RightNation.US
News (Home) | Righters' Blog | Hollywood Halfwits | Our Store | New User Intro | Link to us | Support Us

RightNation.US: The Research Proves The No. 1 Social Justice Imperative Is Marriage - RightNation.US

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

The Research Proves The No. 1 Social Justice Imperative Is Marriage Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is offline   Moderator T 

  • <no title>
  • View gallery
  • Group: Moderator
  • Posts: 35,772
  • Joined: 02-October 03

  Posted 06 November 2017 - 03:01 AM

The Research Proves The No. 1 Social Justice Imperative Is Marriage

Glenn T. Stanton
Federalist
11/3/17

EXCERPT:

A foundational value in our nation is the opportunity for all its citizens to be able to compete for a fair and meaningful shot at the American dream. This begins with access to citizenship, educational opportunity, and securing meaningful work that leads to greater life opportunities via commitment, diligence, and self-sacrifice. But an important contributor to putting and keeping men, women, and children on the escalator toward the American dream is little-known and widely ignored.

Just 70 years ago, social mobility and protection from poverty were largely a factor of employment. Those who had full-time work of any kind were seldom poor. Fifty years ago, education marked the gulf separating the haves from the have-nots. For the last 20 years or more, though, marital status has increasingly become the central factor in whether our neighbors and their children rise above, remain, or descend into poverty. The research is astounding.

Charles Murray of the American Enterprise Institute explains in his important book “Coming Apart: The State of White America” that in 1960, the poorly and moderately educated were only 10 percent less likely to be married than the college educated, with both numbers quite high: 84 and 94 respectively. That parity largely held until the late 1970s.

Today, these two groups are separated by a 35 percent margin and the gap continues to expand. All the movement is on one side. Marriage is sinking dramatically among lower- and middle-class Americans, down to a minority of 48 percent today. No indicators hint at any slowing. It’s remained generally constant among the well-to-do. This stark trend line led Murray to lament, “Marriage has become the fault line dividing America’s classes.” He has company in this conclusion.

Marriage Matters Lots More than Income and Race
Jonathan Rauch writing in the National Journal, certainly no conservative, notes that “marriage is displacing both income and race as the great class divide of the new century.” Isabel Sawhill, a senior scholar at the center-left Brookings Institute, boldly and correctly proclaimed some years ago that “the proliferation of single-parent households accounts for virtually all of the increase in child poverty since the early 1970s.” Virtually all of the increase!

(Full Story)
0

#2 User is offline   ThePatriot 

  • Warpaint
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 26,361
  • Joined: 17-August 03

Posted 06 November 2017 - 08:38 AM

It's all part of the plan - destroy the family unit and you create generations of people dependent on gov't welfare, and along with it, generations of people who will vote for Democrats....
0

#3 User is offline   Wag-a-Muffin (D) 

  • Still clinging bitterly. . .
  • View blog
  • Group: Blog Moderator
  • Posts: 18,232
  • Joined: 03-November 04

Posted 06 November 2017 - 10:22 AM

I remember a thread from a decade ago (probably) here on RightNation about how having a mother and father in a home meant statistically more stable and productive children. A bunch of RN members got all offended and quoted personal stories (from their lives) how their single mom raised excellent children. I remember one female went off on a "should a woman stay with a man who beats her, just to keep an intact family?" tangent.

I remember it well because I was so surprised at how many people (who I'd read posts from and though were fairly sensible people) took it as a personal affront to their lives.

Marriage stabilizes a society. Does this mean all marriages are good? Of course not. Does this mean that single parents can't raise well adjusted children in some cases? Of course not.


<shakes head> It's just not always the people on the left who are quick to take offense.

This post has been edited by Wag-a-Muffin (D): 06 November 2017 - 10:24 AM
Reason for edit: clarification

0

#4 User is offline   Ladybird 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 10,649
  • Joined: 26-October 07

Posted 06 November 2017 - 10:42 AM

View PostWag-a-Muffin (D), on 06 November 2017 - 10:22 AM, said:

I remember a thread from a decade ago (probably) here on RightNation about how having a mother and father in a home meant statistically more stable and productive children. A bunch of RN members got all offended and quoted personal stories (from their lives) how their single mom raised excellent children. I remember one female went off on a "should a woman stay with a man who beats her, just to keep an intact family?" tangent.

I remember it well because I was so surprised at how many people (who I'd read posts from and though were fairly sensible people) took it as a personal affront to their lives.

Marriage stabilizes a society. Does this mean all marriages are good? Of course not. Does this mean that single parents can't raise well adjusted children in some cases? Of course not.


<shakes head> It's just not always the people on the left who are quick to take offense.


When I have argued this point on other message boards, and stated that the Pat Moynihan report from decades ago concerning the black community was positively on the mark and not the least bit racist, I got called nasty names.
My views on this issue have done a 180 over the last 20 or 30 odd years.

It used to be that when a girl got pregnant out of wedlock, it was something shameful. In my church and community, a girl would be sent to relatives ‘down south’ and either never heard from again or return months later, leaving her child south with relatives. The girl would bear the brunt of the stigma while the boy got off scot free, which I thought was terribly unfair. It was unfair, but looking at the way it has worked out, we were better off before.

Remember that old Supreme song, Love Child? I don’t think it would be understood now.
0

#5 User is offline   Wag-a-Muffin (D) 

  • Still clinging bitterly. . .
  • View blog
  • Group: Blog Moderator
  • Posts: 18,232
  • Joined: 03-November 04

Posted 06 November 2017 - 11:10 AM

View PostLadybird, on 06 November 2017 - 10:42 AM, said:

When I have argued this point on other message boards, and stated that the Pat Moynihan report from decades ago concerning the black community was positively on the mark and not the least bit racist, I got called nasty names.
My views on this issue have done a 180 over the last 20 or 30 odd years.

It used to be that when a girl got pregnant out of wedlock, it was something shameful. In my church and community, a girl would be sent to relatives ‘down south’ and either never heard from again or return months later, leaving her child south with relatives. The girl would bear the brunt of the stigma while the boy got off scot free, which I thought was terribly unfair. It was unfair, but looking at the way it has worked out, we were better off before.

Remember that old Supreme song, Love Child? I don’t think it would be understood now.

Daniel Patrick Moynihan was a democrat I admired. Some of his quotes:
"The single most exciting thing you encounter in government is competence, because it's so rare."
"Somehow liberals have been unable to acquire from life what conservatives seem to be endowed with at birth: namely, a healthy skepticism of the powers of government agencies to do good."
and
"There is one unmistakable lesson in American history: A community that allows a large number of young men to grow up in broken families, dominated by women, never acquiring any stable relationship to male authority, never acquiring any set of rational expectations about the future-- that community asks for and gets chaos. Crime, violence, unrest, disorder -- most particularly the furious, unrestrained lashing out at the whole social structure -- that is not only to be expected; it is very near to inevitable. And it is richly deserved."

This post has been edited by Wag-a-Muffin (D): 06 November 2017 - 11:12 AM
Reason for edit: complete the quote

0

#6 User is offline   Severian 

  • Order of the Seekers for Truth & Penitence
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 10,507
  • Joined: 14-February 04

Posted 06 November 2017 - 11:55 AM

View PostWag-a-Muffin (D), on 06 November 2017 - 11:10 AM, said:

Daniel Patrick Moynihan was a democrat I admired. Some of his quotes:
"The single most exciting thing you encounter in government is competence, because it's so rare."
"Somehow liberals have been unable to acquire from life what conservatives seem to be endowed with at birth: namely, a healthy skepticism of the powers of government agencies to do good."
and
"There is one unmistakable lesson in American history: A community that allows a large number of young men to grow up in broken families, dominated by women, never acquiring any stable relationship to male authority, never acquiring any set of rational expectations about the future-- that community asks for and gets chaos. Crime, violence, unrest, disorder -- most particularly the furious, unrestrained lashing out at the whole social structure -- that is not only to be expected; it is very near to inevitable. And it is richly deserved."

The statistics I've seen are that illegitimacy among blacks was about 25% at the start of Johnson's Great Society welfare programs. Too damned high still, but today it's 70% nationwide and over 90% in most large inner cities. Even if you grant that the reason for the Welfare State was initially good hearted (as opposed to nakedly politically opportunistic), you have to judge the programs by the results, not by wishful thinking.
0

#7 User is offline   Coach 

  • Coach
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 13,824
  • Joined: 17-November 03

Posted 06 November 2017 - 01:40 PM

View PostLadybird, on 06 November 2017 - 10:42 AM, said:

When I have argued this point on other message boards, and stated that the Pat Moynihan report from decades ago concerning the black community was positively on the mark and not the least bit racist, I got called nasty names.
My views on this issue have done a 180 over the last 20 or 30 odd years.

It used to be that when a girl got pregnant out of wedlock, it was something shameful. In my church and community, a girl would be sent to relatives ‘down south’ and either never heard from again or return months later, leaving her child south with relatives. The girl would bear the brunt of the stigma while the boy got off scot free, which I thought was terribly unfair. It was unfair, but looking at the way it has worked out, we were better off before.

Remember that old Supreme song, Love Child? I don’t think it would be understood now.



Sounds more like a movie script than reality. Most girls who became pregnant ended up married to the young man who was the daddy. Those with money may have used the solution you described but it was rare.
0

#8 User is offline   Ladybird 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 10,649
  • Joined: 26-October 07

Posted 06 November 2017 - 02:12 PM

View PostCoach, on 06 November 2017 - 01:40 PM, said:

Sounds more like a movie script than reality. Most girls who became pregnant ended up married to the young man who was the daddy. Those with money may have used the solution you described but it was rare.


Not when and where I grew up. I don’t know a soul who got married in high school (at least not back in the 70’s).
0

#9 User is offline   Coach 

  • Coach
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 13,824
  • Joined: 17-November 03

Posted 06 November 2017 - 03:29 PM

View PostLadybird, on 06 November 2017 - 02:12 PM, said:

Not when and where I grew up. I don’t know a soul who got married in high school (at least not back in the 70’s).



You need to relate that to something else that was going on. You have heard of Roe v. Wade ? There is a reason generations of shot gun weddings ended.
0

#10 User is offline   Ladybird 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 10,649
  • Joined: 26-October 07

Posted 06 November 2017 - 03:46 PM

View PostCoach, on 06 November 2017 - 03:29 PM, said:

You need to relate that to something else that was going on. You have heard of Roe v. Wade ? There is a reason generations of shot gun weddings ended.

Yes it changed. Single motherhood was no big deal any longer and girls showed up to school with a big belly.
0

#11 User is offline   Coach 

  • Coach
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 13,824
  • Joined: 17-November 03

Posted 06 November 2017 - 04:31 PM

View PostLadybird, on 06 November 2017 - 03:46 PM, said:

Yes it changed. Single motherhood was no big deal any longer and girls showed up to school with a big belly.



Yes it is a big deal, lots of girls now are proud to show off their distended bellies just as soon as they start to show. Which brings up another gross behavior. What ever happened to modesty and maternity clothes ?
0

#12 User is offline   oki 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 21,385
  • Joined: 14-October 04

Posted 06 November 2017 - 04:40 PM

View PostThePatriot, on 06 November 2017 - 08:38 AM, said:

It's all part of the plan - destroy the family unit and you create generations of people dependent on gov't welfare, and along with it, generations of people who will vote for Democrats....



Hmmm...

Who was it who said:
This will have those n%$$#@! voting Democrat for the next 200 years? This was right after massive Welfare Entitlements where passed.
Would sure seem that the whole point of the massive entitlements expansions weren't about helping people but making them dependent on Government.

Oki
0

#13 User is offline   Ladybird 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 10,649
  • Joined: 26-October 07

Posted 06 November 2017 - 04:55 PM

View PostCoach, on 06 November 2017 - 04:31 PM, said:

Yes it is a big deal, lots of girls now are proud to show off their distended bellies just as soon as they start to show. Which brings up another gross behavior. What ever happened to modesty and maternity clothes ?

Ha ha! I don’t know.
Was it Demi Moore who had the first naked preggo pic cover? It seems like from then on it’s been a parade of “look at my bellay!!!” stars, with fashions, of course, following suit.
0

#14 User is offline   Bookdoc 

  • Daddy's little girl
  • Group: +Silver Community Supporter
  • Posts: 4,408
  • Joined: 07-September 05

Posted 06 November 2017 - 07:05 PM

If I recall, Ann Coulter's "Guilty" covered this quite well and it was several years ago.
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users