Breaking Covenants

[log]

Well, that time of year is upon us.

I was sent this picture (and since found the online version).

It got me thinking how eager Satan is that we should break our covenants, for money.

What do you think?

http://www.bakersfieldcalifornian.com/o ... anhandlers" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A mother's plea: Don't give to panhandlers

Please not to give to panhandlers. Bakersfield people are so generous and kindhearted and, with this being the Christmas season, I am sure generosity will be at its height. I am sure that they are thinking that giving is the right thing to do. Not this time.

This is a personal plea from the mother of one of those young people panhandling at Walmart or Target, or on the street corner. My son has a warm bed and a warm dinner waiting for him at home. He has cable in his room and new clothes hanging in his closet. He is welcome to come home any time as long as he is not under the influence of drugs. But the drugs mean more to him than the warm meal and comfortable bed. Drugs mean more to him than an evening with his family laughing and watching television. He lives for his next fix. He gets the money by panhandling.

I often hear people say, "What they do with the money is their business. At least I gave." Really? Would you pull out that dollar bill and hand it to your son or daughter to buy their next fix of heroin or meth? All I am asking is that people not give it to mine. He has food, clothing and a place to live, but with your money he is buying heroin, and surely one day he will buy his last fix with your generous and kind-hearted gift.

Lizz Rodriguez

[log]

Mosiah 4
16 And also, ye yourselves will succor those that stand in need of your succor; ye will administer of your substance unto him that standeth in need; and ye will not suffer that the beggar putteth up his petition to you in vain, and turn him out to perish.

17 Perhaps thou shalt say: The man has brought upon himself his misery; therefore I will stay my hand, and will not give unto him of my food, nor impart unto him of my substance that he may not suffer, for his punishments are just—

18 But I say unto you, O man, whosoever doeth this the same hath great cause to repent; and except he repenteth of that which he hath done he perisheth forever, and hath no interest in the kingdom of God.

19 For behold, are we not all beggars? Do we not all depend upon the same Being, even God, for all the substance which we have, for both food and raiment, and for gold, and for silver, and for all the riches which we have of every kind?

20 And behold, even at this time, ye have been calling on his name, and begging for a remission of your sins. And has he suffered that ye have begged in vain? Nay; he has poured out his Spirit upon you, and has caused that your hearts should be filled with joy, and has caused that your mouths should be stopped that ye could not find utterance, so exceedingly great was your joy.

21 And now, if God, who has created you, on whom you are dependent for your lives and for all that ye have and are, doth grant unto you whatsoever ye ask that is right, in faith, believing that ye shall receive, O then, how ye ought to impart of the substance that ye have one to another.

22 And if ye judge the man who putteth up his petition to you for your substance that he perish not, and condemn him, how much more just will be your condemnation for withholding your substance, which doth not belong to you but to God, to whom also your life belongeth; and yet ye put up no petition, nor repent of the thing which thou hast done.

23 I say unto you, wo be unto that man, for his substance shall perish with him; and now, I say these things unto those who are rich as pertaining to the things of this world.

24 And again, I say unto the poor, ye who have not and yet have sufficient, that ye remain from day to day; I mean all you who deny the beggar, because ye have not; I would that ye say in your hearts that: I give not because I have not, but if I had I would give.

25 And now, if ye say this in your hearts ye remain guiltless, otherwise ye are condemned; and your condemnation is just for ye covet that which ye have not received.

3 Nephi 12
42 Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn thou not away.

43 And behold it is written also, that thou shalt love thy neighbor and hate thine enemy;

44 But behold I say unto you, love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them who despitefully use you and persecute you;

45 That ye may be the children of your Father who is in heaven; for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good.

46 Therefore those things which were of old time, which were under the law, in me are all fulfilled.

47 Old things are done away, and all things have become new.

48 Therefore I would that ye should be perfect even as I, or your Father who is in heaven is perfect.

3 Nephi 14
1 And now it came to pass that when Jesus had spoken these words he turned again to the multitude, and did open his mouth unto them again, saying: Verily, verily, I say unto you, Judge not, that ye be not judged.

2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged; and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

3 Nephi 12:20
20 Therefore come unto me and be ye saved; for verily I say unto you, that except ye shall keep my commandments, which I have commanded you at this time, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Hebrews 13:2
2 Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.

[Thomas]

Sad because this person will not accept her son , unconditionally. The mother has put her son on the street and blamed the son.

[log]

I wouldn't be too hard on Mom. Heroin addicts tend to steal from those with whom they stay and behave unstably; mood swings one second, falling asleep in the middle of a sentence the next, and spending hours in the bathroom; they also tend to bring unsavory types in and things go downhill very quickly. It would be a great trial to have them around whilst they're smackheads.

[jdawg1012]

Well, that time of year is upon us.

I was sent this picture.

It got me thinking how eager Satan is that we should break our covenants, for money.

What do you think?

OK, I'm probably going to be considered with an unpopular position, but who cares? LOL.

To me, this article is the possibly the pinnacle of unrighteousness (I'll qualify why I believe, that may be the case). I do not know the age of her son, but I would infer he's got to be t minimum a teenager, but I'll bet he's a full grown adult.

I have no problem with people giving food, or money, or whatever on their terms, but I take enormous issue with what I'm going to call "agency candy." It seems to me that there are a lot of people that say they're willing to help people, but only if they meet such and such and such a condition. In essence, they'll give, but often want to remove a portion of someone's agency by making someone concede to something in order to obtain help. That's well within their rights, but I think it is absolutely wrong.

Someone once offered me to come live with them, to save money, but I would have to live precisely by their particular rules (and this person was not someone I found to be trustworthy, truthful, or just), do what they wanted and behave as they saw fit. I told them "thanks, but no thanks." They said, "Why, I'm offering to help?" I said, "No, you're not." "You're offering to take me in, alright, but in exchange for my agency. The minute I exercise my agency to do something other than you want, I would be back on the street." They said, "Well, that's true." And I said, "Then I'll save myself the cost of two moves, and just decline. Because unless you're willing to take full accountability and responsibility for me, then I'm not going to put myself into a position of giving up my own agency." They agreed then that I was right, and they would not be accountable, and it was not a good idea.

That having been said, this young person has a right to make bad choices, and face the consequences. People have the right not to enable them. People using drugs are in a tough position. Unless the person is robbing, mugging, etc., then they're not breaking any natural law, so far as I can see. So while I may disagree with the choice to beg for money that will ultimately end up buying drugs, so too do I disagree with the idea (if it's the case), of this wayward young man (depending upon age) having to go live with his mother as the alternative. It's one thing to write in and say 'We have a home for your Johnny, and we love you, you're welcome here." and It's quite another to say, "Please no one give anything to my son so he has to come back home." Now if he's a minor, it's slightly different, because they have an obligation to provide for him through adulthood/accountability age. But as an adult, if he chooses to waste his mortal life, we can beckon, persuade and help, but I do not believe in forcing him to do something I feel is a better choice.

That having been said, on the issue of panhandlers. They make a fair amount of money, in many cases. When I visited Washington DC, as a youth, there was a man panhandling on the Capitol steps. I saw ten's and twenties (Like $50's or more in today's money), and I exclaimed, "Look mom, that man has lots of money of money!" (I was a small child). The man was on a carpet, and he literally tried to sweep the money under the rug. I didn't understand the ramifications of what i yelled, until later, but still...

When I was in college, one of my sociology professors gave us an assignment to violate a social norm. She said, "Just please don't panhandle, and if you do, don't quit college."

Perplexed, we all came back the next week, and told what we did, and she explained what had happened. She stated that in a previous year (or semester), she gave the same assignment, and one of the students never came back. She said weeks later, she later saw him somewhere in a fancy suit, and asked him whatever happened. He told her he was grateful, and that she did him a huge favor. He said that he went out to do his assignment, and just held a sign on a corner, and at the end of the day made/received over $600 (probably about $1000 or more in today's money). She said he told her he had had a hard time in college, but since then, he had made more money than he thought possible, and quit everything else to panhandle.

Now, where I'm from people are far more generous in tipping (many tipping jobs pay 6 figures where I'm from), panhandling, etc., so I don't know how it would compare to other places.

But as for me, if I have, I give. If I don't, I can't. But if not, I try to always try to say a prayer. As my father before my, I have also taken people in, and pretty much given them free reign. I have paid people more than the asked for a good or service to help them. In my life, I have been taken advantage of sometimes over the years, by more than one person, but I just smile and remember, that it's all God's anyway (and he causes the Sun to shine on the just and unjust alike), and I'm just a temporary steward for a temporary treasure. When I don't believe it's mine, it's a lot easier to give it away.

:ymhug:

[jdawg1012]

Sad because this person will not accept her son , unconditionally. The mother has put her son on the street and blamed the son.

I don't know if she put her son on the street, or if he left. But I take issue with the same things it seems like you do. I don;t know if she's a Latter-day Saint, but I know lots of Latter-day Saints kick their children out for things like homosexuality (There are hundreds in Salt Lake alone). On balance I know lots of non-Latter-day Saints who kick out their children too, and I know parents, Latter-day Saint or not, who make their home so dangerous or inhospitable that the children just leave. My gut tells me this is the case (see my post above). I see nothing that is a welcome back, just a "Stop helping him." To me, the age would play a big factor, also.

I wouldn't be too hard on Mom. Heroin addicts tend to steal from those with whom they stay and behave unstably; mood swings one second, falling asleep in the middle of a sentence the next, and spending hours in the bathroom; they also tend to bring unsavory types in and things go downhill very quickly. It would be a great trial to have them around whilst they're smackheads.

I lived with a couple. I lived with a lot of people, just after high school, and I didn't know what all they were doing, but I knew one who was on methadone (court ordered) to keep her off heroin (she didn't always comply). (She later died after going through rehab, but that's a long story). Your description of heroin addicts is a pretty good one. She also never stole anything from anyone I know (that I know of), and was very honest, loving and kind. Except a few times she was on a mixture of things, then she was unsavory, but not more than many sober people I know. Still, I got out, because I was very uncomfortable.

I have known a lot of drug abusers in my life (I'm from a place it's very common), and I can say that, to a person, everyone of them came from bad homes. I don't really count marijuana (though I do not use it, so it's not a personal bias), because people from all walks of life use that, including some very, very successful people I know of. God proscribes herbs for the use, and if we counted every herb that had an affect on the human body, pretty well everyone would be a druggie. But marijuana aside, all the hard users I know, including alcohol, methamphetamine, pill snorters, heroin, crack (not cocaine), you name it, they all came from homes where the parents do not live in harmony with gospel treatment of others. That may not be universal, but unless there's a rehab worker on this forum who disagrees with me, I probably have previously known more junkies most. Drugs are not the cause of the problem, broken/bad families are, at least that's what I've found. I know crime statistics (of virtually all types, IIRC) are very well correlated to single parent homes, so take that for what it's worth.

[Thomas]

I can tell you that the bad home = drugs is a myth. I have talked to one therapist who has told me, that teen drug addicts are coming from the best of homes, with the best of parents. He said, picture perfect childhoods. Perfect LDS homes.

I have some experience with this. Several years back I was employing around ten people. I was persuaded to hire a couple of recovering herion addicts. One was a nineteen year old boy who had just been relased from jail and was on probation. He came from a higer income home with great parents. He started using pain pills in tenth grade and became addicted to them. When he could not find the pain pills , he bought herion. It soon became appearant that herion was cheaper and more readily available, at his high school. This was a higer income area high school. He begin stealing from his parents and was evuantally kicked out of the home. He stole, almost every day, to support his habit. He lived in run down house with ten other addicts. This went on for about eighteen months until he got caught. He was in treatment and his parents had let him come back home, when I hired him.

I know of at least one ex-BYU, ex NFL, player who has the same problem.

[jdawg1012]

I can tell you that the bad home = drugs is a myth. I have talked to one therapist who has told me, that teen drug addicts are coming from the best of homes, with the best of parents. He said, picture perfect childhoods. Perfect LDS homes.

I have some experience with this. Several years back I was employing around ten people. I was persuaded to hire a couple of recovering herion addicts. One was a nineteen year old boy who had just been relased from jail and was on probation. He came from a higer income home with great parents. He started using pain pills in tenth grade and became addicted to them. When he could not find the pain pills , he bought herion. It soon became appearant that herion was cheaper and more readily available, at his high school. This was a higer income area high school. He begin stealing from his parents and was evuantally kicked out of the home. He stole, almost every day, to support his habit. He lived in run down house with ten other addicts. This went on for about eighteen months until he got caught. He was in treatment and his parents had let him come back home, when I hired him.

I know of at least one ex-BYU, ex NFL, player who has the same problem.

I don't want to quibble over semantics, but I think it depends upon what "picture perfect childhood" means. And "perfect LDS homes," will I know when I look at typical (I contextually don't know what your idea is), but typically, I don't think most LDS parents are very good parents (sorry!). Actually, I don't think that very many parents these days are very good parents. Mostly they're self centered and self absorbed. Usually they follow permissive parenting (if you know the four typologies: neglectful, permissive, authoritarian, authoritative).

I just want to be clear that I'm not invalidating your point, I think I'm just trying to clarify my original point. Maybe I can illustrate too, and then elaborate. (Stereotypical Bishop's kids would be too easy, lol).

There are certain members of my family who were raised by wealthy parents. They materially lacked for nothing. The mother married a man when the kids were about oh 7 and 10, who adopted them, and they were involved in sports, clubs, etc. They went on vacations, they had nice clothes, etc. etc. They attended social functions, family gatherings and on and on. But, what most people would have missed, is that the parent's had no real relationship with their kids, at least not on an emotional level, they acted out all the time for attention, it was just hidden from the public eye. So, by virtually every objective and visible rationale, they had a picture perfect life. But one kid turned to drugs, and the other to alcohol. And everyone said "poor you" (to the parents) and "You did so good, some kids are just bad eggs."

Increasingly I see this all over the country, but especially among Latter-day Saint children. Parent's who say, "They're just kids" (to justify a lack of discipline), etc. Permissive parenting is really, really, bad, and it's seen most in people who have high love for their children, but little to no discipline and order in their own lives.

Now, I know that some people come into life with tendencies, and genes for addiction, etc. So I'm not disregarding that. But I also know that kids can be taught, or as the Lord said, "Train up a child in the way that he should go, and when he is old, he will not depart therefrom."

Now, I know, your story is obviously succinct, but I can already see a few things from your story, that would indicate 'broken home" in the terms I meant. "Broken," in the sense that it's not working properly, or people not fulfilling their diving roles. First, the child became addicted to the pills. There's usually an indication of this early. The pills get used up faster than they're supposed to, is a big one. Did the parents notice? If they were being used up quickly, there's be a vacillation between behaviors when he ran out. Why, or why did they not notice? Did these parents teach their kids about self control? Did they exhibit it themselves? Who knows? When he stole from his parents, did they get him help, at a rehab center? Your story says they kicked him out. Was he a minor? This would indicate to me that they did not fulfill their parental obligations. Also, by the time kids get to by teens (when biological rebellions set in), their behaviors are largely shaped. Were his modeled correctly as a youth? I could go on, but it wouldn't really matter. You're just relating second or third hand, so I don't expect you to answer for them. I'm just making observations.

But I have worked with too many people that ignore their own issues, while "fixing" their kids. I used to be a personal trainer. I can tell you, that whether or not a parent was at a weight they liked, almost invariably (I'm talking, "one in a hundred," for an exception), if they had an overweight kid, the conversation would go as follows (I'm going to leave out the exercise portion, because it would make this very long):

Them: "Little Susie or Tommy has a weight problem."
Me: "What is she eating?"
Them: "Oh he/she eats like a normal kid, I guess..."
Me: "You guess? Do you know?"
Them: "Well I know s/he eats too much.
Me: "Well, too much of what?
Them: "Well ice cream and goodies, and junk food."
Me: "Where does s/he get it from?"
Them: "What do you mean? The Store."
Me: "Do you buy it?"
Them: "Well, yes, of course I do."
Me: "Then, I might suggest you start buy getting rid of the junk food in your home, and buying better food."
Them: "I tried that!"
Me: "Really? Thank doesn't make much sense..."
Them: "Well, I locked the (fridge, freeze, cupboard), but they find the key, or I forget to lock it up sometimes."
Me: "Why did you buy junk food if you aren't going to eat it?"
Them: "Well I'm not going to stop eating it because they have a weight problem."
Me: " If you eat it, then they're going to eat it."
Them: "But I don't have a weight problem."
Me: "Yes, but your child does."
Them: "WELL, that's why I lock it up!"
Me: "Yes, but you see, whether or not you lock it up, your actions are telling them its ok."
Them: "No, I tell them it's not ok, I do everything I can to help him/her lose weight."
Me: "Except, you create an environment non-conducive to losing weight."
Them: "But I have self control."
Me: "If you had self control, I think you would not buy for yourself, things that you know are unhealthy for your children."
(usually at this point they would either self-exonerate and say they did everything they could, or, sometimes admit their mistake).

The parents that realized their bad behavior would help their kids. The ones who made excuses were, in turn, frustrated by kids who also made excuses. The cause was from an utter lack of understanding of natural consequence (Which has been indoctrinated out of society today, at all levels: Financial, Educational, Criminal, Parental, ALL levels, there is no more, "You reap what you sow." It's "No matter what you sow, you're going to reap [this]," be it prison, good grades, salvation, a certain wage, etc.).

So you see, I could always tell the attitudes of a parent, as soon as I said, "Get rid of the junk food." If they said, "Absolutely, I'll do whatever it takes," I knew they would be able to help their child. (Righteous people love to be chastened by the truth). If, however, they said (after the above conversation), "Ok, I see your point, I want to try that," they usually were on board, and the kids had some success (they certainly did better than they otherwise would have). If they said, "I don't see why...." I knew that poor kid would be doomed. Unfortunately like 99% of parents are in that third group, which is why they grow up to be parents in that third group, with kids whos behavior they don't understand, just like their own parents.

This is just one example, but it's why I feel how I do about the drugs. I think a miniscule portion of people who somehow try a drug and get hooked physiologically, might be outliers. But first, I personally have to look at the big picture.

Did/was the child (as a kid not later as an adult):

Taught the dangers of drugs?
Told and SHOWN they were loved?
Come first to their parents before frivolous obligations?
Feel accepted?
Have parents that behaved in a manor in which the child felt they could come to them with anything?
Have regular, individual, talks with their children?
Raised by parent(s) with substance abuse issues themselves?
Raised by two parents?
Raised by parents who put their spiritual and emotion needs before materialism and "fun"?
Raised by parents who met their emotion needs?
Sent away to be raised by a stranger (usually paid to care for several at once) during their developing years?
Raised by parents who righteously supported them?
Raised by parents who let them have natural consequences? (This is almost always a universal "No")
Raised by parents who were a working father, and a stay at home mother?

I can think of dozens more, but it really boils down to the fact that before anyone takes that first hit, drag, whatever, they have to have a reason for it. A (stable) person with a full belly does not go looking to eat. Why? He's already full. An already full cup can't be filled with something else. Most drug abusers have unstable lives, whether its visible to outsiders or not. And that's my point. It may not be universal, but I think its pretty close to being so. Most people feel like people's brains and their behaviors are mysterious and unpredictable. I have found, that humans, like all other things in God's creation, are really quite predictable. What one has to do is always focus on learning the variables. I've named just a few.

To quote the Savior,

"They who are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick."

I humbly submit, that in the opinion of my own flawed and mortal understanding, that the drug abuse is a symptom of the sickness and not the cause, and that sickness is the breakdown of the family, and that breakdown is brought by parent's, even if they don't understand it fully. But no matter the cause, I pray that we can all be more loving, inviting, understanding and compassionate, in the Name of Jesus Christ, amen.

[log]

I wonder if God could be considered a permissive parent.

[Thomas]

Actually, the young man bought the pills at school. The parents had no idea he was taking them.

I had a good friend that died young. He was killed in a drug deal gone bad at the age of 22. I first met him in primary. I knew him and his family well. They were very down to earth, humble, people that were very involved in their childern's life. The disipline was strict but loving and by disipline I mean rules and duties. Sometimes kids do not respond to the teachings of their parents. Inspite of the parent's best efforts, the kids do the wrong thing. I watched my friend make bad choices and everyone around him tried to stop it. You cannot force somone to adopt your values, even if they are your childern. I have seen this in my exrtended family as well, where I know the parenting was second to none.

[jdawg1012]

I wonder if God could be considered a permissive parent.

LOL, Not in Heaven. God's house is a house of order.

If you don't know the typologies, they are based love, and order (discipline is love, with order, punishment is order, without love). Depending upon the source, the four parenting types might be expressed or described differently, but they all basically revolve around high and low love, and high and low discipline and order, here's and article except:

http://psychology.about.com/od/developm ... -style.htm
The Four Parenting Styles

Authoritarian Parenting
In this style of parenting, children are expected to follow the strict rules established by the parents. Failure to follow such rules usually results in punishment. Authoritarian parents fail to explain the reasoning behind these rules. If asked to explain, the parent might simply reply, "Because I said so." These parents have high demands, but are not responsive to their children. According to Baumrind, these parents "are obedience- and status-oriented, and expect their orders to be obeyed without explanation" (1991).

Authoritative Parenting
Like authoritarian parents, those with an authoritative parenting style establish rules and guidelines that their children are expected to follow. However, this parenting style is much more democratic. Authoritative parents are responsive to their children and willing to listen to questions. When children fail to meet the expectations, these parents are more nurturing and forgiving rather than punishing. Baumrind suggests that these parents "monitor and impart clear standards for their children’s conduct. They are assertive, but not intrusive and restrictive. Their disciplinary methods are supportive, rather than punitive. They want their children to be assertive as well as socially responsible, and self-regulated as well as cooperative" (1991).

Permissive Parenting
Permissive parents, sometimes referred to as indulgent parents, have very few demands to make of their children. These parents rarely discipline their children because they have relatively low expectations of maturity and self-control. According to Baumrind, permissive parents "are more responsive than they are demanding. They are nontraditional and lenient, do not require mature behavior, allow considerable self-regulation, and avoid confrontation" (1991). Permissive parents are generally nurturing and communicative with their children, often taking on the status of a friend more than that of a parent.

Uninvolved Parenting [Also know as "Neglectful"]
An uninvolved parenting style is characterized by few demands, low responsiveness and little communication. While these parents fulfill the child's basic needs, they are generally detached from their child's life. In extreme cases, these parents may even reject or neglect the needs of their children.

These are one set of definitions, but give the picture.

I have only perused this article (while looking for a good definition of the typologies), but someone may find this useful:

http://mormonsite.wordpress.com/parent/
Parenting, the Lord’s Way

And here's one on permissive parenting, which I thought had a funny title, but I haven't had the chance to read yet (more at the link, excerpted):

http://www.albertmohler.com/2004/01/29/ ... re-coming/

Thursday January 29, 2004
The Epidemic of Permissive Parenting: The Brats are Coming

Dr. Robert Shaw is convinced that American society has become toxic to children. In his new book, The Epidemic, Shaw argues that a pattern of absentee and permissive parenting has led to children that are anti-social, emotionally fragile, and even dangerous. Shaw is a child and family psychiatrist practicing in Berkley, California. He also serves as director of the Family Institute of Berkeley, and has directed the Family and Children’s Mental Health Services for the city of Berkeley. Even the slightest evidence of common sense coming out of the city of Berkeley is worthy of note–and this book deserves the attention of every American parent.

“Far too many children today are sullen, unfriendly, distant, preoccupied, and even unpleasant,” Shaw argues. “They whine, nag, throw tantrums, and demand constant attention from their parents, who are spread too thin to spend enough time with them. Feeling guilty and anxious, the parents in turn sooth their kids with unhealthy snacks, faddish clothing, toys, and media.”

Something has gone desperately wrong with America’s kids. Evidence seems to flow daily from news reports and personal observation. Far too many kids are rude, belligerent, and hopelessly self-centered. Tendencies toward violence and abusive behavior have been filtering down from teenagers to younger children. A loss of shared morality and parental discipline has produced a generation of tiny dictators with endless demands.

In order to deal with this phenomenon, our society has sought to medicalize the problem. Millions of American children are diagnosed with newly-discovered “diseases” and “syndromes.” As Shaw notes, “A host of new ‘clinical diagnoses’ have been invented to explain why children seem totally spoiled, untrained, and unsocialized, and an incredibly large number of children have been diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and bombarded with psychoactive drugs.” In some school systems, nearly half of all boys in ages four through eight are reported to be on psychotropic drugs such as Ritalin. What kind of society would turn to chemicals in order to deal with what is at base a moral and cultural pathology?
... (More at link)

Like I said, I think permissive parenting is all over the place, apparently this expert predicted it ten years ago.

[Rose Garden]

I used to give to panhandlers, but now I cannot. Recently I realized that if people were taking care of their friends and family members, we would not have panhandlers at all. That made me feel better about not giving to them.

As for children and parenting, there is a great myth about parenting that pretty much damns us all right from the start, and that is that we have anything of value to teach our kids. Jesus set a little child in the midst of a crowd and told them of such was the kingdom of heaven. And yet, when we get these little ones, for some reason we think it's our job to teach them what they are supposed to be doing. We got it all backwards. We ought to be looking to our children to teach us. When you do that, you fulfill the scripture that says, and a little child shall lead them. You prepare yourself to be the type of person that could endure the earth during the millennium.