Posted on 09/04/2007 6:08:36 AM PDT by madprof98
I know many women who are white, single parent moms doing a darn good job of rearing their child (born out-of-wedlock) and holding a job. They may need help from TANF or food stamps, but they aren't TOO PROUD to accept the help to make a life for their kids. In 99% of these cases they are FAR better off this way, than with the LOW LIFER male who impregnanted them.
As for the government trying to re-connect these people...what an insane idea!
Ok. That is my 2 cents worth, backing up my friends who are making a life for themselves and their unplanned children. Praise the Lord they are not on FR to be insulted by some of the comments here.
Perhaps the LIGHT needs to be shed on the real issue...societal norms that have crashed and burned into moral indecency....look at the cause not the effect.
Books about it, web sights documenting the fraud will do nothing until the media are confronted in front of their audience.
The MSM will mount a counter attack, but the idea is to shake the thinkers loose and provide them a path to the truth.
The closest of anyone to doing that is Ann Coulter. But even she pulls back from the obvious (after a lot of soul searching, that is) conclusion that "objective journalism" can never be anything but a fraud from top to bottom, with no more substance than an offer to sell you the Brooklyn Bridge.
It's interesting steam of conscious thoughts spun with logic occasionally wind up being a bit more profound than originally intended.
Does appears to be a bit of a hurdle doesn't it.
How about this approach, instead of conservatives, let's look to another loosley affiliated group; the Republicans to fight the battle.
The MSM require Republicans in interview(confrontation) and debate to maintain their facade. Republicans can not simply boycott the MSM as the MSM would have free reign to define them... in a bad way.
On-air confrontations? Effective possibly but for a very short time. After a number of Republican on-air confrontations the MSM, the MSM would begin preparing spin lines to counter the charges.
Liberal leadership works that way; always a reason offered providing a neural path for the justification of not believing the obvious.
Therefore, I would have to concure, "objective journalism" can never be anything but a fraud from top to bottom
Regards
The left will not credit the family as a socio-economic institution, because they wish to remove all institutions, chiefly the church and family, between the individual and the state.
Greg F wrote: “Condoning and encouraging sin is always wrong, regardless of your own past.”
Very well said, Greg. I’ve made many serious mistakes in my own life. Why would I encourage my children to repeat them?
Very well said, Greg. I’ve made many serious mistakes in my own life. Why would I encourage my children to repeat them?
__________________
Yah, in recovery programs it’s almost always former addicts that take the lead in the groups. That is not considered hypocritical. But in the areas outside of addiction it is labeled hypocritical if someone did something and then speaks out against it.
Very apt point.Former addicts (ie, sinners) always have to take the lead in rejecting addiction (sin). Even - nay, especially - if they themselves are capable of relapse.
The thing most people really don’t want to talk about: The best way to avoid out of wedlock births and the usually resulting ‘poverty’ is to abstain from sex until marriage. (And to exercise your thinking capabilities and not just your emotions when choosing a spouse.)
I worked with a woman who said the father was unknown, even though the father was her husband (by the time she knew she was pregnant, they were seperated and she had filed for divorce), because he turned out to be a bad guy and she didn't want him to have the legal right to continued contact.
The thing most people really don’t want to talk about: The best way to avoid out of wedlock births and the usually resulting ‘poverty’ is to abstain from sex until marriage. (And to exercise your thinking capabilities and not just your emotions when choosing a spouse.)
___________________________________
The young people really, radically, underestimate the value of their opportunity if they look for the right person rather than easy sex. They are completely free to choose their wife or husband, without a sexually transmissible disease haunting the relationship, or an unexpected pregnancy forcing the marriage, or worst of all an unexpected pregnancy tempting them to murder their own child and a lifetime of guilt once they realize what they did. That freedom is so incredibly valuable because the right marriage is so incredibly valuable. As a guy in his forties who was a batchelor late into life I would say that your marriage is THE most important thing in your life with the exception of your relationship with God, and your marriage will effect that relationship as well I think. It is much more important than career, investments, your home, and even the family you are born into. The kids don’t realize what a huge thing they endanger (in reality, often give up) by partying and “hooking up” when they could be looking for the one thing that will determine the path of their life more than anything else. Wish I could just lecture every teenager and twenty something in the country on this. They give up the most important thing in the world for them (getting the most important relationship in their lives right) for one of the least important things in the world (a roll in the hay). The problem is that they think they will settle down at some point, without consequences. They don’t realize how quick life comes at them, how much damage one bad or unlucky decision can do, and how important that one woman or man is when they meet the “right” person. I know a lot of women that I went to school with, no kids, great career, empty lives.
Bears repeating.
There is a young woman at my office, now over 30, who has been living with her boyfriend for close to two years now. She was 27 or 28 when they moved in together. The whole time she has wanted marriage and she’d be a great wife and mother. I want to tell her . . . how incredibly dumb she is being. She could just date and if he asks he asks, and if he doesn’t she hasn’t cut herself off from every other opportunity for years. People do the stupidest things.
So many young people assume that at a later point in life, they will suddenly become different from the shallow, irresponsible people they have spent their whole lives becoming--and, even more, that all their associates will experience a similar transformation. They refuse to admit that "hooking up" and "shacking up" are poor ways to prepare for a lifetime of fidelity and commitment, and if/when they do marry, they end up with partners prepared about as well as they are.
Sad but true.
>>We are told every day and in various ways by people who insist they are smarter than the rest of us that children can be raised just as well by single parents, by or by two people of the same sex sharing a “committed” relationship.
To bring a concrete example to your very true statement, Hollywood and Lefty academics made fun of Dan Quayle in the 1980s, because he suggested that Candice Bergen and the writers of the popular TV show Murphy Brown were doing the country a disservice, for encouraging single motherhood by having Murphy have a baby as an unwed mother.
And the date they imagine this transformation occuring gets pushed out and out. High schoolers think they will grow up in college, or once they graduate, and then in college they think they will get serious once their career is on track, or when they reach 30, and then they think they will magically meet the right person, and then they stop thinking because they will have to face up to the fact that they are now relying on luck, in a long shot situation, to bring them the right person, who is also ready for marriage, in a very limited amount of time -- when they could have been looking for decades and making their own "luck." The kids that get it right early are in a great position in life.
Thanks for the ping. Very good article by James Wooten. Thanks for posting. Interesting thread (read every post). Thanks to all contributors.
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.