11.21.2006

The Sanctity of Marriage

I find that figure amazing. And think how high it would be if abortion was illegal.

22 comments:

Anonymous said...

It only takes 20-40 years to lose a society. This is the basic way to do it; since those coming up do not have guidance and are therefore doomed to repeat.....I think we are in about the 25th or 30th year of the 40 it takes. In another 10 or 15 years it will be too late; unfixable; a few haves and a ton of have nots with no options but to take.

Anonymous said...

I thought abstinence and "just say no" training was to cure this. Maybe this policy is as dumb as invading Iraq and expecting to make it into a democracy.

Mary Mack said...

Barry-

You know that statistic doesn't shock you. Remember you used to track that same statistic from the birth announcements in the Wise County Messenger in your weekly "Spin?"

Anonymous said...

so I guess killing kids is better than having them born into a one parent home.

Anonymous said...

I thought handing out condoms and teaching 6 year olds how to put them on by using a banana was suppose to cure this. Maybe this policy is as dumb as raising the minimum wage or cutting and running.

Anonymous said...

I admit to being old and old fashioned. All of this starts in the home. We know how that has changed. Single moms, single dads, living together with kids, his, mine, ours, or having one together without benefit of marriage. Train sons to take responsibility if they get a girl pregnant after they've been told AT HOME what happens when folks put their sex organs together. Train daughters to TRY to keep their legs together until after marriage. If they don't and get pregnant, be able to talk about it with an understanding mom and dad who don't say, ABORTION, first!

If somebody has simplistic answers to the complex situations above, bring them on. Frankly, I don't think in any of these situations there is a "one size fits all".

My answer is old fashioned. One man, one woman, married and the kids having dad's name.

Ok, libs, bring it on! And conservatives, bring yours on too!

We oldies wait!

Anonymous said...

7:23, if a girl does get pregnant out of wedlock, in your old fashioned view, is the only right thing to do is marry the father? If that's the case, your way of thinking is a big reason why the divorce rate is so high. I would much rather see a child being raised by a single parent (or with shared custody between the two parents) than to see a child confused and upset because his parents are getting a divorce because they "did the right thing" and got married even though there was no hope of a lasting marriage.

Anonymous said...

"Steady drop in teen births" is the key here....I think that's a good thing.

Anonymous said...

7:23 - who knows if a marriage will work out if it happens as a result of a pregnancy? Right now I'm thinking of one couple who has just celebrated fifty years of marriage and "had" to get married due to a pregnancy - that's what it was called in those days.

Marriage is hard work whether a pregnancy made it or not and entering it with a baby coming makes it more complicated. And divorce is still a devastating experience for a family - some have said it is worse than death.

I have no answers to the complexities of situations and really don't think anybody else does either.

Anonymous said...

most posters don't seem to have paid attention. the idea here is that teen births are down, and yet 40% of births are still out of "wedlock".

i believe this shows that women (and men) are becoming MORE responsible in planning pregnancies, but LESS concerned about being married at the time their children are born. these are two very different things.

i suspect that many people my age (mid 30s) grew up seeing one of two things occur with their married parents: (i) painful divorces, or (ii) painful marriages kept together to avoid painful divorces (and the "shame" of being divorced).

also, marriage is an inherently religious concept. less people these days are religious, so they tend to place more importance on practical matters, such as: how much more difficult will "wedlock" make it for me to extract myself from this relationship once i (or my sig.oth.) determine that the relationship isn't working anymore?

Anonymous said...

9:54 - you make good points. Single mothers and dads may feel that raising that child alone makes more sense than staying in a bad marriage.

Bottom line, if there is love, it's funny how folks will work a little harder at the marriage.

If there isn't love, forget about the marriage, divorce and go on down the road.

And anymore religion doesn't seem to matter. Just as many Christians divorce as non-Christians.

Thanks for your post.

Anonymous said...

just to clarify my 9:54 post: i'm not only referring to the phenomenon of single parents raising kids, but also to the modern practice of parents co-habitating, being partners (though i personally dislike that term), and operating as a family unit, but without the legal/religious imprimatur of "wedlock".

Anonymous said...

I think your numbers would change drasticly if you seperated unwed black and unwed white mothers. maybe 65% black 30%mexican 5%white.

Anonymous said...

1:01: good point. i'd also like to see the numbers if we compared parents who could spell vs. parents who cannot.

Anonymous said...

While we're on marriage, what's up with problems with polygamy? Where in the Constitution does it say you may only have one spouse? I'm waiting for those Mormon dudes to take their case to the Supreme Court and see how they resolve it!

txattorneygeneral said...

7:21 Texas statue 345.65 and 567.23 state that a man may only marry one WOMEN until she dies or is given a divorce . Statue 132.6 says that marriage must be between a man and a women. 69.8 says sodomy is a felony punishable by 5 to 20 years in a state correctional house , depending on if the sodomy was consentual .

Anonymous said...

7:47 - is there a law about sodomy in prison?

So many lawyers lurking on here, surely some of them can answer that one?

Anonymous said...

7:41 Yes . It is mandatory in prision.

Anonymous said...

txattorneygeneral, thanks for the specific Texas statutes. My question is, has the constitutionality of these statutes been tested? Basically, just who determines that one may have but one spouse at a time? For instance, the Koran allows about 3 wives (although Mohammed had more). Wouldn't you think a free people could decide for themselves how many spouses are right for them? Why should government get involved here? (Don't you think mzchief's sopuse could use a couple more like her?) Just wondering.

Anonymous said...

Interesting, no one has even attempted to answer the above question.

oldphilosopher said...

I think we should all have sex and more sex !

Anonymous said...

Why is it after over 35 years of driving? In Temple,Tx I not only am ticketed four times, arrested three times. The answer is that they decide how the law reads. They do not go by the law, but by how they think and feel. I personally saw one officer arrest four persons in a six hour period. All based on his personsal beliefs.