Forget what you heard, fathers are still needed

This post is well overdue, but never the less, here it is. It is in response to a comment made by my beloved atheist, liberal, former co-worker and friend, Josh -aka- Raging Dad. Not only is Josh an avid reader of my blog, a feat hard to pull off due to the infrequent posts, I can almost always count on him to post a comment to the story he reads, even if it’s just making a comment about a grammatical error - yes he is a grammar geek. Sometimes when I post an article, I know that it is going to strum at the liberal cords of Josh’s heart…reminiscent of the good ol’ days back at Minneapolis Public Schools. However, when I posted the article “Children need fathers, not baby-daddies” I did not expect to hear from him, but never willing to disappoint, he came through as usual. And as usual, while I respect his view, I disagree with most of what he wrote.

Josh wrote: No doubt kids will benefit from having two loving parents to support them and teach them the ways of the world, right from wrong, and give them skills to cope with the madness that surrounds us every day. I do think that a single parent is capable of doing this, though it is more challenging. I also strongly believe that two mothers or two dads could provide the same nurturing and supportive environment that a mom and a dad could. It had more to do with the environment created, and not the gender of the people involved, IMHO [in my humble opinion].

The first point I want to address is growing up in a single parent home as opposed to having two parents in the home. I agree that a single parent can provide a strong support system and is more than capable of teaching right from wrong. I also agree that this is a challenging feat to undertake. Having two kids of my own, I give much honor and respect to folks like my mother who raised multiple kids, with far less resources, all on their own. And while single parents do their very best to raise their children, there is an irrefutable fact without an exception to its rule. That is the fact that a woman can never teach a boy how to be a man and a man can never teach a girl how to be a woman.

As a man, I can instruct my daughter on how she should carry herself as a young lady. I can tell her what type of boys she will draw by wearing certain outfits. I can also teach her right from wrong, establish values based on our beliefs, and I can teach her to have self-worth so she does not settle for any ol’ knucklehead who comes her way. These life lessons, however, are from a male’s perspective… because I know how “we” think. But when it comes time for my daughter to have her monthly, or when her hormones start to run rambunctiously, there’s not much I can do for her because I have no experience in that area. I am a firm believer that real experience and practice outweighs theory or guessing. Beyond this, there are other things that only a woman can relate to another woman, and there is nothing wrong with that. We were made differently for a reason. The same goes for a young boy as it relates to his mother.

Regarding the comment on same sex parents, I do not disagree that they can provide a nurturing and supportive environment as well. This article was not about the effectiveness of same sex partners, but was a charge to men to step up to their God-given roles. Yet, my stance with same sex parents remains the same as with single parents. Two women cannot teach a boy to be a man and two men cannot teach a girl how to be a woman. They can teach them how to be good, respectable people, but there will always be an element missing.

Our differing in opinion, Raging Dad, is and will remain because of my faith and belief in God and your lack thereof. There are certain things that are immutable according to the Word of God. Proverbs 1:8-9 reads, “My son, hear the instruction of thy father, and forsake not the law of thy mother: for they shall be an ornament of grace unto thy head, and chains about thy neck.” In this verse, Solomon was saying that the wisdom and instruction from a mother and father will bring about blessings and its worth is invaluable. This proverb also shows that there are roles for the mother and father to bring balance in rearing the children. Therefore, I once again admonish parents, in particularly fathers, not to abandon their God-given roles. No matter what the world or society may say, children need fathers in their lives.

Children need fathers, not “baby-daddies”

Recently I became a father for the second time. My wife and I went from the doctor’s giving us little to no chance of being able to conceive naturally, to having an 18-month old son and a two-month old daughter. Our ability to bear children is truly a testament to God’s faithfulness. The Lord spoke to me during prayer one evening and told me that it was going to happen in his timing. Matter of fact, he gave me specific numbers to go along with his promise. And then as confirmation, he led my pastor to tell my wife that she was going to conceive in 2007. God gave us the word, confirmed it, but still required us to have faith and the patience to wait on His divine timing. Sure enough, we had our first child October 2007.

Fast forward to the present, I feel like a veteran to this parenting game, yet, I realize I have a lot to learn. Day by day my son learns to say and do something new, leaving us baffled about where he picked up his new skills. Then at times, when I look at him, it’s like looking into a mirror. Not only does the child resemble me, but he has my gestures and mannerisms down to a T. Just turn the TV to the Bulls or Cubs and he will yell and clap instantaneously. This is nothing he was taught, just something he observed from his father. Which leads me to my point... children need fathers, not “baby-daddies” or a child-support check!

My short stint as a father has reaffirmed what I already knew, but now I see it in practice. The Bible commissions men to be the head of the household. Meaning, we are held responsible for the well-being of the family. It is our job to be the protector, provider, disciplinarian, and the one who makes tough decisions when necessary. All of these things should be done in consultation and consideration of the spouse, but the onus is not on her, God holds the man responsible. Got issues with that statement? Click to read more.

Children need fathers because they need to see theory in action. Lip service is not enough - the best example is the one you live. Children need fathers because baby-daddies are not there to get up in the middle of the night to rock baby back to sleep. Baby-daddies are not there to put Orajel on sore gums. Baby-daddies are not there to give the toddler a bath while mama is nursing the infant to sleep. Children need fathers because a child-support check cannot teach a child how to throw or catch and how to read or write. Children need fathers because young boys need to see how a woman is supposed to be treated; and young girls need to know they do not have to settle for less. Children need fathers because a woman can do her very best, but she can never teach a young boy how to be a man.

God designed a mother and father to raise children together to bring about balance and to share the responsibility. It’s time out for part-time fathers and baby-daddies. And if you are functioning in your role as a father, God bless you, but you do not get a gold star. It’s mighty funny how some men want to brag and boast for doing what they are supposed to be doing in the first place – evidence of low societal standards.

To those men who are no longer with their children’s mother, do not allow this barrier to cause you to abort your God-given responsibility. If both parents have the children’s best interest at heart, the kids will still be able to receive the balance needed from both parents, and that special element that only a father can provide.

Love that chicken from Popeyes

Twin City residents were salty, after traveling near and far to Popeyes Chicken on Lake Street, to find out that the franchise was not honoring the nationally advertised eight pieces of chicken for $4.99 on Earth Day. The local Fox 9 News thought this story was so mind-blowing, that they sent a field reporter to cover the shotty business practices and to get reactions from the irate costumers. While some may appreciate Fox for pulling the covers off the only Popeyes in the state of Minnesota – a franchise notorious for not honoring national deals – I feel there are bigger ramifications to this news stations’ coverage.

For starters, the fact that they did not honor the ad was not news worthy. Most national ads have disclaimers at the bottom that say, “Offer may vary at participating locations.” Even though two reliable sources informed me that this particular commercial did not have a disclaimer, most American consumers know the drill. We’ve come to accept airports and malls charging more than local chains, and no one throws a fit about it - we either buy the food or we move on. If the media decided to cover every time a local business did not honor a national ad, there would be a story practically every day. The bottom line is this, when you are a franchise, it is your prerogative to run sales as you see fit. As consumers, we may not like it, but it’s the fact of the matter.

The bigger issue I have with this “news” story is that it reinforces stereotypes to those who have negative perceptions about black people. The Fox 9 reporter started his report by saying, “I haven’t seen people this passionate about something in a long time!” Really, Mr. Reporter? Our country is at war, kids of color are steadily scoring lower on tests than their counterparts, people are losing their jobs and our country is in a recession, and the only thing we can get passionate about is fried chicken? What is more disheartening is that the people actually gave the news crew the material to use. I had to do a double take to make sure I wasn’t watching the Chappelle Show or Chocolate News. Here they are, throwing a fit, because they couldn’t get their friend chicken. One foolish person had the audacity to let us know he caught a cab all the way from Burnsville. I haven’t taken the time to do a cost benefit analysis, but I do know cabs have a minimal fee of $5 and the alleged sale was for $4.99 plus tax.

To add to that, unlike our white brothers and sisters, people of color always represent the whole when negatively shown in the media. When the news has a breaking story that says, “Man caught stealing happy meal toys,” my first reaction is…please don’t let him be black. Why? It’s because unlearned individuals tend to think this one ignoramus represents the entire race. Arabs are now targeted because of the actions of some militant Muslims. Yet, whites were not targeted when Timothy McVeigh decided to drive a bomb into a government complex in Oklahoma City or when Ted Kaczynski, AKA the Unabomber, decided to send bombs via U.S. mail.

The reporter concluded his story by saying, “The moral of the story is, don’t mess with hungry people.” No Fox news, the moral of the story is you need to report on issues that matter for a change.

Sexual Exhibitionism - The Latest Trend

The following post is an excerpt from an e-mail conversation with one of my friends/church members, Stephannie “Keep it Real” Lewis.

To catch you up to speed, we were talking about the Genarlow Wilson's case, and below is her candid response to my question of why we have so many youths getting caught performing sexual acts on camera in front of their friends.
-----

The trend of teenage sexual exhibitionism, in my humble opinion, is another way for teens to get media adulation, like their favorite celebrities (a la Britney Spears, Ray J, R. Kelly, Ashanti, Nelly, Paris Hilton, etc.). Instead of the aforementioned celebrities being publicly ridiculed for performing sex acts on video, they are rewarded with multimillion dollar advertising contracts (Ray J); improved sales of their albums (R. Kelly), and other deals that catapult them into the nextstratosphere of stardom.

Unfortunately, teens that engage in exhibitionism believe that they, too, will receive rewards by their peers. To them sexual exhibitionism will lead to popularity, attention of the opposite sex, respect from peers and the like. What they do not consider is that sexual exhibitionism is that it encourages, and leads to, sexualization, whereby their identity hinges on their sexual appeal. It further distorts their identity and increases feelings of insecurity.

In short, sexual exhibitionism is public self-destruction. But that's one person's opinion.