Posted on 10/18/2007 3:50:09 AM PDT by gridlock
“It is a label that liberals don’t like because it focuses attention on the fact that families really aren’t any random collection of individuals and that mother and especially fathers do matter.”
Funny, I’ve always pictured liberals as the labelers for their divide and conquer strategy.
Again, my focus here is on the child, not liberals, conservatives, politicians or social scientists. Dumping all this on a new-born is just wrong. No child should grow up believing he is less of a person because he carries some label around defining him as less than the rest of us because his parents weren’t married when he was born.
I’m not condoning having kids out of wedlock. It is not a good idea and puts the child at a disadvantage. I see no need to exponentially aggravate that with social-stigma labels that follow one for life.
Yeah, that happens from time to time. You should try going back every now and again, though. They might surprise you. If not, there are a lot of other churches out there.
“I could care less what a dictionary says on the matter.”
So we get back to how you “feel” about the word. Despite your niggardly approach to the proper use of language, the word has it own proper use and meaning. Words mean things.
Hmmm. I was just thinking, in Biblical times didn't the marriage ceremony just involve meeting each other in the tent and consummating? Maybe I read it wrong.
But to get back to the horrors of Socialized Medicine...
This thread was about Socialized Medicine, after all...
Taxes, sometimes in Europe couples actually pay less in taxes if they live together but don’t marry.
“So we get back to how you “feel” about the word.”
Nope. It’s what I THINK that particular label does to a child in an already disadvantaged situation. It only makes it worse.
“Words mean things.”
They sure do. My point, exactly.
Anyone read the comments.
This is my favorite.
Yet another NHS failing - fortunately for Mr & Miss Jones there weren’t any complications. It’s about time these Hospital trusts became accountable for such actions, but it’ll just go on record as a successful home birth. At least Miss Jones won’t run the risk of getting a hospital infection!
Congratulations to you both.
- Ct, Northants, Northampton
How did that happen? What is the reasoning?
Welfare benefits?
Your article btw makes a point of the illegitimacy of this child. I know you wanted to highlight the “horrors of Socialized Medicine” but there is more than one horror in this story. However it’s your thread so I’ll quit posting on the subject.
Don't do that on my account. Post whatever you want. I think the discussion is legitimate, even if it was not my intended result.
I think the denigration of the family is another product of expanded government and removal of responsibility from the individual. For instance, if I am to be responsible for the health care costs of a child, it strengthens my legal and moral connections to that child. Removing those responsibilities allows me to be more casual about my connection, since I know the child will be cared for, in a medical sense, whether I do take responsibility or not.
And don't even get me into the perverse incentives governments create against marriage. My tag-line is not an accident. In many cases the child is better off, in narrow terms of taxation and benefits, if the parents are not married. This is idiotic, but governments do this sort of thing all the time.
So I don't think this line of discussion is much all that far off the mark. Illegitimacy is just another symptom.
What I believe is the problem is that when a couple marries it pushes them into a higher tax bracket. If they file separately though they both stay in smaller brackets.
Perhaps they don’t feel the need to have their relationship registered with the same government that runs this sorry excuse for a medical care system.
When I realized that this labor was actually going too quickly, I called the county EMT unit. They did send an ambulance, but I had already delivered our son and had cleaned his nose and mouth out, and handed him to his mother when the EMTs arrived.
Ha! It never even got reported in the local paper. The following week, something very similar happened in Kansas City and there was a half page on it in the Kansas City Star. I was real jealous! /s
That’s hardly just in Europe. Many couples here come out way ahead financially if they don’t register their relationship with the government. And many elderly folks who have found a new partner after the death of their spouse would have to give up their Social Security survivor benefits, and also private pension survivor benefits, if they registered their relationship with the government. Government involvement in people’s personal relationships serves only the interests of government.
Yeah, we wouldn’t want “shame” to influence someone’s decisions to take the right and traditional path, now, would we?
Had that experience when I was in my teens as well.
Find a church with some grownups, preferably in a larger setting.
It seems that smaller settings get “cliquish” with folks who like to be kings of their little molehills.
The words “Bastard”, “illegitimate”, and others are
CONSEQUENCES
for the choices the parents made.
To avoid the consequences, MAKE DIFFERENT CHOICES.
Removing the consequences is what the “liberals” do in order to make sure that the wrong choices continue to be made.
A preview of HillaryCare. When the hospitals are full, they would recommend an aspirin, except for the unavailability of aspirin.
But the aspirin, if it were available, would be free!
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.