Who's Daddy?

Articles

Who's Daddy?

By Michael John McCrae
Oct. 16, 2006

Last week I wrote a column based on a conversation I overheard about illegitimate children on Bill O’Reilly’s “Factor” entitled “Where’s Daddy?”

After reading an article today by Sam Roberts in the New York Times On Line entitled: “It’s Official: To Be Married Means to Be Outnumbered”, I am now inclined to ask: “Who’s Daddy?”

The article is lengthy and can be found here: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/15/us/15census.html?ei=5065&en=dfa95b53df6a1dbc&ex=1161489600&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print

Mr. Roberts begins his report: “Married couples, whose numbers have been declining for decades as a proportion of American households, have finally slipped into a minority, according to an analysis of new census figures by The New York Times.”

“The American Community Survey, released this month by the Census Bureau, found that 49.7 percent, or 55.2 million, of the nation’s 111.1 million households in 2005 were made up of married couples — with and without children — just shy of a majority and down from more than 52 percent five years earlier.”

So along with the reported high percentages of single households harboring illegitimate children follows this report showing a major decline in the percentages of legitimate marriages throughout the nation. Again, American culture is showing signs of having disappeared; being replaced by a culture more agreeable and more in keeping with the French and American liberal Democrats.

If there is a “silver lining” Mr. Roberts writes: “The numbers by no means suggests marriage is dead or necessarily that a tipping point has been reached. The total number of married couples is higher than ever, and most Americans eventually marry.” And that is good news, but there is a suggestion that someone might actually be looking for a sort of “tipping point” and as we dig deeper into the article is isn’t long before we find the agenda being tactfully placed before us.

Mr. Roberts writes: “But marriage has been facing more competition. A growing number of adults are spending more of their lives single or living unmarried with partners, and the potential social and economic implications are profound.”

Along with illegitimacy comes a major influx of “adults…living unmarried with partners”. The technicality being overlooked here is that that type of arrangement is an arrangement based in selfishness and fornication. The chief concern is “social and economic implications” rather than any particular moral implications. As with single homes filled with illegitimate children there is no real concern pointed toward any situational morality. It is all being considered as a natural form of human evolution (or devolution if you will).

Mr. Roberts quotes a named source: “It just changes the social weight of marriage in the economy, in the work force, in sales of homes and rentals, and who manufacturers advertise to,” said Stephanie Coontz, director of public education for the Council on Contemporary Families… “It certainly challenges the way we set up our work policies.”

A quick “Google” of “Council on Contemporary Families”, brings up Ms. Coontz’s “non-profit” pro-gay-marriage web site and a quick preview of her article: “Just Which 'Traditional' Marriage Should We Defend?” proves the sympathies of Ms. Coontz stand with the immoral. But that’s her opinion and she’s entitled to it.

Ms. Coontz, billed as “Professor” is further quoted: “we have an anachronistic view as to what extent you can use marriage to organize the distribution and redistribution of benefits” which is why she largely advocates “marriage” as obsolete, unnecessary and ready for the trash heap of “tradition”.

Mr. Roberts cited some of the statistics of the recent survey: “The census survey estimated that 5.2 million couples, a little more than 5 percent of households, were unmarried opposite-sex partners. An additional 413,000 households were male couples, and 363,000 were female couples. In all, nearly one in 10 couples were unmarried.”

Ten percent of the surveyed households were that of unmarried “couples” and Mr. Roberts adds: “And the numbers of unmarried couples are growing. Since 2000, those identifying themselves as unmarried opposite-sex couples rose by about 14 percent, male couples by 24 percent and female couples by 12 percent.”

This is probably a legacy that will be passed down to the next generations until eventually marriage will be eliminated in any social context. Mr. Roberts quotes from another anti-marriage source: “Matt Foreman, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, said gay couples were undercounted because many gay people were reluctant to disclose their sexual orientation. But he said that inhibition seemed to be fading. “I would say the increase is due to people feeling more comfortable disclosing that they are gay or lesbian and living with a partner,” he said.”

There always seems to be the claim of “undercounting” because the gay lobby needs to assure itself that there are always more homosexuals running around than the approximately one percent of the overall population. But with inhibitions “fading” and the public school systems of America touting many elements of the gay agenda it is no wonder we read the following in Mr. Roberts’ article:

“Steve Watters, the director of young adults for Focus on the Family, a conservative Christian group, said that the trend of fewer married couples was more a reflection of delaying marriage than rejection of it. “It does show that a lot of people are experimenting with alternatives before they get there,” Mr. Watters said. “The biggest concern is that those who still aspire to marriage are going to find fewer models. They’re also finding they’ve gotten so good at being single it’s hard to be at one with another person.”

It is good that marriage isn’t being “rejected”. There is currently too much “experimenting with alternatives” however. Further into the discussion of why many couples simply cohabitate rather than marry we read: “Even cohabiting young adults tell us that they are doing so because it would be unwise to marry without first living together in a society marked by high levels of divorce”… A number of couples interviewed agreed that cohabiting was akin to taking a test drive… Some said that pregnancy was the only thing that would prompt them to make a legal commitment soon… Others said they never intended to marry… A few of those couples said they were inspired by solidarity with gay and lesbian couples who cannot legally marry in most states.

“Test driving” a potential marriage partner sounds rather crass. I have attended weddings where the bride was already pregnant or where the “love child” was actually included in the wedding party and the term “solidarity” when discussing homosexuals shows the extent of the influence of NEA homosexually themed public school curriculums. “High levels of divorce are also a sign of the erosion of traditional moral values as displayed in the decades before the “baby-boomer” generation.

From the article: “With more competition from other ways of living, the proportion of married couples has been shrinking for decades. In 1930, they accounted for about 84 percent of households. By 1990 the proportion of married couples had declined to about 56 percent.”

And the latest report from 2005 drops that to 49.7 percent.

You can read the rest of Mr. Roberts’ article to gain the full context of the quotes and the statements. He seemed fair in his presentation of far-ranging sources and his concluding quotes are validation of my own opinion that American culture is in extreme decline.

William H. Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution, attributed the accelerated trend to the lifestyles of baby boomers. “It’s the legacy of the boomers that have finally caused this tipping point,” Dr. Frey said. “Certainly later generations have followed in boomer footsteps, with high levels of living together before marriage, and more flexible lifestyles. But the boomers were the trailblazers, once again, rebelling against a norm their parents epitomized. “This would seem to close the book on the Ozzie and Harriet era that characterized much of the last century,” he said.”

I am sure this conclusion is valid. With American Presidents conducting extended adulterous affairs while in office and not being censured or forced to resign; with “The Vagina Monologues” touring throughout the American Public School System; with a major University like Harvard sponsoring their own pornographic magazine as a matter of “art”; with urine soaked Christian symbols and animal dung splattered on images of the Blessed Mother; with 70% illegitimacy rates for minority children and with many of those children not knowing their daddy or having two daddies or two mommies with one needing to be the daddy the question stands:

Just who is daddy?

------------

About the Author: Michael John McCrae has contributed over 500 articles to Useless-Knowledge.com.

Email: macswordV@hotmail.com

Comment on this article here!

------------

All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com and are not allowed to be posted on other websites. ARTICLE THIEVES WILL BE PROSECUTED!