So...it has been a long long time since I've sat down to write. But I'm back. What is it that brings me back, you say? The radio. No, no...not music or talk radio, but something I heard on the radio from a caller.

If you listen to the radio at all, you know that people will sometimes call in with questions or dilemmas. Sometimes, they are actually worth pondering. The caller tonight, however, just made me sad in terms of thinking about the survival of our species, at least as moral beings.

The dilemma was this: her young son went to the zoo, and brought home a frog which happens to be an endangered species. Whether he meant to or not is unclear. Her dilemma? What do I tell my son now that he's had it a few days and is attached to it? Ummmm...am I the only one who is mystified by this? HELLO!!! GIVE IT BACK! Why is this a dilemma? If I had brought home anything that did not belong to me, intentionally or not, I would have been marched straight back to return it as soon as humanly (and institutionally) possible! The boy has kept it a few days and is attached to it?

Listen, I'm not a parent, but I hope to be one someday. I can't think of a single instance in which this situation would not have been resolved that day or the next. But...let's say I had an out of body experience and I was such a big softie that I let my kid keep an animal that is from the zoo and endangered (I mean an out of this universe out of body experience). What then? Oh, yeah...when my body crashed back to reality, I'd tell the kid I was wrong and that together we'd be making a return trip to the zoo to unload what is not rightfully ours to begin with. And this time, we're not going to be taking backpacks.

And that's how I see it...at least for now.

So, the past two days have given me pause to think about what may be my parenting future. No, no, not in the sense of questioning whether I want children, please - do you not know me at all?? Rather, it's questioning whether my child will hate me because I will choose to be their parent first, and their friend second. Wondering whether my child will understand that what they want isn't always what is best for them, and that at the age of 3 or 4, they need not be little adults - they should be and be treated as children.

What, you may wonder, has given me cause to reflect about events which are not yet on the horizon? Observation, my friends...observation of parents who appear to be uninterested in being parents. Certainly, children should be given some freedom to develop their personalities, their creativity, and their talents. Call me crazy if you will, but I am not of the opinion that such freedom should be limitless. There is a difference between giving a child the freedom to run around outside at home and letting a child run around in a public place without making any attempt to shape their behavior in an appropriate way. For instance, church...I'm sorry, but it is not okay to let your child run around at will. At some point, they need to learn to be disciplined in their behavior - they need to learn where it is and is not okay to act in a certain way. Now, understandably, children are not going to always be silent and still. This doesn't mean that you don't make the attempt to correct and teach, or that you disregard the others around you because your child can do no wrong. Similarly, I would balk at the though of my child running around the mall, if for no other reason than safety alone!

As much as "letting kids be kids" doesn't mean giving them free reign to create mayhem, it does mean protecting them from influences that give them a false sense of maturity, especially the sexualization of children that I think occurs far too early these days. From clothing to music to television and movies, the images out there create far too sexual an image for children at too young an age. There is no reason - zero - that a child of five should be dressing in the same styles as someone in adulthood. Granted, some of the styles for adults are overly sexualized as well, but at least they have (well, ideally, anyway) a sense of what that sexuality is really for.

Some of this could be a result of the child star phenomenon. Even Disney these days seems to be selling its teens (girls at least) with minimal clothing and dance moves that certainly don't belong in a stage show with an audience predominantly between the ages of 5 and 9. What message do we send these girls when we say that is how you gain popularity and notoriety? Certainly not one I'd want my children to receive. And let's not get me started on ABC Family...there are hardly any shows on there that I would deem family friendly anymore. I'm not sure what their "new kind of family" is, but it is not one in whose image I would shape my family. Between the drinking, rampant casual sex, and other questionable moral messages, I'd hardly call it a family-friendly channel. Just because you put the word in there, ABC, doesn't make it true. But I digress...sorry!

So, here's what I think it comes down to. I think the main thing is knowing the difference between being a loving, doting parent and one who idolizes their children either from a false sense of love or a lack of an interest in raising the child. There is a difference between the ooohing and aaaahing of parents over something genuinely cute that a child does (which tends to be evenly mixed in with frustration and discipline), and creating a sense of stardom for the child where everything they do is revered. There is a difference between allowing a child the freedom to develop their sense of self, and giving them freedom without restraint that relieves you of any parental duty.