There are thousands of women like her. Most nights they eat alone and talk about their "special relationship" with their nieces and nephews as if they actually know what it is like to raise a child.
They don't.
I can understand the hard-wired longing for a child. It can be overwhelming which is a good thing really. And to rescue an orphan from poverty and abuse can only be seen as positive.
But it is equally true that women like Ingraham are setting terrible examples for young women who now grow up thinking single parenthood is just as viable and rewarding as married life.
It's not.
Children need a father just as much as they need a mother. Ingraham should have spent more time and effort looking for a husband who could be a good father to either their biological or adopted children.
I don't applaud her. I worry that the world she's creating is just one more log on the fire burning the Christian American male in effigy.
... But it is equally true that women like Ingraham are setting terrible examples for young women who now grow up thinking single parenthood is just as viable and rewarding as married life. It's not.
Certainly I would agree that single parenthood is not as good, it's just that I don't think Laura is holding herself out as conveying the message that it is. I would never put her in the same category as a Rosie O'Donnell "my family is as good and legitimate as yours" crusader. I have heard Laura have authors on as guests who promoted the importance of there being a stable father in the home. So, my guess would be that there wouldn't probably be that many young women who would go it alone based on Laura's example since Laura is so openly pro-marriage.
Children need a father just as much as they need a mother.
I completely agree of course and would even contend that Laura would too. I'll bet she would admit that her chosen arrangement is less than ideal.
Ingraham should have spent more time and effort looking for a husband who could be a good father to either their biological or adopted children.
I guess it's pretty tough for me to go that far. I have no idea how much time she has spent on looking for a husband and as we all know it is not an exact science. I know a couple of singles in my church who are my age and would prefer to be married, but are not for no discernible reason (i.e., there is nothing outwardly wrong with them :). I suppose I have especially strong feelings that finding mates is entirely in God's hand and by His direction given how easy I had it in finding my wife through NO special ability, talent, or effort on my part. I feel that God just put us together when it suited Him (in our case very early). So, because of my own very unremarkable example I find it hard to look at anyone else's "failure" to find a spouse in love. Anyone can "settle", but Laura apparently is not willing to since it is true that it would take her five minutes to "get a husband" if that was the only goal.
What is it about these political pundits (i.e. Newter & Ingraham) who convert from Evangelicalism to Romanism? I wonder if it has to do with a basic disagreement on the level of liberty the people should enjoy that our Reformed forbears encouraged versus the Romanist notion of “ordered society”.