Had Ann Romney become FLOTUS her platform would have been, "Get Married
Before You Have Children"; such a significant and needed message for
today's youth and young adults.
How do you incentivize any man to be a good father?
Married 10 years and loving it. The kids look like they're going to do
pretty well. Wish every kid could grow up in that environment. I didn't
have that growing up and I'm slightly jealous of my own kids that their dad
(me) is around.
"Problems associated with the decline of the traditional family and
increases in the percentage of children born to single women have been well
documented on these pages "No kidding about twice a month. You
people are obsessed with this. It's almost like a tick you all have. The habits, actions, and behaviors of humans have always changed and
always will, and as they change they will destroy and have destroyed the old
behaviors and models. It's a pure myth that the family unit of
today was the family unit of just a few hundred years ago. People didn't
marry because of love. People didn't have children to fulfill the glory of
God or to construct a happy little group to sit around on the couch and laugh at
little sister (see above). And women weren't equal partners in marriage.
All that being said it doesn't mean all changes are equal or
good. But the whole woe is me the world is changing is really getting old, and
especially the only religion can fix this moral mess mantra.
Thank you for writing this profoundly true opinion. American youth would do
well to ponder what you have appropriately detailed herein. In his book The
Greatest Generation, Tom Brokaw wrote “A common lament of the World War II
generation is the absence today of personal responsibility". Members of
today's society would do well to strive to emulate the example of the
greatest generation if they hope to be great themselves.
If you want to make families work again you need to start with the fundamental
units of society - individuals. The components that make up a family. First,
empower women, instead of trying to subjugate them. It's the one thing that
can be done that works around the world. Second, empower sex. Our attitudes
towards it are puritanical and unhealthy. Also, make it possible for a middle
class to exist again. Raise the minimum wage, and create a single payer health
care system. Finally, recognise that a family is possibly going to be different
today than in the past. Children are no longer expected, and some families have
same sex parents. The good old days weren't necessarily good, and in any
case are gone.
When the "enlightened" modify the "rules" so their own appetites
and passions become acceptable, we have the calamity described by this
editorial. Teenagers did not write the sex-education textbooks. They did not
create the movies or TV shows that glorify promiscuity. They did not promote
the music or publish the magazines. Adults did those things. Adults targeted
the youth and exploited them. Adults enticed the youth to buy movie tickets, to
watch TV shows, to sit in "sex education" classes, to buy music and
magazines. Adults, who cared more for money than for the lives of our youth, did
all of those things.What is worse is that those movies, those TV
shows, that music and those magazines depict the lives lived by adults. Serial
sexual relationships, drugs, shirking responsibility are the habits and
attitudes of the adults who profit.Happiness is a gift from God that
comes from living the eternal laws that He lovingly gave us. He desires our
happiness. He told us how to be happy. Those who reject God and profit from
misery entice the youth to follow in their footsteps.
I respect the opinion of the Deseret News on this topic but believe that the
data that was evaluated to arrive at this opinion to be fundamentally flawed.
Wow. Not ALL single parents are promiscuous, lacking values, education, morals
and integrity. As shocking as this may come to those who cannot think or see
outside of the box... Single parents can indeed be excellent parents, moreso,
even than married parents. Single parents are hard working, devoted, committed,
loving, nurturing, and highly interested in their children's well-being,
health, development, and stability. They work twice as hard for their children.
Because they have to, and because they WANT to.
If we really value families, we would outlaw divorce. That is the major problem
with families nowadays.
Gibster, a boy who grows up in a home where the father is a good example, shows
love and respect to his wife (mother of the boy, in the best circumstances) and
the family works together to achieve worthy goals is most likely to grow up
desiring to be committed to similar principles. At one time, that wasn't
asking a lot of society, and when that changed it was to our detriment.A few years ago I did a compilation of stories about ancestors and their
connections in several communities of NE MO, primarily from the 1800s. In these
families there was a high incidence of deaths from illness and accidents, and
many of the children were left without one or even both parents. Many parents
lost small children. However, there were relatives who stepped in to help in all
the tough situations, and the survivors did well. My grandmother was a wonderful
example of caring and sacrificing; she and her siblings had nurturing from many
relatives when their mother died. I interviewed many relatives who had firsthand
experience with life there, and they confirmed that despite hardships they grew
up with positive influences and outcomes.
Although i think teenage sex is dangerous because of std's and the risk of
pregnancy. I also think instilling guilt and shame into your kids is dangerous
as well. I dated a girl in college who became sexually active in high school.
Her parents found out because her boyfriend came home a month after he left for
his mission. She became depressed and felt like a worthless human.
She told me that no worthy man would want her. All of this guilt and shame came
from her parents. I told her that she was a wonderful person and if a man would
judge her because she was not a virgin then he was not worthy of her.Shaming and guilting your kids about sex only works until it doesn't
@Hutterite:Are you sitting down? I want to say I totally agree with
you on something for a change (smile). I agree with you that in America we must
work to "make it possible for a middle class to exist again. Raise the
minimum wage, and create a single payer health care system". We need to
promote the interest of those who are struggling to make ends meet who in most
cases are honest, hard working people. As a healthcare professional I can tell
you that our healthcare system is way too expensive and our outcomes are worse
than other countries that spend half as much (as a % of GDP)as we do on
healthcare. Healthcare costs are breaking the financial backbone of families and
the American economy. A single payer system likely would help that mess!@BIG C: You speak the truth. I personally know several single
moms that are some of our best employees where I work and they are smart,
dedicated and caring mothers. I admire them so much. I have also heard them say
they would like to re-marry and enjoy a successful marriage in the future if
Too much traditional family profiling.Drifting away from the
traditional family, is wrong.It's what makes a prosperous
Big C,The article discussed trends, not everyone's reality.
Many single parents are fantastic, moral, hardworking people who love their
kids. The article was saying that a two parent family with a mom and dad
present is statistically the best condition for raising stable kids. They were
not saying it was impossible in a one parent home, just much more difficult. I would consider myself a good parent, moral, hardworking, envested in
the well-being of my children but I have to state I would not want to parent
alone. My husband's perspective is invaluable to the raising of our kids.
He sees things I miss, I see what he misses and our children are better off for
@Kings Court: "If we really value families, we would outlaw divorce. That is
the major problem with families nowadays."I disagree with both
sentences.1st I would re-phrase the first to: If we really value families
we would have those that wish to be wed figuratively have to walk through fire
to get married. People that have to actually work to attain the goal of marriage
are more likely to stay in it for the long haul and lead to less divorce
IMVHO.2nd IMVHO there are other problems that are far worse for
families than divorce. One of them is invalidating family units as meaningful or
wholesome because they don't fit the image that some have of a
If we truly value families headed by two adult parents, we need to change our
actions. We need to stop trying to create laws that forbid two loving adults
from establishing a family. We need to encourage women to get complete college
degrees or more advanced career training even though they may take considerable
time off to raise children. We need to teach men to get as much education as
possible to financially support their families. The biggest step in improving
the declining family is through better education.
No that photo doesn't look staged at all.....
A "thorough education in how to have sex responsibly" includes the
advice to wait to have sex.Studies - and reality - have shown that
abstinence only education results in higher out of wedlock pregnancy rates,
thereby perpetuating the cycle so bemoaned at the beginning of this article.I find it interesting that the article takes one reasonable approach to
teaching children about responsible reproduction and tears it apart because
parents are apparently unable to handle that part of educating their children.
The authors of the article apparently also feel it is not appropriate for
schools to teach this delicate subject.No - they want this taught at
church.If we, as a society, truly value families and promote
children being born into families, than we must encourage ALL parents, not just
the "gold standard" ones, to get married. We must stress that pregnancy
should occur after marriage and proper steps should be taken to prevent
pregnancy before marriage - including the use of birth control for those who are
going to indulge.We have fantastic messages not to drink but if you
do drink don't drive, we should handle sex the same way.
James Q Wilson, in a report buried somewhere in the federal bureaucracy, on
purpose for sure, said that there were three things to do to avoid poverty your
whole life: Finish high school, marry before having a child, and don't get
married before the age of 20. after reading the absolutely confusing and
disoriented rhetoric by some on this page, kids need something specific. The
above advice ( here) is only possible if it is couple with God behind it!
without God, what is left is a person's personal approach, which, to a kid
boiling with harmones and a culture, abetted by some on this bead, that views
sex as some sort of adventure with no consequences, is certainly not going to be
persuaded by a few boring bystanders without principles telling them that there
is no such thing as a standard, conscience, or responsible citizenship.
Once they have convinced everybody that abstinence isn't possible... they
have won the battle. Then it's not a matter "if"... it's a
matter of "when".Birth Control sometimes works for one
problem (pregnancy) but not all the time. Abstinence is not only 100%
effective at preventing unwanted pregnancy... it even prevents STDs! I think
we owe it to our kids to teach them about this great option.Kids
that are taught that abstinence is impossible... are being done a
dis-service.====I'm not saying we don't teach
them about birth control also. Even married monogamous adults need to know
about birth control.I don't think we hide the topic of birth
control from teens, or prevent them from using it if they decide to be sexually
active in their teen years. But we also need to be teaching them why
abstinence is important (but I'm good with teaching that at home).
Charles Blow is a microcosm of the dysfunctional left wing moral standards. His
inverted think on families is typical of other editorials he has written for the
New York TImes. Bill Cosby refers to them a blockheads.
Teaching kids that being sexually active in their teens is inevitable, so this
is how to do it... is like teaching kids that it's inevitable that they are
going to have to drive after drinking sometime... so this is how you do it...
always dink some coffee first... this sometimes helps. Make sure you take the
back roads. Drive slow. Drive on the line so you don't accidentally hit
something on the side of the road, etc....That would be ridiculous
right?So why do we do it that way with sex?
"Further, we warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon
individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and
modern prophets."The Family - A Proclamation To The World
I must hand it to your editorial writers. This is as fine an example of
arm-waving and hand-wringing as I've seen in quite a while. It's a
pity it's not even half as good at proposing positive measures to combat
these woes.Some of the out-of-wedlock children being born are being
born to minors not even old enough to get married. I'm no sociologist, but
from what they say, poverty and despair are major contributors to some girls
seeking independence from their parent(s) via motherhood.You dismiss
every policy out of hand that could ameliorate this situation, you show contempt
for the poor, and you propose nothing, other than grand wishes that things were
different, and that if only people wouldn't have sex outside of marriage,
none of this would happen. Many people can't even afford to get
married.People need a future. They need training in life skills,
education, employment prospects, and a level of economic comfort to have hope.
Scolding them, denying support, and refusing all practical measures,
doesn't address the situation. Quit whining and do something to actually
help people in need.
Corporations make more money by paying men less.Women have needed to
leave their homes and children to put the "house hold" income back in
line to 1950's-60's inflationary levels.Lawyers make more
money in divorce, rather than keeping marriages together.Men loose
their careers and livlihoood in a divorce.So -- what waws that
incentive to get married again?Money is the root of all evil.
"The above advice ( here) is only possible if it is couple with God behind
it! without God, what is left is a person's personal approach, which, to a
kid boiling with harmones and a culture, abetted by some on this bead, that
views sex as some sort of adventure with no consequences,"That's ridiculous. If you can't teach your kids consequences
without God there is something massively wrong. It's done every day every
where. The whole, there are no morals without God, is pure self
delusion. Morals by definition are personal. How you inform yourself is your
business. I hate to break it to you Christians, but the evolved
default setting for humans is not anarchy it's cooperation which in turn
informs personal behavior.
Editorial: "Children raised in homes led by married parents are much more
likely than others to avoid poverty and be emotionally and psychologically
well-adjusted. They are even, one might say, more likely to 'value
themselves as fully human.' That is a point on which there should be no
confusion."Agreed. There are a few thousand Utah children
growing up in households with committed loving parents who are prevented by law
from marrying simply because they are the same sex. Many of these parents would
gladly marry (if only they could) because they, like the DesNews editorialists,
recognize that marriage offers their children a better chance at success in
life.How does one reconcile the closing statement of the editorial
with opposition to same sex marriage, knowing that denying SSM condemns the
children of same sex couples to suboptimal outcomes? How is that in the best
interests of the children? Why can't we help these children, too, value
themselves as fully human?
Pragmatistferlife: Pragmatist? If God is not involved in how we teach morals,
then, as I said, children boiling with harmones are left with men and women
whom, by all societal measures they don't respect, that they aren't
going to listen to, particularly when it comes to something that is so
immediately satisfying as sex. Come on, if you think that something is
massively wrong about God being involved in how one acts, then I beg to differ
with statistics that show societal methods for teaching consequences has had
little or no affect on sexual promiscuity! As for me, my personal experience
must be extremely unique! I haven't had a problem with 5 kids that seemed
to have missed all the excitement of children before marriage, welfare
dependency, or no education. I guess I like my approach and want to pass it
on! I don't think it was luck! There was no anarchy in our home, nor was
any presence of the Taliban either. Come to think of it, they had choice,great
moments of cooperation, and God. There must be some kernal of advice that
society could glean from it!
I have a question for some of the conservative idealists in our midst.To some extent, I can understand the sentiment behind the slogan you use in
opposition to abortion, that "every life is precious." If I thought you
truly believed that slogan, and were prepared to harness your power as a citizen
to reform our society to reflect that, I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss
you as a simple, single-issue lobby group with clever marketing.So
here we are. Nearly 41% of Americans are being brought into this world out of
wedlock. That's a lot of precious lives. That's a lot of underage
mothers, a lot of poor people, a lot of people living under stress, and a lot of
children who need a lot of help. Of the remaining 59% born to married couples,
the statistics say that those couples face a 50% likelihood of divorce. Money
troubles are among the biggest stresses in and strains on family life.No conservatives are offering realistic plans to address this. Fixing social
problems of this magnitude is expensive. Are all lives precious, or not?
A Quaker: How can you address something when whatever answer you have is
dismissed out of hand, despite statistics showing that it works, by those who
supposedly are asking for an answer? No matter what is said, no matter what the
statistics show about the success of an idea,no matter how sincere one is in
wanting an ear to listen, no matter how few tax dollars are involved, no matter
how much it builds self worth, no matter how much it contributes to the
stability of society, builds family life, increases the likelihood of future
possibilities, or a host of other awesome practical measures to make a
difference, it is dismissed! No wonder great leaders and philosophers the world
over have said that trying to do so is equivalent to using a corn dodger as a
wedge to split a log! Shaking your head and smiling seems to be the only way to
keep your sanity, which I do!
@banderson: Your words sound like what I would say to my conservative friends
about their dismissal of liberal/moderate ideas.Let's recap.
Here are the major conservative positions on social and economic issues:Against foodstamps.Against welfare.Against funding
pre-school/HeadStart.Against sex education.Against public
schools.Against raising the minimum wage.Against abortion.Against birth control.Against universal medical care.Against
funding public universities.Against environmental regulations.Against corporate and bank regulations.Against unions.Against
community organizing.Against anti-poverty programs.Against studying
teen pregnancy, venereal diseases, gun violence or other social problems.For building more prisons.For cutting taxes.For restricting voting
rights.For allowing corporations to dominate the electoral dialog.For abolishing the separation of Church and State.Please explain
which of these strengthens the family, which will put broken families back
together, which will pull children out of poverty, and how we get back to a
growing, prosperous middle class society.
A-Quakler: It appears that you are for all the programs that have failed, but
intend to continue wholeheartedly supporting with even more vigor. As for the
things that you are for, it sounds like you want no accountability (no prisons),
more money for things that don't work (more taxes), and voting rights for
everyone (including criminals). As far as corporations dominating the electoral
collage, I would vote for a more educated and virtuous public that can tell the
difference between a charlatan and a servant. And last, but not least, I
believe in free speech, instead of the limited idea that some, including you it
sounds like, that would only allow certain kinds of speech in the public square,
rather than encouraging a vigorous and wonderful debate about democracy and
ideas. Despite all of that, I have to return to my original position. I like
Simplicity, something the world doesn't want to hear, mostly because it
works. I have seen too many success stories to tell me any different!
"Children raised in homes led by married parents are much more likely than
others to avoid poverty and be emotionally and psychologically
well-adjusted." Exactly. And that is why we should let same sex
parents get married too. Hundreds of thousands of same sex couples are raising
children in this country, lets encourage them all to get legally married.
A QuakerBrooklyn, NY@banderson: Your words sound like what I would
say to my conservative friends about their dismissal of liberal/moderate
ideas.Let's recap. Here are the major conservative positions on
social and economic issues:....11:22 a.m. Jan. 21, 2014======== I'm sorry I could give only 1 star to that 100
star comment!Great post.
We must not be fooled by the equivocation being employed in this editorial. It
is attributing to "traditional marriage" (and ONLY traditional marriage)
these benefits while ignoring that "the value of families" also accrue
to same sex couples and families.In other words, regardless whether
valid comparisons between OSM-families and SSM-families (of which their are few)
show OSM-families to be better off in a variety of ways, there can be no doubt
that legally recognized SSM-families are much better off than "illegal"
SSM-families.This well-established fact cannot be ignored, and cuts
at the heart of the (equivocating) arguments of the so-called "supporters of
traditional marriage". If marriage and family is valuable for opposite sex
couples and their children, then it is impossible to simultaneously argue that
marriage and family are harmful for same sex couples and their children.And this logical paradox position into which the "traditional
marriage"advocates have pitched their political tents, must also recognize
that keeping SSM illegal will not incent a single person to reject their
orientation and embrace "traditional marriage". Indeed, evidence shows
that doing so IS harmful to everyone involved!
Dear Quaker, You may want to dismiss everything that is said in supporting
chastity and virtue, you may want to use a name some would equate with
traditional values and then espouse everything that knocks long tested values
but please look at the statistics on charitable giving. Utah leads the Nation
on Charitable giving, as a side note republicans lead democrats in that aspect
too but never mind that too. The LDS Church has a model Welfare program that
aims to lift people who are willing to do what they can. The LDS Church spends
great time and effort in job training, experience and placement. Many other
Churches do great good as well.
DN is not stereo-typing...merely stating statistical fact. Sure, we all know
terrific single parent homes...they are all around us, just not a very high per
centage of them and the odds are so stacked against them. Heck, I have a
daughter who is a single (divorced) Mom. The ex is a total emotionally abusive
piece of work. He gives her no support whatsoever. BTW Hutterite, God's
laws have not changed.
@BCMom: I'm glad you appreciate that our name is synonymous with values,
but your understanding of our moral position is incorrect. Our Testimonies are
Simplicity, Peace, Integrity, Community, and most of all, Equality. We derive
our Testimonies from the study and contemplation of Christ's words and
actions. The support of marriage equality ("SSM") aligns perfectly with
our Testimonies. Our Meeting is welcoming and inclusive, and several years ago
reached Unity on the subject of witnessing same-sex couples marrying in our
Quaker religious tradition. (I have been present at one of these and can tell
you it was a joyous occasion for us all.)Our Meeting is not the
entirety of Quakerdom, which has no central hierarchy, nor do we have a patent
on our name ("Quaker Oats," grrrrr....), but we are typical of Quakers
of the pastor-less, "Quietist" movement. We worship as a body in
silence, in the presence of His Light, which leads us.We recognize
and appreciate the good works that other denominations do. We hold you in the
Light, that you may fully open your eyes to the Truth and your hearts to all.
" BTW Hutterite, God's laws have not changed." Really?
Ever read the old testament? Bandersen; "as I said, children
boiling with harmones are left with men and women whom, by all societal measures
they don't respect, " No, they are left with their parents. Also my reference to anarchy was simply that the automatic setting for humans
is not anarchy it's cooperation. In other words the natural man is not any
enemy of God (even if there were such a thing). The natural man pretty quickly
realized he/she needed others to survive and it was in his or hers best interest
not to steal, murder, or plunder, their neighbor (defining who their neighbor is
a whole different matter). I have no idea why you referenced anarchy relative
to your own family.
It is interesting how some like to run a Utah plate on cars, which do not
belong.Sneaking in where ever they can.I think it is not harmful to
kids if adults are honest and straight forward.They need to know the truth
about life, and they need to know what is not in their best interest.That would
be parents or a single parent. But what else is there ?SSM is a
china-copy of marriage, that is what it is.It is a change of gender
without having done the home work on consequences.Even SSM needs to have a
role playing in relations in order to keep up with the normal form of feelings.
It is a China - Copy.This is not meant to insult anybody.I just believe it
to be true. But some chinese are insulted, if you put the blame on a
"copy".Feelings in love for family have original roots, they
never came from SSM in the first place !This Article places the source of
love in the right spot for children.
(Name Removed)Had Ann Romney become FLOTUS her platform would have been,
"Get Married Before You Have Children"; such a significant and needed
message for today's youth and young adults.Please excuse me for
using you as an example of how out of touch with the real world some of our
religious folks are:1-- Such a message might play with middle class
folks, but the time to start with people raised in struggle or in inner cities
is when the kids are newly born, 20+ years before they ought to be thinking of
having children. You would be laughed at out loud in some minority
communities.2-- Actually, Mrs Obama's work to create healthy,
well-adjusted kids who stay in school is considerably more productive.3-- The Bible Belt has the highest divorce rates: A-- sex education
and contraception are suppressed, resulting in forced marriages and
unwanted children B-- because premarital sex is taboo, folks get
married before they are ready, or before they have found the right partner, or
formed a career. C-- Massachusetts, full of liberals and married Gays,
has the lowest divorce rate.Even in Utah, which also has a high
divorce rate, things have changed