40% of babies born to unmarried women !!!

[severus68]

There is a positive good in avoiding sin and performing virtuous acts, even when your motives are less than pure. After all, it is not as if those who avoided sin in the past because they feared punishment had no other motive than that.

It is not just that there is no shame. There is not even any guilt at falling, because the entire concept of sexual sin is being rejected! If anything, those who maintain virtue are vilified, because they are implying that sin is a real thing! I agree that it is morally wrong to demean the sinner, but God’s law isn’t arbitrary. People are suffering very much from being taught that it is arbitrary, though. You may not be culpable if you’ve been taught lies and believed them, it may even have been a good thing to cut out the high-and-mighty arbitrary consequences against sin, but you aren’t spared the *natural *consequences of not knowing the true consequences of your actions. Those who avoid sin for the wrong reasons don’t avoid the consequences of acting with a bad motive, but at least they avoid the consequences that make the action morally forbidden in the first place, if nothing else.

I mean to say that it is not as if lacking fear of the consequence keeps the consequence from happening. We ought not whack others when they sin, and God doesn’t whack us when we sin. The sin itself still whacks us, though, and that is the worst punishment of all!

Yep. There are places where a woman who has a child outside of wedlock will suffer less stigma than a woman who keeps her virginity and wants to marry a man who has done the same. The woman who has the child without having the husband does not escape the consequences of raising a child who knows his or her father had no interest in staying around, though.

I am sure in the past too, people avoided sin just because it was good to do so. I just think shame and branding someone is counterproductive and wrong.

 

[severus68]

If there’s no social stigma against sin, then that means sin is acceptable socially.

Not everything is a sin just because there is a stigma against it.

 

[severus68]

Is it any wonder why women get abortions instead of keeping the baby. Even with a lesser amount of social stigma in general, it’s still alive, well, and flourishing here on CAF.

So many sinless people who can and will throw the first stone.

 

[severus68]

I got the first part but what are you saying about a woman having an abortion so she doesn’t have to have a baby shower? Can you try that one again?

Me too.

 

[Walking_Home]

Shin:

If there’s no social stigma against sin, then that means sin is acceptable socially

Is it any wonder why women get abortions instead of keeping the baby.** Even with a lesser amount of social stigma in general, it’s still alive, well, and flourishing here on CAF**.

---

Yes – it has been quite disturbing – to find that kind of thinking – still going around.

 

[Walking_Home]

I am sure in the past too, people avoided sin just because it was good to do so.** I just think shame and branding someone is counterproductive and wrong.**

---

Agree.

 

[Sam_777]

If there’s no social stigma against sin, then that means sin is acceptable socially.

Unfortunately .

 

[JaneGrey]

And a lack of stigma and shame has stopped marriages and resulted in a single diget rate of live births to unmarried women to spike to almost a 50% rate in two generations. Where stigma and social shame still exist the rate is still in the single digets.[SIGN][/SIGN]

And would you rather those births have been not ‘live’? I dont think you do, so I honestly do not know what it is you are up in arms about? Do you actually want to stop premarital sex? Because at the rate your posts are going more and more people are going to be alienated.
I am quite sure the Church does not want us to prioritise the abstract ‘wellbeing’ of marriage and social customs over those of individuals, especially when not all marriages are sacramental Christian ones anyway. In their unrelenting bid to protect certain ‘norms’ of society, people can become blind to the big picture and their priorities become way off. It happens both to athiests and the religious.

Marriage rates could spike as high as the sky but without basic human decency and respect for others, civilisation is doomed anyway.

 

[4Squarebaby]

Unless society is willing to punish the Brad Pitt’s, Kourtney Kardasian’s or the boy next door then 40% is just the start. A child born to a married couple will be the exception, not the rule. Fear that someone might get an abortion because she is scorned instead of put on the cover of People magazine is what is causing the high and growing rate in my opinion and is what caught the eye of the original poster.

 

[robotsarecool]

Here is a link with reasons women give for having abortions (since posters have brought up the issue multiple times). 25% of women had one of their reasons that they didn’t want people to know that they had sex or were pregnant. So what other people think has a large impact on the number of abortions.

womensissues.about.com/od/reproductiverights/a/AbortionReasons_2.htm

 

[severus68]

And would you rather those births have been not ‘live’? I dont think you do, so I honestly do not know what it is you are up in arms about? Do you actually want to stop premarital sex? Because at the rate your posts are going more and more people are going to be alienated.
I am quite sure the Church does not want us to prioritise the abstract ‘wellbeing’ of marriage and social customs over those of individuals, especially when not all marriages are sacramental Christian ones anyway. In their unrelenting bid to protect certain ‘norms’ of society, people can become blind to the big picture and their priorities become way off. It happens both to athiests and the religious.

Marriage rates could spike as high as the sky but without basic human decency and respect for others, civilisation is doomed anyway.

Well said!

 

[Walking_Home]

And would you rather those births have been not ‘live’? I dont think you do, so I honestly do not know what it is you are up in arms about? Do you actually want to stop premarital sex? Because at the rate your posts are going more and more people are going to be alienated.
I am quite sure the Church does not want us to prioritise the abstract ‘wellbeing’ of marriage and social customs over those of individuals, especially when not all marriages are sacramental Christian ones anyway. In their unrelenting bid to protect certain ‘norms’ of society, people can become blind to the big picture and their priorities become way off. It happens both to athiests and the religious.

Marriage rates could spike as high as the sky but without basic human decency and respect for others, civilisation is doomed anyway.

---

 

[BlueEyedLady]

Unless society is willing to punish the Brad Pitt’s, Kourtney Kardasian’s or the boy next door then 40% is just the start. A child born to a married couple will be the exception, not the rule. Fear that someone might get an abortion because she is scorned instead of put on the cover of People magazine is what is causing the high and growing rate in my opinion and is what caught the eye of the original poster.

I don’t know anything about the Kardashians, but why punish Brad Pitt? I want him on the cover of People because instead of promoting a new cologne or fashion line he brings attention to a very real and important issue: the need for children in the US and overseas to be adopted. I think condemning the man for adopting starving children from 3rd world countries would do little to help marriage and would be harmful to children.

I am a big believer that regardless of the circumstances they are born into all children are blessings and their births should be celebrated.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

And would you rather those births have been not ‘live’? I dont think you do, so I honestly do not know what it is you are up in arms about? Do you actually want to stop premarital sex? Because at the rate your posts are going more and more people are going to be alienated.
I am quite sure the Church does not want us to prioritise the abstract ‘wellbeing’ of marriage and social customs over those of individuals, especially when not all marriages are sacramental Christian ones anyway. In their unrelenting bid to protect certain ‘norms’ of society, people can become blind to the big picture and their priorities become way off. It happens both to athiests and the religious.

Marriage rates could spike as high as the sky but without basic human decency and respect for others, civilisation is doomed anyway.

Awesome post!

 

[4Squarebaby]

I don’t know anything about the Kardashians, but why punish Brad Pitt? I want him on the cover of People because instead of promoting a new cologne or fashion line he brings attention to a very real and important issue: the need for children in the US and overseas to be adopted. I think condemning the man for adopting starving children from 3rd world countries would do little to help marriage and would be harmful to children.

I am a big believer that regardless of the circumstances they are born into all children are blessings and their births should be celebrated.

And there is the awnser to the OP. I don’t care what Brad Pitt has done. and that he is part of the 40%, I like him. When you can’t or won’t try tohold Brad Pitt to a standard it becomes hypercritical to try to hold others to a standard

 

[BlueEyedLady]

And there is the awnser to the OP. I don’t care what Brad Pitt has done. and that he is part of the 40%, I like him. When you can’t or won’t try tohold Brad Pitt to a standard it becomes hypercritical to try to hold others to a standard

I do care what he’s done. I love what he’s done. He’s given orphans from developing countries a home and a family.

Furthermore as he hasn’t had any bio children he is not counted in the 40% statistic.

 

[newf]

I do care what he’s done. I love what he’s done. He’s given orphans from developing countries a home and a family.

Furthermore as he hasn’t had any bio children he is not counted in the 40% statistic.

Actually, Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie have 3 bio children… Shiloh is the first, and then twins Vivienne and Knox.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

Actually, Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie have 3 bio children… Shiloh is the first, and then twins Vivienne and Knox.

I’m wrong then. Sorry, I really don’t pay too much attention to celebrities.

Even so I still think that they have a lovely, huge family.and I respect that they don’t parade their kids around in the media and public eye. (At least I haven’t noticed that they do. Once again though I’m not the most observant.)

 

[severus68]

Unless society is willing to punish the Brad Pitt’s, Kourtney Kardasian’s or the boy next door then 40% is just the start. A child born to a married couple will be the exception, not the rule. Fear that someone might get an abortion because she is scorned instead of put on the cover of People magazine is what is causing the high and growing rate in my opinion and is what caught the eye of the original poster.

I thought you weren’t sure about the figures? Now its almost one in two births in the US to unmarried women?

I do not bother about others - celebrities or otherwise, I would rather concentrate on my spirituality. Who are we to punish a Brad pitt or Kourtney Kardashian, really? I can’t understand your reasoning, sorry.

Another poster referred to sacramental marriage. I would prefer that two people stay together making their own vows to each other, perhaps before God, then two who go to a registry, church, whatever, with the possibility at the back of their minds of a way out.

What if two Catholics marry in a registry, have children, stay together as a two parent family?

 

[4Squarebaby]

I thought you weren’t sure about the figures? Now its almost one in two births in the US to unmarried women?

I do not bother about others - celebrities or otherwise, I would rather concentrate on my spirituality. Who are we to punish a Brad pitt or Kourtney Kardashian, really? I can’t understand your reasoning, sorry.

Another poster referred to sacramental marriage. I would prefer that two people stay together making their own vows to each other, perhaps before God, then two who go to a registry, church, whatever, with the possibility at the back of their minds of a way out.

What if two Catholics marry in a registry, have children, stay together as a two parent family?

I am not sure about global figures. The US figure is 40.7%, a new high as was stated in a thread last week. The Republic of the Philippines figure was 38% in 2008. Other single nation and regional figures are also available for different time periods. i just can’t pull up an overall worldwide one.

We as a society has to not honor the Brad Pitt’s and Kardashian’s that is the difference between Japan and their 1.7 percent rate and the double figure rates in Europe and the America’s. The fact that a man did not marry the mother of his children means he is bad by itself. And society and potential employers treat him as a man who will not live up to his responsibilities. So he does not walk out and he to use an old school phrase “does the right thing”

I will let you Catholics hash out what it means to the Catholic Church and her understanding.