Out of wedlock births hit new high in US

know1

VictoryGin wrote:

huh? does uncommitted = selfish? because that would totally make my day.

If I thought those two were synonyms, I wouldn't have had to use both of them.

OutOfBreath

VictoryGin wrote:

i love this post so much i want to marry it.

You have my blessing
Seeing as you are a fan, would you be interested in some over-prized merch signed by yours truly? I have handy the epic story "Shopping list" that I can exclusively sign for you for, oh, 100$. Make that 95, in a today-only offer!

Appreciate the compliments v-gin.

Peace
Dan

VictoryGin

know1 wrote:

If I thought those two were synonyms, I wouldn't have had to use both of them.

so is it not having kids that makes people selfish? i'd love to know what you meant.

Staceb10

fanch75 wrote:

Wow, I never thought of it from that perspective...

Exactly!!!! A lot of people don't and they should.

soulsinging

VictoryGin wrote:

huh? does uncommitted = selfish? because that would totally make my day.

it does if you're having kids.

soulsinging

VictoryGin wrote:

so is it not having kids that makes people selfish? i'd love to know what you meant.

if you are having a kid with somebody and you are not at all committed to them, that is selfish. i believe that is what he's saying.

surferdude

VictoryGin wrote:

huh? does uncommitted = selfish? because that would totally make my day.

Within the context of having kids uncommitted = selfish. It's the height of narcisim to put your want to have a kid over the child's right to have a committed, active and loving mom and dad, under the same roof in a committed relationship.

If this is the model you tried but it didn't work out, fine. But I know far too many people who became single parents deliberately. I really have no time for people who are that selfish, or who think that father's are an unneeded in a child's life.

know1

VictoryGin wrote:

so is it not having kids that makes people selfish? i'd love to know what you meant.

I think there is some selfishness involved in not wanting to commit as much as before.

inmytree

a great example of the benefits of a two parent family....

http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=223964

fanch75

inmytree wrote:

a great example of the benefits of a two parent family....

http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=223964

maybe you're beign facetious, but one can find outlier examples like that from any group of folks, regardless of religion, status, sex, etc.

VictoryGin

OutOfBreath wrote:

You have my blessing
Seeing as you are a fan, would you be interested in some over-prized merch signed by yours truly? I have handy the epic story "Shopping list" that I can exclusively sign for you for, oh, 100$. Make that 95, in a today-only offer!

Appreciate the compliments v-gin.

Peace
Dan

oh, i have plenty of shopping lists here, thank you. there's one in my pocket right now even. but i'll pay for an autographed copy of that post, or many of your other marriage-minded posts.

VictoryGin

know1 wrote:

I think there is some selfishness involved in not wanting to commit as much as before.

thanks for the clarification.

inmytree

fanch75 wrote:

maybe you're beign facetious, but one can find outlier examples like that from any group of folks, regardless of religion, status, sex, etc.

sure...I guess my point is that even children raised by two married parents have issues...a reality that is often ignored in discussions like this...

cornnifer

soulsinging wrote:

seeing as how you yourself couldnt wait for your wedding night to start sticking it in, you're in no position to talk. people have sex. it's ridiculous to say "women should stop spreading their legs" and then at the same tacitly condone men doing whatever it takes to get laid... ghb, pressure, intoxication, harassment, or whatever else. in the eyes of many like you, guys are supposed to have sex as much as possible, and women are supposed to not like it and only put up with it cos they want a baby from their husband.

i notice that neither you or stace is capable or willing to admit that maybe guys shouldn't be fucking everyone they can or should be held accountable for it. you both respond to my point with snide, sarcastic remarks about how WOMEN are the ones who should be responsible. guys... well, we wouldnt want to cut into their fun now would we?

Careful, Tiger. You don't know me like that. In fact you know very little to absolutely nothing about me at all. Because i offered in another thread, in another forum, that my wife and i had sexual relations prior to our wedding provides you absolutely no foundation for the pure b.s your flinging in my direction here. First of all, i believe the thread your pulling this personal information about me from was a thread regarding men who refused to date women who wouldn't have sex with them in which i did not speak exactly favorably of such men, and was ripped apart for it. In my comments made on this board i have always held men equally responsible for the role they play in unwanted pregnancies. You know that as well as i do. Your accusations of me as misogynist and sexist are completely without warrant.If you must know, though we had sex, my wife and i (by the way, she is the first and ONLY woman i have had sex with) were married nearly five years before we were pregnant the first time. It was planned. In damn near twelve years of marriage we've been pregnant 3 times, and have 3 children. You do the math. My comments here are not "sarcastic", "snide" or disrespectful to anyone, and i am in position to make them.

NCfan

Staceb10 wrote:

Great point. When it comes to babies the men are never mentioned unless they are "deadbeat dads". I wonder how many men that are considered that didn't actually want to be fathers but the woman "chose" to make him one.

That's because the woman is ultimately responsible for her body, ex. what goes in it. The same logic is applied to pro-choice advocates. The woman should have a right to an abortion, because it's HER body. You can't have it one way and not the other...

Milhouse VanHouten

Most people would agree with the idea that a loving, nurturing and stable two-parent household is the optimal situation for raising children. I think that certain arguements in this thread go off the rails because they seem to imply that marriage is synonymous with a stable home environment, when there is ample evidence to the contrary.

I also don't see what's so wrong with someone who chooses to raise a child in a single parent household. Lots of single parent households I know of are a lot less fucked up than some of the "happy families" I know.

Staceb10

NCfan wrote:

That's because the woman is ultimately responsible for her body, ex. what goes in it. The same logic is applied to pro-choice advocates. The woman should have a right to an abortion, because it's HER body. You can't have it one way and not the other...

What about after the baby is born? That's what I mean. If Sue and John are dating and she gets pregnant and he wants her to have an abortion but she won't then why are his options to be a) obligated to become a parent or b) a deadbeat dad. Society forces the man to become a father whether he wants to or not. The mother isn't in that situation because its her body.

OutOfBreath

Milhouse VanHouten wrote:

Most people would agree with the idea that a loving, nurturing and stable two-parent household is the optimal situation for raising children. I think that certain arguements in this thread go off the rails because they seem to imply that marriage is synonymous with a stable home environment, when there is ample evidence to the contrary.

That's it in a nutshell. Marriage does not equal commitment, and commitment does not equal marriage. Married does not equate functional and good, and not married does not mean dysfunctional and bad.

And I will also say (generally, not directed at milhouse) that the problems people are talking about won't get better/worse by looking at marriage in itself. Marriage rates can be a sketchy and rough indicator of social integration (This is not uncontested btw). If marriage rates are going down, something is underlying it. Since people don't change from being married, the married status or lack of can not be the root of the problem. The problem is lacking social integration, less community between people, less stability and less certainty overall, and in personal relations.

To put it simply, a marriage can be a gesture of commitment, but the commitment comes first, and the marriage is merely the formal expression of it for those so inclined.

And for the record, I think most people have similar images of how an ideal family situation will look like. I think there is general consensus on child-rearing. But let's look at the problem, not something that is at best a reflection of it. Talk about lacking integration, the fragmented relations and so on, and dont jump on a high horse implying that if people would just buck up and marry, there wouldn't be a problem. Marriage solves or creates no problems in that respect. We're talking about relations, and a ceremony and a piece of paper alters little in that respect.

Peace
Dan

soulsinging

cornnifer wrote:

Careful, Tiger. You don't know me like that. In fact you know very little to absolutely nothing about me at all. Because i offered in another thread, in another forum, that my wife and i had sexual relations prior to our wedding provides you absolutely no foundation for the pure b.s your flinging in my direction here. First of all, i believe the thread your pulling this personal information about me from was a thread regarding men who refused to date women who wouldn't have sex with them in which i did not speak exactly favorably of such men, and was ripped apart for it. In my comments made on this board i have always held men equally responsible for the role they play in unwanted pregnancies. You know that as well as i do. Your accusations of me as misogynist and sexist are completely without warrant.If you must know, though we had sex, my wife and i (by the way, she is the first and ONLY woman i have had sex with) were married nearly five years before we were pregnant the first time. It was planned. In damn near twelve years of marriage we've been pregnant 3 times, and have 3 children. You do the math. My comments here are not "sarcastic", "snide" or disrespectful to anyone, and i am in position to make them.

fair enough. in that case, im sorry to have jumped the gun. it simply enrages me when people seem to act like women who have sex should get the smack laid down on them for it and don't seem to care one way or the other what happens to the guy in the situation. when people talk about responsibility in sex it almost always comes from people opposed to contraception who basically feel women should stop spreading their legs for any guy and it's a double standard i loathe. it seemed to be creeping into this thread big time and that was getting to me.

i believe i was with you on that other thread in any case. i am for responsible sex. i just find too many of the people talking about it have very narrow and one-sided views as to what that means.

cornnifer

soulsinging wrote:

. when people talk about responsibility in sex it almost always comes from people opposed to contraception who basically feel women should stop spreading their legs for any guy

.

i've had a vasectomy, so i'm obviously not opposed to contraception