchild."
"Genetic tailoring" is a popular theme for near-future science fiction. If the human life span is greatly extended, the prospects of that era’s children will look markedly different.
It’s going to take a regular King Solomon to sort this stuff out …
Advocates
Who is currently addressing these issues? Almost no one, save for a few self-proclaimed children’s advocates. They’ve also become experts at promoting any program they desire, on the basis of concern for children. Their agenda is quite predictable.
Want to control an industry? Perhaps their factories produce things -pollution, unhealthy foodstuffs, unsafe products- that may threaten our children’s health. Even if they don’t, any number of scientists would be happy to call a press conference and claim that it’s so.
Want to nationalize American health care? Rejected at your first, massive effort? Just cobble up some inflated statistics and heart-rending stories about "uninsured children." Provide those millions of kids with a new government program. In a couple of decades they’ll all grow up, become voters-and expect the gravy train to keep on rolling.
There are numerous other examples. After all, who wants to be accused of being against children? Not anyone who has to face the voters! Government should do everything it can defend families. But today, our government is run by humanists who have nothing but disdain for traditional families.
Few of them are good parents, but they’re experts when it comes to getting their way. The government has declared that children are to be raised in a "healthy environment." It is possible to "raise the bar" so high that no parent could make the grade.
In an earlier UNews article ("Sheepenization") we discussed these leader’s pervasive efforts to subdue the American people. "Sheepening" is a neater phrasing; their efforts continue. Publications like Imprimis and The Washington Times, and commentators like Rush and Dr. Laura, are properly informing the adults of this nation. Thus, the humanist’s efforts are increasingly aimed at our children. This ongoing "sheepening" is concentrated in the Public School system.
Liberation?
The phrase "It takes a village to raise a child" may or may not be a real African proverb. If it is, while their are many wonderful people in Africa, those villages remain the poorest, most ignorant, superstitious and disease-ridden places on Earth. And if it isn’t, the Federal government’s "village elders" are quite unwelcome.
A quote from America’s "most powerful woman" concerns "equating marriage with slavery." Even within its well-hedged original context, this statement clearly depicts the attitude of our humanist rulers.
The idea of "Kid’s Lib" surfaced in the late 1960s. Back then, this author thought it sounded like a pretty neat idea. But even then, the question arose: once "liberated," what better things were the kids -and society- going to build? In distant Korea, the True Parents had already been rejected; no one could answer the question.
Some people believe it’s foolish to raise "naive" children. These are the same ones who replied "no" to the Third Point in our pre-Blessing vows: educating children about sexual purity.
We realize that our children will eventually be tempted by drugs, pornography, etc. Lurid advertisements, scruffy neighbor kids, cars with "gansta rap" blaring forth, and much more, surround our children now.
In response, some religious families have reacted strongly, much as Grandmother Hong did when she repaired (with her young daughter Hak Ja) to an isolated island. These families have no TV in their homes, and their children are only allowed to attend church-supervised gatherings.
On the other hand, there are Unificationists who deliberately avoid our own religious schools, not wishing their children to be "overly sheltered."
It now appears that the former course is preferable; as far as is possible, any island of sanity should be eagerly sought, by Unificationists and all concerned parents.
Horrible tales of child abuse, and especially the recent epidemic of crack babies, have prompted calls for extreme measures like "parental licensing." Many have responded with sensible, locally-based programs; for example, waiting periods with premarital counseling and special, extra-committed marriage licenses.
Purity does not have to equate with weakness. In the Bible it certainly didn’t. Purity may remain an object of derision-or become the next big social trend. Several million pre-Blessed couples (as of this writing) is no small potatoes! Those very Four Blessing Points encapsulate the solution to our children’s ills.