Editorial:

I Object to the Public Display of Children for Political End

By Tecola W. Hagos

�Verily the kindness that gazes upon itself in a mirror turns to stone, and a good deed that calls itself by tender names becomes the parent to a curse.� Khalil Gibran

In general, I object to the public display of children for political purposes or any other purpose in order to garner sympathy, establish fellowship, and create the illusion of familial tranquility. If the presentation of children as members of a family is done as a matter of general introduction of the particular politician running for office, my objection is not aimed at such conditions. There are dignified ways to present one�s family members in order to help possible voters have a visual impression of the candidate in a family setting. And that type of dignified effort does not draw my irate concern.

Specifically, I object to children being pointed out for some peculiar reason, such as being adopted from a poor foreign country or having some medical condition. It is extremely objectionable where such display is used purely for political goals. No human being irrespective of age or national origin or race would feel happy being singled out as an example of some freakishness. I object to John and Cindy McCain (Presidential hopeful and his wife) parading their adopted daughter as some kind of freak-show. I object to the media�s zooming at children on display by their insensitive parents. I saw on television how the young adopted daughter, Bridget McCain cringe being zoomed at by the media and her being identified in the hall. And my heart stopped.

I object also to the continued presence of a sick child in such public display, for health reasons. I strongly object the display of a sick baby by Sarah Palin for such long period of time. Such things are no different than child abuse and prosecutable at law. These objections of mine are also against celebrities displaying their adopted children from developing countries as acts of charities. This brings to mind Angelina Joli and Madonna. One may argue that such price is far less than the gain of saving lives and giving loving homes to desperate children from underdeveloped countries. It is true that adoptive parents that I mentioned in this editorial are loving and honorable human beings, the better of most of us in more ways than one.

It is precisely the incongruity of the act of public display with the emotion of being a loving parent that triggered my reaction and resulted in this short Editorial. A loving parent will be sensitive to the emotional scar that may be left behind after such identification of a child as being different, even worse having one�s private moments at the beginning of one�s life being part of the public domain. The fact of adoption must not be overlooked because of my legitimate doubt that adoptive parents would display their natural born children with some anatomical defects, as �freaks� for the world to see.  

If one acknowledges the dignity of children from any walk of life in any society, any individual may appreciate why such public display of children is very upsetting to me. Whether it is the McCain family, or the Obama family or the Palin family, I urge all families to be sensitive to their children. Children have a far more solid innate dignity than adults. Whether it is shyness or adventurist curiosity of children, it must be jealously preserved and guarded. The life of a child is the closest that is godly and sacred in all of creation. Ω

Tecola W. Hagos

September 6, 2008