The Unconditional Love of Parents

On one of my Coronation Street episodes today, Ed (Trevor Michael Georges) tries to convince his son James (Nathan Graham) that he's okay with James being gay.

When he first comes out to his dad, Ed distracts from the issue by making it about him being offended that Aggie, his wife (Lorna Laidlaw), and his other son Michael (Ryan Russell) already knew.

No. He's not upset that his son is gay. He's upset that his family felt so little of him.

But we soon see that James probably had good reason to be reluctant about coming out to Ed.

Ed tries hard to push the message that a) he doesn't hate gays b) he loves his son no matter what. 

Although then later, in private, he asks his wife if this might be a phase.

In the bygone days, homophobic parents beat up their kids or threw them out of the house. Now we've graduated to, I love you. I'm not against gays. But this is probably just a phase. So no worries. 

Ed's level of tolerance takes a dive when he learns James is dating Danny (Dylan Brady), Ed's friend and coworker,

Ed angrily attacks Danny in the kitchen, when he wrongly thinks his son's not around. He says, You've corrupted my son; then a few moments later, You keep your sick, filthy paws off my boy.

Now the one thing I can maybe say...not in defense of Ed as a parent...but in defense of the I'm-not-a-homophone argument is....

Could Ed have had a similar reaction if James was his daughter?  Sometimes people get picky about their coworkers, friends, etc. dating their daughters, nieces, sisters, etc.

Based on other dialogue on the show, I do think Ed is homophobic. But I'm not sure he's at the level of thinking someone is sick and filthy for being gay.  

At one point, Ed throws out the line, hate the sin not the sinner.

James is not at all pleased with this. Am I supposed to be grateful for that?

Nor does he welcome all of Ed's proclamations of love. 

You are my son. I will always love you. That will never change. 

It doesn't matter what you do or say. I will always love you.

James responds with a line I love so much. What's love without respect?

We talk a lot about the importance and wonderfulness of unconditional love.

But not all unconditional love is equal.

There's a difference between, I love you so much, because I'm a good parent and...

I love you so much because you are incredibly awesome. But if you did something not awesome, I'd still love you.

Now I think Ed is a good dad. And I do think he thinks his son is awesome. I think he just needs time and personal growth to reduce his homophobia.  

But how about the parents who push the message of, You're very hard to love, but I manage to love you anyway.  Is this type of unconditional love that much better than conditional love?

Unconditional love, tolerance, acceptance, etc. That's all better than hate and rejection.

I think, though, that we all need more than that.

We need to be celebrated. We need to be adored.  

We need to feel like a treasure and not a burden.  

Unfortunately, sometimes it doesn't work that way.

I imagine that in a year or so, on Coronation Street, Ed will be proudly marching in pride parades with his son.  And I'm sure there are many stories with beautiful turnarounds like that.

But sometimes parents continue to unconditionally love their gay children while hating the sin and hoping it's just a phase.

Sometimes parents end up having children who have personalities, hobbies, beliefs, passions, career goals, politics, etc. that they can only tolerate.  I feel wrong judging these parents too much, because I ended up with my dream child—smart, fan of Disney and other popular culture, has strong interests, creative, not a huge sport's fan, politically liberal, etc.

I have, at times, thought about kids, in my life I love but who have personalities and interests that aren't such a good match for me.  What if I was their parent? I love them now not being their parent, so I would certainly love them if I was their parent. But would it be an unconditional love of tolerance, or would I be able to give them the adoration they deserve and need?  

Maybe there would be hope. Because there ARE things I adore about them now. Then maybe with other things, I would gain respect and interest.  For example, I've never been a sports fan. But if I had a child on a basketball team, maybe I'd end up becoming a basketball fan.

 


How would our world change if we knew for sure there was life after death, and it was easy for our dearly-departed to talk to us via the Internet?   

The Dead are Online, a novel by Dina Roberts 

No comments:

Post a Comment