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.
If I knew you didn't eat beaf and, because I am fortunate to live in the Northwest, I would have roasted a Sockeye salmon on a cedar plank. One thing you always do when eating them is watch those bones.
When you really read what he had to say that argument could be made.
Then there's this from the same source: "Go into a closet and pray."
Or my personal favorite: "Judge not, lest ye be judged." And I know we are all going to be judged, and we're all going to be found wanting.
Am I thrilled about this couple bringing a child into the world under these circumstances?
Nope. I'm not thrilled.
Is it better than what millions of other kids in the world have starting out?
You betcha.
Is it any of my damned business?
As long as they don't have their hands on my wallet, it isn't.
Being a parent is a damned tough job. For them it's going to be even tougher. For the childs sake I wish them the best of luck.
L
In principal, I think they are pretty much the same.
What the cannon fodder deviates don't realize is that when the society is changed to their way of liking, they will be a minority, easily identified, and the new elite will exterminate them first.
"Oh, no. We will have a different culture. We will be in charge. We love all deviancy" Sorry, the puppet masters must exterminate their puppets once the puppets think they are in control. Ever thus. Puppet masters don't tolerate deviant, perverted puppets for long. And all along the perverted puppets think they are "the norm" not deviant.
yitbos
Your post 95. Excellently said.
But what if Hydrogen were without sin? Where would we be?
I would have fragrant Iris flowers for you. However, my analogy was not intended to be a romantic dinner. If I wanted a romantic dinner, I would have served oysters!
Thanks very much for correcting my poor memory of the Bible. I very much appreciate it. And if you'll scroll down just a few more you'll have yet another opportunity to correct me.
LOL.
I'll catch some flack for saying this I'm sure. But I would have been thrilled to have two parents of whatever sex who weren't either drunk or beating the crap out of one of us when I was a kid.
Somebody on this thread said no kid 'wants' to be fatherless. Well the day my old man walked out all I felt was a tremendous sense of relief.
I knew once he was gone I wasn't going to have to hide or duck when he was around. Getting knocked into walls gets pretty old when you're a kid. Seeing your mother get dragged around by the hair also leaves quite an impression on youngsters.
He's been born again and has asked for our forgiveness. I'm obligated to do it and let bygones be bygones. He's a pretty decent guy now that he's gotten himself straightened out.
But back in the bad old days all I wanted was for him to be gone and I wouldn't have cared if my mom had let a left handed red headed 7 foot tall lesbian amazon warrior with three eyes move in with her as long as the beatings stopped.
L
Well, remember when Madonna adopted the kid, alot of folks went into frenzied fits.
But these days, you can't turn on the tube without some celebrity begathon going on, and as soon as it's over, you know most of them are just jumping on a plane to head back to Aspen.
But Madonna was actually DOING something about it, I saw a few interviews and you could tell she was and is genuinely concerned about the kids welfare.
So I dunno, sometimes it seems with all the crap going on in the world, we need to pay attention to the good part of things. Ever since BK and their "Have it your way" stuff, some people seem to think the world revolves around them.
Another way of saying "single moms."
Why call yourself anything then if the word has no meaning?
My wife and I are facilitators in a marriage preparation program. Almost everytime I hear the statement (inside and outside of the program) "the divorce rate is 50%", I cannot let it go unchallenged.
Although the divorce rate in the US has increased over the last 4 decades, the divorce rate is NOT 50%. Some idiot writer back in the late 90's (I believe 1998) saw the number of marriages and divorces in the US as 2.2 million and 1.1 million, respectively. The person came to the incorrect conclusion that the divorce rate was 50% - 1.1 is half of 2.2. IF 100% of the divorces that year were from the 2.2 million that got married that year, yes, the divorce rate of the people being married in that year would be 50%. The person who read and misinterpreted the data failed to recognize the divorce rate is made up of ALL marriages and ALL divorces, not just 1998's numbers. Add to that the fact that those who remarry after a divorce have an even greater likelihood of divorcing again.
You can google the research and depending upon what year you will find the divorce rate for first marriages is somewhere between 20 and 35%. The exact rate is dependent upon age at time of marriage, cohabitation before marriage, the religion (if any) of the couple and so many other factors.
Glad I could help...
Why, you ranting religious nut! ;^)
I'd say things turned out OK for your entire family. :)
I did an entire graduate thesis on marriage law and policy. I'm not going to reproduce my bibliography here; but here are a couple of sources:
Sandra L. Hofferth and Kermyt G. Anderson, "Are All Dads Equal? Biology versus Marriage as a Basis for Paternal Investment," Journal of Marriage and Family 65 (February 2003): 213-232.
Mary Parke, 2003. “Are Married Parents Really Better for Children? What Research Says About the Effects of Family Structure on Child Well-Being,” CLASP Policy Brief no. 3 (Washington, D.C.: Center for Law and Social Policy) (May): 6. Concludes that children raised by same-sex parents are comparable to children raised by divorced heterosexual parents regarding school performance, behavior problems, emotional problems, early pregnancy, or difficulties finding employment. However, "children of divorce are at higher risk for many of these problems than children of married parents.”
There are a number of studies out there that are "studies of studies" -- analyses of whether the studies claiming that gay parenting is just as good are validly conducted studies. They find that there are few studies to begin with, and that they are not well-constructed studies. The simple fact is, there are no comparable data available, since gay marriage has only been allowed for a very short time in a very few places. But some of the highlights I have read are that in Holland, which has had gay marriage for a long time, the rate of heterosexual marriage has declined since gay marriage was introduced, and neither group is investing as much in children, so that family life in general is in decline; also, that due to the reluctance of many gays/lesbians to "come out" or to participate openly in studies, the ones who do participate in studies tend to be the models of excellence with high incomes and good circumstances.
If you want to read a bunch of studies online, and it is important to read studies critically and in their entirety and not just cherry-pick a line here or there, here are a few to get you started:
Review Of Research On Homosexual Parenting, Adoption, And Foster Parenting(download .pdf at the red link)
Marriage: What Social Science Says and Doesn't Say
Heritage Family and Marriage Research
Family Research Council research topics page
Woman Reared In Same-Sex Household Speaks Out Against Gay Marriage
As long as we're not treated to a remake of "Mommy Dearest" in a couple of decades I'm ok with it.
If I had Madonnas money I'd probably adopt a couple of dozen disadvantaged kids. Let's ask the child in about 18 years if he's happy being raised by one of the wealthiest people in the world or if he'd rather go back to a mud hut and watch his kids die of malaria, or dengue fever, or yellow fever, or starvation, or dysentery.
But everybody seems to want to worry about other folks instead of worrying about themselves.
Hell folks were scandalized by Joan Crawford adopting when she wasn't married at the time. Now it turns out old Joan was nuttier than a squirrel turd but I think you can see my point.
L
P.S. NO MORE WIRE HANGERS!
Thanks, i think Centra Scrutiniser is a bit too dense to understand a simple point. :)
The whole point is that condemning Mary Cheney is a pretty lousy reflection on the condemner - not on Mary Cheney - who in all likelihood - will be an excellent parent.
I am so sorry to hear about your son-in-law. Sincere condolences to you and all your family, Graybeard.
Regarding the topic of this thread, there is a world of difference between a child who can remember or learn about his or her genuine biological father (a father who would have stayed with them if he could have, who loved their mother and whose memory is cherished by her), and the child with two mommies whose father's identity is unknown or suppressed. There is no comparison.
I pray for your daughter's and grandchildren's comfort and strength from the Holy Spirit in coping with the untimely loss of their husband and father.
Actually the turned out better than ok. Mom met a great guy and married him. They've been together 30 years now.
The old man found God, got born again, and has sincerely apologized for his past behavior. He found a very nice lady and they've been together for something like 20 years.
Mom, with the grace of God and the help of AA, has been stone cold sober for over 15 years now.
All of us kids but one are marrried with our own families. Nobody has done any prison time.
So considering the way things could have turned out most days I get out of bed and while I'm performing my daily rituals I say a short little 'thank you' to the Man Upstairs.
He's blessed me far beyond anything I deserve and for that I am profoundly grateful. It just seems that I'd be being very petty if I started ripping on other folks who are just trying to have the same sort of thing I do.
These women aren't harming anyone as far as I can see. I say they should be left in peace to do the best they can under some pretty difficult cirmumstances.
If folks are really concerned it seems to me that a short sincere prayer to the Big Guy asking for Him to watch over the Cheneys and their child would be the appropriate thing to do.
But what the hell do I know...
L
I keep reaqding this dreck. I am not homo phobic, even if I find the whole lifestyle disgusting at a visceral level.
However, I would like to see a source for the assertion, something to back up the concept that it was the "homophobic Christian Right" that somehow stayed home and cost liberal Republicans the election because one congressman happened to resign at an inopportune time.
The real tragedy of the 2006 midterm is that Republicans were generally outmaneuvered by Democrats who presented themselves as more Conservative, and the Republican response has been push to become more liberal. Wrong way, Corrigan.
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.