Increasing Bastardization of America

Post Reply New Topic

You know what the purpose of marriage is, everyone? It is a financial institution. It is the combination of two family's resources. So, of course single parent households are going to be more likely in poverty.

Children need more than one loving parent. A single parent is just not enough of a person to provide enough stability. You know the saying it takes a whole village to raise a child? It is true. Our ancestors raised children in groups. And, in many societies, children were seen as belonging to the entire group and not just the parents.

After my parents divorced, I was basically raised by my mother. And my father came to visit. Without their combined income and the recession, we lost our home and most of our belongings. I have no doubt that if they were still together that they would have been able to keep everything.

The core of this problem is the extremist views people hold in regards to sex. People seem to think of it as a free thing that people should be allowed to purpose no matter the consequences. Well, the consequences are living, breathing sentient beings who can feel suffering, pain, and neglect. It is no wonder I have a revulsion toward anything sexual.

Liberal views on the subject nor conservative views are going to change this. I propose new types of financial institutions. How about any two people coming together, to share resources in raising children, get tax breaks?

It is not that for everyone, not for me.

Last edited by shrox on 20 Feb 2012, 9:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Why is this newsworthy exactly?

It isn't like that for everyone, but that was the real reason marriage was created. And, because of its financial nature, it is tied to finances and poverty. Thus, that is why "illegitimate children" are more likely to be in poverty.

What is the purpose of marriage to you? If it is to show commitment, couldn't you do that without a marriage?

Funny you should say that, as a friend of a family member of mine just divorced his wife after being in a loveless marriage for a good 16 years because he knocked up someone twice. It's going to be a joint-custody situation. I'd think (though I can't be sure) that the odd home environment wasn't that good for the kids.

My father didn't marry my mother after knocking her up, but he did separate from her and gain full custody of me a a few years later and probably could've gotten child support (but opted not to, as she's perpetually on disability for mental health problems).



The supposed "loser" guy from Sears could seem to be a the "stand up guy" from Sears who was recently promoted to assistant manager, who'll talk all day about his love of children and desire for a family and what not, and then get cold feet when it becomes a reality. There's no perfect signals to see how people behave in a situation like that prior to it occurring.

Last edited by Master_Pedant on 21 Feb 2012, 12:44 am, edited 1 time in total.

I've discovered that many things I care for I cannot explain adequately for many on WP.

Its a big change in society from recent decades.

Whether its good or bad I dont know.

But its certainly newsworthy.

Alright, I just kinda had the impression that was already how it was.........based some of what I learned in sociology. I guess I just am not super shocked about women having kids outside of marriage it seems like a reasonable state of things. Especially with all the younger adolescents/teens accidently getting pregnant...its no wonder women under 30 are having kids outside marriage rather often.

well living in the aftermath of divorce is obviously as bad for children as living in a marriage of convenience - between two people who barely like each other - that is based on someone getting pregnant and it being the done thing.

i'd also mention that many children grow up happily with loving parents who are not married.

so i'm not quite sure of the relevance of this statistic to anything at all...

Well- its been gradually trending for a several decades time to where its just now reached the majority. Folks over a certain age like me grew up when unwed motherhood was a rare and a big deal. The fact that young people like you think of it is normal and dont see it as newsworthy is itsself newsworthy.Both the phenomenon and attititudes towards the phenomenon have changed quite a bit.

That is a very good point.

Quite simply more people just aren't taking marriage that seriously. Most parents I've known with pregnant teens absolutely would not stand for their daughters getting married. From a religious conservative perspective, this is completely backwards. Of course, I support the idea that younger couples be allowed to marry WHILE continuing their education. For someone wanting to maintain religious values, it doesn't make sense for parents to scream "wait for marriage" when even the best educated people out there still have to wait until they're in their 30s and have career stability before they even THINK about marriage and family.

Once religious conservatives figure out just how conflicting the message is that they're sending their kids, the trend will somewhat turn around. But if you really place value on marriage and family, you have to work hard at supporting your own children so they'll maintain the same value and find some incentive other than economics to make it work. As it is, the abstinence evangelicals are making it really tough on their own.

They could just write the pope and get a special indulgence, magically making the children legitimate through a dispensation.

Though that probably doesnt work any more and it might only be for wealthy nobles.

I dunno... I can't speak for Catholics. If you're going to base a personal lifestyle on New Testament morality, then you should be consistent. The Bible teaches that a man and woman living together should be married. Even from a stricter OT perspective, a man and a woman were encouraged to get married if they were already sexually active, and apparently sex between two people who were betrothed was frowned upon but also winked at.

Of course, I view marriage a bit differently than most people. I do see it as a formal binding contract with consequences for breaking its terms. Not to downplay the role of love, but it is only one comparatively small element of the relationship.

I see sex and even children as wonderful and good things that enrich the lives of married couples and parents. I identify as a conservative evangelical myself, and I see this issue as something my fellow evangelicals get dead wrong every single time. Don't tell an older teenager or young adult to wait for marriage, especially at the age they're going to enjoy intimacy the most and have the energy for parenting, and then turn right around and say "oh, btw, you have to wait another 15-20 years while evrybody else gets to have sex and you don't." You create a situation in which a young person is forced choose between compromising his morals and dealing with the guilt and possibly other damaging consequences OR completely missing out on many good things life has to offer.

I'm curious to know in, say, the next 8 years if there really are any guys (or girls) my age who are still unmarried virgins after signing virginity pledges because they're still wrapping up educational and career goals. I'd also like to know how many of them got married and were BOTH virgins on their wedding night. I'm all about teaching abstinence and the value of marriage and family. But those of us who do teach those things aren't looking at it very realistically. It's a special kind of hypocrite who encourages young people to be ambitious and live out their dreams AND practice abstinence and who themselves married early.

Heck, my own parents were high school seniors when they got married and they both managed to graduate from high school as a married couple. But I can't do that...I have to wait for after college? Redonkulous.

I said meh. Personally, I find it kind of sad that marriage is pretty much being abandoned as an institution, but at the same time, it's not for everyone.

Not any more. I am talking about from an evolutionary view point.