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.
]I'm having a hard time reconciling you calling children 'human waste' with you doing 'good' for them[/i]. If you have that attitude toward them then they know it.
I teach children. I consider that good. That's all. As for human waste, perhaps I should have used a different descriptor. Let me explain. In the little burg where I teach we have a large number of people involved in criminal activities mostly drugs, alcohol, and sexual abuse, of both children and adults. I pretty much consider these people human waste. I don't consider the children human waste, but unless they can avoid statistics they'll end up just like their parents.
I tend to like these kids. Traumitized children are the easiest of all children to like and, for me to work with. However, make no mistake, statistics tell us most of them will become just like their parents.
Quote:
You can hold up the man/woman/lifelong model as much as you like. The model itself doesn't work that well, or there wouldn't be as high a divorce rate as there is. It depends entirely on the people that enter into such a union, not on the union itself.
You are almost right. It's depends not just on the individuals involved but their perceptions of the institution itself.
Quote:
I put it to you that with the children you teach, the fact that their parents are active addicts and impoverished has just as much if not more to do with the kids' plight as their marital status.
This is a "what came first the chicken or the egg" argument. I do know they and their children would be better off if they no longer did drugs and married for life.
Quote:
I'll take a gay couple that has had to go above and beyond to have a child and commit to that child over a loveless, bickering, abusive marriage where the children are ignored by two heterosexual parents all their lives any day.
I'll take a practicing christian couple any day over your homosexual ones for raising well adjusted children.
Quote:
You can have situations where some married parents do just as much harm to their children as some single parents.
I'm talking about the relative values of the models not random outlier couples.
Quote:
It does and will always depend on the person raising the kids, not some fairytale whereby all marriages are perfect and all children raised in homes inhabited by two biological parents will be fine and dandy.
The male/female/lifetime marriage model works, period. Come back to me in twenty years and tell me about homosexual marriage and child rearing. Until then I have a functioning model and you have............yet more experimentation with the basic family unit. Experimentation that has done irreparable harm to countless human beings.
The new data, pulled from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, shows that this kind of family structure is found at all levels of income and education. And it’s frequently tied to divorce and remarriage, not just to single motherhood, Dorius says. Forty-three percent of the women with kids with multiple dads were married when their first babies were born.
What a sad legacy of women's lib and the sexual revolution.
Winning the future!
Quote:
Dorius’ study, which was presented Friday at the annual meeting of the Population Association of America, examined data from nearly 4,000 U.S. women who had been interviewed more than 20 times over a 27-year period.
This phenomenon is important to study, Dorius says, because there are consequences to both the mom and her children. Women with children from multiple fathers tend to be disadvantaged compared to other moms. “They are more likely to be under-employed, to have lower incomes, and to be less educated,” Dorius says.
Let's see 2010 -27 years equals 1983, subtract another 19 years, or one generation after the Great Society of LBJ which urshered in welfare support of fatherless families and then resulted in the destruction of the Black family. Before 1964 70% of the Black family was in tact with both mother and father, after LBJ's Great Society, the number plunges today to 30%.
By not holding certain men responsible for their own children has certainly contributed to what we see in society today. Thanks LBJ.
First of all, I don't think that this study has established that this is a new thing. I don't think it was all that uncommon prior to women's lib for women to have children with multiple fathers. Younger women married older men. Life expectancy was shorter, so their husbands died. Women remarried, and had more children.
Women and men have often had children with multiple partners. That doesn't seem problematic to me. I think for conservatives the real issue is children in single-parent homes.
That doesn't back up your claim of "most" though.
I thought you had another link with actual numbers.
I didn't say "most" I said a large number. Which is really not rocket science, considering the amount of second marriages and the husbands who want their own biological children in addition to their step children.
First of all, I don't think that this study has established that this is a new thing. I don't think it was all that uncommon prior to women's lib for women to have children with multiple fathers. Younger women married older men. Life expectancy was shorter, so their husbands died. Women remarried, and had more children.
Women and men have often had children with multiple partners. That doesn't seem problematic to me. I think for conservatives the real issue is children in single-parent homes.
The real problem is the perpetual cycle of fatherless families in poverty that are supported and the result of government social programs.
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.
