Posted on 01/08/2009 8:52:24 AM PST by lewisglad
Uber conservative political commentator and author, Ann Coulter, is drumming up controversy among the masses with her new book Guilty: Liberal Victims and Their Assault on America.
The gist of her book? Liberals "playing victim" when she believes them to be the actual "victimizers."
With anything Coulter has her hand in, this latest installment is sure to get tempers flaring, especially among single mothers.
Monday night Coulter appeared on Fox News Channel's Hannity & Colmes.
Tuesday morning Coulter made a controversial appearance on NBC's Today Show (after her originally scheduled appearance was cancelled.)
In both appearances, Coulter's lastest stabs at single motherhood were discussed.
Alan Colmes quoted Coulter's book, "Single motherhood is like a farm team for future criminals and social outcasts."
And finally, "We have a term for youngsters involved, the 'children of divorce,' or as I call them, 'future strippers.'"
Coulter reverted her argument about single motherhood back to what she believes to be our country's recent "hatred" of the institution of marriage and made mention of Hollywood's promotion of single motherhood.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
I agree that the two-parent family is ideal. But, the social pathologies caused by kids of single mothers tend to come from the demographic of uneducated, poor, teenage single mothers. I doubt many gang-bangers and other assorted criminals have a a single lawyer or doctor for a mother.
Of course she isn't. But not being in support of divorce is a long way from prohibiting it.
She's telling uncomfortable truths, not banning anything.
And just out of curiosity did Coulter offer any solutions? Or was she having too much fun ripping people down to come up with any?
Is anyone on the Left interested in Ann's solutions?
Implicit in the statement, "It's stupid for people to glorify single motherhood and encourage easy divorce" is the solution: Don't glorify single motherhood and don't encourage easy divorce.
I think that message is pretty clear even without being spelled out in black and white.
She doesn't appeal to people who want everything to be "nice." But she can be effective against liberal bullies who have never been stood up to. Sometimes it takes a 2x4 to the head to keep some people on the straight and narrow.
And her forthrightness connotes confidence, which can get the attention of the wishy-washy, who instinctively gravitate toward strength, or the crowd.
OK, if it means that much to you, you must be right.
I watch the news a lot and with a rare mention on a conservative talk show, I hear nothing concerning Charles Murray book.
Re: She’s telling uncomfortable truths
Calling children of single moms “future criminals” is not a truth, uncomfortable or otherwise.
Oh, really? So you've ranked the classifications of wit. I'd love to see your ranking.
Got it handy?
Look, every abortion is a little atrocity. I’m not arguing that.
The point is, children raised without fathers are overwhelmingly more likely to commit felonies, use drugs, end up incarcerated, etc. etc. etc. This is undeniable. Call it “bashing single mothers” like the liberals do, it won’t change the facts.
A society composed primarily of people raised without fathers is going to be a feral, animal society. To view its rules, you can look at any nature documentary filmed in the Serengeti.
Fools are my theme, let satire be my song.
-Lord Byron
Mocking single mothers is not going to help the cause of hoping pregnant single mothers bring their children to term, it only hurts it.
Using your words, this is undeniable.
According to a Secular Humanist, writing in 2003, we should Legitimize Bastardy!.
And here's a 1989 college sociological history essay also concluding that Bastardy be eliminated as a crime: Bastardy and Baby Farming in Victorian England
The terms Bastardy and Bastard came to be seen as mean. Crude. Rude. "Bastard" was often applied as a most vile pejorative. By the 1970's the law establishment was swayed by the claims of heartlessness. Yet the remedy is worse. It is actual harm, massive harm, not just the sting of a nasty word.
Often the major concern of the Bastardy laws has been inheritance rights. Yet, as we have found -- by our generational experience in a society of wholesale rampant bastardy, those inheritance concerns are secondary.
The primary concern is in establishing cultural norms which encourage raising children in a stable home with BOTH a father and a mother. The fruit of alternative methods of childraising is risky, and the fate of those children born bastards to unmarried women is abysmal, they are lost, they tend to general immorality, theft and violence more readily. They have chips on their shoulders that won't come off , and ....
THEY are now, THEY are our future.
Much of the harm of any situation can be undone by seeing a situation for what it is and then acting in a proper thoughtful response. One can end up in a better place than ever before by so doing.
So it is I ask, having spoken my peace on the matter -- what see you in these bastards, what is the measure by you?
Re: To view its rules, you can look at any nature documentary filmed in the Serengeti.
Do you read the newspaper at all????
Many families comprised of both a father and a mother lead terrible lives because of domestic abuse. Having two parents does is not tantamount to utopia. Sometimes, it is closer to the Serengeti.
Consequences of Artificial MethodsIf you haven't read it, it's a real eye-opener. "The Pill" had a lot to do with the current sad state of affairs.Responsible men can become more deeply convinced of the truth of the doctrine laid down by the Church on this issue if they reflect on the consequences of methods and plans for artificial birth control. Let them first consider how easily this course of action could open wide the way for marital infidelity and a general lowering of moral standards. Not much experience is needed to be fully aware of human weakness and to understand that human beings—and especially the young, who are so exposed to temptation—need incentives to keep the moral law, and it is an evil thing to make it easy for them to break that law. Another effect that gives cause for alarm is that a man who grows accustomed to the use of contraceptive methods may forget the reverence due to a woman, and, disregarding her physical and emotional equilibrium, reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires, no longer considering her as his partner whom he should surround with care and affection.
Excellent! So you do understand.
Ann Coulter is a contemporary satirist who employs sarcasm and hyperbole (as all great satirists do) to attack the foolishness of the Left. By citing Byron, you seem to understand this.
So how can you not appreciate what she does?
If you believe that quote reflects well on satire, then keep on reading Coulter.
That seems to be an established pattern.
We know a woman who had a child this way - running out of time and wanted to do the baby thing. The kid is now in his early 20's and is an absolute mess. One main problem while he was growing up - no discipline. Mother gave him everything and never punished him. Why? No father in the house.
It may sound cruel but there may be a reason you are not married and do not have children. God has a plan for all of us and His plan for may not include children.
LOL!
My apologies. I thought I was debating with someone with an education.
You really have no idea what that Lord Byron citation means, do you?
Yes, except for the case of widows. Interestingly enough, there is no statistical difference in social pathologies between the children of married couples and the children of widowed women.
Of course not all of them, probably not even most of them, but there's a pretty strong correlation between crime and missing fathers. It's quite true.
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.