Posted by The Taint on 7/11/2011 10:11:00 AM (view original):

Posted by swamphawk22 on 7/11/2011 1:39:00 AM (view original):

We are having an epedemic of children born out of wedlock.

We dont need more social services, we need a return to good family values.

Their is no greater indicator that a child will have less of a chance at a good life than not having 2 parents.

Hmmm, Obama grew up with one parent.  I guess he showed great character in overcoming that obstacle that left him with less of a chance at a good life.....wouldn't you agree?

I agree.  Of course there were other factors that helped him out specifically.

I hope you're not implying via sarcasm that it isn't better, in general, for kids to have a two parent home....

No, I'm not.  I was just commenting on Swamp talking about how Obama had everything handed to him basically...but then posted that nugget.  For what it's worth, I'm of the opinion that the worst thing that has happened to us as a society is the breakdown of the family "institution".  Mainly driven by the need to have both parents working.

You never responded when you implied that both parents "had" work and I questioned why.

In short, both parents work because we "need" two cars, 3 HDTVs, the cable package, cellphones, dinner out on the weekends, etc, etc.

So, really, they don't "have" to work, they choose to work to have other things. 

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2011 11:56:00 AM (view original):
You never responded when you implied that both parents "had" work and I questioned why.

In short, both parents work because we "need" two cars, 3 HDTVs, the cable package, cellphones, dinner out on the weekends, etc, etc.

So, really, they don't "have" to work, they choose to work to have other things. 

Exactly.  People who agonize over not having a Lexus while having latchkey kids are the problem. 

You.
Don't.
Need.
A.
Lexus.

Seriously, get over yourself. 

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2011 9:32:00 AM (view original):
I don't know that I'd use "epidemic" to describe the problem. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/13/health/13mothers.html

So what would you call it?

This is a huge rate. We need parents to raise their children.

We just stopped getting along?? I looked at him one day and decided I couldnt stay married to him??

TOO BAD! Raise your damn kids!

Posted by The Taint on 7/11/2011 11:47:00 AM (view original):
No, I'm not.  I was just commenting on Swamp talking about how Obama had everything handed to him basically...but then posted that nugget.  For what it's worth, I'm of the opinion that the worst thing that has happened to us as a society is the breakdown of the family "institution".  Mainly driven by the need to have both parents working.

This is based on the false assumption that anyone who is opposed to Obama politically hates him as a person.

I never said he was given everything. I said aside from college he was given everything.

I like Obama the person.

1 He is a hard worker. No matter who on this site tells you college isnt anything is wrong. And Harvard is that times 10. This guy works hard!
2 Good family man. I believe that if Obama had ever cheated the woman would have been on Fox News sometime in 2008, or 2010. That being said I also believe that Obama, being charming and smart, has had offers. More than a few. He also, from everything I have heard, is great with his kids. 
3 He seems like an OK Guy. I would like to have a beer with him or Bush. He has an akward sense of humor, but at least he has one. I know Nixon didnt.

He is just a bad president and his entire backround is social and economic socialism.

That is why I oppose him.

I wouldn't call it an "epidemic".    From that article, it seems to largely affect specific groups.  Would you call male pattern baldness an epidemic? 

Anyway, do you think it's better for a child to be raised by two people who hate each other or just one person?

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2011 1:47:00 PM (view original):
I wouldn't call it an "epidemic".    From that article, it seems to largely affect specific groups.  Would you call male pattern baldness an epidemic? 

Anyway, do you think it's better for a child to be raised by two people who hate each other or just one person?

Epedemic seems ok to me.

You can say it is only rising fast in certain groups, it is rising across the board. And one of the groups that is rising is "Women over 30". Seems like a pretty broad group.

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2011 1:47:00 PM (view original):
I wouldn't call it an "epidemic".    From that article, it seems to largely affect specific groups.  Would you call male pattern baldness an epidemic? 

Anyway, do you think it's better for a child to be raised by two people who hate each other or just one person?

If the two people who "hate each other" can manage until the kids are grown, it would be better, yes - depending on how they behave.  Obviously it depends on degree.  I would be willing to bet that a majority of those that claim to "hate each other" after having been married, could probably find a lot more wrong by looking in the mirror than at the object of their hate.

Part of what makes us civilized is the ability to act on rationality instead of our feelings.  Those who can't act rationally typically devolve into hateful relationships.  Hating isn't what you feel - it's what you do.  (Funny, I've heard the same thing said about love)....

Of course it depends on how they behave.  But let's face the facts.  You don't have to be a well-behaved human being to make babies.

Raising a child in an enviroment of constant clashing is in no way better than a single parent home that is well run.

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2011 11:01:00 AM (view original):
BTW, I'd be soooooooo for forced sterilization.   The first time you ask for a handout because you can't feed your child, you get a free visit to the doctor to help you with birth control.   And, if you're willing to name the father, he can get some help too once the DNA test is complete.  That puts an end to a lot of problems.

Great idea, Dr. Mengele.

Posted by jiml60 on 7/11/2011 11:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2011 11:01:00 AM (view original):
BTW, I'd be soooooooo for forced sterilization.   The first time you ask for a handout because you can't feed your child, you get a free visit to the doctor to help you with birth control.   And, if you're willing to name the father, he can get some help too once the DNA test is complete.  That puts an end to a lot of problems.

Great idea, Dr. Mengele.

Just forces people to either A) only have children if they can take care them B) keep it in their pants C) practice birth control D) let the gov't teach them birth control.

I fail to see the downside if you can get past the moral implications. 

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2011 11:01:00 AM (view original):
BTW, I'd be soooooooo for forced sterilization.   The first time you ask for a handout because you can't feed your child, you get a free visit to the doctor to help you with birth control.   And, if you're willing to name the father, he can get some help too once the DNA test is complete.  That puts an end to a lot of problems.

By this logic, we should ban anyone from running a business the first time they ask for a tax break. Or lobotomize anyone who asks for a Pell grant.

I got a Pell Grant.  Hmm....that would ecksplane alot.

Posted by antonsirius on 7/12/2011 7:28:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2011 11:01:00 AM (view original):
BTW, I'd be soooooooo for forced sterilization.   The first time you ask for a handout because you can't feed your child, you get a free visit to the doctor to help you with birth control.   And, if you're willing to name the father, he can get some help too once the DNA test is complete.  That puts an end to a lot of problems.

By this logic, we should ban anyone from running a business the first time they ask for a tax break. Or lobotomize anyone who asks for a Pell grant.

Poor logic on your part.   Tax breaks and Pell grants can be denied.   You can't kill children that have already been born.   Well, unless your name is Casey Anthony.