No Honor in Murder

The recent murder-suicide in Kansas City is one of several murder-suicides to be reported lately, punctuating a disturbing trend in our society. Apparently people are eschewing civility and reason, opting instead to solve their problems by committing the egregious act of murder followed by a cowardly act of suicide. 

The football player in Kansas City not only took a vibrant daughter from her parents, he slaughtered the mother of his 3 month-old child….in the presence of his own mother, no less!

Far be it from me to judge the impact of someone’s feelings or situation. Admittedly, I have never been so despondent over a situation in my life that I wanted to commit suicide. And though I have thought of what it must be like to commit such a selfish act, I could never fathom the depths of despair that would serve as a sufficient enough catalyst to make me even attempt to end my own life. So all I can do is empathize with the person whose only solution is to die. And regardless of the spiritual implications of such an act, if in fact the person has no responsibility or connection to another in this life, the act itself becomes an isolated event, reflecting the despair of a troubled soul. And for them I pray.

The act, however, takes on a vile, detestable hue when it is performed after the perpetrator decides to kill others before he or she extinguishes their own life. The lives destroyed and altered by such a despicable act are immeasurable. And, just as in the Kansas City case, sometimes there are children who ultimately become the residual victims, perpetually enduring the unspeakable act, which undoubtedly will haunt them for the rest of their lives.

Yet and still above all of this malevolence is the response from those left in the wake of the act. The maelstrom of feelings and emotions that friends and family of the perpetrator must feel juxtaposed with those of the victim(s) seems unfathomable. I can only imagine the conflict the murderer’s loved ones must feel when trying to find reason in the actions of someone they cherished. And, then, for the loved ones of the victim I cannot begin to imagine the contrast of their feelings with the disdain and hate they must feel for one coupled with the crushing sense of loss and grief for another.

But what happens when someone decides to honor the murderer, as in the case of the Kansas City football player. Purportedly one of his teammates decided to wear a tee-shirt in honor of the player, depicting him in heaven.  Perhaps this was a spontaneous response catalyzed by grief, as it happened the day after the tragedy; yet the fact that anyone would memorialize a murderer is mind-boggling. Further, though I concede that the NFL is a business, to proceed with a game the very next day, leaving the jersey of a murderer in his locker seemingly as a tribute, is so disrespectful and tasteless, I can’t help but believe that the family of the victim felt further victimized by this act, knowing their daughter lay slain silently in the shadow of her murderer.   

Life is worth more than a game. It is worth more than a pay check. To devalue life by making it secondary to the business of the day is unconscionable. The Kansas City Chiefs and the NFL are culpable for asinine greed. They were so consumed with preserving their brand they were willing to forgo decency so that a game could be played. Clearly this was an error of epic proportions. Had both entities been prudent and acted out of due diligence, it is likely they would have contemplated, evaluated and executed a more compassionate course. One in which the team would have seen the ridiculousness of leaving the jersey of a killer hanging in the locker room, knowing that even if it was not their intent, others could construe such an act as a memorial. And one in which, if reason prevailed, the League would have shown compassion and empathy for life, forgoing the game, supporting the grieving family, despite the fact that they exist outside of the ever powerful, insular fraternity known as the NFL.

We have an obligation to be better than this. Our intellect allows us to use discretion, choosing the right course of action in moments of unspeakable tragedy and/or devastation. Although we may not be able to stop senseless acts from occurring in our midst, we must be courageous enough to condemn the perpetrators and honor the victims when such horror is enacted. No one deserves to lose their life at the hands of another. Murder and suicide are cowardly acts, and when committed together, the level of maliciousness is so monstrous the perpetrator should lose the right to be recognized as human, for only an animal could commit such a heinous act.

_____________________________

My prayers are for the solace and comfort for the family of the young lady who tragically lost her life. May God bless them and the beautiful daughter left in the wake of this tragedy to find strength and comfort in each other in this time of grief, as well as grace and blessings in the words and spirit of God. 

S. McGill

One of the most powerful things in the world can be obtained and used liberally by anyone who chooses to use it.  "If" can be the beginning of something great or the acquiescence to defeat. How will you use your "if"?

The Color of Election

The election is over, and America’s attention is once again focused on the elected men and women to lead this country and maintain the greatness of its legacy. How do we do this though when we just endured some of the vilest divisiveness our nation has ever seen? Most of us are so punch drunk from all of the vitriolic propaganda that invaded our lives for the last 18 months, that some of us cast our vote to relieve the sheer political fatigue we felt as opposed to our political convictions.

Should elections be predicated on intrinsic elements such as fear and hate? Has American politics become such a despicable effort that only proficiency in mudslinging and name calling can sufficiently catalyze a candidate to the apex? 

This last election should prove to be the straw on the back of the proverbial camel for most, and most assuredly will prove to be a moment in an epoch that our children and their children will study ad nauseum. The issue is not the overt actions of the candidates, their parties and the organizations and media outlets that supported them, yet the caustic currents that ran beneath them, creating an undertow of misdirection and sleight of hands, using feeding frenzies of hate and anger as impetus to action.

It is disturbing to me that a country whose premise inherent by the very nature of its name “United States”, can shrug off the fact that the Country continues to perpetuate color as a deciding factor. It should be detestable for anyone to associate their feelings merely with a color of preference, condemning others for not sharing their ideals or convictions. Further, the fact that color can be used to illustrate borders not only reaffirms the divide but places a clear distinction on where the enemy resides. It has become an all or nothing affair – compromise is not an option! 

Indefensible!

Oddly enough in war one method to intimidate your opponent and their constituents is to use psychological tactics. One way this is done is by infiltrating the borders of your enemy and dropping propaganda by air, articulating points that are designed to break the spirit of said enemy and destroy their resolve to fight, because defeat was imminent. Sound familiar? Well, it should. This is a tactic that our politicians have resorted to. The Country has been divided in such a way, both figuratively and literally, that each party knows where the enemy resides (red states and blue states) and where their efforts should be focused to gain influence and secure defeat – though not by air -- television, internet, radio and other contemporary media is used to infiltrate the borders now. This technique would not be remarkable, however, if the information shared was salient rhetoric articulating what actions are best for the country. Yet, unfortunately, these efforts often espouse caustic attacks on the opponent, using hate and anger to defile another.

Viscerally, I know America should not work this way. Politicians should be people of integrity who respect their entrusted positions of power and influence, using their collective intellect to strengthen this great nation by crafting policies and legislation that ensure all American’s are afforded a fair share at attaining a comfortable life. Because in truth, a nation that argues over tenets that ostensibly focus on the haves and the have-nots is a nation divided.

I am not defined by a color, nor do I look across the fence and define my neighbor by a color. It amazes me that as a nation we have condemned hoodlums for fighting each other over colors, admonishing them for dismissing civility, failing to see and know the person first before they hate, attack, or kill. Yet, sadly, I see this as being analogous to contemporary politics in America. Honestly, I cringe when I hear the media define me by a color. For history has taught me that segregation by color is hurtful and wrong. I am not blue nor am I red, I am American – and I hope the next election affords me the opportunity to vote for someone who first and foremost is the same.

S. McGill

One of the most powerful things in the world can be obtained and used liberally by anyone who chooses to use it.  "If" can be the beginning of something great or the acquiescence to defeat. How will you use your "if"?

Is My Money Not Green?

What should your expectation be when accepting merchants’ bids to do business in your community?  Have you really taken account of whom and what is setting up shop in your neighborhood?  What value does the vendor bring? Is there a crowd that is inherent with the particular business? Do you care?

The funny thing about having no retail of immediate convenience in your neighborhood is, when you do get something, you tend to cheer the arrival of the offering. You exhale, appreciating that finally you do not have to travel an inordinate distance just to get common or desired products. Or, you smile knowing you can ease into an evening without having to travel too far to get a quality meal, one that exceeds the standard fair of burgers, fries, pizza, subs, and etcetera.

I live in a community that is experiencing such retail growth. The conundrum, however, is the quality of the retail the area is realizing.  Some may argue that retail is retail, and that there is no difference between the quality of one store’s products and another’s. Yet there seems to be anecdotal evidence to argue the contrary. In fact, if you look closely at the geographical boundaries in particular areas, you can see the metaphorical railroad tracks dissecting the haves and the have not’s. Retailers continually draw the line in the sand, purposefully creating outlets and subsidiaries that arguably suit the areas in which they have chosen to build or occupy.

Classism?  Racism? Maybe.

I live in a predominantly Black community in Maryland; one which is touted as one of the wealthiest in the nation. One glaring fact about my community, however, is there is a dearth of upscale retail. Though there is evidence that some effort is being made to improve the selection and quality of retail in the area, the efforts are sparse and seem to involve a few retailers willing to “take a chance”. 

Ostensibly, one could argue that market research is likely to have proven that families in my community lack the sustainable income to patronize upscale establishments; thus, proving fiscally imprudent for a retailer to set up business in such an area. Any sound, reasonable person would certainly understand the business decision not to engage in a given community that lacks the discretionary resources to acquire goods of above average value. In fact, however, the data shows that the county that I live in has a median household income of just fewer than ten thousand dollars less ($69,545) than a neighboring county ($79,843) that enjoys far greater access to upscale retail.

The dichotomy between the neighboring counties is not subtle. From restaurants to automobile dealerships, there are copious examples of divergent standards. Is there a correlation to what or who a business believes their image should be associated with and therefore who they should market to and where? If where I live was offered as a case study for this question, I think the answer would be a resounding yes.

For example, you can travel my community for many miles and not find one upscale restaurant. Though, in places, you can walk from fast food joint to fast food joint, sometimes only stepping over a parking barrier to get to the next artery buster. Yet when I visit neighboring counties, the diversity of retail offerings, including an eclectic array of food choices with fast food offerings existing as one genre of many, is astonishing.

Looking for a luxury car dealership? Good luck! Though there are a few (Lincoln, Cadillac and BMW) in my county, you might have to hire Lewis and Clark to try and help you navigate the area to find the likes of Acura, Infiniti, Land Rover, Mercedes, and Lexus. Yet the proliferation of luxury brands in my community is phenomenal, occupying every driveway, parking lot, and gas station as far as the eye can see.

It seems evident in a community where a house can easily exceed a half a million dollars in value that there is the existence of income to sustain upscale retail establishments. Undoubtedly, folks from my community travel great distances to procure products of higher quality and standards. Yet, despite their proclivity to purchase and enjoy these indulgences, retailers refuse to reciprocate the allegiance, thumbing their collective noses at a distinct consumer who has proven unequivocally that they have the wherewithal and desire to spend their money on some of life’s finer offerings.

SMH!


S. McGill

One of the most powerful things in the world can be obtained and used liberally by anyone who chooses to use it.  "If" can be the beginning of something great or the acquiescence to defeat. How will you use your "if"?

The Business of Business

The recent termination of a local football favorite has sparked anger from many fans. Chris Cooley, an eight year veteran with the Washington Redskins, was fired Tuesday, August 27th because he was no longer serviceable to the team.

Arguably, Cooley was one of the most likeable players on the team in a long time. And since he played during an era where the team was woefully bad, his production and demeanor endeared him even more to the fans. Undoubtedly the fans needed a bright spot to hold on to during a protracted period of disappointment, and with the cast of characters and failures coming and going on the team, the good guys who gave it their all every Sunday captured the hearts of the fans even more…Cooley personified this good.

Admittedly, I had a visceral response to the news of the release, feeling sad that one of the true class acts of the team was being ushered out. I did not, however, for one minute think his dismissal was a bad thing or wrong for that matter. My initial and only impression was and is that this was business.

There, I said it…the B word…business.  It is a dirty little word that evokes fear and disdain in the hearts of many. Not to mention what it does to those given the charge to execute it.  Inherent in business is the obligation and responsibility to do what is right for the corporation or organization. Moreover, it is understanding when to execute difficult actions and having the wherewithal (read: GUTS) to follow through.

Having run a nonprofit organization for 5 years and managed people for many more, I have seen my fair share of supervisors who shrank at the thought of removing a person for a justifiable cause.  Ostensibly, many of these folks vacillated in their attempts to do the right thing, often times failing to act because of personal feelings for the person who was being released.

That's just bad business.

The success of a business is predicated on its ability to grow and meet the needs of its consumers. When an employee, product or resource becomes dated or ineffective, business must move to address the failing component in order to ensure the business remains competitive and efficient in its work. Though these decisions may be difficult sometimes for myriad reasons, good businesses understand that these decisions are paramount to their success.

I understand and empathize with people who allow themselves to get enamored with a person and loathe the thought of having to fire or remove a person, especially one who once performed at a high level. However, change is inevitable. And in the ebb and flow of change, the right decision in critical moments can be the pivotal difference between failure and success. Good business necessitates that a good manager effectively handle these moments with poise and resolve, always keeping what’s best for the business first and foremost.

Business is business and must maintain its integrity despite the popularity of its decisions. We are all susceptible to loss and failure, and perhaps this vulnerability is the foundation for our dismay when unpopular business decisions are made involving people or things we have an affinity for. Business, however, often has very little room for emotions. The true measure of the effectiveness of a buiness decision is not how you feel when it was made but the outcome realized from its impetus. 


S. McGill

One of the most powerful things in the world can be obtained and used liberally by anyone who chooses to use it.  "If" can be the beginning of something great or the acquiescence to defeat. How will you use your "if"?

The Justice League...Or Is It!

Are real life superheroes (see linked story on CNN.com: http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/23/justice/washington-superhero-wannabe/index.html?iref=allsearch)  a sign of desperate times or indicative of a society that has capitulated to a “as-long-as-it-doesn’t- hurt-me” mentality, turning a blind eye to unconscionable or reprehensible behavior because we don’t want to be bothered?

Funny thing is I am not quite sure what the answer is to this question. Knowing that I am somewhat perspicacious in my dealings I gravitate to the notion that as a society the parameters defining acceptable, normal behavior has been stretched by the constant introduction of the absurd. I mean, does anyone else feel like nothing surprises them in the news anymore. It is not if it will happen anymore, but when.

The proliferation of media sources that constantly stream news and information to us is astounding. One is inundated with relevant news and information as well as being peppered with obscene, objectionable material day in and day out in the never ending struggle to stay informed. News media outlets and other more derisory venues comingle germane topics and information with the asinine and the ridiculous to embellish their broadcasts, exposing and introducing us to ideas, concepts and practices that challenge the limits of cultural tolerance. Moreover, society has endured such a sustained barrage of these inane, unethical and sometimes immoral practices that most have intrinsically agreed that apathy is the best strategy to neutralize them. 

Caring is just too costly!

Ironically, the truth has been so obfuscated by all of the confounded rhetoric tossed around by self righteous advocacy groups and self-proclaimed experts, that the truth is now inextricable from the lies, the acceptable from the deviant. We don’t know whether to cheer someone who is trying to do the right thing or persecute them for getting involved and possibly violating the rights of the perpetrator. SMH!

Personally, I think any adult who dresses in a costume and patrols the streets looking for crime to defend is displaying poor self-direction at best, and possibly exhibiting signs of something more sinister. But mocking a person for being concerned and impassioned about the contemporary state of society and the liberal free fall many of us perceive we are in as a people and a nation seems to be antithetical.

True self-proclaimed real superheroes may have adopted a laughable, exaggerated approach to remedying the palpable degradation of ethics and morals in our society; but can we really persecute and dismiss the larger message that something is terribly wrong and drastic measures are needed now. Perhaps we need to get beyond the cover, open the book, and read the real message.  

No, I don’t intend on donning a mask and cape and lurking in the shadows looking to eradicate the city of evildoers. In fact, I am more likely to lock the doors, hunker down and write a blog about all of the vile things that are plaguing mankind…hmmmm. But I can’t and won’t condemn or ridicule anyone who is compelled to make things better, regardless their method.

Truth be told the bad guys want you to stop caring. The corporate villain, the dubious politician, and the common street thug thrive on apathy. They want you to close your blinds and look the other way. Unfortunately, ignoring something does not relieve you of the inherent burden it carries. Society’s tolerance and direction is your problem. It is our problem. 

Perhaps the person who sets out in a mask and a body suit to fight perceived injustices is a fool; unequivocally, though, they possess one thing all of us could  use a little more of: indignation at the current state of our society.

IJS

S. McGill

One of the most powerful things in the world can be obtained and used liberally by anyone who chooses to use it.  "If" can be the beginning of something great or the acquiescence to defeat. How will you use your "if"?

A License to Kill?

Much has been said about the Trayvon Martin MURDER. As a father, Black male, and a citizen of These United States, I have struggled to make sense of what I have read, watched and heard concerning the senseless act perpetrated against Trayvon.

Like many of you I have tried to be objective. I have dissected the reports and articles looking for one discernable thread of reason for why Mr. Zimmerman pursued the young man, did so with his weapon, and instigated a confrontation – all of this while being advised by the police not to do so.

Here’s the problem: I can’t make sense of it at all…NONE!

If I am to give the initial response by the police credence – which by the way I don’t – I might find reasoning in their decision to label this incident as self-defense or the now infamous assertion of stand-your-ground. However, after hearing and seeing the evidence adduced thus far surrounding the case, I am incredulous at why the gunman is still free. Common sense should have prevailed once the evidence was evaluated, leading the police to delve further into what happened; where further investigation conceivably should have lead the police to arrest Mr. Zimmerman if for nothing else, manslaughter.

Am I to interpret that a license to carry a gun is also a license to hunt, KILL!? Because that is in fact what this self-proclaimed vigilante did, hunt this kid. He demonstrated a preconceived notion of ill intent on behalf of the young man by characterizing him as “…these expletive always get away…” as well as muttering another invective, purportedly calling Trayvon a coon – although it is not clear that this is the word he actually uttered. He showed blatant disregard himself for authority by ignoring the instructions of the police dispatcher not to follow. He further exacerbated the potential for a misunderstanding and confrontation by taking his weapon with him when making contact. Finally, one can purport that if in fact he believed the person to be a deadly threat, he clearly understood the advantage he held with respect to his weapon and the imminent arrival of the police. Therefore, if I am the reasonable person I believe myself to be, I come to the conclusion that Mr. Zimmerman became the aggressor once he decided to pursue Mr. Martin, thus inciting a fight or flight response from Trayvon to defend himself. And if I give this reasoning credence – which by the way I do – then the assailant would be Mr. Zimmerman, thus making Trayvon’s actions self defense, not Mr. Zimmerman’s.

So as I see it Mr. Zimmerman was the antagonist and instigator in this tragedy, not the victim. All indications are that he willfully and knowingly pressed the situation with Mr. Martin with the intent to confront. His actions from beginning to end were unconscionable and provocative, eschewing common sense and pragmatism, acting far beyond any rights or authority he had as a simple resident of that neighborhood. His bravado was clear on the 911 call, in his complete and utter dismissal of authority, and in his callous, asinine, murderous decision to pull the trigger.

My heart breaks for Trayvon’s family. I cannot fathom losing a child. What’s more, I cannot fathom losing my child to what is tantamount to a modern day lynching. The alleged rogue justice meted out by Mr. Zimmerman cannot be condoned or tolerated in any society, let alone ours. If we allow Zimmerman’s actions to stand as an acceptable precedent, I fear the consequences such unfettered stupidity would unleash.

Sadly, there is no justice for Trayvon. I understand that even if Mr. Zimmerman is found guilty of something in this tragedy it would never satisfy the emptiness, grief and anguish his family most assuredly feels. The anger is inextricable here. I fear that just as in the Rodney King case, the OJ Simpson case and the Casey Anthony case many of us are going to be left in a perpetual state of wondering why? How? Crimes such as these and their outcomes erode the foundation of our faith regarding the justice system, causing many to pause and wonder who the law is actually there to protect.

Admittedly, this is one of the toughest things I have ever written about. I have edited my script so often, removing the anger and frustration, choosing instead to grapple with reason. I continue, as I am sure many of you do, to watch and follow this case as things unfold. The anger is unabated at times, repressing common sense, ushering in feelings of disdain for a system that is so obfuscated at times that it can defy common sense and reasoning. Though I believe and support the voices of the many denouncing the injustice done to Trayvon, I cringe at the abhorrent response of others who through ignorance and disillusionment insight and provoke violence as an intelligent response or remedy to this tragedy -- I will, however, save that topic for my next blog. For now, I am left with a profound sense of sadness and anger for a life lost, a family devastated and a country where there is evidently justice for the chosen, to include the egregiously guilty, as is the case with Mr. Zimmerman.

S. McGill

One of the most powerful things in the world can be obtained and used liberally by anyone who chooses to use it.  "If" can be the beginning of something great or the acquiescence to defeat. How will you use your "if"?

Take Me to Your Leader!

Leader is a designation that unlike some other titles it is quite explicit in what the owner is to do. Though their nuances may differ from position to position, department to department, organization to organization, the inherent duties of a leader are essentially understood. So why is it that many who accept the title have such a hard time understanding and executing that which is expected…required…of them!?

This is not a rhetorical question.

Too often I hear about a boss or manager who is either inept or purposefully negligent in their duties. These management deviants often allow the pedestrian to hone their skills of mediocrity while they proceed to tax the productive with burdensome deadlines and unyielding requests for more. Further, when pressed to make a decision of consequence with respect to poor or underperforming employees, they cower and find ample excuses to shun their incumbent responsibilities.

But the failures of the poor leader don’t end there. No. What you find with many of these leaders is the tendency to micromanage situations in a feeble attempt to display control. Their proclivity to focus on the efforts of the productive employees, examining and commenting on the minutia and not trusting their skills and competency is mystifying. Juxtapose that with their inability to see the vulpine, incompetent actions of the mediocre and the ensuing conundrum can make one speak in tongues perforated with gratuitous expletives, leaving them dangling at the threshold of insanity.

These purveyors of underperforming teams are masters of the deflection. They are often mired in perpetual assessment of their team, erroneously identifying inconsequential issues as the problem, while trying to squeeze between the 800lb gorilla and the door as they try and make their exit. From realignments to reclassifications to reassignments, they constantly shuffle the deck unwilling to address the real issues at hand.

We all know the song and dance by now about how difficult it is to get rid of a slouch. And yes, we know that the paperwork is tremendous, placing the burden of proof on the complainant while protecting the perpetrator. So! You chose the job and, thus, the obligatory duties assigned therein. Wait, let me say that a different way…it’s your problem…fix it.

If I come to work everyday and do my job, sitting next to a peer who circumvents every rule, defiles the integrity of every deadline, and struggles daily with the unfaltering truth that their day is governed by the same clock as mine, my morale is surely going to suffer. If there is no parity in our effort or productivity, then there should be no parity in pay or privileges.

You see, my contention is that there are two major types of inept leaders. The first is the self-preservationist. This is the leader who has indiscretions they don’t want exposed. We all know the ones who come in late and leave early, or the ones playing footsies with someone in the office, being just about as discrete as a tutu at a cocktail party.  Consequently, this leader feigns to be ignorant of the actions of the slackers, playing the deadly game of you don’t tell I won’t tell, effectively becoming a hostage to the slouch.

The second type of inept leader is the sprinter. This is the supervisor that lacks the ability to deal with confrontation. Come on, you know the one. This is the leader who always has a reason why the guilty should receive a reprieve. They adjudicate a situation just about as well as our politicians balance the budget. I call them the sprinter because they always seem to go the other way when there is a problem. You can never find them when decisive action is required. And, perchance you do find them, they defer to HR or some other authority, sighting their lack of knowledge or experience regarding the appropriate procedures or protocols that govern such a situation. Really!

Enough! If you have accepted the title of leader and the inherent duties therein, do them. Presumably you are part of the upper echelon in the organization and possess the skills and competencies needed to lead. What you may not understand is that there are certain intangibles that a leader must possess in order to be effective, in order to be good, in order to be respected. One of these intangibles is courage. That is, you must have the courage to follow the same rules you enforce, you must have the courage to never tolerate blatant insubordination from anyone, you must have the courage to admit a mistake, and you must never lose the intent or fortitude to execute the duties of your job with courage. Those of us who follow expect it, demand it, and deserve it.

There...I said it!

S. McGill

One of the most powerful things in this word can be obtained and used liberally by anyone who chooses to use it. “If” can be the beginning of something great or the acquiescence to defeat. How will your “if” today?

Protect Our Future

The current assault on our children is unprecedented. With grandmothers throwing their kids off of parking garage footpaths to mothers killing their children, stuffing them in a car trunk and going off to party, the goings on in America are unconscionable.

 When innocence is targeted in an effort to exact revenge or to remove an obstacle to allow for freedom of indiscretion, societal indignation is not only expected it is obligatory.   

As a people, community, country we cannot afford to be despondent with or dismissive of the proliferating reports we see in the news with respect to the safety and well being of our kids. Hanging our heads and sighing from the grievous report of a young person dying over a pair of shoes or something as seemingly innocuous as watching a mother defend, characterizing her daughter as being an "individual" and "artistic" for wanting to wear a salacious, provocative outfit for her yearbook picture is ridiculous.

Why have the words stupid, unethical, and immoral fallen from our lexicon?

Is everything worth justifying so that other’s indiscretions go unnoticed or un-judged? I mean, do we really want to turn everything in to a right of personal choice, allowing for an all out assault on common decency, robbing our children of a chance to mature enough to comprehend the plethora of depravities they are being bombarded with daily? What happen to maternal and paternal instinct to protect the children? Are we so rapacious and self-absorbed that we no longer have time to give our kids a fighting chance by fortifying them morally and ethically, enriching their lives with positive, steadfast examples of positive living.

Parents no longer care enough to monitor their kids to see what they are watching on TV or what they are perusing on the internet. Kids as early as elementary school are reciting words and acting out scenes filled with sexual connotations, violent overtones and misogynistic lyrics they have heard on the radio, seen on TV or ripped straight from the internet. Moreover, these kids are left to interpret these despicable visual and audio barrages on their juvenile minds and perceptions, leading them to believe that “right” is some abstract concept based on individual perception and that acceptable social norms and self discretion is something void of their responsibility or accountability.

Regardless of who you are or where you live you have the responsibility to ensure that your child is given guidance and love. Allowing a child to be liberally exposed to society’s iniquities is wrong. Guidance starts at home. Turn off the smut and indulge your kids in meaningful activities. Show them that you care by asking them what they are doing on the computer, who they are talking to at school, and what they are talking about with friends and acquaintances. And should your child see something, hear something or read something that has moral and ethical implications in society, discuss it with them. Tell them it is stupid, criminal, unethical or immoral if that is what it is. Let them know right and wrong do exist. Instill in them that wrong is not an arbitrary, arcane concept conceived by some phantom establishment, but a standard of living that shows deference to your fellow man and upholds the expectation and obligation of decency and civility as equal denizens of this world.

Cherish your kids and make them your priority. Correct them when they are wrong and praise them for their accomplishments, big or small. The world is changing rapidly, putting increasing pressure on our kids to mature quickly if they are to survive and thrive as respected and productive members of the world to come. Although it may be difficult to forgo your adult indulgences, as you have earned them through hard work and sacrifice, remember to look into the eyes of your future…our future…and nurture in them the love, compassion, curiosity, and all of the other positive virtues that make us better people.

Undoubtedly our children will grow and be given the chance to experience every facet of life both good and bad as we have. Yet it is the indelible tools we give them when they are young that form the foundation for when they embark on their solo journey. Feed them well, clothe them well and enrich their minds so that they are spiritually sound, individually confident, and morally strong.  

Let’s make the children our priority, not our burden.

One of the most powerful things in this word can be obtained and used liberally by anyone who chooses to use it. “If” can be the beginning of something great or the acquiescence to defeat. How will your “if” today?

S. McGill