A few weeks ago, a Muslim woman refused to shake hands with the head of the Met police, Ian Blair, for religious reasons. The incident occurred during an official ceremony held by the metropolitan police where Blair was meeting new recruits. The chorus of facilitators quickly took to the internet and the media, declaring that the woman’s action was entirely legitimate. The argument that no one should be compelled to disregard the mandates of their chosen religion prevailed.
Recently, a heated debate arose over whether church leaders in Britain were right to oppose giving children for adoption to same-sex couples through agencies associated with the Church. In this case, however, the chorus of facilitators opposed the stance taken by religious authorities, claiming that allowing such actions would be akin to discriminating against the gay community.
In no way am I a defender of the Church, but I simply cannot believe the so-called moral superiority that some claim to possess on this matter. Hypocritically, advocates for gay rights argue that their motivation is the well-being of the child when, in fact, if that principle governed their actions, the Church’s position would be easily understood: the foundation of the Christian faith does not recognize same-sex unions as holy or sacred, similar to how devoted Muslims view Western behaviors. Why should one stance be accepted and celebrated while the other is not? Or better yet, why not outright condemn or praise both? The answer seems to arise from a rather barren field known as political correctness. It is politically incorrect to tell a Muslim woman that living in a Western society entails adopting certain practices, but criticizing homosexuals from church hierarchs that may condemn some children to a life of uncertainty is not. Does this even make sense?
Then, UNICEF released a report a couple of days ago regarding the state of children. Naturally, the benchmark for comparison is other industrialized nations. Among the 21 countries evaluated, Britain ranked last, and again, analysts, politicians, social workers, and the media launched a loud chorus of shock from every corner of the country. I know that children in this country are simply out of control. They do whatever they please, they backtalk, curse, insult, offend, and disrespect, and that’s when they are not binge-drinking, smoking, engaging in sexual activities, or getting high on drugs. But, of course, this nation of flatterers struggles to admit it, which is why UNICEF could summarize things for them. At the core of this issue, in my humble opinion, lies the same problem I’ve just pointed out: political correctness. Parenting isn’t done well for most, and, naturally, little can be expected from children who mostly grow up indifferent to proper moral and ethical guidance, and worse yet, lack love. Discipline cannot be enforced by absent parents, nor will children tolerate it. Correcting the problem is very simple; love and discipline are needed, but seeing discipline as politically incorrect has prompted the establishment to come up with a novel approach to this: let’s engage with the children, let them express what they feel, and see how they think this may be right. Perhaps none of them are aware of the fact that teenagers possess common sense…