MICHAEL JACKSON KING -WHAT ABOUT POP?
Published On 07-05-2009 , 10:23 AM
WHILE many folks feel we've had more than too much of the Michael Jackson coverage, with all aspects of the King of Pop's life being repeatedly pored over by the media, I'm pretty much like so many people I’ve heard from who are awaiting the somebody who will put an end to the shameful reporting, mainly speculation, regarding the biological origin of the man's children.
Often when a person dies, no matter how awful the deeds they may have committed during their lifetime, there seems always to be a grace period where all we hear is the good.
This kind of grace period has prompted many a joke. In my family, the one that passes down through the generations is about the widow who, with her children, sat in the first row of pews in the small Baptist church listening to her late husband's eulogy.
By the time the presenter had spent a good 15 minutes preaching, the mother nudged one of her sons and whispered, "Willie, Willie, tip up there and see if that's yo’ daddy in that casket."
No such eulogies being delivered on this deathwatch by news people eager to uncover any clue that might help them show that Jackson doesn't truly have any little Willies.
Most of us have heard more Baby Mama and Baby Daddy dramas then we actually want to admit to, and for all of them that we're acquainted with, the bottom line is always the same: It is the children who suffer.
The media needs to leave the children out of their witch hunt.
I don't believe Prince Michael, Paris and Prince Michael II, who is also known as Blanket, are following news reports and are now saddened and troubled because they've learned that Michael Jackson may not be their dad.
But I do believe there are multitudes of children throughout the world who have believed one person was their biological father when in reality it was only mom who knew the real truth to be otherwise.
All children deserve respect - they are not responsible for the deeds of their parents.
I don't believe the public's right to know trumps the Jackson children's right to privacy. I do believe Jackson's mother, who may well be the person to have permanent custody of these children, is the person with the responsibility, when and if she determines it should be done, to tell them of circumstances surrounding their birth.
How dare members of the media take it upon themselves to work at uncovering that which is not news but is instead hurtful and damaging to the innocent?
Is Michael Jackson really the pop? Did Debbie Rowe, the alleged mother of Michael's two oldest children, undergo artificial insemination? Was the sperm donor her old boss, Michael's dermatologist? If Jackson wasn't the biological father, shouldn't he have legally adopted these kids? Do the kids look anything like African-American people are part of their ancestry? Does the public really have a right to know?
It doesn't matter how these questions are answered. We can look around and find lots of families and raise lots of questions about them. But we don't do that because it isn't our business.
And the media? It isn't their business, either.
This blog can be found in our column section where you can print a copy or e-mail to someone
http://talkaboutparenting.org/pages/articles.php
 Tune-in Wednesdays Noon to 1:00 p.m. Talk Abut Parenting with Shirlee Smith LIVE Call-in at 626- 794-2116 or 794-2551. PCAC Charter Channel 56 in Pasadena. Return to our home page and click the channel 56 logo for streaming. See our calendar listing for show guest and for further information.
|
