Posted on 06/15/2005 6:43:04 PM PDT by CHARLITE
There's a huge meth problem around here. So because there are a lot of meth customers, that makes it okay?
Just because people buy porn and keep the shop open, it's okay, even if the majority of local citizenry don't want it there?
What's your point?
People should lobby local government to enforce the laws as written.
I agree that if the gov't drastically reduced spending - 50% would be a good start - many problems would wither up and die.
But I don't see that happening, so both fronts need to be fought.
The definitions of "family" are shifting because of societal pressures. In a few years, the nuclear family, which many believe to be the norm, will become more and more rare. It may prove to be an economically unsustainable model for a lot of people. More than likely a large portion of nuclear families will be replaced by the multi-generational extended families.
The extended family is actually a more efficient use of resources in regards to child care and other expenses etc.
And yes, unwed mothers are a problem. But again, this has to do with economics. It's a phenom that thrives when people have very limited time horizons. And time horizons tend to be influenced by economics.
Yeah, right. Example - Philadelphia, every year, gives $20,000 to "gay" organizations for their "gay" pride parade.
You know that's a useless argument.
That would lead me to conclude that the people of Phillie are okay with their gay pride parades.
My belief is that drugs are a plague -- but the absolute worst of all the drugs is meth. I believe this not only because of the way that the drug impacts individuals' bodies, but because it targets those communities that can least afford the human, financial or emotional toll. I've made something of a study of meth. So, trust me on this point -- having lived through the crack days of NYC in the 1990s and comparing it to meth -- well, there is no comparison. Crack is like applesauce compared to meth. Luckily it hasn't really hit NYC yet, but it will.
You named two destructive influences in a small community. One legal and one illegal. A big city, like NY, can absorb both and keep functioning. A small town can't. It's up to the will of the population to fight back.
It would lead me to believe that the local gov't there is replete with leftists, those who support homosexuality, and homosexuals themselves. Whether the actual voters themselves agree or not is unknown.
So in your world view, single mothers having babies with a series of men they aren't married to is called "extended families". Well, that's a novel definition of the phrase.
"Extended families" really means not only the mother and father and their children, but some grandparents, and maybe some aunts and uncles and cousins as well.
So, it's clear that you place zero importance on traditional marriage and family - IOW, "real" - marraige and intact families. It's good to know your viewpoint.
As far as local communities fighting porn shops, they tried already here, and lost. Think my town of 1200 plus wants to fight the ACLU?
No, we share the same definition of extended families.
Not by what your previous comment said.
Anyway, my other life is intervening. Gotta run.
My other comment spoke to the changing shapes and make-ups of families -- the nuclear family being replaced, at least in part, by the extended family. This is due largely to outside pressures. It's a solution to several problems, not the least of which are economic. I implied, but didn't outright state, that unwed mothers are what happens when solutions to those pressures aren't instituted.
That just about sums it up, well put!
Always!
now lets talk about C. Heston and R. Reagan
I like your comments.
Actually, it only takes one to wreck a marriage.
The trick to having the golden touch, is to be darned careful what you touch. Congratulations to those who chose wisely.
As for me, never again.
If your girlfriend askes you to get married, you say "Well, you better find a man who wants to get married."
Guaranteed, in about 20 minutes you will have some good things going on.
Depends what you mean by "vociferously support." I vociferously support the regulated legality of pornography, although I don't consider myself a supporter of pornography, not because I want it or because I applaud the destruction of morality, but because using force to combat non-rights-violating vices is wrong.
"ending sleaze and various forms of "immorality" would not do a thing to help terrorism, illegal immigration, or any other of the serious issues"
You just don't get it. They are all interlinked. A society in decay will never be able to deal with any of the problems you've mentioned.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.