Posted on 12/08/2006 8:31:16 PM PST by rakovskii
Mary Cheney’s pregnancy poses problems not just for her child, but also for all Americans. Her action repudiates traditional values and sets an appalling example for young people at a time when father absence is the most pressing social problem facing the nation. With 37 percent of American children born to fatherless families, Mary Cheney is contributing to a trend that is detrimental to all Americans who will live with the ramifications of millions of children whose anger and frustration at not knowing their father will be felt in the public schools and communities of our nation.
Mary Cheney is among that burgeoning group of adult women over age 20 that are driving the trend of women who don’t want a man in the picture, but want to have a baby. These older women are pushing out-of-wedlock birth statistics higher and higher. At a time when teen births and teen abortions are declining dramatically, older women are having more un-wed births and more abortions, including repeat abortions (indicating that they are using abortion as birth control).
Well-educated, professional Mary Cheney is flying in the face of the accumulated wisdom of the top experts who agree that the very best family structure for a child’s well-being is a married mom and dad family. Her child will have all the material advantages it will need, but it will still encounter the emotional devastation common to children without fathers.
One Georgia high school principal reported, “We have too many young men and women from single-mother families that don’t have the role models at home to teach them how to deal with adversity and handle responsibility. They’ve seen their mom work 60 hours a week just to put food on the table; they end up fending for themselves.”
When fatherless children get to be teens, the girls tend to start looking for love in all the wrong places and the boys tend to find as their role model the bad-boy celebrities of MTV, NFL and NBA.
As they grow older, fatherless children tend to have trouble dealing with male authority figures. Too often children in single-mother households end up angry at their absent fathers and resentful of the mother who has had to be a father figure, too. Typically, the boys who have a love-hate relationship with their mother end up hating all women. Numerous of them look for vulnerable women where they can act out their anger and be in control.
Mary Cheney’s action sets an example that is detrimental for mothers with less financial resources who will start down an irrevocable path into poverty that tends to be generational –– children in households without a father tend to themselves have unwed births later in life. Experts from both the left and the right cite a disastrous litany of negative outcomes that are predictable when a child grows up in a fatherless family. Such children tend to get involved in drugs, alcohol abuse, and delinquency; they tend to drop out of school and have teen pregnancies. An assistant principal in a Junior High School said that many of the behavioral problems that teachers face in the classroom stem from households without a father’s influence.
Mary’s pregnancy is an “in-your-face” action countering the Bush Administration’s pro-family, pro-marriage and pro-life policies. She continues to repudiate the work to which her father has devoted his life. Mary has repeatedly said that “studies” show that children only need a loving home. Her statement is incomplete because the experts agree that for the well-being of children, they desperately need a married father and a mother.
All those people who talk about doing what is best “for our children” need to get back to the basics: children need a married mom and dad. Children can do without a lot of the trimmings of childhood, but nothing can replace a home where the mother and dad love each other enough to commit for a lifetime and are absolutely crazy about their kids –– enough to be willing to sacrifice their own needs to see that their children get the very best.
Janice Shaw Crouse, Ph.D., Senior Fellow at the Beverly LaHaye Institute, a culturally conservative think tank for Concerned Women for America, is a recognized authority on domestic issues, the United Nations, cultural and women’s concerns.
Exactly.
I've lived in El Salvador and I've lived in Washington, DC. I would rather be raised in an orphanage in San Miguel than by two upper middle class pervs in Georgetown. The only advantage to your life in DC is materialism. There are many great Salvadorans working with poor orphans in El Salvador.
"... two people both of whom are suffering from a mental disorder. You call that secure?"
Have you read some of the posters around here? They have kids too!....
Don't like my views?
Too bad, they are mine, not yours.
You are talking about a gay man engaging in dangerous practices.
I am talking about two women engaged in a 15-year monogamous relationship.
Get the diff???
How are they pervs?
I'm sure that the two girls would much rather be living in abject squalor with no hope of ever getting a quality education, or opportunity in their lives.
These girls have a wonderful life and loving parents and a very large extended family.
And, its none of your business (as a conservative, you know that, right?)
It was only within the past 2 weeks or so that a thread was posted about a new study concerning the increased rate of homosexuality among those raised in single parent homes.
The study showed the more exposure a child has to the traditional nuclear family setup the less the probability he/she will become a homosexual.
Herbert Marcuse was one of the most prominent Frankfurt School promoters of Critical Theory's social revolution among college and university students in the 1960s. It is instructive to review what he has written on the subject: "One can rightfully speak of a cultural revolution, since the protest is directed toward the whole cultural establishment, including the morality of existing society ... there is one thing we can say with complete assurance. The traditional idea of revolution and the traditional strategy of revolution have ended. These ideas are old-fashioned ... what we must undertake is a type of diffuse and dispersed disintegration of the system." This sentiment was first expressed by the early 20th century Italian Marxist, Antonio Gramsci.
yitbos
You may worry, but there is no evidence that two loving gay parents in a stable relationship damage children whom they raise. I know one such couple, who adopted two kids, out of a foster home, and they are marvelous parents. The kids are thriving. I have seen it with my own two little beady eyes. There is a rigorous screening process for such adoptions, at least in Orange County, and the applicants must go through a 100 hour class first.
"There is no *right* to a mother and father..."
That you believe this has been very helpful to banning gay marriage. Every liberal candidate should be captioned with that exact quote.
"I will repeat that I understand how hard it is for those on the extremes to see that it is not their place to control others' choices."
I also understand your deep mental deficiency. The sentiment is completely mutual.
I don't think anyone (or almost anyone) here has faulted Rosie O'Donnell in her parenting. By all accounts, she seems to be a good parent.
Do we fault her stupid political ideas?? YOU BET!!!
DSM 2 manual.
Now is the DSM IVR check it out and see if you are correct
Some of these folks don't have a clue about what they are talking about. None. They are just pounding the keyboard. They have no evidence, statistical, anecdotal, or otherwise. None of them know gay couples with children personally I suspect. None.
Did I say Townhall was the MSM? No! Many people are voicing their opinions that the MSM will blow this out of proportion to the liberals advantage to somehow make it "Bush's Fault" once again.
"...living in abject squalor with no hope of ever getting a quality education, or opportunity in their lives...."
You obviously know nothing about El Salvador. It is a beautiful country. Go there and look for an orphanage that can be described as "squalor". You'll not find one. There are poor people there but 97 percent are a very clean and well-fed poor people.
Political conservatives are conservative on morality...and that includes being pro-life, which one cannot be if one is pro-embryonic stem cell research. "Free thought" is usually a code-word for atheism (often linked to evolution) which also is not a conservative position. I'd wager that 98% of professed conservatives are theists....
...If you want to disagree with the immorality here, fine, it is a free country, but please don't shame the name "conservative" by calling yourself one.
Obviously Central Scrutiniser is not a True Scotsman.
I am a straight conservative who had breast cancer at 26.
In spite of the inspring sitcoms...there aren't a whole lot of men who want a woman without breasts.
I would have loved to be pregnant. To go through the whole experience. Why do you think Mary would not want to do the same?
Why should Mary not want to carry a child, give birth?
I am hoping this viewpoint will pass away in a generation...and I am not young.
You'll have to pardon me, but I don't find it very impressive that people found it necessary to crawl over needy children in our own nation to save needy kids overseas.
It's become quite the rage to adopt from overseas. How about jumping in and giving kids from our own nation a happy home.
That would be my first objection. My second objection is that children do best when they have a male and female role model in the home. God didn't provide Adam and Steve or Eve and Eva. There was a reason for this IMO.
Now there are times when people have been exposed to kids from overseas through their life travels there, and they stepped in seeing a need. I would admit that could mitigate my comments in the first paragraph.
Perhaps you could give some indication that you are familiar with what the word *rights* means. Socialists believe in *rights* to jobs and certain levels of income - in a *right* to health care etc etc. And you are arguing for a *right* to a mother and father? No, there are no such *rights*.
Yep, the world is changing, the gay people that have kids do so by choice, not by mistake. And the ones that go out of their way to adopt really do set a high standard.
And, like anything: negative, ill informed sterotypes fall when people see the reality that destroys their bias.
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.