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.
Freepmail wagglebee or little jeremiah to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda or moral absolutes ping lists.
FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
Either we have the courage of our convictions regardless of who the subject is or we are hypocrites. We CAN'T have it both ways!
That is not true. Socialism does not represent truth. Each individual has a *right* to make the best of the circumstances they find themselves in. They have the *right* to pursue happiness and success. They have a *right* to wish their life was different and to do something about it themselves. There is no *right* to a mother and father or even a good mother and father. I do not think you understand what *rights* are.
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.
Any trolls?
I was going to let that other post go - until I saw yours I supposed most everyone would see how silly it was. Far from pointing out flaws, lonestar's post completely misses the point. In the first place, since virtually all children are raised by heterosexuals, it's completely unsuprising that most homosexuals are raised by heterosexuals.
But where the post goes really astray is by implying the concern is that children raised by homosexuals will become homosexuals themselves when the woory is actually that the children will suffer from not having a mother and a father present, that the nonstandard home environment will hurt them. Now that may be wrong in the present case, but it's not obviously wrong and should therefore not be dismissed out of hand.
And I've seen 14-year old boys:
1) allowed into gay clubs
2) passed around among 30-50+ year old men
3) completely accempted into the culture.
Sorry, the only loser in this gay marriage debate is society. Having lived with gay roommates, having seen that other side, having been to numerous gay establshments, and then having worked in a hospital, there's nothing healthful about the gay lifestyle. At all.
And that will go for parenting, as well.
And that has nothing to do with my former roommate, who I'm still great friends with (even though he is living an incredibly dangerous and unhealthful lifestyle at the moment...).
Yes, it does. It's a wonderful thing to have a child coming-to-be in the Christmas season
I wish the family much happiness!!
BRAVO !
I'll have to say that I do not approve of this situation. Reality being what it is, there's really nothing we can do about it unless we wanted to do things most people whould not accept, me included.
IMO it's a sign of a decaying society.
Isn't it interesting the willingness of the right to accept this situation in light of reality, but the left remains fixated on 'outing' homosexuals in this day and age and damns the right for being mean to homosexuals.
Which party is the most enlightened? It sure as hell isn't the leftist degenerate party that embraces this lifestyle above that of heterosexual households.
You know what is funny?
The same folks a year ago would be in serious denial about Ted Haggard and Mark Foley, they would call you an evil socialist liberal if you dared to note that they were gay.
But, honestly, this time, they are right, really, they are.
LOL
What about individual freedom do you not understand? It may be that you are ignorant of what freedom is and what the United States of America is about.
"Mary Cheney's Pregnancy Affects Us All"
ok...
Moral relativism rears its ugly head.
One may adapt, perhaps, while it is certainly fitting that gays have a selective disadvantage to those with normal mating habits.
Bollocks.
My friends are raising two orphaned sisters from a 3rd world hellhole. They are getting a wonderful life in a loving home.
If that's what you think is a decaying society, then you need to look in the mirror for decay.
"Pro Evolution, Pro Stem Cell Research, Pro Science, Pro Free Thought, and Conservative"
Just what exactly are you conservative about? Economics? You sound like a mislabled libertarian to me.
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.
As far as asking for homosexuals to be left alone--we do leave them alone; at the same time tolerance (practically universally offered all homosexuals these days) is not the same as approval: Mary Cheney is not above criticism for irresponsible and immoral behavior.
According to all conservative value systems (Christian, Jewish, even Islamic and Hindu, for that matter) living in active lesbianism is immoral. Purposely getting pregnant without a husband is also immoral.
No one here is talking about sanctioning Miss Chaney, however we do have the right--and even the responsibility--to condemn immoral behavior, even by (or especially) public figures.
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.
In reading through this string, it appears that the majority vote is for folks to mind their own business and leave Mary Cheney. I agree with the majority view of the posts by the way. However, I do wonder how the vote would turn out if the subject person happened to be a liberal? A conservative just thinking out loud....
Yeah, and Ted Haggard got married and had kids.
He screwed over his wife and his kids because he felt he had to put on a charade to hide the fact that he was gay.
I'd rather have two loving lesbians adopt or have kids than allow a phoney baloney evangelical hypocrite like Haggard to have kids.
Why? Am I going to have to buy a baby shower gift? Babysit the child one night in the future? Go to PTA meetings as a proxy for the parent? How exactly is this going to affect me?
THAT started about 35 years ago with LBJ's war on poverty.
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.