Riots

"The limitation of riots, moral questions aside, is that they cannot win and their participants know it. Hence, rioting is not revolutionary but reactionary because it invites defeat. It involves an emotional catharsis, but it must be followed by a sense of futility." ~MLK~

sometimes riots do not ignite starting from nothing, or better to say, are not the first reaction towards the opposite ideology. They occur after the participants exhaust other means to make their case. So, they are used to get the attention of the "suppressor", or a third body. They are used, as MLK said in his speech( from which I quoted the ... Read Moreabove piece), to throw the very guilt on the system the participants are against to ...so that others would condemn not the sin they committed but the cause for the darkness which their soul is left in. However, their immediate result is another reaction instead of civil debate, a chain of riots and violence, more loss of life and property until the"suppressor" gives in or compromises or to the worst until the "rebellion" is crushed.. But it means that it requires the latter either to have a good will or to be cornered. Best examples are what happened after the murder of MLK and the spread of protestantism(Reformation)...
But what happens if the more powerful does not want to yield?
>>it will get an opening to mention loud the disorder, the loss of life and property. The participant will eventually be an outlaw. Doors will be closed for any progress, the suppressor will be more negligent. That is what happens in the developing countries after every election cycle... Read More.
And as MLK said defeat will be the ultimate result. The defeat is worse because it will come not from the outside but from the participants themselves. Low morale and finally lack of purpose...

FatherHood

We need fathers to realize that responsibility does not end at conception. We need them to realize that what makes you a man is not the ability to have a child — it’s the courage to raise one." ~BO~

I went through recent statistics about single parents, and watched movies and reality shows which depict about the life of single moms. these products of the show biz industry applaud divorce, undermine the core family value, and presents reluctantly mothers as the only engine in the process of the upbringing of children. While I was left ... astounded with how issues that can be solved with selflessness and little sacrifice lead to divorce which I say it the biggest Personality- Miscarriage, I was equally appalled by the dismaying character of some fathers.The economic independence of females in the developed nations may help them decide to step out of a marriage which they claim abusive, or boring having no space for love anymore and so on and so forth because they know that they can carry on in their own right.
But what about in nations like our own Ethiopia where a father is the sole provider, where he is the rule and the law of the family, where a mother does not know what her spouse earns? This father treats the family member as his own subject because he knows that they don't have anywhere to go, that they're helpless. He demands apology from them for his own mistake.What about the father who does not know which grade his children are in, who spends most of his out- of- work time outside home leaving his wife with the needy children... ? or the father who has children in every town he visited?..
The Scripture says"Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it." But say it the divorce case i mentioned above or the marriage with already- separated- 2 ways, the absence of father in ones childhood has enormous impact on the child's future. He'll either avoid marriage fearing of ending up like his father or learn through failure. He will live being angry with his father for he was not taught how to handle crisis..
OR
as BO says in his book:A man's either trying to live up to his father's expectations or make up for his father's mistakes.