Subject:
|
Re: Excellent article
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 11 Aug 2001 23:27:47 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
160 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
<snipped everything>
You assume too much.
Or maybe I just didn't give enough detail on my parenting practices.
My wife and I determine the law in our home.
I balance the law in our home with real world issues as well as some of my
own ideas.
Our attention to our children is not based on the deserving of such, but on
the necessity of what we believe the children need.
I will not use a psychological manual to determine how much of what is
needed in a particular circumstance.
I trust myself enough to make that determination myself.
I am an individualist to the degree that I disagree with many "pro-utopia"
practices that you seem to adhere to. My children will be exposed to a wide
range of human emotions and experiences based on my own determination of
what it means to be human.
My children will have rights in my home based on my determination of what
rights children should have.
My children will know they are loved no matter what behavoir they display.
However, they will know what behavior I expect from them in public and in
private. It is my belief that they will use the experiences from their
youth to guide them in the horrific realities of their impending adulthood.
I determine how prepared they are for adulthood. Their training begins as
early as they are capable. This is the duty that I have assigned to myself.
I don't care if you agree or not. I will not stand by and allow a
government or psychological institution to determine how my creations should
be molded.
If you want your children to grow into sexually perverted (based on previous
posts of yours that I have read), selfish, overindulgent slobs, then by all
means go for it. I have the utmost confidence that my children will be far
better prepared to handle adulthood in a nondestructive, intellectual, and
observant manner.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Excellent article
|
| (...) Why? (...) So not only do they have no rights whatever, but you don't even have any responsibility to them? What if you are wrong about what they need? (...) Because you reject science as a way to determine and refine our understanding of the (...) (23 years ago, 12-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Excellent article
|
| (...) I would hope that everyone would like to see 20-year longitudinal studies. Then we would have some real knowledge to bandy about. (...) How? It didn't actually do anything. Mostly it came on pretty strongly that kids these days have too much, (...) (23 years ago, 11-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
11 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
