| | Um, what? Why? Is that a subjective value preference or is there going to be some evidence or an argument to back that up? Because I can just say "no, it's not".
--
The fact that without someone to properly raise you, including proper food, clothing, medicine, and *education* you probably would have wound up differently, and sub-optimal for your capacities. If you think this is subjective, tell that to every child that is neglected, abused, and so on. That in itself is not a plead to emotion, rather it's a plead to reason, in that if you suppose that child rearing is unimportant, then it follows that you think civilization is unimportant, because all civilization hinges upon the ability of adult humans to raise their progeny to the age that they too can raise their own, and it takes a fracking lot more than just squeezing one out after nine months and five minutes in the back of a Buick. It takes a hell of a lot more effort than you think.
I've helped my sister in the raising of her first child, and I can tell you it's work and a half. You have to be patient, caring, and able to discipline; not necessarily all at once, but necessarily within the daily routine. And then you got other things to consider, how you act around that child outside of being a parent, because rearing the child is two parts: maintenance and teaching by example. The former is fairly automatic, but it still takes reasoning to follow it through consistently, and the same for the latter. Both become interdependent skills, in that doing one requires the other. You can't be a good parent if you are not a good person. You can't raise a child to be healthy physically and mentally if you yourself are not either.
So, is that subjective? By what principle do you derive such a incredulous claim? I think you owe me and all the other people here who have children in their lives an damn good explanation, buck-o.
-- Brede
|
|
People who can do nothing else ought to rear people, while the rest work for their happiness and enlightenment.
