Could We Or Should We?

An article in the The Independent this earlier this week reviewed the machinations occurring in Great Britain as their Parliament considers whether or not to make mitochondrial donation legal when it comes to In-Vitro Fertilization (IVF).

Though the process or "three parent" IVF was banned by the Food and Drug Administration there has been no public discussion about whether or not the procedure was safe.  Saint Barnabas Medical Center in New Jersey performed the procedures on many of the children currently alive and is studying whether or not there were any long term affects, but has refused comment to those interested in its survey results.  It would seem they are unwilling to share the bad news that their actions did not produce children without healthcare worries, but perhaps transferred new worries to the parents.  After all, if the results were good I suspect they would be ringing the newspapers instead of avoiding the questions like Cindy Lucus who would not answer questions for me or the Independent.


Science seems very comfortable treating children as a commodity.  If you want one, we can provide one.  You do not need to be in a marriage, you do not need to be in a marriage of man and woman.  We can develop a child for you - in the lab.  Perhaps, you would like a tall boy, blonde hair or brown, green eyes, or blue.  Science seems able to make all these decisions for us without questioning the cost.

The cost of course is not just is the procedure safe short and long term, but is it safe from how we view children.  Are they just a commodity that if I produce, but don't want I can dispose of easily?
  The American left loves to talk about caring for children, but again and again, children seem to simply be a commodity.

I can have a child on demand.  My friends who veer liberal also tend to be the first to complain about their child's selfish desires - I wonder if those are genetic too.  Moreover, while it is uncomfortable for anyone to think about, IVF is linked to higher birth defects.  Again, these are the same parents generally who think abortion on demand is okay or abortion to save a child from a birth defect.

Once again, it seems science is ready to take its hand into the world of God.  Once again, it appears that the slippery slope of science (and dollars of course) is more interested than a perfect child than any child.  It was only last week that scientist Richard Dawkins suggested it immoral to not abort a child who had been diagnosed with Down's Syndrome in utero.  Immoral to kill a child because of a disease?  Really?

This is the talk of Adolph Hitler.  Once again the reality is, Adolph Hitler spoke of systematically killing those children deemed "mentally defective."  Here, Mr. Dawkins speaks of the same idea yet he is not ostracized by the scientific community.  Hitler too believed in the mercy decree of allowing people the peace of death rather than suffering through life as "defective."

While the two items seem different, they are not.  In both cases, science wishes to enter the world of creation by adding their two cents.  They believe they can safely create a human being from three person's genetic material, but the issues is not can they, but should they.  Unfortunately, it does not appear that anyone is asking that question.

Getting Educated

In an amazing turn of events, it appears California is now leading the way when it comes to school reform.  Okay, that is hyperbole, but a recent court decision ruled (for the kids...it's always about the kids, isn't it?) against the almighty teacher's unions of California.

In what truly has become a civil rights epidemic in the United States, the courts found that too many bad teachers were able to coast in a system designed ti protect incompetence at the real loss of students whose future earnings would be affected.  According to one expert in the case, students lost $50,000 in future earnings due to ineffective classroom teacher.

The case which was heralded by Education Secretary Arne Duncan is an interesting one if for no other reason, it may pit two Democratic groups against one another: teacher's unions and child advocates.  The dissension in those ranks should be interesting to watch over the coming months and years.

In any case, perhaps not all is lost in California, and perhaps in this case, it is the teachers who are getting educated.

Crimes Against Children, Not Parents

Recently I was harangued on Facebook about the utter injustice of a man sent to prison for overpaying his child support.  Incredulous I couldn’t believe that a father could be sent to prison for overpaying child-support.

However as you notice in the video that’s what happened except that isn’t what happened what really happened was the gentleman was late with child-support payments.  This of course is a crime in the State of Texas.  This gentleman is now paying a criminal penalty - he is serving time in prison not because he overpaid child support, but because he was late with the original payments.

For some reason local news stations seem to believe that it was a good story to focus on the gentleman's suffering for being sentenced to prison.  My question is where is the focus on the child when they needed assistance the previous several months and why are we concerned about a father who is responsibility to his children seems to be only when it’s convenient?

I get that the child support may have been paid up to the point, but the issue raised was that black men were being unfairly targeted.  This same race baiting discussion is part of the same one that has men thinking it is okay to father a child and then have no responsibility thereto.  That is a not a race based issue, but one of responsibility that no one seems comfortable bringing up.

It is time that children who are with single parents have the support they need.  That means single fathers caring for children should not be paying back social services for charges racked up by their errant ex-spouses who are kept away from children.  It means dads should be picking up the tab for the children they father and not running away.  It means perhaps we should be thinking about what marriage truly means and we consider the children who suffer their decisions.

Daughters

If only I had known.

They say daughters are tougher than boys and I am sure we are probably fast approaching that age, but when you are the dad, or in my case, the papa, I don't see to many downsides.  I guess I am on the lucky side of the stresses of girls thus far, but so , so much better than good.

Nothing but funny watching you do your hair all up or try to paint your nails or keep up with your oldest brother playing baseball.  Those are all fine and dandy, but just sitting with me, ah, perfection.  (It's almost like watching a no hitter lose to a perfect game pitcher.)  When is our next Corda and Daddy night?

We could watch the Jungle Book...or Little Mermaid....or even just watch the crazy Disney channel.  No matter, as long as it's me and you and your mama and bubbas and sister.

Keep working hard in school and your papa will keep sending you flowers to school, even if they say I can't, or college or work.  You work on school and getting smart and strong and stay away from those smelly boys a little longer.

Happy birthday big girl!