There’s no denying how important a position the mother plays in the upbringing of her children. But torn by modern economics, mothers are leaving home for professional practice, raising the question “who now takes care of the children? ” In my belief, though, all efforts to replace the proverbial mother are destined to be futile.
Observing Nature, scientifically or a wise, tells us that being a parent, if it were a social role, is ideally possible by the child bearing female and others may only be nurses or patrons. The physiological and psychological exclusiveness of the mother means all the other social entities and all the greatness of science and civilization can only supplement, and never replace, her part in the upbringing of children. Anyone else trying to don her role is simply unnatural.
But, of course, there is opinion on the contrary also. Modern science flaunts its age old practice of replicating nature and natural processes. Now more than ever humans and their society are evolving frequently against the tide of Nature, and civilization sustains this evolution. Such evolution has also effected the socioeconomic distinction of men and women. Now in the industry women are producing as much as men do. So “women are better off in the house” is no longer true.
While such human evolution is true and should morally be supported, going against Mother Nature, when we’re clearly not in a position to, is immoral. Science has not yet found a biological and psycho-social alternative for the natural mother. And while gender equality is great, it never means fusion of the two poles of our species. I don’t believe science never has strived to eliminate sex because it is simply impracticable. So men and women, so uniformly productive as they recently are, don’t have to utilize their worth in the same end of civilization.
If one person, or sex, is naturally gifted to play a special and vital role in the society, it is her duty to thrive in it. I therefore conclude that in a child’s life its mother is irreplaceable, and, hence, it is she who should rear her child.
There’s no denying how
important
a position the
mother
plays in the upbringing of her children.
But
torn by modern economics, mothers are leaving home for professional practice, raising the question “who
now
takes care of the children? ” In my belief, though, all efforts to replace the proverbial
mother
are destined
to be futile.
Observing
Nature
,
scientifically
or a wise,
tells
us that being a parent, if it were a social role, is
ideally
possible by the child bearing female
and others
may
only
be nurses or patrons. The physiological and psychological exclusiveness of the
mother
means all the other social entities and all the greatness of
science
and civilization can
only
supplement, and never replace, her part in the upbringing of children. Anyone else trying to don her role is
simply
unnatural.
But
,
of course
, there is opinion
on the contrary
also
. Modern
science
flaunts its age
old
practice of replicating
nature
and natural processes.
Now
more than ever humans and their society are evolving
frequently
against the tide of
Nature
, and civilization sustains this evolution. Such evolution has
also
effected the socioeconomic distinction of
men
and
women
.
Now
in the industry
women
are producing as much as
men
do.
So
“women
are better off in the
house
” is no longer true.
While such human evolution is true and should
morally
be supported
, going against
Mother
Nature
, when we’re
clearly
not in a position to, is immoral.
Science
has not
yet
found a biological and psycho-social alternative for the natural
mother
. And while gender equality is great, it never means fusion of the two poles of our species. I don’t believe
science
never has strived to eliminate sex
because
it is
simply
impracticable.
So
men
and
women
,
so
uniformly
productive as they recently are, don’t
have to
utilize their worth in the same
end
of civilization.
If one person, or sex, is
naturally
gifted to play a special and vital role in the society, it is her duty to thrive in it. I
therefore
conclude that in a child’s life its
mother
is irreplaceable, and,
hence
, it is she who should rear her child.