Melissa Harris-Perry Promo About Raising Children Collectively Becomes News
- Thread starter Street Knowledge
- Start date
don't think I get the joke here
when i looked at that study behaviour is narrowly defined as the personality differences that make each individual unique
You cant project this to mean that ALL behavior is not dependent on parenting
the kind of behavior that makes someone a productive civilized succesful human being DEPENDS MOSTLY ON PARENTING..period...theres tons of studies and empirical evidence all over
Look at how the products of neglectful single moms are tearing up Chicago then tell me parenting has little effect
Crime in Chicago is way down compared to times when the "out of wedlock" rate was much lower. Why is that?
how this is even an issue 
Um, Chicago is the murder capital of the country.
Until someone can refute the link between marriage and poverty reduction, then Melissa Harris Perry and the rest of you delusional left wingers will continue to be wrong. A mother and father are the most essential factor in the sucess of a child.
This article cites statistics from both liberal and conservative think tanks.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/02/13/why-marriage-is-best-anti-poverty-program/
Here's a secret -- marriage is America’s most effective anti-poverty program
By Sheila Weber
Published February 13, 2013
In spite of other disagreements, there is one aspect about marriage that both the left and the right can find to agree on. Marriage is a valuable anti-poverty program.
The Brookings Institution says that if we had the marriage rate today that we had in 1970, there would be a 25 percent drop in poverty. The Heritage Foundation says that marriage drops the probability of a child living in poverty by 82 percent.
This week we focus on Valentine’s Day; and while a celebration of romance is great, we should also celebrate marriage as a valuable culmination of romance, because it’s not just about love, but ultimately about providing a better life for the children of America.
If you graduate from high school, work full time, and postpone marriage and childbearing until after the age of 21, your chances of being in poverty are only 2 percent
The decline of marriage is complex and multi-faceted—high divorce rates, increasing cohabitation, and high rates of out-of-wedlock births (42 percent of all U.S. babies today) have all contributed to the drop in marriage. Here are five reasons why we need to start a movement to re-value and strengthen marriage:
1. The decline of marriage hurts the working and lower class. Recent findings show that in working class white America, only 37 percent of children are living with both their mother and father (compared to 96% in 1960).
In upper class America, the numbers are better—84 percent of children live with both their parents (compared to 99% in 1960).
We can’t ignore the overwhelming research that shows marriage brings greater financial stability to families, and single motherhood is the leading cause of poverty for both women and children.
It’s astounding that recently, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s Human Resource Commissioner Robert Doar was reported to be planning a campaign to promote marriage for “the outcome of the child,” since 70 percent of all babies born in the Bronx are born to unwed mothers.
Most Americans feel compassion for the working 28-year-old single woman who finds herself in an unwanted circumstance and courageously chooses to give life and to raise her child alone. They understand her desire to maintain financial stability, and her hopes for marriage as part of her future.
But the growing epidemic of births to single mothers that NYC Commissioner Doar wants to address is coming from women who are choosing to put themselves in unwed pregnancy, very often during their teenage years, and who have no means of financial self sufficiency nor any expectation or plan that the father will be a constant presence and legal provider.
2. Loss of marital skills for the next generation. The decline in marriage rates (79% of U.S. adults were married in 1970, now only 52%) has been increasing the population of troubled youth and enlarging our prison populations (almost all prisoners are from single parent or broken homes), but there is another serious by-product: We are now raising a generation which does not know what healthy marriage looks and feels like, and thereby cannot model it.
This means their children will also be less proficient in relationship skills, the ability to use self discipline, to restrain impulses for the sake of another, to exercise forgiveness and seek reconciliation….and so much more.
3. Celebrity modeling sends the wrong message. While modeling adoption is positive, cohabiting unwed celebrity parents who make millions in the movie business are sending the wrong message about marriage to those who live paycheck to paycheck.
This devaluing the importance of marriage has created a new cultural norm that childbearing prior to or without marriage is eminently socially acceptable, even heroic. But research proves overwhelmingly that this is harmful to regular folks who do not have the enormous financial wealth that affords celebrities to live their unusual lives of abundance.
4. We can do better. It may be that the old-fashioned adage “first comes love, then comes marriage, then comes ___ with the baby carriage” sent a subliminal message and played a role in keeping more women and children out of poverty. Part of the rhyme’s messaged called on men, too.
It challenged them to marry first and to live up to much more of their potential, even if they did not do so perfectly. While there should be no tolerance for abuse, it turns out that a husband who was just “good enough” was better, for any child, than going through childhood without a permanent and committed male role model (as opposed to a boyfriend or partner).
5. Our leaders know the truth, but don’t say it. The Obamas are modeling the marital path toward success in raising children, but we need them and more leaders to speak forthrightly about the best ways to really give one’s offspring the greatest advantages in life. If you graduate from high school, work full time, and postpone marriage and childbearing until after the age of 21, your chances of being in poverty are only 2 percent. If you don’t do all of those three things, your chances of poverty rise to 77 percent.
In our justifiable compassion and respect for anyone finding themselves in a difficult life circumstance, we simply don’t know what to say or do about the unwed childbirth epidemic. Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s forewarning to us years ago was that a declining society accepts as normal the bad things that are not normal. Given our current predicament, can we now tug at something inside the human heart— hope for the betterment of one’s own child, civic duty, conscience, conviction about right or wrong (whether spiritual or merely practical) to shift the thinking and behavior of our fellow citizens….for their own good?
Let’s start a movement where more and more Americans seek out relationship education and marriage enrichment classes as often as we seek out other forms of self improvement such as home renovation, book clubs, grooming, fashion, décor, or cooking.
If we can change the public’s thinking and habits on recycling, smoking, exercise and healthy eating, how much more does America need a campaign to improve the public’s thinking and actions about the benefits to our country of encouraging healthy marriage?
This article cites statistics from both liberal and conservative think tanks.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/02/13/why-marriage-is-best-anti-poverty-program/
Here's a secret -- marriage is America’s most effective anti-poverty program
By Sheila Weber
Published February 13, 2013
In spite of other disagreements, there is one aspect about marriage that both the left and the right can find to agree on. Marriage is a valuable anti-poverty program.
The Brookings Institution says that if we had the marriage rate today that we had in 1970, there would be a 25 percent drop in poverty. The Heritage Foundation says that marriage drops the probability of a child living in poverty by 82 percent.
This week we focus on Valentine’s Day; and while a celebration of romance is great, we should also celebrate marriage as a valuable culmination of romance, because it’s not just about love, but ultimately about providing a better life for the children of America.
If you graduate from high school, work full time, and postpone marriage and childbearing until after the age of 21, your chances of being in poverty are only 2 percent
The decline of marriage is complex and multi-faceted—high divorce rates, increasing cohabitation, and high rates of out-of-wedlock births (42 percent of all U.S. babies today) have all contributed to the drop in marriage. Here are five reasons why we need to start a movement to re-value and strengthen marriage:
1. The decline of marriage hurts the working and lower class. Recent findings show that in working class white America, only 37 percent of children are living with both their mother and father (compared to 96% in 1960).
In upper class America, the numbers are better—84 percent of children live with both their parents (compared to 99% in 1960).
We can’t ignore the overwhelming research that shows marriage brings greater financial stability to families, and single motherhood is the leading cause of poverty for both women and children.
It’s astounding that recently, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s Human Resource Commissioner Robert Doar was reported to be planning a campaign to promote marriage for “the outcome of the child,” since 70 percent of all babies born in the Bronx are born to unwed mothers.
Most Americans feel compassion for the working 28-year-old single woman who finds herself in an unwanted circumstance and courageously chooses to give life and to raise her child alone. They understand her desire to maintain financial stability, and her hopes for marriage as part of her future.
But the growing epidemic of births to single mothers that NYC Commissioner Doar wants to address is coming from women who are choosing to put themselves in unwed pregnancy, very often during their teenage years, and who have no means of financial self sufficiency nor any expectation or plan that the father will be a constant presence and legal provider.
2. Loss of marital skills for the next generation. The decline in marriage rates (79% of U.S. adults were married in 1970, now only 52%) has been increasing the population of troubled youth and enlarging our prison populations (almost all prisoners are from single parent or broken homes), but there is another serious by-product: We are now raising a generation which does not know what healthy marriage looks and feels like, and thereby cannot model it.
This means their children will also be less proficient in relationship skills, the ability to use self discipline, to restrain impulses for the sake of another, to exercise forgiveness and seek reconciliation….and so much more.
3. Celebrity modeling sends the wrong message. While modeling adoption is positive, cohabiting unwed celebrity parents who make millions in the movie business are sending the wrong message about marriage to those who live paycheck to paycheck.
This devaluing the importance of marriage has created a new cultural norm that childbearing prior to or without marriage is eminently socially acceptable, even heroic. But research proves overwhelmingly that this is harmful to regular folks who do not have the enormous financial wealth that affords celebrities to live their unusual lives of abundance.
4. We can do better. It may be that the old-fashioned adage “first comes love, then comes marriage, then comes ___ with the baby carriage” sent a subliminal message and played a role in keeping more women and children out of poverty. Part of the rhyme’s messaged called on men, too.
It challenged them to marry first and to live up to much more of their potential, even if they did not do so perfectly. While there should be no tolerance for abuse, it turns out that a husband who was just “good enough” was better, for any child, than going through childhood without a permanent and committed male role model (as opposed to a boyfriend or partner).
5. Our leaders know the truth, but don’t say it. The Obamas are modeling the marital path toward success in raising children, but we need them and more leaders to speak forthrightly about the best ways to really give one’s offspring the greatest advantages in life. If you graduate from high school, work full time, and postpone marriage and childbearing until after the age of 21, your chances of being in poverty are only 2 percent. If you don’t do all of those three things, your chances of poverty rise to 77 percent.
In our justifiable compassion and respect for anyone finding themselves in a difficult life circumstance, we simply don’t know what to say or do about the unwed childbirth epidemic. Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s forewarning to us years ago was that a declining society accepts as normal the bad things that are not normal. Given our current predicament, can we now tug at something inside the human heart— hope for the betterment of one’s own child, civic duty, conscience, conviction about right or wrong (whether spiritual or merely practical) to shift the thinking and behavior of our fellow citizens….for their own good?
Let’s start a movement where more and more Americans seek out relationship education and marriage enrichment classes as often as we seek out other forms of self improvement such as home renovation, book clubs, grooming, fashion, décor, or cooking.
If we can change the public’s thinking and habits on recycling, smoking, exercise and healthy eating, how much more does America need a campaign to improve the public’s thinking and actions about the benefits to our country of encouraging healthy marriage?
Correlation =/= causation
This idea fails to stand up to reality. In the same time that marriage rates have gone down, poverty has gone down as well. If the marriage rate was as closely related to poverty as you say it is, poverty rates should be up, not down. How do you explain this phenomenon?
Dusty Bake Activate
Fukk your corny debates
You cant project this to mean that ALL behavior is not dependent on parenting
Which one? There's been a lot of studies that lead to the same conclusion. Parenting is not as important as most people make it out to be. I know you're a parent, and most parents don't like to hear this because they like to think they're in control of how their kids turn out, and you are in a lot of respects, but surrounding environmental conditions and culture are extremely pivotal in shaping peoples' identity and behavior. That's why you see the children of immigrants who raise them with vastly different cultural norms act no different than Americans for the most part.
Nah, that's a simplistic conclusion. If someone's parents are drug addicts or abusive or something that creates a traumatic maladaptive environment, their kids will probably be more fukked up than the average person. But any studies or statistical indicators about whether someone ends up being a "productive civilized successful human being" will ultimately show that socioeconomic status as the most important predictor.
Not sure what this would have to do with anything. Chicago had higher murder rates in the 70's and most people there were raised in two parent families then.
Chalking up violence in Chicago and similar places suffering from poverty and urban to single parenthood is flawed reductionism in the first place because there are a myriad of factors: poverty, bad education, deindustrialization, poor nutrition and health, bad culture, lead and other contaminants, structural racism, etc. that lead not just to violence, but the very single parenthood you're decrying in the first place.
And that's beside the point altogether. All I'm saying is that parenting is not the be-all end-all in how a child's makeup turns out and it is overrated. Someone raised by a single parent is going to obviously have an extra amount of pressures that someone who is raised in a two parent home doesn't.
Piff Perkins
Veteran
Her point was pretty obvious, and if you've hung around old ass family members I'm sure you've heard that basic argument before. I always hear my parents talking about how the entire neighborhood helped raise kids back in the 50s/60s. If you was fukking up you might get a spanking from the neighbor, go home and get a spanking from your parents. That's the general gist of what she was saying.
Obviously today no one gonna be spanking other people's kids, but if people took more of a role in their neighborhood things would be better. Likewise if we had policies that actually made neighborhoods and cities better - better schools, safe streets, after school programs, etc - kids would grow up better.
Obviously today no one gonna be spanking other people's kids, but if people took more of a role in their neighborhood things would be better. Likewise if we had policies that actually made neighborhoods and cities better - better schools, safe streets, after school programs, etc - kids would grow up better.
NZA
LOL
i knew the moment i saw this ad there would be trouble. i suspect she and MSNBC knew too, so they did it, and now her show is a lot more famous, or infamous. either way ratings will be decent.
But in this case it is causation not correlation. Having two incomes in a family obviously reduces the likelihood of poverty more than having just one income. Having two parents provides more love and discipline and guidance to a child than one parent can. The fact that I have to point out something so obvious to you guys is really sad. It just goes to show how conditioned left wingers are to feel helpless and victimized with absolutely no control over their own lives.
And since when are poverty rates going down in America's inner cities? I am pretty sure it is the opposite, and that is where the breakdown of the family structure is most occuring.
Where does she or anyone justify single parenthood?
who said anything a out being a liberal or "victimized"Go read up on it. Poverty rates have been in a constant decline while at the same time "out of wedlock" rates have been rising. Crime rates are down as well. I'm not downplaying the importance of family. But to blame all the problems of society on this one stat is missing the point completely.
the mechanic
Greasy philosophy
Who told you that..that number has just hit a record high of 46 million 15% {EDIT: since the war on poverty began}Record U.S. Poverty Rate Holds As Inequality Grows - Businessweek
That war on poverty is going about as well as the war on drugsNow try again to answer his post with some truth
Record U.S. Poverty Rate Holds As Inequality Grows - Businessweek
Now try again to answer his post with some truth
Your talking about a global recession here. This has absolutely nothing to do with the "out of wedlock rate" check before that. Check what the BLACK poverty rate has been historicaly.
^^^^^this entire time the "out of wedlock" rate has been going up. Shouldn't the poverty rate have been going up as well?