It was
reported the other day on an inside page of the Pioneer Press, and without
nearly enough fanfare, that more than six out of 10 women who give birth in
their early 20s are unmarried. That is census data, from census demographers,
from the very government that then becomes responsible for many, if not most,
of those unmarried women and children.
If that
isn't an astonishing statistic, it should be. Why, to any logical person's way
of thinking, it explains everything in terms of government at all levels
bloating out of control.
Supposing
that even angels might fear to tread here, it being liberal dogma that I
shouldn't be telling women what to do, or men, either, for that matter, I would
submit that marriage would solve virtually every economic issue facing this
country.
The
census demographers said that single motherhood, on the increase since the
1940s, has accelerated mindblowingly. The birth rate for unmarried women in
2007 was up 80 percent in the almost three decades since 1980. Just between
2002 and 2007, it was up 20 percent.
The
census people didn't use the word mindblowingly. I have chosen it because these
numbers are chilling and so telling of the true nature of the government's
insatiable spending. Just think of entitlement spending the next time the
hypocrites in Washington want to take a snowplow off the road in Yellowstone or
take a few flight controllers out of a tower because of this so-called
sequestration. Who do they think they are fooling?
Statistically,
you can avoid poverty in America by getting a high-school degree and waiting to
get married before having a child. It's really that simple.
The
census report would state it differently. The U.S. Census Bureau report said
that women with college degrees and higher household incomes are less likely to
be single mothers than are women who have lower incomes and less education.
Now, I
suppose this is where I should acknowledge that not all women who choose to
give birth without a marriage are consigning themselves and their child to a
life of poverty.
But
when more than 600 out of every 1,000 children born to women in their early 20s
have single mothers, can anybody come up with a percentage for how many of them
will flourish?
Single
mothers in their early 20s instantly become the have-nots, statistically, in
income and education. For so many women to have so many children without a
husband is a complete abdication of personal responsibility, which leads to a
complete shunning of any civic responsibility. We are going broke. And if you
think taxing higher-income earners more is the answer, you haven't done the
math. The men who are party to these births are, of course, just as
irresponsible, just as uncommitted to a civic responsibility to take care of
their own.
So what
has happened as a result of this mind blowingly destructive trend? Well, most
principally, what has happened since the 1940s is a government that has
expanded to require more and more money to feed, clothe, house, educate and
medicate the children of mothers who cannot afford to do it themselves because
their education has stalled, knocking them off the path of growing their
incomes.
We hear
a hue and cry for all-day kindergarten, which I suppose makes sense because the
children have no place else to be if their single mom is fortunate enough to
have a job. Whole bureaucracies have been created to cut general assistance
checks and food payments and housing vouchers and health care provisions. All
because there is no conventional family in place to take care of these
obligations.
I am
hopelessly conservative in these matters and not in tune with all the wonderful
life choices encouraged by liberal dogma.
But the
numbers don't lie. More than 60 percent! Not for an air traffic controller or a
snowplow driver are we going broke.
No comments:
Post a Comment