1). The parent who
believes that love and success means giving to their children everything they need and want
2) The parent who believes that teaching children to discipline their wants and evaluate their needs is love and leads to success.
HOW YOU VIEW LOVE IN PARENTING COULD BE A STRONG INDICATOR OF YOUR POLITICAL IDEOLOGY...and all based on each individual's definition of LOVE.
The LEFT clings to an indulgent, patronizing love that mothers and smothers, like the helicopter parents that hover over every hurdle or challenge that their offspring faces, ready to remove any obstacle that might challenge the resourcefulness, determination, fortitude or character of the individual. What could have been a lesson of growth and stretching of character, an opportunity to build muscles for future encounters similar in nature, has been lost to an overprotective and indulgent overseer, and all of it done in the name of LOVE. What happens to an individual that never has to carry their own weight and bucks the muscles of hard word and personal responsibility? Those muscles atrophy and the individual becomes INVALID and IN-capable of holding themselves up. And the ever selfless, doting parent becomes the blessed saint that pushes the invalid around in a wheelchair for the rest of their life, all the while believing that LOVE put them there, keeps them there and receives the accolades for keeping up the good work, ENABLING the victim of "love" to be immobilized and disabled. This is the LIBERAL, socialistic view of political love, but a love defined from an ideology that is ingrained in their psyche.
Why would a parent embrace this kind of parenting? The answer to that question is the answer to the ideology of THE LEFT.
THE RIGHT, on the other hand, sees the benefit of what has come to be known as "tough" love. It is the kind of love that EMPOWERS the realities of our own abilities and options as to how we face life.
“The real destroyer of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits.”
No comments:
Post a Comment