MORAL ARMORS Irrational Parenting, Part I

"If a kid asks where rain comes from, I think a cute thing to tell him is "God is crying." And if he asks why God is crying, another cute thing to tell him is, "Probably because of something you did.""—Jack Handey

My view on parenting holds one key premise in mind: that every decent parent should assure that upon leaving the nest, their kids can fly! So herein lies a critique against the attributes which make this crucial moral obligation impossible.

The Wrong Decision.

Stupid men and stupid women are dysfunctional on their own. They are dysfunctional together. Their answer to fix everything? More people. Babies are the one gigantic liability people can assume in America without credit or common sense. At upwards of four-hundred thousand dollars to raise a child responsibly these days, if you didn't take specific actions to earn and plan for that expense, you cannot afford it independently. Affording a kid is like affording a Ferrari. The stature for extravagance takes time to earn, and requires a tenacious discipline to reach that economic class. Being a responsible parent is no different.

If you can't afford to buy a median priced home with all the trimmings, you can't afford a baby, and probably haven't accumulated the knowledge necessary to raise one. This however, is a luxury the Fear-driven indulge in. Most have kids because they don't know what else to do with themselves. They don't know what's next, where to take their lives, or where to take their relationship. There is no order to their lives, only what they saw their parents do. Life for them amounts to adolescence, dating—uh ho!—a baby, marriage and game shows. Unable to stop their own biological maturation, they develop an adult mind with adult needs within a being already trapped by prior errors—so discontent follows, then fighting, divorce and poverty. Then they do it again.

To some, having children is a form of involuntary companionship, an unthreatening presence that demands little cognitive action. They claim this route because kids "keep life simple." Isn't it simple enough? They extol the simple joy of children and spend their lives looking at the floor. What's so interesting about it? Someone has to grow up, take adult action and advance the world. Instead they waste their early productive years stagnating at the level of baby talk when they should be building a solid future, and through productive action, learning the true nature of consciousness before they commit to another, or try to raise another.

The most laughable life-cowards are the moral missionaries. Everything in their lives, as if a flower blooms with their words, is "for the children." In youth I recall overhearing, "If I didn't have kids, there would be a void of time I wouldn't know how to fill." Exactly. Children, when not a planned occurrence along a romantic sketch of living desire, are a substitute for the frustrated need of achievement. Kids are just other people. Thought and spirit are the exclusive domain of the individual. There is no social endeavor that trumps the moral value of individual action. That action must generate more than enough to feed ourselves, whose surplus feeds them as well, not by social concern, but by purposeful productive ability. One's purpose in life must be self-defined, whose core is to be pursued and accomplished without assistance. Any living purpose requiring people is by its nature, neurotic. It is the confession that one does not know what to do with oneself alone; that one cannot live independently and be happy by the functioning of one's own brain, meaning that for this person, life is not an end in itself. Worse yet, if a central purpose is not defined, one cannot convey its importance to another. They can't teach happiness and can only pass along their own status—slave, master, predator, host or parasite. Their blissful concern for the children doesn't earn them jack for respect in anyone past the age of five.

Through children, some people generate liabilities for the free ride our legislators permit, using a combination of the above excuses. "We can't afford it" becomes "We need not consider the expense. The government will give us $X for the production of each baby. The government wants babies—babies can be our enterprise. If we control costs and push the remaining burden onto the shoulders of others, we won't have to work." There is nothing as heart-wrenching as a hungry child? Well, it's nothing compared to the collapse of a nation by internal corruption. En masse, they and their sympathizers including those responsible for such laws, are responsible for all segments of overpopulation, of rent-control slums, inner-city crime and societal breakdown. The shortest-term thinkers and those willing to submit to them, always have the longest-term disasters.

Next time, we'll explore what bad parents hand down and what it does to their children's lives.

Copyright 2005 Ronald E Springer

Ronald E. Springer is the Author/Philosopher of Moral Armor, the world's first fully-integrated moral philosophy based on the nature of Man. Featured on The Mitch Albom Show, NBC and FOX News radio affiliates, Mr. Springer is available for interviews, speaking engagements, philosophy workshops and seminars. Please contact RonaldESpringer@MoralArmor.com or visit http://www.MoralArmor.com for details.