Reducing inequality: Not more government - More marriage.

[chanel]

The largest predictor of child poverty is a single-parent household. Family instability, and not racism or bias, has created different classes of children. And since liberals are big on class warfare and social justice, they should wage war on single parenthood and make marriage — the legal union between one man and one woman — a social justice issue. In the name of human rights, strongly recommend people marry before having children. Marriage would decrease children’s risk of poverty and the social pathologies associated with growing up in a home with no father.

Liberals spent years undermining the family. Now Daddy Government has replaced irreplaceable biological fathers, and the result is inequality. The irony is bitter. In the warped world of traditional family opponents, however, it seems a far, far better thing that a woman and her children depend on the government instead of a husband and father.

The solution to reducing inequality isn’t more government, but more marriage. Although the government has no power to make people marry before having children, branding marriage a social justice issue might inspire liberals to focus less on social programs and more on that stifling, patriarchal institution called the traditional family.

That irony is sweet.

PJ Media » Marriage: A Social Justice Issue?

 

[WillowTree]

you must never speak of the 72% born out of wedlock situation in the black communities, you will be at all times labeled a racist and accused of all kinds of evilness for not wanting to feed hungry mothers and children.

 

[chanel]

The article was written by a black woman.

La Shawn Barber is a freelance writer who blogs at La Shawn Barber's Corner.

Every time I see a young pregnant woman I know I always say "Congratulations! When did you get married?" They think I'm funny.

Doing things in the right order: school, marriage, home, baby, etc. can mean the difference between poverty and success. It's no guarantee; but the statistics are pretty damn telling.

 

[uscitizen]

Hmm we used to brand out of wedlock pregnancies as shameful.
We now pay out of wedlock mothers 1/4 million to tell others to not have sex outside of marriage.
Well one other one anyway.

 

[chanel]

We have one of the highest teen pregnancy rates in the state (and it's not just a "black issue").

The girls get special treatment at school and everyone gives them lots of attention. It's so incredibly sad.

Should they be shamed? No. Should they be congratulated? Hell no.

How about just a little honesty? How about a few statistics in those sex ed. classes?

 

[uscitizen]

Should they be shamed? Hell yes!
They made a big mistake and should be reminmded of that so that others may not make the same mistake.

And I am not speaking of a moral mistake but of a fiscal and functional one.
They have jsut made their and their childs life much more difficult and cut way down the chances of success for themselves or their child.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The largest predictor of child poverty is a single-parent household. Family instability, and not racism or bias, has created different classes of children. And since liberals are big on class warfare and social justice, they should wage war on single parenthood and make marriage — the legal union between one man and one woman — a social justice issue. In the name of human rights, strongly recommend people marry before having children. Marriage would decrease children’s risk of poverty and the social pathologies associated with growing up in a home with no father.

Liberals spent years undermining the family. Now Daddy Government has replaced irreplaceable biological fathers, and the result is inequality. The irony is bitter. In the warped world of traditional family opponents, however, it seems a far, far better thing that a woman and her children depend on the government instead of a husband and father.

The solution to reducing inequality isn’t more government, but more marriage. Although the government has no power to make people marry before having children, branding marriage a social justice issue might inspire liberals to focus less on social programs and more on that stifling, patriarchal institution called the traditional family.

That irony is sweet.

PJ Media » Marriage: A Social Justice Issue?

Another excellent spotlight from Chanel....
...rep on the way.

In his excellent book, "Coming Apart," Charles Murray castigates the elites, the college educated, the wealthy who accept this behavior that dooms whole generations to poverty.


One change in societal attitude has been the “ecumenical niceness”…don’t fight, share toys, take turns….and never, ever be judgmental. As a result, the upper cultural class, which has stabilized by returning to more traditional ways, survives, yet these individuals will not criticize the behaviors which are destroying the lower cultural class.

a. “For Women Under 30, Most Births Occur Outside Marriage” http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/18/us/for-women-under-30-most-births-occur-outside-marriage.html

b. “One group still largely resists the trend: college graduates, who overwhelmingly marry before having children. That is turning family structure into a new class divide, …” Ibid.

c. The elites must preach what they practice.

 

[chanel]

From the NY Times:

Estimates vary widely, but scholars have said that changes in marriage patterns — as opposed to changes in individual earnings — may account for as much as 40 percent of the growth in certain measures of inequality. Long a nation of economic extremes, the United States is also becoming a society of family haves and family have-nots, with marriage and its rewards evermore confined to the fortunate classes.

Mr. Western found that the growth in single parenthood in recent decades accounted for 15 percent to 25 percent of the widening income gaps. (Estimates depend on the time period, the income tiers and the definition of inequality.) Gary Burtless of the Brookings Institution found it to account for 21 percent. Robert Lerman of the Urban Institute, comparing lower-middle- and upper-middle-income families, found that single parenthood explained about 40 percent of inequality’s growth. “That’s not peanuts,” he said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/15/us/two-classes-in-america-divided-by-i-do.html?_r=2&pagewanted=all

 

[SniperFire]

Cut off the free gubmint money.

Problem solved as well as it can be solved.

 

[Seawytch]

Does that go for the queers too?

 

[SniperFire]

The direct cause and effect between cranking out bastard children and inequality in our society should be front and center in political discussion.

 

[Gadawg73]

Over the last 50 years single mother head of households have grown times FIVE.
Over the last 50 years child poverty has grown times FIVE.
Do the math.
And the big fact in all of this is that in over 50% of these households the grandfather and great grandfaher were never in the household of the grandmothers and great grandmothers.
A cycle of irresponsibility.
When I started my detective agency in the early 80s we saw numerous dead beat Dads locked up at the drop of a hat. But with the current policies of wasting tax dollars on the War on Drugs, senior services and the trillions that come with that, children now take a back seat. To hell with them, they are someone else's problem. The courts do little or nothing now as there is no $$$ and the prisons are full of petty dope peddlers.
Chain gangs for dead beat Dads would solve half of this problem.

 

[Gadawg73]

Does that go for the queers too?

I do not see this as a gay/straight issue.

 

[Seawytch]

Does that go for the queers too?

I do not see this as a gay/straight issue.

Marriage isn't a gay/straight issue...or it shouldn't be. The OP is calling for more marriage. Does that include us or not?

 

[Care4all]

We have one of the highest teen pregnancy rates in the state (and it's not just a "black issue").

The girls get special treatment at school and everyone gives them lots of attention. It's so incredibly sad.

Should they be shamed? No. Should they be congratulated? Hell no.

How about just a little honesty? How about a few statistics in those sex ed. classes?

For the most part in this country, when women were shunned for being pregnant out of wedlock, abortion was not legal. (And the men who got the girl pregnant were shunned and shamed as well, in to marrying whomever they got pregnant...it's not that women were not screwing before marriage back then like some seem to imply, but it was the MEN who took responsibility for knocking up their girl back then, and THIS is what has changed imho)

Today, abortion is legal and it could be a fine line in shunning the women for being pregnant and keeping their child to be, or shunning them enough to push them through shame, in to keeping it hush hush and having an abortion.

Unless that is all fine and dandy with the right wing, they better be careful of what they propose regarding this issue...think it through from all angles....

 

[Care4all]

I had read somewhere, that in the 1950's, out of all marriages in the USA, 60% of those that had children within the first year of marriage, their child was born before 7 months of marriage. What's that mean folks? It means these women and men were expecting a baby before they tied the knot. So to me, although it is looser than goose today, it was pretty loose for the times back then too! BUT the difference was that MEN married the girl they got pregnant....no?

 

[Listening]

Does that go for the queers too?

When you've got something useful to contribute, I won't think of you as a the jackass you seem to be.

 

[Listening]

I had read somewhere, that in the 1950's, out of all marriages in the USA, 60% of those that had children within the first year of marriage, their child was born before 7 months of marriage. What's that mean folks? It means these women and men were expecting a baby before they tied the knot. So to me, although it is looser than goose today, it was pretty loose for the times back then too! BUT the difference was that MEN married the girl they got pregnant....no?

And I read somewhere that the moon was made of green cheese.

How about a link.

 

[SniperFire]

Does that go for the queers too?

When you've got something useful to contribute, I won't think of you as a the jackass you seem to be.

It was a revealing post, however.

Seawytch is just reflecting the 'us vs. them' mentality of today's Leftist voting bloc.

They must support and defend each other's atrocities to protect their own.

 

[Listening]

The article was written by a black woman.

La Shawn Barber is a freelance writer who blogs at La Shawn Barber's Corner.

Every time I see a young pregnant woman I know I always say "Congratulations! When did you get married?" They think I'm funny.

Doing things in the right order: school, marriage, home, baby, etc. can mean the difference between poverty and success. It's no guarantee; but the statistics are pretty damn telling.

I have a friend who works in an inner city school. She is white and has five kids. Her story:

A young black 1st grader is talking to her. He asks how many kids she has. She says five. He asks how many "daddies" to the kids have. She says one. The kid says "bulls**t, ain't no two kids have the same daddy."

She says that to talk to them, it is pretty much accepted that no two kids from the same woman has the same father, but that the same guy can father several kids by different mothers.

And some want us to think that is O.K.