Dec
12
A couple of days ago, a kid of 13 killed his classmate. Those children were of class 8. The boys had a fight in school and the principal resolved the fight. But it actually didn’t stop at that point, it took a life.
Deputy Commissioner of Police of Delhi said action would be taken against Azad Yadav, the father of one of the accused children, under the Arms Act for alleged negligence.
Azad’s son had brought his licensed revolver to school and allegedly fired four shots at Abhishek (the victim) near the staircase and then handed the gun to his friend who fired another bullet.
http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=newen20070035593
So, it’s not only up to US now. India is also suffering the same irrespective of so much harsh rules over Arms freedom.
Some days ago, I discussed “Kallo”, the poor orphan girl. And here there are different kids of some millionaire families with able mothers and fathers.
Again, I would express myself as I cannot do anything more than that.
I am sure it is not the wrong of children, but the wrong of parents.
It is the failure of the individual parents and the society as whole.
Marriage is a very important institution and it must not be taken lightly. And so is parenthood.
Marriage is important when two people have found the person with whom they want to spend the rest of their life. It cannot be an emotional of light decision. It must be very proper and objectivistic.
I must again present the views of great Scholar Gargi about marriage.
Gargi asked “What is the purpose of a marriage?” Yaajnavalkya replied, “To have progeny” Gargi said, “No the wife is one-half of the husband Ardhaangi. This means that she should pursue Dharma together with the husband as a Dharmapatni (a Righteous wife). Marriage is for the sake of pursuing Dharma. It is not for enjoying worldly pleasures. Our emperor enjoys carnal pleasures in his palace. The same is experienced by street dogs. Is that happiness? “
A righteous self-objectivistic moral life is what happiness is. One must not involve in a relation if he/she cannot understand the objectivistic worth of it. When one is certain that one’s choice is final, then marriage is, of course, a desirable state.
Similarly, when one is seriously objectivistic about having a progeny, then only it is proper to them to become a parent. It is a responsibility and not a game of fun.
If the parents are not able to provide proper attention and a rational parenthood to the child, what right they have to be parent?
Any couple will like to have a healthy, rationally strong and morally able person as their progeny. But if one is not even able to consider and rationalize it that how can the child of him/her achieve those humanistic characters, then what right he/she have to be a parent?
It is much better to NOT TO BE a parent if one is not able to provide proper nurture and care and guidance to the child. It is a duty and surely not a way of carnal desires.
Parenting is very objectivistic duty, a cause of worth importance. Proper parenting requires imparting a strong set of values, and encouraging the child’s confidence in his ability to make wise choices and to attain his goals. It is not at all an easy task. And every couple needs to provide and devote enough time and endeavor to achieve it.
It must not be indoctrination.
The rationales, the morals cannot be indoctrinated. They cannot be taught via some funny religious notes. Proper reasons are to be shown and explained and the child’s inner self must be inspired to gather those reasons themselves.
It is always difficult to provide an environment amicable to provide the child a individualistic, free unbiased morally, rationally strong environment.
But, the biggest difficulty which arises is from the inner emotional struggle of the parents.
Parenthood is not at all about providing good chocolates, gifts, toys, bicycles and bikes and rich schooling.
Parenthood is about providing a good Individual existence.
If the parents themselves do not know how to handle the emotions, what they can teach to the child? Many a times, a sort of emotional struggle occurs between parent and child, from the whining and temper tantrums of a toddler to the sulking and angry outbursts of a teenager. It is all a matter of who has the power: you or your child. It becomes a win-lose situation only if the parent is an authoritarian who always wins, or the child knows how to manipulate a parent’s emotional responses so that his demands are always met. This must not be the case.
Ways must be find out so that these distressing events can be avoided or resolved, including teaching a child how to handle emotions, having a parent who enforces standards and giving the parent control while fostering independence in the growing child.
The real power of parents do not lies in being authoritative but it lies in their ability to guide their children toward self-control, which is necessary for self-esteem, maturity and rational independent thinking.
There may arise many questions like how to teach children about acquiring reading habits, and to manage money, how to manage anger and enthusiasm and other emotions including lust.
There are very basic and objectivistic duties regarding parenthood and no rationalist can ignore those duties if he/she decides to be a parent. The physical development of child is the responsibility of the parents which includes physical training “Yoga” and introduction to sports and developing habits of health in the child. The environment of intellectual freedom must be provided for the child by providing the sense of “Dignity” in the child by creating an environment of peace and justice in the family and promoting no-fear, no-threat, no-verbal abuse and no discriminatory environment. The child must be taught not only to respect his individual self, but to keep himself away from attacking or encroaching others individual space. Sense of self-worth and self-righteousness is different from sense of arrogance.
Parenthood must be based on set of principles (DHARMA). The basic principle of parenthood must be how the parents can help the children become self-confident, self-reliant and happy. A child’s mind is his greatest value. A child needs to develop his mind so that he can think rationally and live successfully. Parents must help the child to gain knowledge (not the crap) and help him learn how to use this knowledge effectively and to appreciate the value of their own mind.
Many times in the ORKUT forum “Rational Behavioral…” I have stated that the government and the social organizations must stress on providing psychological studies and researches to provide rational ways to help the parents how to raise the kids.
It is very necessary not only for the individual parents but the Society too, to create an environment for the children to adapt rationally with the environment and raise themselves in objectivistic mode. Otherwise such cases will keep on repeating themselves irrespective of arms prohibitions or any other authoritative strict measures.
Related Posts
1 views2 Responses to “The shootout, the kids and the question of Parenthood”
Leave a Reply
reallyoldturtle Says:
January 12th, 2008 at 7:47 pmdear …,
about your pic. you are wrong. it’s illegal to think even.
Self-Defense, Right of Living, and Handguns | Reason for Liberty Says:
June 2nd, 2008 at 4:41 am[…] India is growing old. As life expectancy improves, the number of 60-plus individuals is estimated to cross 100 million by 2013. The proportion of 60-plus in the total population was 6.8 per cent in 1991 and it will be over 8.9 per cent in 2016. Delhi alone has a population of five million ‘financially secure’ senior citizens. Over 170,000 are old couples living alone. As enormous numbers of young, educated Indians move abroad parting old parents behind, or moves to different parts of country. Not all of individuals left behind want to go after their children abroad or other parts of country and many of those who do are not exactly in love with the experience so they returns. Many find social interaction difficult. Anyways, I am not going to talk about the responsibility of youth towards their old parents, nor I am going to mention the Amitabh Bachchan starred movie BaghBan. I don’t intend to talk about Retirement homes or retirement resorts or new-age retirement senior citizen communes. It’s not always that the senior citizens have been driven out of oppressive homes or treated badly by offspring and relatives. More and more, the aged are discovering that they need a place that will give them security and camaraderie without the sacrifice of personal space. And yes, I am talking about the security of individuals, not only the security of old citizens living alone, but security of any individual in any circumstance. Although every city is facing the growth of senior citizens to some level, Delhi Police has taken some initiatives regarding the security of senior citizens in proper manner. To increase the efficiency, help lines and Senior Citizen’s Security Cell have been established with a proper set up for the identification of senior citizens living alone in NCR, proper verification of employees particularly domestic servants is also provided by the police, while the Police Station House Officers and Beat Staff is instructed to periodically visit the residence area of senior citizens. The officers of Senior Citizen Security Cell keeps proper contact on either personal level or via phone lines to increase the feeling of security and emotional support for each identified senior citizen and proper educative and informative meet ups and liaisons program to educate them about their safety and welfare related laws are also been held. But above all this, the provision of Gun for the purpose of self-defense is not free and easy. Overwhelming historical substantiation and simple logic make it obvious that guns which are often termed as the “great equalizer,” for noticeable reasons are a potent means of self-defense in the valuable moments prior to police to arrive and take hold of situation. Police can’t remain always with the senior citizens, and Delhi along with NCR is a BIG area. It is even not palpable to think that Police along with some private security system alone can guarantee the protection of a senior citizen living alone. But it is not only about the senior citizens alone Governments are formed to look after our individual civil rights to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” The right of self-defense is incorporated and implied in the right to life. The right of self-defense is common sense. In creating a government, citizens entrust the task of defending themselves to the police. But to entrust is not to surrender. Each citizen retains the vital right to protect himself in emergencies when his prearranged agents, the police, or some private security service are not available to help. Hand Guns are lethal weapons. Many objects generally owned for nonviolent purposes can be used for urgent situation self-defense. But dissimilar to kitchen knives or cricket bats or some iron rod, handguns have no nonviolent use; they are intended to exterminate people. The same dangerous power proves handguns as the main realistic way of self-defense against robbers, rapists, and murderers. Handguns are lethal power and nothing. This fact gives rise to genuine concerns over their personal ownership in an elegant society. Opposing to a frequently articulated worry, a right to keep and abide arms in no way indicates that citizens may build up stocks of weaponry in accordance with their illogical preferences. Bombs, Cannons, tanks, and nuclear weapons don’t have any valid use in a personal emergency and self-defense, and their very presence is a threat to calm neighborhood. If handguns are limited to self-defense in crisis, then keeping other sorts of weapons can be banned by government, while the handguns can be free to be used for proper safety-purpose in emergency situations against looters, rapists or criminals during emergency. Prohibiting keeping of Handguns won’t stop the criminals to have guns and other weapons in anyway, yet it will contravene upon a law-abiding citizen’s right in crisis to fend off attackers and bullies who are exercising knives, clubs, fists – or cans of soda brutally. I support the allowance of handguns more easily for self-defense purposes. It is becoming a need. Self-defense is my right, as it is everybody else’s. An appropriate lawful system recognizes and protects that right, by allowing private possession of handguns. . Related post:- The Shootout […]