DGS49
Diamond Member
I just finished watching a 15-minute video of Ann Counter being interviewed on one of the daytime talk shows. This one was some guy in a clerical collar in front of an audience of women.
Briefly, Ms. Coulter's point was that if any pregnant single girl/woman wants to "do what is best" for her unborn child, she will make arrangements to give that child up for adoption. Her argument is based on overwhelming statistical evidence that the children of single mothers are MANY times more likely than a child of an intact couple to (a) drop out of school (b) do drugs, (c) end up in jail, (d) [do every other bad think you can imagine].
And as with all of what she says, she has published a book where the studies confirming her points are set forth in excruciating detail.
To be clear, she is not rendering her "feelings" on the point, merely pointing out the FACT, as illustrated by a mountain of statistics, produced by agencies and organizations coming from all over the political spectrum. FACT: Children of single mothers are MUCH MORE LIKELY TO HAVE MESSED UP LIVES than children of married couple. Not OPINION, FACT.
After briefly making her point, the Host threw his hissy fit, and 5-6 women in the audience threw their respective hissy fits, punctuated by numerous gratuitous.
But NOT A SINGLE RESPONSE was a rebuttal of her point. Every single one, was...
I know a woman who.....
I was raise by a single mother and.....
I know a married couple who fight all the time, and...
I know single mothers who work their asses off...
I'm a single mother and my kids get.....
Are we, as a nation, too stupid to understand how to form a cogent rebuttal to something we disagree with? Are we too stupid to comprehend that "I know a guy..." is not a rebuttal to a statistical point?
Question the relevance, question the methodology, cite a conflicting study.
Statistics are not "hurtful" or "insulting." They speak for themselves. If I'm a Catholic geezer and someone cites a study that says 92% of Catholic geezers beat their wives I have no reason to be insulted. If I think the study is bogus, then I can question how they define "Catholic," or what constitutes "beating your wife," or how the statistical sampling was conducted. That's how you dispute the findings of a study. You DON'T say, "I know a bunch of Catholic geezers who don't beat their wives." That's just stupid.
Briefly, Ms. Coulter's point was that if any pregnant single girl/woman wants to "do what is best" for her unborn child, she will make arrangements to give that child up for adoption. Her argument is based on overwhelming statistical evidence that the children of single mothers are MANY times more likely than a child of an intact couple to (a) drop out of school (b) do drugs, (c) end up in jail, (d) [do every other bad think you can imagine].
And as with all of what she says, she has published a book where the studies confirming her points are set forth in excruciating detail.
To be clear, she is not rendering her "feelings" on the point, merely pointing out the FACT, as illustrated by a mountain of statistics, produced by agencies and organizations coming from all over the political spectrum. FACT: Children of single mothers are MUCH MORE LIKELY TO HAVE MESSED UP LIVES than children of married couple. Not OPINION, FACT.
After briefly making her point, the Host threw his hissy fit, and 5-6 women in the audience threw their respective hissy fits, punctuated by numerous gratuitous.
But NOT A SINGLE RESPONSE was a rebuttal of her point. Every single one, was...
I know a woman who.....
I was raise by a single mother and.....
I know a married couple who fight all the time, and...
I know single mothers who work their asses off...
I'm a single mother and my kids get.....
Are we, as a nation, too stupid to understand how to form a cogent rebuttal to something we disagree with? Are we too stupid to comprehend that "I know a guy..." is not a rebuttal to a statistical point?
Question the relevance, question the methodology, cite a conflicting study.
Statistics are not "hurtful" or "insulting." They speak for themselves. If I'm a Catholic geezer and someone cites a study that says 92% of Catholic geezers beat their wives I have no reason to be insulted. If I think the study is bogus, then I can question how they define "Catholic," or what constitutes "beating your wife," or how the statistical sampling was conducted. That's how you dispute the findings of a study. You DON'T say, "I know a bunch of Catholic geezers who don't beat their wives." That's just stupid.