I was just thinking today of how much we fail our children in our
attempts to protect them. When I talk to people about trying to
introduce reason and choice to children, the same parents who say that
children can't reason and need to be punished fail to see the irony in
expecting them to associate pain with a disconnected action. I think we
end up breeding a society of people dependent on absolutist authority
to set limits, when punishment is associated with an unmet object of
desire rather than a natural consequence of meeting that desire.
Even the classic extreme that everyone brings up, that I heard every
time I presented non-violent parenting at RAVEN, the child running into
the street. While I think you need to give parents some leeway for
their own feelings of fear, imagine that scenario where a parent,
instead of screaming at the child or grabbing the child and beating him
or her, takes the child safely out of harm's way and then explains how
scary that was and how dangerous cars are. Maybe a follow up is an
object lesson in basic physics, maybe even showing an example of a car
hitting a watermelon. More work than scaring the hell out of the child,
but it becomes a growth lesson in recognizing boundaries rather than
another imaginary prison.
I think I'm either going to have really balanced children, or they're
all going to die before the age of four, from electrocution, burns,
falls, car wrecks, poisoningings. I guess part of the problem is that
we live in a society that is not particularly safe anymore for bags of
water, human flesh.
I've also been thinking a lot lately about the fact that we can't
really have a sense of how humanity will evolve until humanity evolves.
I have a picture in my mind of a just and humane universe, and I
believe we will achieve that just and humane universe at some point in
our existence. Until then, I need to try to be less caught up in the
day to day frustrations of our world, and look to that joyful place.
I had an imaginary conversation in my head with anti-choice
"fundamentalist" Christians, without getting too far into the irony of
their religion itself being based on highly selective and fanatical
readings of a highly selective and fanatical document, taken completely
out of the socio-political context, largely by poorly educated
graduates of bible colleges, and I keep hearing Steve L.'s comment when
we were talking about my discomfort with the Nicene creed, that the way
he resolves that for himself is to simply remember that people were
trying to figure things out back then, and that that's a snapshot of
the process of questioning. That puts my own struggle with my faith and
spirituality into a new light - that the entire existence of humanity
is not a definition, but a question, and that organized religion is one
way of exploring those mysteries in community. But to suggest that any
one faith or non-faith has the answer, is folly, and an abomination in
the eyes of the very God exlusive and limiting religions worship.
On the pro-choice issue, from my perspective, that we have too many
people period, beyond the issues of patriarchy that I see having huge
detrimental consequences for humanity long term, I can't imagine a God
who was willing to sacrifice his own son for the salvation of the world
would not be pro-choice. I wonder if that argument has been made
before, and what the response is.
5:01:07 PM
|
|