🚀 go-pugleaf

Re: RISING TIDE OF THE CHRISTIAN HOLOCAUST!

Trish Craig <Trish@speedy.ehs.uiuc.edu> wrote:

>umanyad0@cc.umanitoba.ca (Kenneth Chidi Anyadike) wrote:
>>In <31372f1b.2338322@News.IslandNet.com> mul@Islandnet.comTips (Andy Mulcahy) writes:
>>
>>> Single women are bringing up
>>>children who are sensitive and honest. The only problem they face is
>>>the enforced poverty that the  greedy ideologists would love to
>>>inflict upon them.  "God is in his counting house, counting up his
>>>change." is the hymn of choice for the self-righteous. 
>>
>>>Andy
>>
>> That is true, to a point. Single mothers can and have done excellent 
>>jobs of raising beautiful children, except for one thing; while they may 
>>not need a man to help support the child, the child needs a father figure 
>>while growing up. A boy needs someone to teach him what it means to be a man.

> In this day and age, I would like to know what the male 
>majority feels it is to "be a man".  If it is the same things 
>that have been taught for the last 40-50 yrs., then I think we 
>should all re-evaluate what "being a man" stands for.
> I never worried about my son after divorce.  There were 
>plenty of men in the family who could provide him with decent 
>examples of what men CAN be vs. what a lot of society calls 
>"manly".  A new spouse or boyfriend is not needed to help 
>raise boys, or girls for that matter. (IMHO)

>>Not being up on my child psychology, I am not sure how to put into words 
>>how a girl needs a father (figure), but I know that there is a very good 
>>reason. I hope someone can back me up on that.
>>
>> I do know that throwing religion in the face of these people is 
>>oversimplifying the problem.
>>
>> Ken
>>
>>-- 
>   I agree.  Girls need a "male figure" if for no other reason 
>than to teach them that this world will be shared with men, 
>and they should feel as comfortable as possible in relating to 
>them.  The rest is just a bunch of "hooey".
>-- 
>Trish Craig
>
  Ken and Trish and Andy,  may I jump in here.  It seems to me that
what is being discussed is already a distraction from what you seem to
be  aiming for;  that is,  having our children  grow up as balanced
human beings.

  Unfortunately, Life is neither bound, nor plays by mankind's rules.
Such rules are an accretion of the mind and have no existence
otherwise.  But for the belief invested in such rules,  life on this
planet would indeed be one of  balance and peace  (on the
psychological level). 

   We are already unbalanced when we speak in terms of Male and Female
roles.  Those roles have been instilled in us early in life  through
conditioning.  It is the beginning of divisiveness.  Males are to act
one way, while females another.  They are to complement one another,
but never the twain shall meet.  That only feeds the inextinguishable
blaze which eternally  burns between the sexes.   That's dualism,
plain and simple.    It is from these humble beginnings that the cause
of the problems humans must face in life pave the way for endless
suffering until understanding sets them free. 

  If any of you have a chance, check out the movie on video tape
"Tarzan, Lord of Greystoke."  As you watch it set aside all of your
prejudices and biases and just observe.  It is the story of a
masculine man who is a balanced spirit, having emerged that way as a
result of direct, uncultured, experience.    The civilized society
calls him a savage, but simple observance will reveal where the true
savagery exists. After watching the story, you decide where the future
of humanity is to be found.  Our present world, or DIVINE ANARCHY?

                                                         Ray


Raymond Karczewski  http://www.virtualplex.com/vplex/ark/