Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-01-2017, 02:18 PM
 
16,212 posts, read 10,789,071 times
Reputation: 8442

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Listener2307 View Post
I think the central question is, "Why are large numbers of children born to "unpartnered" women in America"? Let's agree for a moment that marriage is neither good nor bad.

And the answer is, "Because the government pays for that to be so".
If well intended social programs did not pay for "unpartnered" women to have children, there would be far fewer children born to "unpartnered" mothers.

And almost everyone agrees that if there were far fewer children born to "unpartnered" mothers, it would be a good thing for America.

Like several other posters in this thread, I have some experience myself, having been raised by a single mother and without a father figure. In the 1950's that was very, very unusual. I never knew another kid in my situation.

As I said, I don't believe the Great Society programs "destroyed Black families". I do believe, however, that progress in Black society has been restrained by government programs which were meant to help. It has impacted Black families more than White families only because Black people qualified for these programs at a greater rate than White families.

Nonetheless, I think those welfare programs are needed. Just because a percentage of the recipients use the safety net as a hammock is no reason to discontinue its availability.
Actually the answer is because women do not feel an obligation to get married today. Contrary to what many believe, a lot of women, myself included when I was a young women, feel that marriage as an institution is antiquated and provides no benefits at all for young women other than to trap them.

That was the main reason why I was one of those young women who cohabited with my now husband for over 5 years before we got married. We also had a child during that time period. I only changed my mind because I lost a job and needed health insurance and so us getting married provided me health insurance. I don't regret getting married but for many couples it is just not important in the grand scheme of things anymore. I am not religious and don't base my self worth on what other people think. A lot of women have the same mindset I do so just don't think it is important to get married.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-01-2017, 02:24 PM
 
7,827 posts, read 3,367,515 times
Reputation: 5141
Quote:
Originally Posted by residinghere2007 View Post
Actually the answer is because women do not feel an obligation to get married today. Contrary to what many believe, a lot of women, myself included when I was a young women, feel that marriage as an institution is antiquated and provides no benefits at all for young women other than to trap them.

That was the main reason why I was one of those young women who cohabited with my now husband for over 5 years before we got married. We also had a child during that time period. I only changed my mind because I lost a job and needed health insurance and so us getting married provided me health insurance. I don't regret getting married but for many couples it is just not important in the grand scheme of things anymore. I am not religious and don't base my self worth on what other people think. A lot of women have the same mindset I do so just don't think it is important to get married.
As I stated earlier, yes, we have legitimized single mothers despite the overwhelming amount of data showing that children raised in single parent households do not perform as well and often end up in poverty. Yes, sometimes issues arise; death of a spouse, abuse, etc, and that is one thing, but we don't have to legitimize people choosing willy nilly to have children without a father present, which very clearly presents problems.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2017, 02:24 PM
 
16,212 posts, read 10,789,071 times
Reputation: 8442
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8won6 View Post
This is what needs to be repeated a million times.
On this in that the OP you quoted said the video mentioned how slaves had a family of dysfunction, I'd disagree.

Slaves had families with unrelated kin and those relationships are the basis of what is now considered "the black community." They looked out for each other as best they could and raised children that weren't theirs like they were their own in many instances, similar to Frederick Douglass' upbringing by an old black woman who probably wasn't even related to him.

I saw a funny video recently about HBCU homecomings and there was a friendly rivalry between Howard U and Hampton U and which one of them is the "real HU." The young man from Howard mentioned how Howard is the most well known HBCU and how even many white people know about it. The young lady from Hampton said that Hampton was the "real HU" and on how they don't place too much value on what white know lol! (FWIW, this mindset is why I support and encourage black people to attend HBCUs). That was the best clapback I ever heard in public lol!

On the video, we have families no matter what white people think and we have always had families. We really should stop caring what they think we need to do or how they view our families because they have way more dysfunction than we do in various categories and are no supreme beings we should be trying to impress or strive to be like.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2017, 02:29 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,804 posts, read 44,610,756 times
Reputation: 13626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Indentured Servant View Post
You cannot remind someone who is not listening or reading. I tree falling in the forest makes no sound if you drowned that sound out with other noise. Turn off the other noise then you can hear the trees fall. Friendly tip on how to be gain knowledge.
Doesn't answer the question. It's a KNOWN fact that children from single parent homes experience poverty at significantly higher rates. So WHY are 72.2% of Black children born to single mothers? Is the INTENTIONAL goal to live in poverty and have one's children live in poverty, as well? Because, otherwise, you'd think they'd take steps to curb that rate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2017, 02:31 PM
 
16,212 posts, read 10,789,071 times
Reputation: 8442
Quote:
Originally Posted by EastwardBound View Post
As I stated earlier, yes, we have legitimized single mothers despite the overwhelming amount of data showing that children raised in single parent households do not perform as well and often end up in poverty. Yes, sometimes issues arise; death of a spouse, abuse, etc, and that is one thing, but we don't have to legitimize people choosing willy nilly to have children without a father present, which very clearly presents problems.
There is no equivocal data that shows what you think it shows. There is data that shows a "risk." Not all risk come to fruition.

Also I don't remember you ever answering the question of how someone "legitimizes" something else that someone does.

If I don't think marriage is valuable to me as an individual, especially after growing up and seeing everyone I knew who were married get divorced and turn into crazies. I am going to make up my mind by myself. Also as a woman, marriage for many women, especially young women is just not something they want in their lives. I can respect that people don't always think the way I do or want the same things out of life that I do. I'd hope that you respecting other people's views and the way their live their lives, especially if they are doing nothing to harm you, would mean you would "legitimately" respect those people on an individual basis.

Also, just because someone is born out of wedlock doesn't mean they don't have a father present. I was born out of wedlock and have always known my father. My son was born out of wedlock and I am now married to his father.

Statistics actually show, especially in the black community if you compare data over a span of years, that children of single mothers have much higher educational achivement that previous generations raised in two parent homes, they make more in income, have better careers, and are less likely to be criminals. Yet people deny this because they read too many media stories about someone being "at risk."

Reminds me of the 1980s/1990s when media spoke of how blacks are at risk of birthing a generation of "super predators" of due to them being born as crack babies and all other things going on back then. None of that happened. And it is ironic they don't make the same predictions about all these meth and heroin addicted white babies being born today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2017, 02:36 PM
 
7,827 posts, read 3,367,515 times
Reputation: 5141
Quote:
Originally Posted by residinghere2007 View Post
There is no equivocal data that shows what you think it shows. There is data that shows a "risk." Not all risk come to fruition.

Also I don't remember you ever answering the question of how someone "legitimizes" something else that someone does.

If I don't think marriage is valuable to me as an individual, especially after growing up and seeing everyone I knew who were married get divorced and turn into crazies. I am going to make up my mind by myself. Also as a woman, marriage for many women, especially young women is just not something they want in their lives. I can respect that people don't always think the way I do or want the same things out of life that I do. I'd hope that you respecting other people's views and the way their live their lives, especially if they are doing nothing to harm you, would mean you would "legitimately" respect those people on an individual basis.

Also, just because someone is born out of wedlock doesn't mean they don't have a father present. I was born out of wedlock and have always known my father. My son was born out of wedlock and I am now married to his father.

Statistics actually show, especially in the black community if you compare data over a span of years, that children of single mothers have much higher educational achivement that previous generations raised in two parent homes, they make more in income, have better careers, and are less likely to be criminals. Yet people deny this because they read too many media stories about someone being "at risk."

Reminds me of the 1980s/1990s when media spoke of how blacks are at risk of birthing a generation of "super predators" of due to them being born as crack babies and all other things going on back then. None of that happened. And it is ironic they don't make the same predictions about all these meth and heroin addicted white babies being born today.
Actually the data shows that very clearly, with one example here:

http://living.thebump.com/data-singl...lds-15860.html

Children raised in single parent households are more likely to suffer from economic deprivation, but also cognitive and social issues.

Legitimizing children being raised in a single parent household, in or out of wedlock is constantly occuring in the pop media and pop culture and now the left, taking over the Democrat party tells us we can't correctly point out scientific data showing the facts, or we are somehow attacking people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2017, 02:37 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,804 posts, read 44,610,756 times
Reputation: 13626
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoloforLife View Post
The bolded is correct. Conservatives like to use percentages to demonize black people. However, by the share size of the white population in this country, they consume the largest amount of the social welfare pie.
No wonder the President of the California Community College System eliminated algebra as a graduation requirement (because he said POC can't do math). There's a problem with many people even understanding basic statistics.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2017, 02:39 PM
 
3,538 posts, read 1,323,295 times
Reputation: 1462
Quote:
Originally Posted by residinghere2007 View Post
On this in that the OP you quoted said the video mentioned how slaves had a family of dysfunction, I'd disagree.

Slaves had families with unrelated kin and those relationships are the basis of what is now considered "the black community." They looked out for each other as best they could and raised children that weren't theirs like they were their own in many instances, similar to Frederick Douglass' upbringing by an old black woman who probably wasn't even related to him.

I saw a funny video recently about HBCU homecomings and there was a friendly rivalry between Howard U and Hampton U and which one of them is the "real HU." The young man from Howard mentioned how Howard is the most well known HBCU and how even many white people know about it. The young lady from Hampton said that Hampton was the "real HU" and on how they don't place too much value on what white know lol! (FWIW, this mindset is why I support and encourage black people to attend HBCUs). That was the best clapback I ever heard in public lol!

On the video, we have families no matter what white people think and we have always had families. We really should stop caring what they think we need to do or how they view our families because they have way more dysfunction than we do in various categories and are no supreme beings we should be trying to impress or strive to be like.
The person I agreed with said that slavery gave blacks a poor foundation of family structure in the U.S. I think this is very true and an often overlooked aspect of the black American experience. You have centuries of families being split up. There were also slaves that would snitch on other slaves. You didn't know who to even trust. Centuries of the black males being either removed from the home or black males being put in a position of not being a part of the leadership of a household. I do think it matters that the black families and the black community was socially engineered for a few hundred years. Especially when combined with a host of other aspects of being dominated by whites.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2017, 02:42 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,804 posts, read 44,610,756 times
Reputation: 13626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian View Post
The War on Poverty. Please read: How The Welfare State Has Devastated African Americans

Not going to quote all the good stuff in that article, and I use that one as a summary of MANY that are all in agreement on the subject, and come from respected left, right and centrist organizations. Obviously, I agree with what Malcolm X said in 1963 (wouldn't have quoted him if I didn't), but tons of people have written on the subject and all are singing from one sheet of music. Hell, listen to Frederick Douglass from 1865:

Look at black poverty rates from 1940 to 1960. Look at the how the explosion of the out of wedlock birthrate skyrocketing in the black community coincides almost exactly, as in perfectly, with the LBJ speech that started the "war on poverty." Look at black economic progress from 1956-1960 an then 1960-1964, and note that it has never once been that high since. Look at Dunbar HS in DC and the Harlem public schools prior to 1964, where lower class, black-only student bodies scored higher than the majority of the all white schools in the surrounding areas, but have fallen to near or dead last in same comparison s in the years since 1964.

White politicians who needed more vote currency found a real cheap source in the mid 1960s. And then they decided to ignore Mr. Douglass sage warning and once again began meddling and interfering, in the name of helping, which was actually just the branding on the real goal - buying black votes with welfare crumbs. Meddling and interfering you see, is very profitable in terms of vote currency. What did LBJ say about how long the Democrats would get the black vote? He knew what he was doing just fine, and at no point in that racist jerk's life was he ever doing it to actually try and help anyone.

In virtually every possible way to measure socio-economics, blacks were better off prior to 1964 than they have been any time since. [/b]Once the white bourgeois political machine found a way that blacks would enslave themselves, and paid for with other people's money...well, a grand political tradition was born, but to keep it going, the black America MUST AT ALL TIMES be the permanent underclass of the US. [/b]They have to be poor, dependent, fractured and dysfunctional, as this will keep them pissed off and motivated to spend that vote currency on exactly who their "leaders" tell them to, according to a broken and morally bankrupt narrative that at its core is nothing but a big freaking scam.

Every political move the federal government makes where the American black individual is concerned is designed to make sure they do not advance economically in the same proportions as white people, because middle and upper class voters are nowhere near as lockstep to voting for whatever free candy the government is doling out, and whether Democrat or Republican, the permanent pissed off underclass is easy to sell more government to. Partisans from both sides will blame the other guy and try to hold some moral high ground, but where the government's destruction of the black family is concerned, that is two prostitutes trying to claim that one of them is a virgin and the other is a dirty ****. As Malcolm X said, two canines, just one more cunning than the other, and both wanting to feast on you.

If there is any one single community I wish I could teach libertarianism, natural rights theory, laissez faire economics, and most especially voluntary association and as little government intervention in their lives as possible, it would be the average American black person. Hard to undo 50+ years of near constant brainwashing, but if I have a representative target audience, that's who it is.
"Once the white bourgeois political machine found a way that blacks would enslave themselves, and paid for with other people's money...well, a grand political tradition was born, but to keep it going, the black America MUST AT ALL TIMES be the permanent underclass of the US."

Exactly correct. But just try to get any of them to recognize how they're being used.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-01-2017, 02:45 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,804 posts, read 44,610,756 times
Reputation: 13626
Quote:
Originally Posted by EastwardBound View Post
I don't think the current leftist climate in the Democrat party would agree with that. In their inability to differentiate between all or nothing, they would argue that pointing out statistics that show children raised in a two parent household are much better off, is attacking single mothers.
Exactly. They've already labeled such as "white privilege." There's a thread on how the white intact nuclear family is "racist."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:59 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top