[Lorianne]

But Mr. Kurtz also acknowledged in his article that the number of children living in two parent households is higher in Norway, than in the USA. The poverty rate is much lower and the teen conception rate is much lower as well.

In fact, whether both parents together support/care for/raise their children is more important than marriage per se.

[Mr. Silverback]

Though not everything is bad in Scandinavia, I've found that most of the "low poverty, low teen pregnancy shiny happy people" stuff is manipulation of facts or only half the story. For example, Sweden banned spanking, and child abuse skyrocketed. Not reports of "My neighbor still spanks his kid," but cases of real child abuse--"My neighbor punched his kid dead on the face last night!" But you won't hear any of that from the folks who want to liberalize the family, because they have to convince us that their ideas have worked where they're tried, and if telling us half-truths is what it takes, then that's OK because they're doing it for our own good.

[narby]

In fact, whether both parents together support/care for/raise their children is more important than marriage per se.

Huh. Yeah.

And two parent families are far more likely to exist if they marry.

You need to look up an extreemly good article that came out around 6-8 years ago, titled "Dan Quale was Right" in Atlantic Monthly. It was the cover story, so it shouldn't be too hard to find.

It is a highly researched article that covers the single parenthood and marriage discussion very thoroughly. It's a long article, and worth the effort to look it up.

The synopsis is that it demolishes totally any rationalization for single (meaning unmarried) parenthood.

[mrustow]

But Mr. Kurtz also acknowledged in his article that the number of children living in two parent households is higher in Norway, than in the USA. The poverty rate is much lower and the teen conception rate is much lower as well.

It won't last. Undermine the family, and all manner of social pathologies will explode.

In fact, whether both parents together support/care for/raise their children is more important than marriage per se.

"In fact"? You mean, "in rhetoric." First of all, your statement was normative, not factual, and secondly, you set up a false dichotomy between loving, unmarried parents and unloving, married ones. That's the same rhetorical game pro-gay marriage activists use. Marriage is the best means ever devised to ensure that people properly raise their children. Without marriage ... well, just walk though any black urban, American neighborhood.