Boys Town 2007 Part 2

Hear, my children, the instruction of a father,
And give attention to know understanding;
For I give you good doctrine: Do not forsake my law.
Proverbs 4:1-2

Now that we have gotten over the shock phase, let’s look at how we would create these schools. Let me say for the record that it is my firm belief that children of all races and economic status do better with both parents in the home, most studies will attest to this fact. So I am not advocating the complete isolation of the young men from all female contact, this would be just the other side of the same coin we have now. We would replace young men who have the emotional state of women with young men that would not be able to display compassion or tenderness.

Let’s begin with how we would house the young men. I think the school housing should be done as a two parent home. The homes would have house parents that would supervise the homes and the young men when they are not in school, physical training, and or other curricular activities. Preferably the couple would be a married couple, but that would not be a necessity. A married couple would help to teach the young men in a real world scenario how a man treats a woman he loves and it is a statistical fact that children from two parent homes do better than those from single parent homes.

An increase in the numbers and proportion of children born outside of marriage and a rise in divorce rates have contributed to a three-fold increase in the proportion of children growing up in single-parent families since 1960. These changes have generated considerable public concern and controversy, particularly about the effects of these changes on the wellbeing of children. Over the past 20 years, a body of research has developed on how changes in patterns of family structure affect children.

Most researchers now agree that together these studies support the notion that, on average, children do best when raised by their two married, biological1 parents who have low-conflict relationships.[1]

I don’t think we can stress enough the importance of marriage for these young men, due to a number of economic, cultural, and selfish reasons marriage is not highly valued in our community. We should begin the process to change this phenomenon, because the statics concerning the chances of children growing up in poverty in single parent families is well documented. However, studies show that it is not just purely economics; there is something inherent in marriage that transcends to the family. It is what I call one of the mysteries of God, God has sanctified marriage and He continues to support marriage.

Also, if income was the major factor behind the negative association between single parenthood and child outcomes, one would expect children of single-parent families who are not poor to have better outcomes than children of poor single-parent families. However, a recent study in Sweden—where the safety net is stronger than in the U.S. and where the poverty rate among single mothers is very low— found problems for children of Swedish single-parent families similar to those found for children of American single-parent families.[2]

Two opposite sex staff members could fulfill the same purpose only to a lesser degree. They could demonstrate to the young men inter-gender relationship skills that a lot of our youth do not presently have. They would learn the value of respect for women and see them as more than faceless bodies gyrating on the television. Under no circumstances should it be an unmarried couple or staff members who are romantically involved, this would only reinforce behavior we hope to modify.

Within the homes, the young men should be given instruction in cleanliness, trustworthiness, and thriftiness. They should be taught in life skills and be required to take an active role in the chores of the house. They should be required not only to have scholastic studies, but also spiritual and historical studies of their ancestors. At all cost we must provide a stable and secure home for these young men, they should learn conflict resolution at an early age.

---

[1] http://www.clasp.org/publications/Marriage_Brief3.pdf

[2] Ibid

Boys Town 2007

My son, despise not the chastening of the LORD;

neither be weary of his correction:

For whom the LORD loveth he correcteth;

even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.

Proverbs 3:11-12

As more and more of our young men fall prey to violence and our young women continue to have children outside the covenant of God, we must begin to look at some radical ideas to change the direction we are headed. What I am about to propose will be seen by many as controversial and maybe inhumane, but I believe it will help to bring our people back to their rightful place as strong men and women of God.

As the rates of Black on Black homicides increase annually and murder has become the leading cause of death for our young Black men, these rates appear to correspond to the rise in single mother households. This is not an indictment against single mothers, it is an indictment against the men who are willing to create life, but do nothing to sustain that life once it is born. Despite everyone’s calm demeanor and political correctness we are in a crisis that demands our immediate attention and our action.

What I propose is that we create residences for our Black male children born to single mothers staffed by Black male educators and social scientist. These would be homes that they would reside in once they reached an age where they could be separated from their mothers. They would remain there for possibly 10 months out of the year being educated, prepared, and trained in what it takes to be a successful Black man. They would be given a regular scholastic curriculum bolstered with history of our people and continent. They would be separated from their mothers and from girls of the same age. I guarantee if we had the courage and the will to do this, in one generation we could turn the fortunes of our people around; in two we would be the most successful minorities in this country.

This all seems so drastic; why do we need to resort to these measures?

In regard to the subtitle of the book, single motherhood is what hurts insofar as it often deprives children of important economic, parental, and community resources. Most single-mother families have low incomes or, following a divorce or separation, experience sudden drops in income. According to McLanahan and Sandefur, low incomes and sudden drops in income are the most important reasons that children in single-mother families fare worse than other children. Indeed, these two account for about half of the disadvantage in high school graduation, and somewhat less of the disadvantage in other outcomes.

Another factor behind the disadvantages faced by children in single-mother families is inadequate attention and guidance from the mother. Children need more than just economic security to thrive; they require parents who have the time to help them with their homework, read to them, and listen to how their day went in school. They also need parents who can supervise their activities outside of school. One parent alone does not have the time to do these things, whereas two parents working together often do.

Finally, children who live in single-parent families lack the community resources that other children frequently have. They are more likely to live in disadvantaged neighborhoods and to associate with peers who have negative attitudes toward school. They are also more likely to change residences, which disrupts their lives even further, since it usually means going to a new school and losing contact with old friends.[1]

The issues outlined in the above quote are all issues that have led to our no longer being competitive in education, invention, and science. It isn’t that single mothers are not trying to be good parents; it is just that they have the deck stacked against them going in. Most have to work for minimum or low wages; they have to work long hours and shifts that are not conducive to raising children. It is not that single mothers do not love their sons, but we are loving them to death right now. Maybe it is time to discuss alternatives to what we have been doing in the past and what we want to accomplish in the future. Do we want to continue down the path we are on condemning our children to a future of poverty and the cycle of lawlessness? Aren’t our children worth more than that?

I have deliberately not included statics supporting or refuting the benefits of same sex schooling, I have learned that no matter what numbers I pull out, opponents can pull out an equal number disputing my numbers. But this isn’t about numbers; this is about the things our young men need that don’t appear on any sheet of paper or scholastic test. Our young men more than anything need to learn how to be men and they will not learn it from our women. No other culture expects their young men to be trained by women in how to be men. We are the only ones in the world who are doing this.

The time has come to put emotionalism and sentimentality away and think about for a change what is best for our children. It is a selfish thing to have kids you know you can’t support, to sentence them to a lifetime of struggle just to survive. God have mercy on us…

---

[1] http://www.irp.wisc.edu/publications/focus/textver/16.2.a/impact.txt

Single Mothers Raising Men?

Today’s post will generate a lot of controversy but it is discussion that I think is way overdue. The question is can a woman raise a male child to become a “successful” man alone? Now of course the knee jerk reaction will be a resounding yes and there will be story after story of how it was and is being done. I applaud any and all single mothers that are raising young men alone. I pray for you daily. The question remains, is it possible for a woman, a single woman to raise a man on a consistent basis? The reason for this question stated this way is because of the numbers of young black men being raised by single mothers. Has this been positive for Black people or negative?

Due to the diverse myriad of information and scenarios, I am not going to try to answer this question in one post. I plan to continue this series periodically so that we are able to examine as much data and empirical evidence as we can. I am going to be proposing some controversial steps and ideas and I want to provide them with a full hearing. I ask that you be open minded and at least consider the proposals before dismissing them out of hand.

The rule of thumb has always been that a boy needs a man in the house to imitate and emulate the masculine skills needed to successfully navigate manhood in a hostile environment. With the landscape of the “family” changing daily, the question is this still a valid assumption or was it ever valid? We must begin by developing some common ground that we can proceed from or our debate will be grounded before ever taking flight.

Are men and women different and does being a man or woman require different skills to be successful? This is always a fly in the ointment for many, because we often times equate different with unequal. Men and women are equal in the eyes of their Creator and should be so in the world, with that being said men and women are different. Men and women were created to fill different roles and despite our societies insistence to the contrary the fact remains. Most women can bear children and have a more maternal or protective instinct of the family than men. Because we are a continuation of nature we can look to nature to get some ideas of the difference in roles between the species. Regardless of our desire to rid ourselves of our connections to our untamed neighbors we share a lot of similar behaviors with them. It’s funny in nature how it is often the mother that does most of the raising of the off-spring and giving them guidance in hunting, surviving, and development into adulthood.

As independent parents raising children without the presence of a father, mothers have long been treated with dubiousness, fear, and even contempt. Traditional theories contended that mothers who reared sons without the presence of an active father -- or who were married but “overbearing” or raising “mama’s boys” -- instilled lifelong psychic disability, schizophrenia, or, worst, homosexuality in their sons. More recently, society’s guardians have declared that mothers -- especially single mothers, whether unmarried and poor, divorced and employed, straight or lesbian, or as white and prosperous as Calista Flockhart and Jodie Foster -- are sending violent, drug-using hellions out in into the world, boys who present no positive maleness, all due to the combination of Mom’s presence and Dad’s absence. Since Freud, mothers have been inculcated with the idea that we need to cut our sons’ cords to make them men ready to take on masculine roles in the world, from working toward worldly success to making war.

We have been further told by Freudians, social psychologists, and the popular culture that our sons need their dads in order to become upstanding male citizens. If not for Beaver Cleaver’s mom and dad, June and Ward, where would Beaver and his brother, Wally, have been? Without Ward, wouldn’t the boys have missed the supposedly crucial opportunity to separate from June by identifying with a very present father?

According to Freud and others who followed him, June alone could not have achieved everything required to bring up “the Beav” successfully. During the first 3 to 4 years of Beaver’s life, he would have needed Ward to imitate, long for, and react to, in order to gain the prize of being like his father. This theory -- that boys acquire masculinity only with an in-house male in the mother’s bedroom -- has prevailed to the detriment of both mothers and their sons. It presumes that the earliest relationship between infant and mother is simply a caretaking one. The assumption is that the mother is only a need provider for her son, while he in turn becomes physically and emotionally dependent on her. Eventually, assuming there is a present father in the home, the mother must withdraw herself from the child if her son is to become independent of her and escape the dire fate of being a mama’s boy.[1]

Are these concepts accurate and have they served our community well in the past? Are there any lessons to be learned from the past? I believe we must begin to look at ourselves and ask some tough questions about what we truly believe and what we truly want. We cannot continue to live the way we do and allow the things we do and expect things to improve. On the contrary things are getting worse.

---

[1] http://www.peggydrexler.com/excerpt.htm

Are You Worth Waiting For?

To the pure all things are pure, but to those who are defiled and

unbelieving nothing is pure; but even their mind and conscience are defiled.

Titus 1:15

As I was on my way to work this week, I saw a young lady wearing a tee shirt that stated, “I am worth waiting for”. I have to admit when I first read it I was shocked; it’s not every day that you find our young women wearing the message of abstinence. Unfortunately for many of our young women the uniform of the day is a little more tawdry. As the day went on and I thought about the young ladies shirt, I was reminded of the many comments from folks that abstinence is unworkable, and impractical. Those kids are going to have sex and there’s nothing anyone can do about it.

I began to think about that logic and those who are promoting it. The majority of people promoting this logic are people who themselves were unwilling or unable to remain celibate. I thought back into my training; there is a saying to find out who is behind something, follow the money. In this case, who would have something to gain from promoting this position, would it be God or Satan? If it were God then this would be in direct contradiction to His Word, which he said he would never do.[1] If Satan, then why are we promoting his agenda and doing his bidding? Am I foolish enough to think that kids or adults for that matter won’t fornicate? No, but I am not so jaded and cynical to give up on standing for something, God.

I believe that our women and our girls are worth waiting for. I believe that our children are our most precious resource and they should be protected, sometimes from themselves. Too often in our community our children are not being protected, they are being abandoned and forced to raise themselves. In many cases it is not even intentional neglect, but the byproduct of single parenthood. I believe the majority of single mothers want the best for their children, but because they are so over worked and stressed they can’t provide the attention and the care the children require. Our community is full of strong and beautiful women, who have been raising our children alone for years. I think though that it is time for our women to look at the bigger picture of what single parenthood does.

William Raspberry of the Washington Post writes

For the 2000 Census, the percentage of black families headed by married couples was 38. The only good news is that it was also 38 percent in 1990, suggesting that the trend may have stopped getting worse.

Now consider this: Fatherless families are America's single largest source of poverty. The Annie E. Casey Foundation's "Kids Count" once reported that Americans who failed to complete high school, to get married and to reach age 20 before having their first child were nearly 10 times as likely to live in poverty as those who did these three things.

But while marriage may not be a cure for poverty, it does turn out to be a fairly reliable preventative . Isn't it worthwhile to spend more time and resources helping young people to understand the economic implications of single parenthood before they become single parents? Wouldn't it make sense to rethink our relatively recent easy acceptance of out-of-wedlock parenting?[2]

The conclusion is that if our young women choose to become pregnant without the benefit of marriage they are not only condemning themselves, but also their children to a greater chance of a lifetime of poverty. I don’t think that if presented with the evidence most mothers would knowingly place their children in the vicious cycle of poverty, but many of them do it. This has given rise to generations of families that cannot escape the cycle of poverty. We will not be able to break the cycle of poverty that plagues our community without addressing the epidemic of fornication. Any remedies that do not take this into account will be like placing a band-aid on a shooting victim, it helps but it ain’t going to stop the bleeding.

This bleak prospect for single mothers prompted US public affairs columnist Jonathan Rauch to suggest that "marriage is displacing both income and race as the great class divide in the new century". Indeed, research shows that the growth of single parent families accounts for virtually all the increase in US child poverty rates between the 1970s and early 1990s. Children growing up in single parent families are four times as likely to be poor than are those from two-parent families.

Today, almost two thirds of all poor children are in single-parent homes. Growing up in single-parent families also has negative effects on the social and economic outcomes of children. In addition to their high incidence of poverty and low income, studies show that children from single-mother families are much more likely to experience psychiatric disorders, ranging from hyperactivity, conduct or emotional disorders, and schooling problems than those living both parents. While children growing up in single-parent families are not doomed, the odds are certainly stacked against them.[3]

We as concerned parents and neighbors have to come up with a way to educate our children on the negative effects of fornication. The biggest hurdle is the fact that in our community it is not just our children that are practicing fornication, but our adults as well. It is very difficult to press the argument of abstinence when the adult is laying up with people they are not married to. I think what fuels a lot of the anti-abstinence argument is the fact that we don’t want to teach our kids about abstinence if it requires us to evaluate our own lifestyles. We should be more that just hearers of the Word, we should also become doers of the Word.[4]

---

[1] Matthew 24:35

[2] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/31/AR2005073101075_2.html

[3] http://www.nzbr.org.nz/documents/perspectives/perspectives-2004/Issue47.pdf

[4] James 1:22

Pro-Life or Pro-Choice?

I recently was a part of an online discussion about abortion. I felt limited in how I could respond because it was not my blog and I didn’t feel it my place to fill up someone else’s space. However, after posting my comments I felt as though I had not expressed all or how I wanted to in that space at that time. So, I thought I would use this forum to complete my feelings concerning this very divisive issue.

First of all I want to state my opposition to abortion. I believe that it goes against the teachings of God and is a sin. Where it stacks up among other sins I do not know, but I base my feelings on the following passage from scripture:

Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; Before
you were born I sanctified you;
Jeremiah 1:5

With that said, I believe that everyone has choices in this world and it is not for me to make those choices for others. I believe that when we stand before the judgment seat of Christ there will be no witnesses called. God will not ask me what I thought about your decisions; it will be each one of us alone before God. We all must search our own hearts in making decisions and there are few if any decisions that are as overwhelming for many women as the decision to have an abortion. It is a decision that has plagued many women for the rest of their lives. Even those who have gone on to have successful full term pregnancies afterwards are haunted by that faithful decision. I am not here to cast stones at anyone, for I am no one to judge another. My only hope and desire is that those in this position will find the support, love, and the wisdom to make the right decision.

I have lost two babies to abortions in my life that I know about. In each case it was a heart wrenching experience for my partners at the time and myself. In each situation I protested vehemently against having the abortion, but again each of us is responsible for our own decisions. The issue that I don’t think most women understand is how the abortion affects a lot of men. Of course for the most part unfortunately it is the man promoting the abortion for various selfish reasons, but there are many of us who deeply feel the lost of our unborn. Of course in both cases there were plenty of reasons for having the procedures; we’re too young, we aren’t established, we’re not ready, my career, and etc. It is in my nature to see both sides of an argument and it makes a lot of my decisions real torment; I go back and forth. Being the man of course limited my being able to offer anything more than an opinion, which was torture in itself. I would be reduced to a mere spectator in the decision on whether to keep my unborn child. Women, if you don’t know that was one of the most powerful feelings of powerlessness I have ever had. It was so difficult to be supportive and yet have feelings of anger, frustration, and fear.

Because of my beliefs, it was more than just the life of my unborn child that troubled my spirit. It was also the soul of my partner that caused me great alarm; I worried for their eternal life. It is amazing to me how we waxed so poetically about our love for one another, yet many of us care absolutely nothing about the eternal destination of our partners. If I truly love someone shouldn’t I want to protect their eternal life as much as I want to protect their physical life? If I could avoid placing them in positions that could jeopardize their souls by controlling my selfish desires, shouldn’t I want to do it? Do I love that person more than I love myself? I think so many of us err in our choices for partners because we don’t do the homework, we don’t ask the right the questions. Some don’t ask the right questions because they don’t want to hear the answer they are going to receive.

The women in each of these cases were “good” women. They were loving, kind, and considerate. They both in my opinion would have made excellent mothers. I don’t think that either took their responsibilities lightly or the dreadful decision that they would have to make. In each case the process of deciding was torment for both of us. It took us to the brink of terminating our relationship and back again. In each case the relationship was never repaired to its previous state. In both cases I lost not only the unborn, but my partners as well. In each case the lost was devastating.

The point I want to stress is that today I realize if we had remained in the state that God had intended for us, these decisions would not have been necessary to make. The attending loss of trust and intimacy would have not been necessary. There are those who will say, “Or you could have used a condom, but that is really not the answer. This is not the answer for me because it is merely treating the symptom and not the underlying cause. I know today that God’s plan is the best plan for my life; He gives me instructions not to punish me but to protect me. I can never articulate the pain and anguish that my partners and I suffered during these times, nor do I believe that any single mothers can articulate the struggle of her life trying to raise children alone. I know that raising children with two parents is a herculean endeavor. I see the hardship daily in the lives of all the single mothers I encounter. I have never met a woman yet who did not continue to be haunted by their decision years later to have an abortion. If we want to avoid the results, we must avoid the cause. We must remain pure at all costs.

To those who have had to struggle and make that dreadful decision my heart goes out to you, because I too am bruised and hurt. I want you to know that there is no condemnation at the cross, there is forgiveness and reconciliation. Come to the “Healer” and be healed, there is no sin so bad that it will not be forgiven. I first must ask for that forgiveness.

Fornication and Role Models

But he who did not know, yet committed things deserving of stripes, shall be beaten with few. For everyone to whom much is given, from him much will be required; and to whom much has been committed, of him they will ask the more.

Luke 12:48

The following is a list of athletes and the number of illegitimate children they have fathered. I tried to locate a list of actors and politicians, but it appears athletes are the only ones anyone cares enough about to create a list for.

ATHLETES WITH ILLEGITIMATE KIDS

THE HEAVYWEIGHTS
Shawn Kemp - 7 illegitimate kids by 6 women. Gives his nickname of the Reign Man new meaning.
Evander Holyfield - 9 illegitimate kids. "Heck I'm not even mad, I'm impressed!"
Ex-San Antonio Spur Willie Anderson - 9 illegitimate kids. If only his field goal percentage had been as high as his impregnation rate.
Derrick Thomas - 7 illegitimate kids by 5 women. He died at 33. Let's just leave it at that.
Ray Charles - Not an athlete, but still had 9 illegitimate kids and 12 total, which is quite impressive. Being blind must have made it tough to get that condom on.
UPDATE: Don't know how we missed this - thanks to a reader for pointing this out to us - Calvin Murphy reportedly had 14 illegitimate kids by 9 women. Wow.

THE MIDDLEWEIGHTS
Larry Johnson - 5 kids by 4 women. 3 are illegitimate.
Santonio Holmes - 3 illegitimate kids by two women, before leaving college.
Former Celtic Greg Minor - 3 illegitimate kids.
Ricky Williams - 3 illegitimate kids. Maybe that's why he smokes so much weed.
Priest Holmes - 3 illegitimate kids. You best keep running Priest.

THE LIGHTNING FAST GROUP
Willis McGahee - 3 illegitimate kids in 2 years in Buffalo. Not a lot to do in Buffalo, except make babies. Lots and lots of babies.

THE GUYS YOU WOULDN'T EXPECT GROUP
Walter Herrmann
Peja Stojakovic
Wizards Coach Eddie Jordan
NHL player Daniel Alfredsson
NHL player Richard Zednik
Mike Miller

THE FAMOUS OLD GUYS GROUP
Steve Garvey - 2 illegitimate kids by 2 women.
Dr. J - 2 illegitimate kids by 2 women.
Larry Bird
Isiah Thomas
Jim Palmer
Pete Rose

THE GETTING A HEAD START GROUP
Gary Sheffield - Had 2 illegitimate kids by age 17. Added a few more later on in life.

THE THAT'S JUST WRONG GROUP
Elijah Dukes - recently impregnated a 17-year-old foster child.

THE QB KIDS GROUP
Matt Leinart - already has one, my guess is he's working hard on another.
Tom Brady - his is on the way.

GUYS WITH AT LEAST ONE ILLEGITIMATE KID
Antawn Jamison
Chipper Jones
DeShawn Stevenson
Cliff Floyd
Mark Messier
Brian Urlacher
Rae Carruth - Yes, he fathered an illegitimate kid before the incident where he had his pregnant girlfriend gunned down.
Oscar De La Hoya
Juan Gonzalez
Andre Rison
David Justice
Alonzo Spellman
Dave Meggett
Gary Payton - If the glove doesn't fit...
Stephon Marbury
Jason Kidd
Allen Iverson
Latrell Sprewell
Juwan Howard
Kenny Anderson
Scottie Pippen
Hakeem Olajuwon
Patrick Ewing
Randy Johnson - by reader request. We missed him.

This is just wrong. It is behavior like this that some say further reinforces the idea that “stars” are above the rules. If that were only true, the truth of the matter is that this is just a reflection of our society as a whole. These men are not in some isolated environment, but are merely acting out the same mores of the society. We as a community and as a nation have come to the place where we accept fornication as a way of life. We have lost the power to control our bodies, as if they were no longer connected to our brains, but a separate entity that does what it wants. I don’t believe that this is the way God intended for us to live. God did not intend for us to be slaves of our passions, but to be in control of them. Does this mean that we will live perfect lives? No, but it does mean that it is our duty to bring our minds and our lives under the obedience of Christ.[1] The apostle Paul writes, “It is our reasonable service”, to present ourselves as living sacrifices.[2]

The problem today is so many modern Christians say to God, “Oh God I will follow you and I will believe in you, so long as I can continue doing the mess I am doing.” They want to be Christians with no sacrifice. They want to continue living the way they want to, fornicating, gambling, lying, and cheating. Being a Christian is simple, but it is not easy. It requires that certain things I want to do, I can’t do. Not because they are forbidden by the law, but because they are no longer who I am. When the Holy Spirit truly abides in someone their behavior changes, they no longer want to do the things they use to do. Their desires change and reflect the desires of the Father, no longer seeking selfish pleasure.

I don’t fault these men, they are just men. But as a parent I realize that it is up to me to be the role model for my children, to teach them what is expected of a man in the sight of God. The message of what a man is supposed to be was perverted for me; I don’t want my children to get that same perverted message. I cannot allow the world to define what I am or what my children will become. Our society, especially in the Black community is being given these images that are direct opposition to what God desires for us to be. Our sons have been sold this “thug life” garbage and our daughters have been reduced to nothing more than faceless sex objects. Where is the outcry? It has become so common for our young women to have children out of wedlock that we don’t even think twice about it anymore. Getting married has become the unusual situation and fornication the norm. It is time we reverse this trend. But it has to begin with us as Black men getting back under the authority of God. A man first and most important job when he becomes married is to save his household. Men, let’s save our homes and our families…

---

[1] 2 Corinthians 10:5

[2] Romans 12:1