Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Given the person who made the complaint makes the most idiotic posts with no factual data that is rich.
I provided lots of factual data. It's obvious you didn't take time to read the links, or you woudn't have said that. At best, all you could have said was that you disagreed with the facts presented and provided links to alternative facts. You didn't do that. Instead, you resorted to name calling, which is what people with no credibility do.
Last edited by mysticaltyger; 10-12-2010 at 12:49 AM..
Personally, although I think it’d be easier in most cases to have a partner in raising a child, I don’t see anything wrong at all with single people choosing to raise kids on their own.
It's a terrible idea. And the reasons are quite simple. Raising kids requires lots of time and a certain minimum amount of money to do it well. Single parents are much less likely to have both of those two resources. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out.
To those who say all it takes is love, I would ask...if you love your kids (not to mention yourself), why wouldn't you want to provide those two main resources for your kids?
MT cited some articles and numbers that are completely valid. Households where there is a marriage have a strong tendency to be more financially stable than households without marriage. Are there exceptions? Sure, there always will be. But marriage correlates more often than not with better financial stability. Why? Two incomes are more than one.
I agreed with everything you said in this post. I just wanted to add that it isn't just the fact that 2 incomes can add financial stability. Even in one income households, the single earner can focus more heavily on work/career if there is someone at home taking care of the house/kids. Married individuals are also more able to take more career risks ('cause there's someone to fall back on), and for this reason married individuals tend to earn more than single people. Since married people tend to complement each other in strengths/weaknesses, I think there's also a "kick in the pants" factor for married people that doesn't exist. (EG, one spouse kicks the other in the pants to get moving on upgrading skills/getting promoted, etc...when the other would have otherwise put it off).
Then there's also the ecnonomy of scale issue. It's more economically efficient to house everyone under one roof than under two.
I agreed with everything you said in this post. I just wanted to add that it isn't just the fact that 2 incomes can add financial stability. Even in one income households, the single earner can focus more heavily on work/career if there is someone at home taking care of the house/kids. Married individuals are also more able to take more career risks ('cause there's someone to fall back on), and for this reason married individuals tend to earn more than single people. Since married people tend to complement each other in strengths/weaknesses, I think there's also a "kick in the pants" factor for married people that doesn't exist. (EG, one spouse kicks the other in the pants to get moving on upgrading skills/getting promoted, etc...when the other would have otherwise put it off).
Then there's also the ecnonomy of scale issue. It's more economically efficient to house everyone under one roof than under two.
But it's patently obvious that marriage doesn't have to be involved to provide any of those things. Admit it, what you people are looking for is the religious aspect of marriage because you see it as "immoral" for parents not to be married, and it tweaks your archaicly prudish sensibilities when they're not. There are just as many kids out there from horrible two-parent families as there are from horrible one-parent families.
I disagree that a religious marriage is required. What is essential is that the children live in a house with the same parents from the time they are born until they move out on their own, and that they are convinced that both of their parents love them and will always take care of them. This can be done with a common-law marriage, an official state marriage, a religious marriage, or any similar commitment.
That's a pretty rare scenario you're using to try to support your point. And it's a whole different kettle of fish when a person is a single parent as a result of something they likely had no control over.
Um, yeah. You may have done well in school and beat the odds in that way. But you're paying an emotional price for what your parents didn't give you. And you're passing that legacy on to your own kids.
And my response is...So What? People get rich by winning the lottery, too. That doesn't mean playing the lottery is the best path to becoming wealthy.
What we really need is a road map for people to 1. learn how to pick mates for themselves and 2. how to be emotionally intelligent. But #1 and #2 must come with the recognition that single parent families are detrimental to children.
I do believe there are reasons for divorce....but I believe more marriages are salvageable than most divorcees will admit to.
1. Who are you to say I'm suffering emotionally from my parents breaking up? I'm quite happy thank you. I have a good life, and I've suffered nothing in my life that most kids haven't gone through.
2. How am I the exception to the rule? Single parenting doesn't mean bad parenting.
Certainly, the ideal situation is a two parent household. But the world we live in is far from perfect. Most human civilizations for thousands of years were made up of the mother and the children, with infrequent visits from the father that provided for the family. This idea that we should all have a leave it to beaver household is new, and way to far from actual reality.
The list of well to do people is far more than wealthy lottery winners. You dismiss my examples by assuming they are the only three, or a small percentage of the population.
Bad parenting is bad parenting, regardless of the number of parents in the household. Lots of good single parent homes, just like there are many bad dual parent homes.
But it's patently obvious that marriage doesn't have to be involved to provide any of those things..
In theory, yes. In practice, it's the people who are less committed to a long term relationship who don't get married in the first place. You can save your breath about pointing out the exceptions. Sure, there will always be exceptions. Some people get rich by playing the lottery, too...doesn't mean it's the best route to becoming wealthy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercury Cougar
Admit it, what you people are looking for is the religious aspect of marriage because you see it as "immoral" for parents not to be married, and it tweaks your archaically prudish sensibilities when they're not..
Um, no. It has nothing to do with that. I don't even go to church. And I don't appreciate you thinking you know stuff about me that you don't.
For the record:
I'm gay, so I know ALL about the benefits of marriage because I can't do that myself.
I'm all about the data. And the data are overwhelmingly in favor of married, 2 parent famliles. It's common sense. But as they say, common sense isn't very common.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercury Cougar
There are just as many kids out there from horrible two-parent families as there are from horrible one-parent families.
Simply not true. On average, the kids from single parent families have more problems.
And the data in my previous links back me up. You can take it up with the people at Princeton University who did the study, Ok? Or is Princeton University too right wing and religious for you?
I suspect people don't like to be told when they're making a bad decision.
1. Who are you to say I'm suffering emotionally from my parents breaking up? I'm quite happy thank you. I have a good life, and I've suffered nothing in my life that most kids haven't gone through..
You're very intelligent...but it comes through in your posts, on this and other threads. Sorry if that makes you mad, but I'm just callin' it as I see it. I'm not trying to be high & mighty about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
2. How am I the exception to the rule? Single parenting doesn't mean bad parenting..
Kids from single parent families don't do as well in school. So in that sensem, you're the exception. You had a kid out of wedlock yourself. If you come from a divorced/single parent family, your chances of doing that are higher than if you don't. So, in that sense, you're not the exception at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
Certainly, the ideal situation is a two parent household. But the world we live in is far from perfect..
As I mentioned in another post....I think the problem now is that children being born to 2 married parents is seen as some kind of distant 'ideal' instead of as a realistic possibility. Usually ideals are something that we aspire to that are out of reach. Somehow, I'd like to see us get to where the 2 parent household that seems like something that's normal and achievable, instead of some distant ideal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
Most human civilizations for thousands of years were made up of the mother and the children, with infrequent visits from the father that provided for the family. This idea that we should all have a leave it to beaver household is new, and way to far from actual reality..
And my response is....so what? Doesn't mean it was a good idea. Rape was more common in the past as well...as was treating women as property. Doesn't mean these were good things to do just because they were common.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
The list of well to do people is far more than wealthy lottery winners..
Um, right...that was my point. You can become wealthy by playing the lottery, but they odds are terrible. By the same token, some kids from single parent families come out ok emotionally, intellectually, etc....but the odds are stacked against them, so it's advisable to make every effort to avoid bringing children into such a situation.
You dismiss my examples by assuming they are the only three, or a small percentage of the population.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
Bad parenting is bad parenting, regardless of the number of parents in the household. Lots of good single parent homes, just like there are many bad dual parent homes.
Let's face it. You and all the other people who've had kids out of wedlock are never going to admit that what you did was a bad idea no matter how much data I provide. No one wants to admit they screwed up, especially when they can't fix it. So, in a way you probably feel you have to tell yourself this 'cause marrying the mom you had the kid with probably doesn't seem like a realistic possibility.
I agreed with everything you said in this post. I just wanted to add that it isn't just the fact that 2 incomes can add financial stability. Even in one income households, the single earner can focus more heavily on work/career if there is someone at home taking care of the house/kids. Married individuals are also more able to take more career risks ('cause there's someone to fall back on), and for this reason married individuals tend to earn more than single people. Since married people tend to complement each other in strengths/weaknesses, I think there's also a "kick in the pants" factor for married people that doesn't exist. (EG, one spouse kicks the other in the pants to get moving on upgrading skills/getting promoted, etc...when the other would have otherwise put it off).
Then there's also the ecnonomy of scale issue. It's more economically efficient to house everyone under one roof than under two.
You don't need to be married to live together and offer all of those things.
You can be in a loving, committed relationship without a piece of paper declaring that.
I think that a single parent household is better than a ****ty dual parent household.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
