livius: “The problem is not “single mothers,” because historically, there have always been a lot of them, either because Daddy got killed in the wars, Daddy was just a passing fancy, or for other reasons totally beyond anybody’s control.”
It’s all a matter of degree. If you’re making the point that single mothers made up a significant portion of the population historically, I have to disagree. Yes. There were men killed in wars, but the number of males killed versus those not killed was relatively insignificant (at least in America).
The US in WWII had about 130 million souls, but it only lost a bit more than 400 thousand killed. I’m not making light of the men killed, but compared to roughly 65 million men in the population at that time, you’re talking about a very tiny percent killed. That’s hardly “a lot” of single mothers.
I submit that nothing in American history comes even remotely close to the single motherhood rates (or attitudes) of today. In the past, I bet single mothers usually remarried fairly quickly, and having a child out of wedlock was (rightly) considered a bad thing. For the relatively small numbers of widows who didn’t remarry, society was generally supportive. Being a widow didn’t bear the same negative connotation as being an unmarried mother.
However, you’re right that nowadays most folks see nothing wrong with sex outside of marriage. Spiritually, the rules are the same as always, so fornicators and adulterers are still destined to Hell if they don’t repent. Unfortunately, that message no longer resonates with many people who think that being “non judgmental” is the greatest moral attribute one can have.
England lost a huge percentage of its male population in WWI, and many other European countries experienced vast losses of males in 19th century European wars. There were entire villages of spinsters in Spain and France because there were no males left to marry them, and the only children belonged to widows.
But the point is that there are many situations in which children have been brought up by the mother alone, and this does not automatically produce a damaged child. Even if the mother is pregnant out of wedlock, it’s better for her to have the child, because then there is at least a chance of happiness and of turning things around. And of course, it’s a lot better for the child not to be aborted!
I’d rather be the child of a single mother than dead, personally. So I don’t like it when people put pressure on single mothers to abort. Blacks have a hugely high rate of illegitimacy (something like 80%, I believe) and an abortion rate of 60%, so they seem to have the worst of both worlds.
But, that said, “single motherhood” is certainly not a desirable thing, particularly if it becomes a staple in certain communities (such as blacks and, increasingly, lower income whites like Casey Anthony).
Very good post, thank you.