Can Solomon straighten this out?
(Courtesy of newsflash.org)
(I use the term in quotes because, frankly, other than his lineage, I have no recollection of the child showing any prowess in acting, singing or any of "the usual" talents associated with the label. A friend noted that his appearance in various commercials may be the result of his mother's pushiness, more than anything else.)
If you've read my blog, you would know that I keep a healthy distance from anything religion-related, the reasons for which I detail clearly in various posts. But I cannot help but refer to a particular segment of the Christian Bible in this particular instance: when a king named Solomon was asked to mediate between two mothers over a single child that both claimed as her own. (Refer to 1 Kings 3:16-28 in the Christian Bible.)
To summarize: two mothers were living in the same house, each having an infant son. One of the sons was smothered in his sleep, so both mothers claimed that the other exchanged him for the living one. Brought to King Solomon, he pondered on how to settle the case with both mothers unwilling and unrelenting. He then asked for a sword, and declared he would cut the baby in half, so that each mother would get a "fair share" of the living infant.
The pretender found it to be "just," but the real mother begged and pleaded with Solomon to spare the infant's life, and was content to give her son away, knowing at least that he was still alive. That is how Solomon determined who the real mother was - one who would sacrifice everything just so one's child could go on.
I cannot help but wonder: how would Solomon have mediated between Kris and James, knowing fully well that a life - Bimby's - would be caught in the crossfire?
Would he, like our legal system, have a particular leaning or bias towards the mother?
Would he have changed the way he viewed the case, knowing that both parents are in the public eye?
And, if he did ask for Bimby to be cut in half, in order to be "fair" to both parties, I cannot help but wonder: which parent would concede their custody claim, in order for Bimby to remain whole, able to fulfill his commercial contracts?
And while we're at it, I would like to know what Solomon's stand would be, seeing (annulled) parents making their domestic miss (as opposed to domestic bliss) so publicly aired out, while deliberately injecting Bimby into each of their public statements?
I may not be a parent myself, but I do know that in this case, Bimby is the biggest loser of all.