The Catholic Thing
HOME        ARCHIVES        IN THE NEWS        COMMENTARY        NOTABLE        DONATE
Elective Genocide Print E-mail
By Brad Miner   
Monday, 24 February 2014

It’s neither light nor pleasant reading, but last week I pored over Summary of Vital Statistics 2012: The City of New York Pregnancy Outcomes.

There’s some apparently good news in the report, as for instance: “Since 2003, the teen birth rate continued its steady decline”; or that induced abortions also declined – to 73,815. The NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene doesn’t speculate about reasons for these declines, no more than it decries other data that ought to horrify any moral person.

The Centers for Disease Control tracks birth and fertility rates over the years, and CDC’s national data suggest there’s no surprise in New York’s falling birth rates, as we can see in the chart below: 


Birth and fertility in the U.S., preliminary 2012; provisional for year ending June 2013

But to get to the really bad stuff: More than one-third (35 percent) of all pregnancies in the Big Apple end in abortion. Such a number is, to many of us, simply horrific. But it’s not the most disturbing datum.

Among African-Americans (termed by NYC as “non-Hispanic blacks”), who constitute a quarter of the city’s population (this includes all five boroughs), there are 1¼ abortions for every live birth. Put another way: although African-Americans are 25 percent of the city’s population, they have 42 percent of the abortions performed in New York.

Since these numbers are not the consequence of a Chinese-style program of forced abortion, it seems indisputably a case of elective genocide.

Drilling down a bit: According to the report, 59,522 black women became pregnant in New York City in 2012. The results of those pregnancies were: 31,328 “induced terminations” (i.e. abortions); 24,758 live births; and 3,446 “spontaneous terminations.”

Although not in the NYC health department’s data (though it should be), of those nearly 25,000 black babies who survived un-aborted, the number born to unwed mothers approaches 80%. When Daniel Patrick Moynihan first sounded the alarm (1965) about rising illegitimacy rates in the black community, that rate was at 25 percent. As Doug Patton has written:

That is higher than the rate during the years when parts of America still practiced slavery. . . .In 1850, when black men, women, and children in several of the states could be ripped from their loved ones and sold as property, a higher percentage of their children were being born and raised in marriage-based, two parent families than there are a century and half later. . .

You’ll get no handwringing or caterwauling from me about the “destruction of the black family,” although what New York’s “civil-rights leaders” are doing to focus on this demographic nightmare is not apparent. My respect for people is too great to fall back on nostrums that, for half a century, have anyway proved themselves ineffective in the extreme – and that deny that the people in question have abilities to apply reason to problems, may accept responsibility for mistakes, and must themselves undertake paths to reform.

I’ll also decline to assign blame for New York’s decades-long descent into demographic chaos on its liberal politics (which includes the mayoralties of Republican Giuliani and independent Bloomberg). African-American neighborhoods in the Bronx, especially, have enjoyed fifty years of self-governance, yet during that time things have grown progressively worse for the poorest of the poor, which is especially stunning given that in Queens, black household income exceeds that of whites’.

How long can a society – or a community – sustain such a pattern? That’s hard to say. In the meantime – as we discover the answer – the usual, failed policy initiatives are refashioned as innovative and hopeful. As Kay S. Hymowitz recently wrote, many insist the answer is more government support, pointing out that “poverty rates for single-parent households are lower in most other advanced economies, where the welfare state is more generous.” There is truth in that. But as Ms. Hymowitz writes, America is not Sweden:

Simply put, unmarried parents here are more likely to enter into parenthood in ways guaranteed to create turmoil in their children’s lives. The typical American single mother is younger than her counterpart in other developed nations. She is also more likely to live in a community where single motherhood is the norm. . .

The worry is that even government programs designed to encourage marriage will fail, in large measure because they reduce marriage to an argument of sorts about economic stability. Marriage as a utilitarian tactic, not a spiritual union.

 
The Marriage at Cana by Tintoretto (1561)

            Even at the website devoted to Catholic marriage, www.ForYourMarriage.org, which is an “initiative of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops,” David Popenoe of the National Marriage Project includes on his list of ten research findings on marriage that matrimony “helps people to generate income and wealth.” Perhaps that’s a useful argument in some cases. One suspects, however, that visitors to For Your Marriage are there to get either marriage counseling advice or information about their upcoming nuptials.
 
            And what is really needed to solve the fornication, abortion, cohabitation, and single-parent crisis is an understanding of marriage as a sacrament. And, thank heavens, For Your Marriage does that well. On a page about sexuality in marriage and in the context of John Paul II’s Theology of the Body:
The pope begins with the idea that each human being is willed for his or her own sake. Out of love God created human beings as male and female, persons of dignity and worthy of respect. Also out of love, God established marriage as the first communion of persons.
Good luck getting New York’s political class to embrace this, the most realistic solution to its serial sexual crises.
           
Brad Miner is senior editor of The Catholic Thing, senior fellow of the Faith & Reason Institute, and a board member of Aid to the Church In Need USA. He is the author of six books and is a former Literary Editor of National Review. His book, The Compleat Gentleman, read by Christopher Lane, is available on audio.
 
 
The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.


Rules for Commenting

The Catholic Thing welcomes comments, which should reflect a sense of brevity and a spirit of Christian civility, and which, as discretion indicates, we reserve the right to publish or not. And, please, do not include links to other websites; we simply haven't time to check them all.

Comments (32)Add Comment
0
...
written by ken tremendous, February 23, 2014
I have no particular problem with the piece Brad except that it is a good 30 years out of date. The story is no longer about "the black family" but families in general where illegitimacy rates are already higher than they were in the "negro family" the year Moynihan wrote his essay.

Further, if you read Charles Murray you'll see evidence that the white illegitmacy rate is closer to 50% among whites of a working class background. If anything the experience of black America was a canary in a coal mine for white America.

And it is at this point where the conservative narrative of things breaks down somewhat. See, in 1980 one could argue plausibly that the surge in black illegitimacy was due to liberal social programs. Ergo reform welfare, cut taxes, jail the criminals..problem solved. But now I think conservatives will have to face the uncomfortable fact that the American economy is not working so well for below average whites either..and that this is one big factor in the rise of illegitimacy. This problem is now very large in parts of the country that still vote Republican !

See, Brad I know that you think these sorts of concerns are hopelessly "utilitarian"---but if your own daughter's only marriage prospects were to men unable to earn much more than minimum wages and who would be only marginally attached to the workforce, would you blame her for not falling all over herself to get married to one of them? It is very unlikely that such a marriage would work over the long haul or even the short haul.

But the desire to make babies does not go away! We Catholics have to wise up that if we want a more virtuous people that part of the answer is that we need to help create a society where virtue is easier to live. And having a society where a man had the ability to earn a decent living that could support a family working full time would be a start!

It's wonderful to have a sacramental view of marriage too, don't get me wrong....but sacraments are grace that build on nature. It's hard for even a sacramental marriage to work if a man cannot make a living.
0
...
written by Jack,CT, February 24, 2014
Brad,
Very powerful stuff!

I do not agree with "Ken" that your piece is outdated
simply because you refer to 1965 culture.
I think it is a very bold statement to degrade the faith
as "Ken" did while in the richest country on earth!

I found your piece as much a call to prayer as well and
I Thank you.
0
...
written by Deacon Ed Peitler, February 24, 2014
I was visiting one of my sons recently who lives outside NYC and took a quick bus ride into NYC for a leisurely jaunt through Central Park on a brisk but sunny Saturday morning on my way over to the Metropolitan Museum of Art. A crowd of mostly 30ish aged persons sporting their obligatory Starbuck's 'latte-this and latte-that' was gathered in a fenced-off area with their dogs. They were there to 'exercise' their dogs and to converse with the like-minded. I thought to myself that in a former life, those would have been children at play, and not dogs. I concluded that dogs are the new children. So sad.

The other thought I had about the abortion vs live-birth numbers among Blacks is this: Margaret Sanger would be pleased that her goal of auto-eugenics has come to pass. Even more sad.
0
...
written by Michael Paterson-Seymour, February 24, 2014
Fewer and fewer people are marrying, but, even in the lower classes, reason, combined with instinctive feelings, can preserve the sympathies and affections they feel for their mates and offspring. They know that bringing up a child requires the united exertions and superintending care of both parents.

In France (I do not know the figures for the USA) 44% of all births are out of wedlock, including 56% of the births of first children. Nevertheless, 85% of children under 15 are living with both their biological parents.

The question is not one of persuading parents to stay together, for the sake of their children; it is one of persuading them that marriage is something of relevance to them, not only to the rich, Muslims and gays.
0
...
written by maineman, February 24, 2014
It makes sense that the impact of liberalism (not the Classic Comic political/economic version, but its underlying philosophy, the denial of the existence of the absolute) would impact the more fragile cultures with more virulence than the more established ones. That would explain the collapse of the black American family immediately following the 1960's era of government hand-outs and the comparative resistance of the French family.

But no one gets out of liberalism alive, which is why we call it the culture of death. And only a reversal of the ideas which found perhaps their most obvious lethality in the French Revolution can save the French at this point.

As for NYC, we will now see the tired, discredited mantra of more government intervention exacting an even greater toll on the tragically sad underclasses in NYC, while the real cause goes unnoticed by the purveyors of liberalism, even after the coming, new round of failures becomes obvious to everyone else.

It's really not that complicated. Demographics are linked to hope. Hope is linked to faith. And faith in this world, and in the stuff of which it is composed (or the people who promise to rearrange it), is no faith at all.
0
...
written by Other Joe, February 24, 2014
Ken, you may think there is a financial solution to social problems of this scope, but finances have been provided. You may think there is a political solution, but schemes have been tried. You must admit that there is also a moral component to social behavior. Sadly, the moral component has been abolished in favor of political-financial nostrums. Moral understanding allows an individual to be self-regulating, which is true empowerment. Regulation by others is the opposite of empowerment.
Your other remarks about the economy are not supported by experience. In the bad old days when the "era of big government" was temporarily over. We had full employment and had jobs for uncounted millions of undocumented immigrants. Think about a citizen of New York State today who works hard for a middle class living. Federal, state and local governments take more than half of the person's income. What do they get for their money? A flourishing of the underclass (now in danger of becoming permanently socially disabled)? How much more should the various governments take to put things right? Eighty percent? Without moral guidelines more government influence will produce greater social malaise.
0
...
written by Athanasius, February 24, 2014
Liberalism, that is "liberty from God", assumes that human society is perfectible through human means. You just have to find the right formula. The fact that many of the formulae that have tried have not worked to date just means that they haven't found the right formula yet, and most likely this is due to rich people or religious people getting in their way. If only they had more power over others, more control, then they would stumble upon the right mix of policy, programs, and taxes that will achieve utopia. In the meantime, they must crush those who oppose them on their quest. After all, it is for the good of the collective.
0
...
written by Manfred, February 24, 2014
Brad: You have put your finger, with this article, right at ground zero. Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg, when asked what she thought when she learned the Roe v. Wade decision stated, that she thought it was passed as there might be too many of cetain types of people in this Country. Where are most abortuaries located? There are powerful people in this Country who do not want this nation to become another Brazil, with favela shanties climbing up the mountains outside of Rio. Why is the main focus of the HHS Mandate the employer paying for contraceptives and abortifaients? Why is the sterile sexuality of sodomy/lesbianism being pushed so forcefully by our government? It is all of a piece. We are not concerned about the American Indians any longer as they are incapable of anything other than drinking themselves to death on the reservations they are able to leave at any time, if they wanted to. The city of Detroit served as a "reservation" (compare it to Grand Rapids, for example) for the last forty years and it is bankrupt. The cost of policing and jailing these marginal wards of the Government, whatever their ethnicity, has simply become prohibitive.
0
...
written by Ted Seeber, February 24, 2014
Why are we ignorant of the historical problem that may be contributing to this? As early as 1855, Fredrick Douglass had noted the devastating effect chattel slavery had on the tradition of fatherhood, both for blacks and for lower class white slaveowners. What makes us assume that anything at all has been done to restore a tradition of families living together and men working to provide for their families in the 170 years since? I see no evidence of such in the United States, in fact, mostly the opposite- we've spend 170 years trying to give sexual freedom to men and women and destroying the family in the process.
0
...
written by ken tremendous, February 24, 2014
Other Joe--

It's amazing to me the lengths to which those living in the Catholic conservative bubble will go to refuse to see what is staring them in the face.

Take a young girl in middling small town in the heartland like Topeka, Kansas or Dayton, OH. Let's assume she's white to avoid bringing race into the equation. What does she see when she hits 18?

All the best marriage prospects, the most talented young men, have moved away to places like Chicago or LA or New York or Boston to try to make some real money. And what are the life prospects of the young men who are left...who, lacking much to do with themselves besides working odd low paying jobs, spend a lot of time smoking pot and playing X box. Is it really so surprising that many of these average and below average young women conclude that marriage is a bad deal for them and not likely to produce a better life for them? You can preach all you want about sacramental marriages but the vast majority of such successful marriages that you could point to are among those of a higher social and economic class than she or any of her likely suitors could reasonably aspire to. Let's face it...Christianity for whites is largely an upper middle class phenomenon.

So let's set aside the bromides and generalities about the failures of big government in the past and look at the reality today!...all I'm saying is that there is a problem of declining wages and life prospects for those at the bottom 1/2 to 2/3 of our society that is getting worse not better. And it is having a deleterious effect on traditional families.

I'm not sure what to do about it, but an acknowledgment of the basic issue here on the part of conservatives might be a start
0
...
written by Noah Vaile, February 24, 2014
Looks as if the genocidal dream of Margaret Sanger and her Planned Parenthood organization are coming to fruition in the rotten apple.
We must fight evil everyday and in every way.
0
...
written by Pam Slizofski, February 24, 2014
This should be called elected genocide. In spite of Obama's record and statements concerning abortion Catholics voted for him in a big way, and saddest of all religious voted for him overwhelmingly. If you don't vote Pro-Life you are voting Pro-Abortion. It's time Catholics vote Principles above Personalities, until then abortion rules.
0
...
written by Rene, February 24, 2014
A great chastisement appears to be here, and we are doing it to ourselves. I forgot who said something like this "God always forgive, humans sometimes forgive, but nature never forgives." What we see here is Liberalism's disregard for natural law and its natural consequences. Are New Yorkers learning anything? Didn't Mr. DeBlasio win in a landslide?
0
...
written by DeGaulle, February 24, 2014
Other Joe, I think that Ken has a point, and I utterly disavow socialism as totally incompatible with Catholicism. The world has taken a very wrong turning when a man (and I mean men, not women, who would be better off if they could stay out of the workforce) can be expected to work a full week and not receive a living wage that could support marriage and children. I don't care what the work is, cleaning toilets or making hamburgers, to not pay a living wage for good work is exploitation. Indeed it is considered that to defraud workers of their just wages is one of the sins that cries to heaven for vengeance. Ken is right in that it is nearly impossible for people in that social grouping to marry in any conventional sense. Of course, throwing state money at the problem only exacerbates this. Our social and business leaders should show leadership here, and I'm not so sure that an increased minimum wage is anathema either. If a business can't survive without exploitative wages, does it deserve to? Of course there might be increased unemployment and other difficulties, but it is likely that to remedy these problems pain will be unavoidable. The alternative is an ever-growing and eventually unsupportable under-class.
0
...
written by Seanachie, February 24, 2014
Excellent piece, Brad. Somewhat surprised that the piece whose point, I believe, was understanding marriage as a sacrament and solution to the sexual crises was convoluted by some into a rant about "minimum" and "living" wages. Your exhortation about the political class was well sounded. Seems like a no brainer that marrying and having a family requires one to be able to support a wife and children. If one is only able (training, education, experience, personal background, job market condition, etc.) to earn less than required to support a wife and children, one awaits marriage and parenthood. In short, the financial burden of providing for a wife and children is upon the individual. And, yes, some jobs pay more than others but generally require more knowledge, abilities, skill, and experience. Qualify for better employment, work smart and diligently, and higher earnings will follow.
0
...
written by Jack,CT, February 24, 2014
THE SUGGESTION that we should "Loosen" the role of
a Sacrament is simply insane......

@KenTrem....you have slandered the "Sacraments" more
than needed and certainly have left all our kids
living in the 'Heartland" out of happiness and
That is a strong statement.
The scene you write about the young female is insulting
to her and the "Farmers" who feed your great big
supermarket!
0
...
written by maineman, February 24, 2014
No, DeGaulle, Ken's point is a slight-of-hand, really just Marxism pretending to Christianity. The question to ask is why are we, the richest society in the history of the planet, returning to the ways of the Romans, and the Greeks before them?

Even our poor have more material wealth than almost everyone in history. For that matter, poverty was the stuff of Francis' sainthood and was a central prescription of our Lord. You can argue that material deprivation is bad for you or the girl in Ohio, but that is not Christianity. Christendom was built mostly by those who went without from a material standpoint, including many who eventually (and joyfully) went without their heads, their heartbeat, or their blood.

People must wrap their minds around what a nightmare liberalism has unleashed. This article articulates the fact that NYC has entered the same territory occupied in history by the Aztecs. Hundreds of thousands are being sacrificed to the will, the same will that always wants more, no matter how much one has.

Arguing that women are murdering their babies for convenience, people are choosing perversion rather than procreation, and men are abandoning their children and women because they don't have enough stuff is really just a contemporary version of the ruse used by the serpent in the Garden. It can only lead to the same place every time.

0
...
written by Jack,CT, February 24, 2014
To me the fact that of 60,000 conceptions
30,000 made it to birth is more alarming
than any of this jargon.
0
...
written by DeGaulle, February 24, 2014
Maineman, perhaps Ken's motivations are Marxist, but mine are rooted in traditional Catholic teaching. Multinational business and national and international finance, which recent events have shown with the transfer of wealth from the people to bail out failed banks, are far closer to Marx than traditional bourgeois capitalism as I have known and understood it. Up to very recently, in Ireland at least, unskilled manual labourers could support wives and very large families on a single wage. What infernal social changes have occurred that this is no longer possible? Nor is it fair to simply dismiss these people by saying they should work harder or get an education. There will always be a large cohort of any population unable to perform anything more complex than unskilled labour-it has always been so. The rest of the community has a Christian duty to ensure dignified work is available to them or we end up with a chaotic underclass. The dignity that work affords to a human life is very considerable. Now, socialist solutions to this problem are counter-productive, but Catholicism exhorts us to find a Christian alternative. Whatever his motives, Ken is correct to say that such a solution (but not a socialist one) would be an encouragement to marriage.
0
...
written by ken tremendous, February 24, 2014
OK Maineman...so when your 20 year old daughter says that she's pregnant and wants to marry a guy who makes $1000 a month driving a forklift in an Amazon warehouse--and few prospects beyond that, in the town where you're making a decent living as a doctor--I'm really sure that you would reassure her that even if she'll have to go on medicaid and rely on foodstamps and even then will not have any where near the standard of living that you had, that she should be happy because she lives in America the land of opportunity with more wealth than any society in history.

Right....and as I recall you were the guy who a few weeks back was complaining about losing money on some patients in his medical practice. You should have known that that it was pure Marxist materialism to worry about such mundane concerns...and that the dedicated poverty of Francis is the way...

SOmehow the abstractions aren't so comforting when it its our own or our loved ones standard of living that is declining, eh Maineman!!!

Anyway you should realize though that roughly this scenario for young marriage age people has been playing out all across America for the last generation. And now we have lots of college educated kids addled with student loan debt who cannot find a better job than as a barista at Starbucks. And you are really going to argue that marriage is the solution for them?
0
...
written by Other Joe, February 24, 2014
Ken et al, the problem of a living wage is a moral problem therefor the solution is a moral solution. The context to the moral problem is an increasingly secular society in which morals are defined by the individual by his or her own lights. There is either a God and judgment or it is every beast for himself.

The problem of a lack of charity is a moral problem, and sloth, and envy and lust and so on. Justice finally is a moral issue in which political justice must be a subset. There is no need for a term such as social justice because justice encompasses the social. With no moral structure on which citizens are in general agreement, there is no reason not to underpay, no reason to marry, no reason not to use abortion as birth control or sell abortion to those one may not wish to see reproduce. It's all just a matter of self interested preference.

This is not a political argument, it a small point that moral solutions must be part of any reasonable program of social wellbeing. Morals must have a basis. Individual taste is not such a basis.
0
...
written by Carlos Caso-Rosendi, February 24, 2014
The one principle of Hell is "I am my own" -- George MacDonald

Which in this culture of death means: I think therefore I am [god].
0
...
written by Albert Nygren, February 24, 2014
I'm sorry but the answer to the problem of abortions is not a living wage or sufficient Government financial support for the mother to keep and raise the child. The reason for the increase in abortion has more than one factor. The biggest factor is that it is now legal. When abortion was illegal there were much fewer abortions. Another huge reason is the breakdown in the morals of the country caused by a too Liberal Supreme Court and the control of the public schools by the National Teachers Union which supports and has started to teach the acceptance of same gender marriage ion pre school and kindergarten. Another huge problem is the promotion by the Catholic Church of candidates for the office of President of the USA of Liberal Democrats who support large social programs but also support legal acceptance of immoral sexual behavior. I am a Catholic and if the Catholic Church wants to be a part of the solution instead of part of the problem, it must support candidates for office that support moral behavior and incentives for moral behavior. This will be a big change for the Catholic Church but a change that is necessary if the Church if it wants to be a part of the solution and not part of the problem.
0
...
written by ken tremendous, February 24, 2014
so two things Albert...1) the national abortion rate is now lower than it was in 1973. So it is not "higher" as you claim. Google this if you like. There are many theories as to why this is so. Mine is that it is mainly because of diminished stigma associated with out of wedlock births. which leads me to

2) the article by Brad was really as much about marriage as it was about abortion. And yes, I do stand by my assertion that one reason for the decline of marriage (sacramental or otherwise) is that it is harder to form households with stagnating or declining wages particularly for men. And although strict causation is hard to prove it is a fact that marriage has declined most sharply among lower socio-economic groups of all races..while the institution is still pretty common among the well-to-do.

The rest of what you say has nothing to do with anything I have said...

I repeat..criticism of conservatives for spinning 30 year old stories about the "black family" while refusing to adapt to a very different set of facts on the ground today is very different than supporting "liberal democrats who support large social programs but also support immoral sexual behavior."

Nothing I have said indicates the latter!
0
...
written by Deacon Ed Peitler, February 25, 2014
Anyone can live a moral life even in the face of poverty with God's grace as their source.

Government has managed to destroy the family and with it the moral life that is communicated to the individual by the family. The people of Ukraine know this; the people of Venezuela know this; the people of the former Soviet Union knew this; and before long the people of the USA will know this. What is getting in the way are people who think they know more than God - people who believe in big government as the answer to all problems.

Abortion is simply the fruit of this breakdown in morality and has nothing to do with how much money you have. Anyone who believes that material wealth results in moral behavior or is causative to its decline has simply drunk the Kool-Aid.
0
...
written by maineman, February 25, 2014
DeGaulle, please understand that I have impugned no one's motives, only their arguments. Yet the notion that large corporations are responsible for the creation of poverty is, itself, a central tenet of Marxism. As is the notion that the government must regulate the marketplace so as to distribute the income of those with more to those with less.

Such recommendations for government intrusion violate the Catholic principal of subsidiarity and are, therefore, the stuff of a different philosophical and theological tradition. That tradition is, recently, a child of the so-called enlightenment but has a long tradition and can be summarized as materialism.

We can now see the fruits of materialist theology, some of which was the death of tens of millions during the last century and which continue to take a similar toll right here, under our noses and with the sanction of those who also see the state as the primary arbiter of what is good and what should be. These people are upside down and think Caesar is in line with God when the opposite is the case.

Our poverty is spiritual and moral, which is much more destructive than material poverty. As I said earlier, the decline of the family, marriage, and birth rates signals a loss of hope, and this derives from a loss of faith in that which is real and from whence all things come.

What that means is that only a restoration of faith in God will reverse the ascent of this culture of death.
0
...
written by Jack,CT, February 25, 2014
I just am very curious those who REJECT the sacraments,
are you comfortable staying faithful to our faith?
0
...
written by ken tremendous, February 25, 2014
Maineman...I don't know what "theology" you're talking about but mine and (I think Degaulle's) are based on the constant teaching of the Church that 1) there must be an adequate distribution of productive property (which should not be caricatured by you as some sort of Leftist redistributionism) and 2) breadwinners--especially men need a living wage (like it or not, the Church has constantly rejected the idea of market wages which are especially pernicious now in times of a labor glut).

If it is mostly left-liberals in our society who are arguing such things so be it---an idea is not refuted simply because other people we disagree with on abortion are arguing it--because the Church has long been saying many of the same things.

I think this charge of "Marxism materialism" levelled by you and other commenters frankly is just a smokescreen to avoid facing unpleasant realities that your ideological system has no real answer for. It's more than a little hypocritical too but we'll leave that part aside.

Early 21st century American conservatism might be right on abortion and gay marriage, but that doesn't change the fact that the economic policies that it continues to champion of high finance cum low wages has been disastrous for lower skilled workers.

Yes there is a moral component to all this too, but moral living always exists in the context of lived experience in the here and now. What DeGaulle and I are saying is that you can't just talk about morality in the abstract and completely ignore what life is now like for people living at the bottom.
0
...
written by Mary, February 26, 2014
My comments come from a mother of 4 young men 18-27. We live in the Midwest, and have traditional Midwest values. Hard work, family faith/religion,education. What many of these people are forgetting in my opinion is that marriage is working together for a shared mutual respect, support and love. Financial independence or high wages doesn't guarantee this. I remember how much my grandparents and parents struggled without to give to us. Going through the depression, loss of home, jobs, but not faith. Getting back to work for minimum wages( thankful ) and working themselves out of debt. The parents are to be role models of self sacrifice, not material gain so they can boast to their friends that my daughter is married to a $$, not a man. Yes young people are having a struggle, as are many in middle and business owners. It is to show them it can be done. The struggles and the working together is what makes a family strong, same with friendships. To many people want it all now, not willing to go without for a while. Spend less on themselves and what makes them happy and looking at helping a future partner reach their full potential.
0
...
written by Rockerbabe, February 28, 2014
I am struck by the overt refusal to mention the work woman in most of these post. There seems to be a level of disrespect [such as talking about women as if we were not in the room - much as the GOP does on a daily basis]. Your posters keep pondering about this and that and maybe they should actually ask a women why she has an abortion or wants to use birth control. What the underlying assumption seems to been, is that women have no good reason from wanting to control their bodies, their healthcare or the direction of their lives. Forcing any women, irrespective of color, to do something she does not want to do, is a denial of her humanity, her equality and puts her in the position of being enslaved. That is the classical definition of slavery. As for economics, well, better job prospects, better housing, better and not so expensive educational opportunities and better men would go a long way to decreasing the abortion rate across the board.
0
...
written by Brad Miner, February 28, 2014
Rockerbabe: This is a website committed to the Catholic Church. Catholic teaching on abortion leaves no wiggle room for such shibboleths as "a woman's right to choose" or "her right to control her own body," because the infant, although inside a woman's body, is not her body. Every child in the womb has his or her own uniquely distinct DNA, is a real, developing person, and -- as we believe -- has an inalienable right to life. To abort a child is to murder one's son or daughter.
0
...
written by John Wessley, March 10, 2014
The time has come when IRRESPONSIBLE males who impregnate, then totally abandon,reject being 'baby'daddy' get what they deserve: BEING FORCED TO SUBJECT THEMSELVES TO PATERNITY TESTS AND/OR BEING SUED FOR CHILD SUPPORT IF/WHEN SAID 'BABY' DADDIES' REFUSE TO SUPPLY THE NECESSARY MONETARY SUPPORT FOR BABY' MAMAS......
THANKGOODNESS, some STATES already REQUIRE said support from baby' daddies'.... and, IF 'DADDIES don't support their illegitimate bastards, THEY END UP IN JAIL!

Write comment
smaller | bigger

security code
Write the displayed characters


busy
 

Other Articles By This Author

CONTACT US FOR ADVERTISERS ABOUT US
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner