The Current State Of Bastardom In America

[dgs49]

Yes, Scooter, in the U.S. I really don't care about Western Europe, or anyplace else.

Rubato, I almost agree with you about the free BC thing. I personally address major policy questions with three questions:

(1) Is a good idea? YES!

(2) Can we afford it? On balance, YES!

(3) Is it Constitutional? Unfortunately, NO!

Therefore, leave it up to the states. I would support it in my own state of Pennsylvania, even though it takes some of my Catholic tax dollars to fund it.

Of course, I wouldn't be passing out pills in middle schools to pre-teens, as you would. Only to adults or with parental consent.

[Scooter]

Yes, Scooter, in the U.S. I really don't care about Western Europe, or anyplace else.

Then you don't care about determining what the actual problem is, and have no hope of solving it.

A thirty year old woman with a decent career who decides to have a child without a husband in the picture is no more prone than anyone else to give birth to a serial killer. Nor is a two income household where the parents have decided, for whatever reason, not to avail themselves of a marriage licence. If one or both parents is (a) poor, (b) abusing substances, (c) abusive, (d) in and out of prison or (e) any combination of the above, their kids are at high risk of ending up that way as well. And there isn't a marriage ceremony in the world that's going to make a shred of difference to that.

Of course, I wouldn't be passing out pills in middle schools to pre-teens, as you would. Only to adults or with parental consent.

When parents can be made criminally and financially responsible for what becomes of the babies their pre-teen and teen children produce, then they can have a say in their kids' reproductive choices. Until then, none of their fucking business.

[MajGenl.Meade]

When parents can be made criminally and financially responsible for what becomes of the babies their pre-teen and teen children produce, then they can have a say in their kids' reproductive choices. Until then, none of their (..) business.

Never been a parent then? AFAIK as a parent one is financially responsible for all that befalls one's children below the age of majority. As long as they lived in my house, they lived by my rules. As long as I had input to the school boards, I'd fight for my rules there too.

When children reach majority, then they can live in their own house and by their own rules

Meade

[dgs49]

Scoots, your last couple sentences were probably the dumbest thing you have ever posted here. Congratulations.

[Grim Reaper]

The lack of affordable or available birth control in the U.S. is a non-issue. Any single girl walking into a PP or other "family planning" clinic and asking for BC will have it provided forthwith. The fact is that they do not take the time or have the interest to walk into them because our "social safety net," porous as it is, has made single motherhood economically tolerable, and the culture, porous as it is, has made it acceptable.

Assuming they even get any education on birth control or other contraceptives. And assuming Planned Parenthood or other clinics can continue to operate since you want to slice their budgets for being "unconstitutional".

Of course, I wouldn't be passing out pills in middle schools to pre-teens, as you would. Only to adults or with parental consent.

On one hand you say they should be able to get birth control, but then you turn around and say it should require being an adult or having parental consent. Which would of course greatly reduce the availability.

[Scooter]

Scoots, your last couple sentences were probably the dumbest thing you have ever posted here. Congratulations.

Translation - can't come up with a single logical argument to rebut a word of what was said.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Sorry dgs - you have to quote me if you want to (non attributed). Scooter has me on ignore. Has a point

[oldr_n_wsr]

When parents can be made criminally and financially responsible for what becomes of the babies their pre-teen and teen children produce, then they can have a say in their kids' reproductive choices. Until then, none of their fucking business.

I do believe that parents of teens under the age of 18 are responsible for things their children do (although not all things). There are some things kids do that the parents are forced to pay for.
Don't know about what the grandchildren of those teens may do. But as Meade said, under my roof, under my rules. And I was hte first person to buy both my kids condoms for the son and condoms and birth control pills (co-pay, but if I had to pay full price I would have) for the daughter.

Births outside of marriage are only a problem (as I said above) when the woman/girl is emotionally, socially, or materially unprepared to be a parent; hence focussing on teen parents makes perfect sense.

With no thought given to the father. Herein lies at least half the problem.

Assuming they even get any education on birth control or other contraceptives.

In a loving and open family atmosphere that would happen. But too many rely on the gov/public school system/others to raise their kids for them, feed them, cloth them, etc. I know there are plenty of needy out there but a good home life can be provided pretty much regardless of circumstances. I see it in my peers and the results in the friends of my kids. Too many expect someone else to be the "cop" and do not discipline not teach their kids. Since when is society the solution of family not doing what they should?

And assuming Planned Parenthood or other clinics can continue to operate since you want to slice their budgets for being "unconstitutional".

unconstitutional with regard to the Constitution of the USA, not to the states/local community/family. I'm sorry, a condom is what a buck? maybe two? A cup of coffee is about the same (probably double if you patronize Starbucks). We need the feds money (which ultimately comes from us) to buy condoms?

[Sean]

Yes, rubato keeps posting this data about "teen births," which ignores the more salient issue of birth outside marriage (bastardy).

Most illegitimate births in the U.S. are the product of either carelessness or gross irresponsibility. The "Murphy Brown" births are becoming more common, but statistically they are insignificant. Births to cohabiting "couples" who happen not to be married is a number that should be looked at more closely.

So hang on, you started talking about numbers of illegitimate births but went on to say there are not any good figures for unmarried couples having illegitimate children. How can you possibly use phrases like, "most illegitimate births in the U.S.", without these figures?

BTW Why was the word 'couples' in quotation marks? Do you not see these as real couples?

The lack of affordable or available birth control in the U.S. is a non-issue. Any single girl walking into a PP or other "family planning" clinic and asking for BC will have it provided forthwith. The fact is that they do not take the time or have the interest to walk into them because our "social safety net," porous as it is, has made single motherhood economically tolerable, and the culture, porous as it is, has made it acceptable.

Right! So we're talking about single mothers and not all illegitimate births...

But the statistics don't lie. And oddly enough, rubato never publishes them. Men born out of wedlock are more likely to drop out of school, take drugs, be unemployed, be poor, end up in jail, and produce more bastards in the next generation. And blaming this phenomenon on Gub'mint, or supposing that Gub'mint has the solution is stupid beyond imagination.

Now we're talking about all illegitimate births again...
So men born out of wedlock... say (as a purely random example) to a couple who are in a committed, life-long, monogamous, loving relationship for example... are more likely to do all of those things.

Wow! I didn't realise that a marriage licence was a magic piece of paper that stopped boys going bad. Why didn't you say so in the first place?

[Grim Reaper]

In a loving and open family atmosphere that would happen. But too many rely on the gov/public school system/others to raise their kids for them, feed them, cloth them, etc. I know there are plenty of needy out there but a good home life can be provided pretty much regardless of circumstances. I see it in my peers and the results in the friends of my kids. Too many expect someone else to be the "cop" and do not discipline not teach their kids. Since when is society the solution of family not doing what they should?

But why should children be punished for their parents' apathy?

unconstitutional with regard to the Constitution of the USA, not to the states/local community/family. I'm sorry, a condom is what a buck? maybe two? A cup of coffee is about the same (probably double if you patronize Starbucks). We need the feds money (which ultimately comes from us) to buy condoms?

Condoms aren't foolproof. And again, the knowledge to use contraceptives is the important part. It doesn't matter how much they cost if they don't know enough to want to use contraceptives.

[oldr_n_wsr]

But why should children be punished for their parents' apathy?

Long long ago, in a galaxy far far away......

Anyway, no child should be punished for hte sins of the parent, nor the apathy of the parent. But there are plent of programs in place that take care of that. Should the federal gov be saddled with that burden? The constitution doesn't wiegh in on that. If local districts want to provide sex ed, then they can given parents (who employ all of those educators/administrators via property taxes) approval. I have no problem with sex ed in the schools, but before the school "taught" them, we had those discussions with our children. We alredy let them know our "feelings" about births outside of marriage (right/wrong, that doesn't matter, they were our opinions). That does not mean we turn a blind eye to anything that may happen.

I see it in my community and county in general where parents just don't give a F%&^ and let thier kids run willy nilly and what is the result? A lifetime of the same and living on the public dole meanwhile the parents have a new SUV every three years. If my daughter or son had a child (for son his girlfriend would actually have the child) , we would do everything in our power to give the child a loving, happy home even if it placed a great burden on us (and it might). As I have said before, too many walk away from, what I think is the whole families responsibility. It's your grandchild/niece/nephew/whatever. Step up and help those who have made a mistake. Mistakes happen (aka unwanted childbirth) but they need not be a burden to society. Families can and should take care of their own.

Condoms aren't foolproof. And again, the knowledge to use contraceptives is the important part. It doesn't matter how much they cost if they don't know enough to want to use contraceptives.

Nothing is foolproof and even those who get the "bannana" lesson may not use them correctly. And giving them away free, to those who did not learn nor to those that did not pay attention (too busy making fun of the banana with a condom on it, yes I was one of those) it means nothing. To them, it is a water balloon, or a blow up balloon. You cannot beat it into them. I would guess (and it is only a guess) that those who don't use birth control, just don't give a F%&^ at the time and let the chips fall where they will. And when the dice roll craps, only then do they realise their choice was "bad".

[Grim Reaper]

Should the federal gov be saddled with that burden?

It'd actually be nice if the federal government abandoned the policy that currently favors abstinence-only education. Too many states use it because it earns them more money.

Nothing is foolproof and even those who get the "bannana" lesson may not use them correctly.

Which is still better than having no idea at all. It gives the kids who do pay attention a better chance than abstinence-only education.

[oldr_n_wsr]

Should the federal gov be saddled with that burden?

It'd actually be nice if the federal government abandoned the policy that currently favors abstinence-only education. Too many states use it because it earns them more money.

The feds should abandon any kind of policy regarding sex ed be it abstinence only or full blown abortion til the kid is born. Just wash their hand of it and states won't go after the money as there is non to be had. Then the states can do it for themselves.

Nothing is foolproof and even those who get the "bannana" lesson may not use them correctly.

Which is still better than having no idea at all. It gives the kids who do pay attention a better chance than abstinence-only education.

I don't disagree. I disagree where the feds need to even have a say in it. Let the parents/communities/local gov/counties/states take care of it.

[rubato]

Only stupid people oppose providing effective and cheap birth control to young women.

Republicans, in other words.

yrs,
rubato

[Sean]

What about Catholic Democrats?

[Lord Jim]

Rube, since you have as much experience with the responsibility of raising children as you have with the responsibility of being a primary bread-winner, (which is to say precisely "none") why don't you try posting about something you actually know something about for a change?

Like the vast number ways one can be a gratuitously insulting asshole to anyone who disagrees with them...

Nobody is ever going to dispute your authoritative expertise in that area...

[rubato]

What about Catholic Democrats?

Most Catholics in educated societies ignore their "church teaching" on birth control.

Very few are stupid enough to pretend that biology is not driving the bus on this one. And they are mostly in countries or parts of countries where education is reviled.

yrs,
rubato

[Gob]

http://www.democratsforlife.org/


Who We Are
We are the preeminent national organization for pro-life Democrats. We are the pro-life voice and wing of the Democratic Party.

We are:
Pro-life: We believe in the fundamental worth, dignity, and equality of all people. We believe that the protection of human life is the foundation of human rights, authentic freedom, and good government. These beliefs animate our opposition to abortion, euthanasia, capital punishment, embryonic stem cell research, poverty, genocide, and all other injustices that directly and indirectly threaten human life.

Democrats: We believe in the core values and principles of the Democratic Party. We are committed to freedom and justice, security and prosperity, equality and community, and hope and progress. We are proud to be members of the party that created the New Deal, Fair Deal, and New Frontier. We share the party’s commitment to the Four Freedoms: freedom of speech and religion, and freedom from fear and want. We look to continue and perfect the party’s commitment to the most vulnerable members of our society.

Pro-life Democrats: We believe in the legal protection of unborn life and a comprehensive, bipartisan approach to reducing the number of abortions in America and around the world. We believe in supporting women and children, strengthening families and communities, and protecting the environment. We favor eliminating unfair discrimination, improving education, and preserving the American dream for all Americans. We believe in the elimination of the death penalty, euthanasia, and embryonic stem cell research.

We believe in honest, efficient government that compliments the market and civil society to build a strong economy that benefits all Americans. We believe this can be achieved through consistent growth, sensible regulation, fair taxation, and adequate wages, along with efforts to ensure the equality of opportunity, a reduction in poverty, and the existence of an effective social safety net that guarantees that all people have sufficient access to food, shelter, healthcare, and life’s other basic necessities.

Globally, we oppose tyranny, terrorism, genocide, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, human trafficking, and all other unjust acts of violence and aggression. We support international cooperation, the spread of democracy and human rights, and the empowerment of women.

In representing pro-life Democrats within the true “big tent” party, DFLA works across a broad spectrum of life ethics. We recognize that people of good faith have different approaches to these issues; therefore, we refuse to use a single issue as a “litmus test” to exclude those who would otherwise seek common ground with us on the expansion of human rights. We encourage all people committed to the common good to work together to protect human life at all of its stages.


What We Do

We mobilize Democrats at local, state, and national levels to:
-elect pro-life Democrats to office
-support pro-life Democrats while in an elected position
-promote a pro-life plank in the Democratic Party platform
-achieve pro-life legislation with the help of national and state pro-life Democrats
-participate actively in Democratic party functions and offices

[Lord Jim]

Aw gee Strop, you're going to cause rube's head to explode....

He doesn't handle cognitive dissonance at all well....

[Gob]

If he could handle cognition it would be a start....