For Women Under 30, Most Births Occur Outside Marriage

[sinnseanair]

How do we fix it? That is the question. We now have the third generation being raised under Roe V Wade. We no longer have a Hollywood censor board other than alphabetic codes which are ignored by many parents, TV channels, and even public education. Do we place a scarlet “A” on all females who have and unwed child? I’m sure today that would bring a society of pride vice the original writings.

Even our first Catholic President made no secret of being and adulterer, nor did his father, or brothers. They wore it like a badge of honor. Then, there was the most public affair with a young lady by President Clinton, first denied, then proven, then impeached, and still one of the most popular men in our country. There was the daughter of a vice presidential candidate who very publically admitted to being an unwed mother. Both the potitical mother and the daughter remain very popular in our country, both appearing on mass media almost daily.

We have groups of young females banding together with no other idea than each getting pregnant while in school.

My wife was a neo natal nurse in a large hospital. One of her duties was to teach the basic caregiving to young mothers, sometimes as young as twelve. She related a very sad incident of a teenager lying in bed with the TV on watching soap operas. She came in and turned off the TV to which the young girl immediately turned it back on. Well, after disabling the signal to the room TV, she returned and began explaining the care and feeding of her infant child to the young girl. “I ain’t gonna do all that”, was the child’s answer. “That’s my mother’s job”. Unfortunately, that incident was but one of several similar ones.

Until, with God’s help, we are able to curb entitlement spending as a priority of our government and get the government out of our daily lives in all respects from telling us what to eat to rewarding young women for having out of wedlock babies, much like the slaves of the plantations in the 1800’s, we will continue to have this problem and it will continue to grow. Until we cease public funding of abortions, in the name of female children’s rights, we will continue to have this problem. It’s that simple.

Now each of us has a success story of an unwed child. However, for that one story, how many failures can we recall? We can debate all day about how it used to be, or how we got here, but that is just a Sound and Fury signifying nothing—like going to the beach and shouting against the roar of the waves.

Fixing this problem is going to be the hardest task that our country has undertaken since the battles to become the United States. We are not going to be able to win without God’s help.
The other day, I watched a documentary on the Amish sect. It focused not on the positive but those few that left. They were more important than those who remained faithful to the teaching of the sect. It showed young men and women is varying stages of undress “feeling free of the rules”. That, to me, pretty much sums up what our nation has become, no more rules, and being paid through entitlement programs for that.

 

[Rence]

Until, with God’s help, we are able to curb entitlement spending as a priority of our government and get the government out of our daily lives in all respects from telling us what to eat to rewarding young women for having out of wedlock babies,

Unfortunately, the “rewards” to which you refer are not supposed to be for the women, it’s supposed to be for the children caught in the middle. The unfortunate thing about it, is that we can’t take those funds away because they will affect the child caught in the middle. Not only that, it’s near impossible for a case manager to differentiate between a woman “milking the system” and a woman truly in need. And again, a child (or children) will be caught in the middle. I don’t see a solution to this problem emerging in the near future. It’s simple to say that the funding has to stop, but really, it’s not that simple ethically or morally. Simply stopping the funding will just result in women and children being on the streets starving, homeless and suffering in the elements. That’s not a moral or ethical solution. And nor can it be “pro-life”.

In the meantime, the government is paying out incredible amounts of money supporting women’s pregnancies, and supporting their resulting children for 18 years for each child, in addition to paying for the medical expenses of qualifying sick and disabled people. People like to say the spending has to stop, but I don’t see how that’s going to happen without millions of women, children, elderly, and disabled being thrown out into the streets with no healthcare, no housing, no food, etc. There is no “simple” solution to the problem because simple suggestions will just lead to very complicated problems that will need to be addressed immediately, taking us right back to the beginning.

Fixing this problem is going to be the hardest task that our country has undertaken since the battles to become the United States. We are not going to be able to win without God’s help.

It’s going to be the hardest task because the only way the problem will be fixed is when people change their behavior and I think we’re a bit too far gone for that too happen. For way too long, people have been enjoying sex without commitment, and sex without consequences. There is no ethical or moral way to prevent them from continuing to do so…I truly believe this is the basis for the “free ABCs for everyone” mentality of our current administration. They can’t keep supporting all these women and children forever. We can argue until we’re blue in the face that the only way to prevent unwanted pregnancies is abstinence, but it’s a moot point when those involved are not being abstinent, so easy access to birth control (especially those who can’t afford it on their own) is something they want to do. I can totally understand it.

The other day, I watched a documentary on the Amish sect. It focused not on the positive but those few that left. They were more important than those who remained faithful to the teaching of the sect. It showed young men and women is varying stages of undress “feeling free of the rules”. That, to me, pretty much sums up what our nation has become, no more rules, and being paid through entitlement programs for that.

I can’t see the US denying food stamps, wic, stipends, and health insurance to children. It’s not going to happen in our near future. What will replace it? Throwing the kids on the street? Because I know placing them in adoptive homes will cause a big uproar in the name of morality. Forcing sterilizations to repeat “offenders” will cause the same. You can’t change the beliefs, values and actions of other people. And you can’t make innocent people pay for irresponsible peoples’ behaviors. It’s way too late to play hardball. It will create more problems that can’t be solved.

 

[JimG]

Unfortunately, the “rewards” to which you refer are not supposed to be for the women, it’s supposed to be for the children caught in the middle. The unfortunate thing about it, is that we can’t take those funds away because they will affect the child caught in the middle. Not only that, it’s near impossible for a case manager to differentiate between a woman “milking the system” and a woman truly in need. And again, a child (or children) will be caught in the middle. I don’t see a solution to this problem emerging in the near future. It’s simple to say that the funding has to stop, but really, it’s not that simple ethically or morally. Simply stopping the funding will just result in women and children being on the streets starving, homeless and suffering in the elements. That’s not a moral or ethical solution. And nor can it be “pro-life”.

In the meantime, the government is paying out incredible amounts of money supporting women’s pregnancies, and supporting their resulting children for 18 years for each child, in addition to paying for the medical expenses of qualifying sick and disabled people. People like to say the spending has to stop, but I don’t see how that’s going to happen without millions of women, children, elderly, and disabled being thrown out into the streets with no healthcare, no housing, no food, etc. There is no “simple” solution to the problem because simple suggestions will just lead to very complicated problems that will need to be addressed immediately, taking us right back to the beginning.

It’s going to be the hardest task because the only way the problem will be fixed is when people change their behavior and I think we’re a bit too far gone for that too happen. For way too long, people have been enjoying sex without commitment, and sex without consequences. There is no ethical or moral way to prevent them from continuing to do so…I truly believe this is the basis for the “free ABCs for everyone” mentality of our current administration. They can’t keep supporting all these women and children forever. We can argue until we’re blue in the face that the only way to prevent unwanted pregnancies is abstinence, but it’s a moot point when those involved are not being abstinent, so easy access to birth control (especially those who can’t afford it on their own) is something they want to do. I can totally understand it.

I can’t see the US denying food stamps, wic, stipends, and health insurance to children. It’s not going to happen in our near future. What will replace it? Throwing the kids on the street? Because I know placing them in adoptive homes will cause a big uproar in the name of morality. Forcing sterilizations to repeat “offenders” will cause the same. You can’t change the beliefs, values and actions of other people. And you can’t make innocent people pay for irresponsible peoples’ behaviors. It’s way too late to play hardball. It will create more problems that can’t be solved.

But apparently you CAN make innocent people pay for other people’s irresponsible behavior, through taxation, or through borrowing, which is another way of taxation.

And as you say, it may be impossible to simply cease or slow down the entitlement spending. Still, such draconian cuts could be forced on the nation by a monetary crisis when the debt bubble bursts, as it must. At that point, I suspect there would be families on the streets, or alternatively, martial law and widespread poverty. It’s not a pleasant prospect, but it’s also not a problem that either party is willing to fully grapple with.

 

[tomarin]

JC: Nice to hear from a real Irishman, not one like me who’s ancestors came to America on a boat. I spent several summers there researching this very subject. I respectfully disagree with you about the term Fitz being introduced to Ireland by the Anglo Norman as I have related those facts that I learned from Irish Gaelic historians on both sides of the Atlantic.

I know your questions were directed to Jharek, but if I may jump in here, I’m pretty sure “fitz” is Anglo-Norman French, that is, from the variant of French spoken by the Normans who conquered and settled in England (and later Ireland; they built distinctive castles in both countries, and in Wales). It’s derived from the French word for son, “fils.” There’s absolutely no Gaelic connection so far as I know.

I hadn’t heard about the illegitimacy connection; thanks to you and Jharek for enlightening me.

 

[vsedriver]

It’s going to be the hardest task because the only way the problem will be fixed is when people change their behavior and I think we’re a bit too far gone for that too happen. For way too long, people have been enjoying sex without commitment, and sex without consequences. There is no ethical or moral way to prevent them from continuing to do so…I truly believe this is the basis for the “free ABCs for everyone” mentality of our current administration.

This is the essence of the problem. Asking an adult today to curb their behavior will bring an unholy wrath down upon your head… usually beginning with “who are you to judge!”

Study the economic conditions of Rome from 150AD to 400AD. It will scare the pants off of you.

 

[Rence]

But apparently you CAN make innocent people pay for other people’s irresponsible behavior, through taxation, or through borrowing, which is another way of taxation.

And as you say, it may be impossible to simply cease or slow down the entitlement spending. Still, such draconian cuts could be forced on the nation by a monetary crisis when the debt bubble bursts, as it must. At that point, I suspect there would be families on the streets, or alternatively, martial law and widespread poverty. It’s not a pleasant prospect, but it’s also not a problem that either party is willing to fully grapple with.

That’s because it’s not a problem that can be solved without a change in the actions of others, who are creating the crisis. There is no moral or ethical way to solve the problem. When there are no viable solutions, it’s difficult to have a meaningful dialog, so niether party can be blamed for not being able to grapple. When the debt bubble bursts, the government will be forced to do something about it, and then everyone will be crying out about the injustice of it all because the solutions won’t be morally or ethically compatible with them, whether they’re conservative or liberal.

 

[LovePatience]

Malta has solved the problem. They don’t seem to have any absolute poverty. The only trick is that they are a tiny country that is almost completely Catholic. Thus, the priests and nuns generally take care of the orphans.

 

[JimG]

That’s because it’s not a problem that can be solved without a change in the actions of others, who are creating the crisis. There is no moral or ethical way to solve the problem. When there are no viable solutions, it’s difficult to have a meaningful dialog, so niether party can be blamed for not being able to grapple. When the debt bubble bursts, the government will be forced to do something about it, and then everyone will be crying out about the injustice of it all because the solutions won’t be morally or ethically compatible with them, whether they’re conservative or liberal.

If the debt can’t be rolled over, the nation would suddenly have to live withiin its means. That would mean a 40% cut in spending. The government would have few choices. Those of us–and I include myself, since I’m on social security–who depend on government checks of any sort, should worry. Adversity does change behavior.

 

[seekerz]

I think to solve current problems in society you have to look at the source of what started them. It started in the 1960s with War on Poverty.

capitalismmagazine.com/politics/poverty/3864-War-Poverty-Revisited.html

I usually find your views quite well-supported by evidence Abyssinia, but in this case I see you have fallen to a very common assumption that government assistance (+/- the sexual revolution) is what has struck at the integrity of black families. It may have contributed, but I would suggest that you consider other parts of the hemisphere e.g. the Caribbean, where slavery also existed and where state assistance is negligible or non-existent. Family structure and out-of-wedlock rates are quite similar to those being discussed here. So I would contest your statement that the black family survived slavery and was subsequently subject to destructive forces. Any large scale social upheaval - such as employment-related migration that disrupts the fabric of family/community life, seems to have similar effects as slavery (add to that the reality of forcible, deliberate separations associated with the latter) - put in terms of generations, it wasn’t that long ago…

 

[sinnseanair]

Well, It’s the word origin of fitz that is getting in the way of the real discussion. As a retired professor of History, I can only stand on my vast research and my learned professors on both sides of the Atlantic who taught me. If you want to believe the the word comes from the Norman, go ahead. It is a small difference at best and not worth a behest.

It now appears that the origin of that word, is, to some, the same as the horror when one tells of President Lincoln being bisexual and having syphilis. That his body was buried and reburied at least seven times, that his wife refused to attend his funeral, that three of her brothers fought for the Confederacy and had placed a price on Lincoln’s death, that upon leaving the White House, she stole all the silverware she could carry which was never returned. While all this is true, those facts are lost in the myth has become the truth. There is an old jocular saying around we historians. When the myth is better than the truth, it’s easier to teach the myth.

To all, about entitlements, I firmly believe that Faith Based Organizations without any form of government interference or funding should be assume the responsibility of caring for unwanted children. I believe that contraception will never be fully stopped. How do you unopen a jar? It is just as the ladies of the evening in ancient Rome who stood under the arches of buildings and practiced their trade while using a form of contraception so an unwanted pregnancy would not interfere with their chosen trade.

An arch in Latin is Fornix that is where we get the word fornicate. The other four letter vulgar word comes from the middle english wooden grave marker of a man put to death for committing sexual assault on a woman. Those four initials carved in the wood whict stood for “For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge”. I’m fairly sure I will receive posts questioning this also.

There is an ongoing war of secular socialism which is winning the hearts and minds of our young future. It becomes one of, If you have never seen a nativity scene in the public park, then why should you think one should be there. That is now the mindset of those who would send us further down that path. It is being taught in schools and universities. I can attest to that. One of the universities at which I taught passed a resolution that all religious activities must occur off campus. I left shortly thereafter. The irony was that that university was originally founded by a religious order.

Herr Goebbels did all this very well in Nazi Germany. First you rid the population of principles, then find some for them to hate and vent that hatred, then establish “rules of the state” for everyone to follow. The state replaces God. Then everyone must serve the state, equally. All monies comes from the state and is distributed equally among the state faithful, exept for those few upon whom the state finds worthy of more. How did that work out? The only difference between National Socialism and Communism was the state versus the collective masses, and who was passing out the propaganda at the time.

I, too, receive social security. To a few of my friends and neighbors where I live today, that is their only means of monetary support. Why? Because the mindset of their youth told them that the money would always be there for them after age 65. However, what if Presdient Roosevelt and congress had never passed the legislation and signed it into law? Would we have made other arrangements to support ourselves after age 65. Probably not. As you recall, we, in the days of passing that law, didn’t, for the most part, live that long as a population in those days, and those who did were taken in by their children or relatives. We do not have those family ties anymore, excpt in small pockets of our rural nation. We now have government ties. We have been given so much by our government that now we expect and demand it. Every new entitlement program quickly becomes a “can’t do without it” part of our daily lives.

The only way we are going to retrieve our “opportunities for happiness” is to reverse that mindset. That with take generations. Unfortunately we do not have that long. Socialism is great—until the other guy’s money runs out.

We can teach marriage first until we are blue in the face. It will work for many. However, that few that do not adhere to it will, as now, become the norm, the envied, the advertised and like now, will overpower our teachings.