Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site rochester.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!rochester!ray From: ray@rochester.UUCP (Ray Frank) Newsgroups: net.abortion Subject: Re: Planned Parenthood posting Message-ID: <11137@rochester.UUCP> Date: Wed, 21-Aug-85 12:18:10 EDT Article-I.D.: rocheste.11137 Posted: Wed Aug 21 12:18:10 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 24-Aug-85 19:09:09 EDT References: <639@ttidcc.UUCP> <10929@rochester.UUCP> <1473@pyuxd.UUCP> <11043@rochester.UUCP> <1549@pyuxd.UUCP> Organization: U. of Rochester, CS Dept. Lines: 76 > > I seem to have touched a raw nerve with Rich concering parents. He is having > > a great deal of trouble remaining objective. [RAY] > > Where do you see that? What's non-objective about it? The fact that it's > at odds with your opinion? > No. It is obvious by your over generalization of your attack on parents. > The fact that you choose deliberately to hide such real information from > children clues me in on the fact that you wouldn't make a very good parent. > I knew about the non-existence of Santa Claus at a rather early age. I > also knew about death camps around the same time. So did most people in my > peer group. So do most of my friends' kids. What are you trying to hide > from your kids? And why? Real information about the real world teaches you > to be a realist. Maybe you just wouldn't want your kids to be realists. > That might get them thinking. > What you appear to be saying is exactly what I am saying. Give kids real information. WHERE you I and whole heartedly disagree is when! You give generalizations but no answers. Why do you think movies have ratings? Would you read your 2 yr old a nursery rhyme at bed time or the life and times of Idi Amin? I've noticed several references on the net to your habit of putting words in other people's mouths. Your holding true to form. I never once mentioned anything about hiding information from children, I merely stated that it is the rights of parents to give out that information and to decide when. You say you knew at an 'early age' blah blah blah. Ambiguous. Again, no concrete information, just vague generalizations. You also knew other 'real information' about the same time as 'early age'. Huh? It is perhaps true that to some kids who insist on having a mind of their own and feel 'all grown up' and ready to make important decisions before they even know how to properly use toilet paper, it would be nearly imposible to make a good parent. I believe from what I've observed of your postings that you fit the above description (mild flame intended). > > To blazes with the petty concern of parents wishing > > to buffer their children from the horrors of the real world till their old > > enough to understand. > > Hear, hear! (Oh, you meant this sarcastically?) I think your version of > "old enough to understand" is roughly equivalent to "too late to understand". > Would you delay sex education the same way? Is puberty "old enough"? > No? Guess what? You're already five or six years too late!!! > Again putting words in other people's mouths. Do your own words and thoughts escape you? Are you asking me something or telling me something? > > Someone said, I don't remember who, but I agree whole heartedly, "The way > > to destroy a society is to erode its base, which in essence is the family." > > I don't give a crap what you or anyone else on the net thinks, > > but I personally believe that this very erosion is going on all around us > > all the time right now. Nothing could make us weaker than 250 million > > alienated estranged Americans. > > The erosion of the family isn't coming from outside, it's coming from > within: from parents who fail to take responsibility for the proper > raising of their children to think for themselves and become adults, > by being so strict as to restrict independent thought processes, making > them dependent on sticking to established conventions rather than seeking > their own way. By sheltering their children from the real world because > they think it's best for them, only to find that the kids can't cope once > they get out there with real people (and real influences, bad and good). > By leaving a television set in charge of the kids as their babysitters, > and then wondering where they got all these strange ideas from. > Perhaps you're living proof. But I seriously doubt that your situation can be representative of the institution of parenting. > -- > Life is complex. It has real and imaginary parts. > Rich Rosen ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr What's important is knowing the difference. Do you?