We all know what the phrase means: an “illegitimate child” was born to parents who were not legally married.
The phrase originated from an English and Welsh law that said if the oldest son was a “illegitimate child” he could not inherit if the parents of his younger brother were married. Coincidentally, another particular word referring to illegitimate children has become an intermediate curse word over the years.
There are probably five good reasons you won’t find me using profanity.
One of them is because sometimes in order to call someone a profane name, even and especially jokingly, it puts me in a position to judge a person based on an insensitive stereotype or demographic to which I am indirectly validating.
By calling someone this particular modern day curse word I am referring to, it is insinuating that person’s parents were never married; that he was conceived outside of a committed, loving relationship; and therefore, he is not capable of treating people with respect and decency.
But really, which is worse: the phrase “illegitimate child” for tying the word “illegitimate” to the word “child,” or that particular inglorious curse word I keep referring to because it has gained the status of profanity in our culture?
I think the first is worse. Again, this is me being overly analytical and taking things too seriously (and deep) because that’s what I do as a writer, but it’s a crazy thought to consider any child being “illegitimate.” Right?
Sure, I totally realize we don’t literally mean a kid is illegitimate in a literal, overall sense. But it makes me wonder if we really do see certain children as illegitimate.
Maybe part of the reason I am so passionate about this concept that no child is illegitimate is the fact that, like Ron Paul, I am an avid pro-life supporter.
It’s easy to say that no child is illegitimate, but I’m not sure we are convinced about that. At least not until he or she passes through the birth canal.
Be on the look-out next month for No Such Thing as Illegitimate Children, Part 2.
Except for in the state of Nevada, prostitution is illegal in our country. It is against the law for a person to be paid for sex… unless that action is filmed, therefore making it hardcore pornography, which is perfectly legal in America as long as the “entertainment film” features consenting adults.
Why is prostitution illegal while hardcore pornography is not? It’s a lot easier to tax porn. Yes, money is the difference between a “legal” or “illegal” status.
Plus, we as a Christianized nation can’t allow for legalized prostitution; it would be like giving our approval.
I, for one, morally oppose both pornography and prostitution, but I recognize the fact that it’s impossible to outlaw pornography; because after all, what exactly constitutes as pornography?
Does it have to be explicit nudity? How about Michelangelo’s famous statue, David? You can’t censor classic art.
What about a large number of Beyonce’s music videos, featuring gyrating females wearing little clothing in the name of feminism?
What about that? Where could the line on pornography ever be drawn?
It can’t. So we tax it. Does that make it right? (Or does that make it even worse?)
But what politician would ever be practical and honest enough to acknowledge such a double standard which is based on tax revenue? Ron Paul.
He doesn’t necessarily want to legalize prostitution, he wants to leave it up to each state to decide, as he believes that is how our American Constitution was written.
Ron Paul doesn’t care about modern-day social expectations of what a man running for President should be like. If anything, that’s his downfall- he’s a politician who’s not political, in the negative sense of the word.
Instead, he is a man who has voted consistently throughout the decades. He stands for what he believes; no matter what. He has been married to his wife since 1957, around the time my parents were born. He sticks to his guns; no secret mistresses to be discovered with this guy.
As for me, I am a 30 year-old dad who doesn’t care at all about the word “Republican” or “Democrat.” I would like to say I don’t care about politics, but that’s not true because I care about social justice, as well as running our nation’s economy like a legitimate business.
Last week when 29 year-old pop star Kelly Clarkson publicly endorsed Ron Paul on Twitter, her record sales spiked 442% during a 24 hour period. What does that say about “our generation?” We get Ron Paul. We value his stubborn and (un)reasonable approach to political issues.
We could be the first generation to vote in a President who finally ends the expensive and ridiculous federal “War on Drugs,” where a man who is caught with possession of marijuana can be sent to prison for a decade while a child molester serves a shorter term.
Bless Ron Paul for calling our government out on so many of its asinine policies. No matter how he runs, whether as the official Republican candidate, or as an independent, I’m voting for Ron Paul. Even if I have to “write in” his vote.
Image credit for top photo: Gage Skidmore.
Thanks to Wikipedia, I am able to point out some of the major ideas that Ron Paul supports:
Paul calls himself “strongly pro-life”, ”an unshakable foe of abortion”, and believes regulation or ban on medical decisions about maternal or fetal health is “best handled at the state level”. He says his years as an obstetrician led him to believe life begins at conception; his abortion-related legislation, like the Sanctity of Life Act, is intended to negate Roe v. Wade and to get “the federal government completely out of the business of regulating state matters.”
Paul also believes that the notion of the separation of church and state is currently misused by the court system: “In case after case, the Supreme Court has used the infamous ‘separation of church and state’ metaphor to uphold court decisions that allow the federal government to intrude upon and deprive citizens of their religious liberty.”
Paul pushes to eliminate federal involvement in and management of health care, which he argues would allow prices to drop due to the fundamental dynamics of a free market.
He is an outspoken proponent for increased ballot access for 3rd party candidates and numerous election law reforms which he believes would allow more voter control. Referring to the federal government, Ron Paul has also stated that “The government shouldn’t be in the medical business.” He is also opposed to federal government flu inoculation programs.
My wife is without a doubt a very strong, confident, and independent woman. However, there are times when I need to take control of the situation, as I see signs of her becoming overwhelmed with daily events.
Most recently, I took control of our son’s inability to fall and stay asleep. My wife’s maternal instincts made it very difficult for her to try the “cry it out” method, so I used my paternal instincts and now, our son sleeps all the way through the night (7PM to 6:20 AM). And when I refer to my “paternal instincts,” I’m talking about my ability to strip away emotion for the purpose of practicality.
However, it would do me no good to always remain in “emotionless” mode. Because a big part of being a leader is being able to truly understand where others are coming from; I have to be able to relate to them, emotionally. The word is “empathy.” In order to be a good leader, I must make myself a humble servant who understands (or at least tries to understand) what it’s like on the other side.
Granted, I don’t want to be the President or a CEO of a huge corporation. But as a father, husband, and a guy who joins the work force everyday, there are constantly moments where I must use my leadership skills to be as proactive as the situation calls for. And this all ties into my mission of positively re-branding fatherhood. Because as I’ve said before, being a good father doesn’t simply mean “being there,” it means being both actively and emotionally involved in the lives of your spouse and children.
I remind myself how crucial it is to be cool, calm, and collected, as well as, to be direct, assertive, and respectable. I even keep mental images in my head of both real and fictional people who I believe encompass calm-assertiveness, including but not limited to the following random examples: 2012 Presidential candidate Ron Paul, Don Draper (at work, not home) on Mad Men, Chris Harrison (as host of The Bachelor),Leonardo from the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (okay, so he’s not actually human), and perhaps the most calm-assertive man I’ve ever heard of, Jesus Christ.
Even as the writer of this blog, I believe in the importance of being calm-assertive. I realize that in the blog world, it’s important to be controversial and edgy in order to engage readers and gain a following. Interestingly though, I have learned, especially here on The Dadabase, that often when I try to be controversial and edgy, my efforts typically go unread, uncommented, and un-“liked.”
What seems to generate the most interest is when I write positively and directly about parenting. That is what has gotten readers excited in both agreeable and disagreeable ways. Positively parenting with a sense of authority is controversial and edgy.
I believe there are a lot of people out there looking for a positive and proactive outlook in the parenting blog world. I want The Dadabase to be the obvious go-to blog for that crowd. I want my blog to be both a safe and realistic environment for other parents. And I plan to do this by being a calm-assertive leader of the blogosphere.
My wife Jill and I have a spunky and animated friend named Lisa Welch(pictured right), who mentioned to us that when she thinks of us, she sees us as the “Joe Cool” of parents; that we are really “laid-back, groovy people.” And because of that, our son Jack will surely be the same way. Well, he is, actually.
As Jack’s parents we were flattered, though we never really thought about how people perceived us. To the two of us, we’re just a normal married couple who go through the same stuff as everyone else. I guess it’s easy to be unaware of how others perceive you. Because how can you know, not being able to crawl outside of your head and observe yourself with a viewpoint that is not preconceived or idealized in some way?
We are passionate supporters of Jamie Oliver’s Food Revolution. Jill makes all of Jack’s baby food herself. We are experimenting with cloth diapers for Jack. Normal cologne (alcohol based) is too strong for me to wear; so instead, I wear patchouli and my wife likes that I do. Oh, and we’re not really into sports.
I guess that covers enough of the bases. The cultural criteria is there for us to be “chill” kind of people. Obviously, a child picks up on the vibes of his parents. I didn’t realize it can happen at such a young age. But it’s pretty obvious, at six months old, Jack just doesn’t let much bother him. Jack is very outgoing, so he doesn’t get afraid of new people. And we are blessed that he is so easy to travel with, because I would say that traveling is one of our main hobbies.
He only cries when he’s hungry, tired, or needs a diaper change. Other than that, he’s happy just to bop around and enjoy the scenery.
Because my writing style is largely based on finding the irony in situations, here it is: We do enjoy the title of “Joe Cool” and being seen as laid back– but don’t be fooled, we do have a serious side, too. We are both very big into structure and setting expectations to live by. Having order and control is very important to us.
We are the paradox of being both laid-back, yet very focused. We are old-fashioned, yet still free thinking and open-minded. And it looks like our son will be the same way.
Entertain me: How has your child adopted your personality traits? I am truly curious to hear other examples.