-
Aborting ‘Pro-Choice,’ Promoting ‘Nuance’
January 22, 2013 | 46 comments
-
Obama Comes Full Circle
May 11, 2012 | 261 comments
-
Fiscal Crisis At Tipping Point
July 11, 2011 | 102 comments
-
Family Deformation
April 8, 2011 | 47 comments
-
Obama Abandons Marriage
February 25, 2011 | 229 comments
The Nation's Pulse
Why Young Black Males Are Not Graduating High School
Judge Walker’s “facts” are not holding up.
A new report from the Schott Foundation reveals that only 47 percent of black male students earn a high school diploma on time. Ironically, this report came out shortly after Judge Vaughn Walker ruled regarding Proposition 8 in California. If the statements on which Judge Walker based his ruling are “facts,” how do we explain what is happening educationally to boys in the black community where a large majority are growing up without fathers?
Nancy Pearcey, in an article on American Thinker, identified certain “facts that Judge Walker claims are now established by the ‘evidence’ presented in his courtroom.” Those “facts” presumably will be deemed as “truth” far beyond the courtroom. Among those “facts,” the following three are especially relevant for young black boys’ futures:
• “Gender no longer forms an essential part of marriage.”
• “The gender of a child’s parent is not a factor in a child’s adjustment.”
• “Having both a male and a female parent does not increase the likelihood that a child will be well-adjusted.”
Those three general false principles that Judge Walker supposedly established in his arguments in favor of so-called “same-sex marriage” are equally faulty when applied to the more than 40 percent of today’s children who are born to single mothers. They are doubly relevant when the majority of those children are black.
Here are some irrefutable facts that Judge Walker and his ilk need to ponder.
Poverty: When it comes to poverty, a contributing factor for dropping out of school, the majority are single parents — 37 percent of single moms and 17.5 percent of single dads are in poverty, whereas only 6.7 percent of married couples are in poverty. Put in the simplest possible terms, the poverty rate of single mothers with children is five times higher than the rate for married couples with children, and the rate for single fathers is more than two-and-a-half times the married-couple rate. Even worse, now the poor children in single parent households constitute almost two-thirds of all poor children.
Our Beverly LaHaye Institute analysis of census data shows that if the family structure of the population had been the same in 2007 as it was in 1972, the poverty rate for all families would be lower today. Instead of increasing from 11.8 percent in 1972 to 15 percent in 2007, it would have been 10.7 in 2007. Thus, poverty and fatherless families are inextricably linked. So are certain other negative consequences for children — we have forty years of social science data detailing the higher frequency of adverse child development outcomes for children raised in single-mother households.
Bad Schools: While plenty of poor children excel in school, other factors contribute to the poor educational outcomes for black boys, including bad schools in minority areas. The District of Columbia spends more per pupil than almost any other school district in the nation — close to $25,000 per child — on par with tuition at the exclusive Sidwell Friends private school the Obama girls attend. Yet, the D.C. schools consistently rank among the poorest in the nation, with run-down facilities and bloated central management. Both New York and New Jersey also spend huge sums on education — $13,780 annually per pupil. A Fordham Foundation report found that only eight states had achieved “moderate” success in the past fifteen years in improving poor and minority students’ scores on reading, mathematics, and science. Only seven to eight percent of black 9th graders are at or above the proficient level in science and math.
Family Breakdown: Yes, poverty and poor schools are partly to blame, but black children suffer disproportionately because of family breakdown. White and Asian parents are more likely than black or Hispanic parents to read to their children (white, 68 percent; Asian, 66 percent; black, 50 percent; and Hispanic, 45 percent). Again, it comes as no surprise that children are read to more often in two-parent families than in single-parent homes (62 percent in two-parent homes compared to 53 percent in single-parent homes).
At some point, we will have to come to grips with the fact that a very large percentage of our students fail because they lack a father and mother who value, encourage, support, and reinforced their efforts to learn. Common sense tells us that there is no surer recipe for the child to lag behind in learning than having to contend with the strain and disruption of a broken, dysfunctional family, where the parent or parents are so focused on themselves and their needs that they have little emotional energy to spare for the child’s needs. Before we can address the problems of public education, we have to address the problems of marriage and family. Only then can we begin the massive overhaul of cultural values that will be necessary to close the educational gaps in America.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (169) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Janice Shaw Crouse
More Articles From The Nation's Pulse
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/08/23/why-young-black-males-are-not
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
drudge ette obama| 8.23.10 @ 6:32AM
Judge Vaughn Walker wasn't interested in the black children referenced in this article in reaching his decision - he was interested in himself and his lifestyle. In his world, gays are educated, moneyed and urbane, not illiterate, poor and urban.
The loss of the bigger picture (the demise of the value of marriage to a healthy society) was necessary to redefine marriage to include same sex couples.
These children are lost and will continue to pressure our society in negative ways rather than contributing positively. What a waste, on so many levels, of huma potential.
baslimthecripple| 8.23.10 @ 7:30AM
Bingo, Yahtzee, or whatever. Endlessly, I see the welfare products of single family households, and this being New England, they aren't black. Their mothers cohabit or whatever, smoke, and the children suffer from ear infections or asthma as a result. Many have pulled an Ann Dunham and gotten themselves pregnant. Some fathers line up for a while, many others not. Few, it seems, sign on for a lifetime, but it is hard to say as the ones who do don't wind up with their spawn supping at the public trough.
RCV| 8.23.10 @ 11:37AM
Rather difficult to blame the deterioration of the black family on gay marriage since it happened when there was no gay marriage. Also difficult to understand how providing the opportunity for gay couples to strengthen their relationships through marriage will in any way interfere with efforts to do the same in the black community.
Look for another scapegoat.
Eric Cartman| 8.23.10 @ 12:03PM
OK - how about the garbage pile of other Liberal ahole policies? Everything from the education establishments and unions run by Liberal aholes, to unlimited welfare designed by Liberal aholes, to coddling criminals and elevating jackasses like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton to "Black Spokesperson" status and all the other Liberal crap dreamed up to "fix" our "problems"? How did all your Liberal crap work out there? Oh yeah . . . Detroit.
Huh| 8.23.10 @ 1:03PM
We are constantly told that gay people are born that way. If so, then they are born with no pre-disposition to have children and thus parent. Two members of the same sex cannot pro-create - duh. Oh, and how about the cross-dressers - they are born to desire the clothing of the opposite sex? LBGT is an acronym for transgressing the will of God by "choice." All men shall be judged by how their actions lined up with God's Word.
Jeff| 8.24.10 @ 5:07AM
The logic in your post is so ridiculous, it's actually funny. How can you make any correlation to being born gay and being born not to wanting children? How would you explain all the straight people who don't want kids? Are they secretly gay? Straight people are not attacted to each other because they necessarily want to have kids. They are attracted to each other because that's who they find desirable. They then might choose to marry someone of the opposite sex for many reasons - one might be to have children. The same holds true for gay people. They want to get married for many of the same reasons as straight couples. And one of those reasons would be to have kids. Gay couples may not be able to pro-create but that's not a reason to not marry - especially with how many options there are today to "have" children that both gays and straights can exercise - adoption, surrogancy, etc.
If all men will be judged by how their actions line up with God's Word, I would hate to be in your shoes when your judgement day comes.
Bill| 8.24.10 @ 10:08AM
You bozo.
joliz| 8.23.10 @ 12:36PM
You missed the point. She doesn't "blame the deterioration of the black family on gay marriage". She merely draws a comparison between the educational outcomes of black children raised in fatherless families and the possible educational outcomes of other children raised in single-gendered parenting arrangements.
Continuing to break down the family by redefining "marriage" to mean "whatever the heck we want it to mean today" will not, in the long run, serve the needs of children in impoverished situations. In fact, it may create more such children since in vitro, surrogates, and adoption are all available to same-sex couplings--and these couplings are less likely to result in a permanent family structure than heterosexual marriages.
RCV| 8.23.10 @ 12:58PM
What is the evidence for the bald statement that same sex couples who adopt or use in vitro or surrogates "are less likely to result in permanent family structures than heterosexual marriages"?
How does extending the right of marriage "break down the family"? Since gays can adopt in California and other states, doesn't providing the status of marriage to that family help strenghten it?
joli| 8.23.10 @ 1:47PM
I didn't say that bringing children into the relationship would make the relationship less likely to endure. I said that the relationship is already less likely to endure, and bringing children into it will ultimately likely increase the number of single-parented children.
I can quote sources if you like, but you can no doubt quote sources of your own to "prove" the opposite. In fact, you go first.
Jeff| 8.24.10 @ 3:41PM
Joli: I’m confused with your last post. You said that gay marriages are less likely to endure. Are you implying that your sources show that gay marriages will end in divorce and therefore any children that might have developed from that marriage would end up in a single family home?
You’re using terms like “POSSIBLE educational outcome” and “MIGHT cause”. Where’s the validity in any of this? Using phrases like these are merely one’s own opinion based on someone’s personal agenda usually stemming from religious beliefs and ignorance. We could always draw our own resemblances of what COULD happen whenever we don’t agree with someone else’s views. These studies that show that children don’t do as well in single family homes are based on many factors, the least of which include a single gender parent. Children of divorced families are dealing, more often than not, with two parents who don’t get along, are usually fighting and bad-mouthing each other, and have to go through a disruption in their lives physically, mentally and emotionally. In many cases, it’s an unhealthy environment to raise children in and THAT is the cause of many of the results we read in those studies. Having children in a gay marriage is nothing similar to that of a broken home. In fact, it’s quite the opposite. Children will be raised with two loving parents who can give the child the stability and care that will allow them to succeed just like if they were raised in a “traditional” home. The correlation of a single gender household with that of a gay marriage goes way beyond the idea that there’s only one male or one female in the home. It’s like saying because someone who kills others with guns is bad so therefore, anyone that owns a gun is a bad person. You can’t make that analogy just like you can’t say that because a single parent household is less healthy for children; therefore, any family with only one gender as parents will be less healthy for children.
No one is redefining marriage to be “whatever the heck we want it to be.” Judge Walker has simply upheld the fundamental rights that are given to everyone in the constitution. Just because it doesn’t fall within your personal beliefs doesn’t make it wrong or redefined.
Helen Dickson| 8.23.10 @ 1:50PM
Gay marriage isn't natural. All the rhetoric in the world can't make it natural. Neither can the courts or legislatures.
Male/female couples fit each other in physical emotional, and spiritual ways. Children need the unique characteristics of both a mother and a father for optimum development. This is not rocket science. It is rooted in nature and is obvious. You can't change nature.
That's why natural female/male parents have a profoundly, positive effect on the well being of their offspring. It's scientifically proven and undeniable.
Helen
Helen Donnelly| 8.23.10 @ 3:36PM
From one Helen to another....well said!!
Jeff| 8.24.10 @ 4:46AM
To both Helens, I've never heard such disgusting, ignorant comments in my life. Who are either of you to determine what is natural and what isn't? What do you mean it's obvious? To who? God made gay people as they are. Hence, it's natural. Just because YOU don't accept it, doesn't make it any less natural than your ignorant, judgemental excuses for a human being like yourselves. Where exactly are you getting your facts? Where are all these studies?
If you feel that female/male parenting has such a positive effect on children and is so natural, then why are there so many straight couples that are horrible parents? If you want profoundly positive effects on children, don't stop gay people from getting married. Stop straight couples from getting divorced.
The only rhetoric here that's full of crap is yours.
wbheff| 8.24.10 @ 9:48AM
There is nothing remotely "gay" about being sexually perverted.
kandika| 9.19.10 @ 4:41PM
It's also 'natural' for men to have more than one woman(not all men though, some were virgins then); since many of us DONT WANT TO BE LADIES ANYMORE (men cannot get what isn't there and when too many women act like this), this ensues. I also think, I hope i'm wrong, that women created polygamy because many want a 'strong alpha male' for their kids. We don' t know how to stop this mess either and white men are babydaddies too. People have got to realize that DAYCARE CANNOT RAISE YOUR CHILDREN. It used to be grandparents would take care of the kids when both of the parents worked, but many of us 'baby boomer' grandparents are working and don't have time for the kids anymore either, or trying to recapture some youth, or working on a third marriage, etc.
joli| 8.23.10 @ 1:22PM
Yeah, I can type my own name correctly. That was me.
W.l. Barton| 8.23.10 @ 12:51PM
Beverly is the wife of Tim LaHay, a known pulpit pimp , who prostitutes Jesus for a living.
The religious right is full of these right wing think-less tanks. They are tanked all right, why do you think they love their spiked TEA parties?
All right wingers are parasitic low life scam artist, who come from rich families, and know nothing of work, and the real world. FAUX NEWSWHORE and Rupert Murdoch is their guru.
W. l. Farton| 8.23.10 @ 1:00PM
Yeah, you right wing jerks! I'm so mad I forgot to capitalize the L in my name! I am losing my patients with you pathetic right wing trash! So far I have used FAUX NEWSWHORE, spiked TEA parties, Ralph W. Emerson, made fun of using common internet abbreviations, accused you scum of rape and murder and needing DNA testing, and being racists and Nazis! I'm running out of ideas so you guys better stop making fun of us! I'm warning you! I'm gunna have to sick Keith Olbermann on you!
drudge ette obama| 8.24.10 @ 6:36AM
It is not sick, it's sic. I would agree that Keith Olbermann is sick, though. How are you feeling?
wbheff| 8.24.10 @ 9:51AM
Sorry about you losing all those "patients" Mr. Barton, or is it "Farton" as you had it in your second post. It seems to me that the second version of the last name describes your rants more accurately. Oh, and it must be sad to be as full of irrational hate as you.
Seek| 8.23.10 @ 2:30PM
"Rich families" -- ah, you must mean George Soros' family, right? Boy, we right-wingers are feeling so lucky these days.
People like Mr. Barton traffic in cliches so crude as to defy belief.
nena| 8.23.10 @ 3:46PM
What the article is stating to the person who is ignorant and wrote this comment. The article is stating that a household needs a mother and a father model for children in order for them to flourish in life, which is proven in many studies. Children do not need adam and steve or Jenny and Eve you ignoramous! Talk about confusing a child how sad!
Jeff| 8.24.10 @ 5:15AM
The studies that you are referring to (I'm assuming) are comparing a mother and father versus just a mother or just a father. Show me a study that compares how male/female parenting is more successful than a male/male parenting or female/female parenting.
What children NEED are parents who love them, care for them and show them the right ways of life - regardless of what sex they are.
Margie| 8.23.10 @ 7:11PM
RCV,
It deteriorates the family because God did not set it up that way and going against His will ruins everything and especially relationships. Homosexuality sends the wrong message to children and it distorts their view of Marriage and family.
There will never be "Gay Marriage" in the eyes of God no matter if it becomes legal. When God says He will throw practicing homosexuals into Hell, He means it. It is destructive behavior and ruins every soul that practices it. He warns us in the Bible. It is a lie that it is good or healthy in any way, shape or form.
Occam's Tool| 8.23.10 @ 10:06PM
Any review of marriage laws needs to be done with the following in mind: does it help create a more stable environment for the majority of marriages (heterosexual) to help raise their kids? I fail to see how. Civil Unions will accomplish all the legal goals that gays desire without compromising the already damaged institution of marriage.
Margie| 8.23.10 @ 10:36PM
Ah yes, if that was what the lawmakers were really and truly interested in. But alas, they are not. They are part and parcel of the homosexual agenda. Getting it passed is all they want, and they do not care a whit about damaging. They CANNOT in fact care because if they did they'd have to admit the truth, that being that it's wrong, which they aren't interested in.
RCV| 8.23.10 @ 11:01PM
Margie: We can't construct public policy based on your theological interpretations. From a legislative standpoint, the issue is whether the policy promotes social good. From that perspective, it encourages gays and lesbians to develop stable, Long- term relationships; it provides stability and support to gay couples with adopted children, of whom there are many. The argument that it somehow weakens or cheapens heterosexual marriage is difficult for me and many others to even understand. From a judicial standpoint, the issue is whether denying gay couples the opportunity to marry denies them the equal protection of the laws. I find Judge Walker's legal analysis on that question quite persuasive.
Jeff| 8.24.10 @ 5:28AM
Margie, RCV is absolutely correct. And YOUR interprutation of what God deems right and wrong is disgustingly ignorant. Who are you to interrupt what he says to be? Is it your interprutation of the bible? If that's the case, do you realize how many things would be considered morally wrong and illegal? What sends the wrong message to children is not gay marriage but in fact showing them (like you're doing) it's ok to judge others to treat them as sinners and freaks if they're not like yourself.
I think the only thing that is wrong here is you. You need to take a good hard look at yourself in the mirror and ask yourself if this is someone that God would want on his side. Someone who judges others, who feels they can dictate the right and wrong of others and someone who finds themselves to have the authority to govern who is protected under the constitution of the United States. I don't think He would want someone like that on His side. I know, I sure wouldn't.
Margaret| 8.25.10 @ 6:53PM
Sorry RCV and Jeff. Our Declaration of Independence and Constitution are based on Christian theology whether you like it or not. Marriage is a religious sacrament whether you like it or not. Solve the problem: return marriage to religious organizations. Create a "cohabitation registry" for the states and/or feds. That way marriage stays man/woman and who ever lives in a household, related or not, perverted conduct or not, can register with the state. Want a "divorce" - go pay the state a fee to free you up to live elsewhere. "cohabit registration" lets you, not the government, say who's in your "family household" with full legal benefits. This won't change the dilemma for kids that are single parented or "gay" parented but it should end the marriage argument. FYI - MA's law has not changed because the legislature refused to vote in the change. Under the MA Constitution judges can't change the law. One day there will be another lawsuit and one man/one woman will be restored. 1 judge cannot decide for the whole of this society unless you do away with the US and State Constitutions.
Jeff| 8.26.10 @ 2:52AM
Margaret: Whether you like it or not, marriage is a fundamental right protected under the constitution. You saying otherwise will not change that fact. It may be YOUR belief or desire that you want the constitution and Declaration to be based on Christian theology, but it isn’t. That’s why there was a separation of church and state many years ago – to protect all of us for this exact reason. And if it was based on Christian ways, what does that do for the Jewish people or Muslim people or anyone not of Christianity? Does it not apply to them? What you’re insisting on here are your religious beliefs – the way you would LIKE them to be. That’s not how the government works. As a matter fact, this country was started (as was the Declaration and constitution developed) to allow freedom of any religion to its people. We are not a country based on religious factors. We are governed based on laws created for the people and enforced by government branches – none of which use religion as a basis for these laws. It keeps religion away from the people to protect them from this very reason that you’re so trying to incorporate into our lives for your own personal satisfaction.
Marriage is only a sacrament if your religion says so – not the US government. If your religion deems it to be a sacrament and that sacrament prohibits homosexual marriage, then so be it. A same sex couple would not be able to marry in that religion. But whether you like it or not, no religion has to be present to get married if the couple chooses not to be married in one. Gay people are not asking every church or every religion to change their ways. They are only asking for those that don’t belong in their business to stay out of it. They’re not affecting your beliefs so don’t try to control theirs.
The solution you suggested is somewhat already in place. That is, we don’t’ need to return marriage to the church. If the church already says gay people can’t be married under their rules then they won’t get married there. But it’s not necessary to return this freedom to the religious organization. They can each make their own rules regarding marriage. We need one uniformed set of laws to be dictated by the same organization – the government. If religious organizations were to govern marriage, who would oversee the rules? There are too many religions for all of them to agree together. That is why having one objective government set the rules – or rather enforce the rules – gives if a fair advantage to everyone. And let the religious groups practice what that may regarding religion.
One judge is not doing away with marriage in this society. If the laws will change for the entire nation, they will do so because the US Supreme court says so. Under our judicial system, that is what their job entails them to do. You need to keep YOUR personal beliefs out of it. Your ignorant reference to homosexuality as perverted conduct only proves all the more reason.
kandika| 9.19.10 @ 4:45PM
As i said in the previous post about polygamy: Sarah TOLD Abraham to lay with the 'slavegirl' to have an heir--someone assumed Abraham probably liked it, maybe so, but it was Sarahs idea
SAC| 8.31.10 @ 8:31PM
I do not know how this person got the idea that the author is blaming "gay marriage" for the problems within the black family, but it is typical how people misread or misinterpret statements, especially when they read them with biased minds. As a black man, I can appreciate what the author is saying because I have seen it with my own two eyes. Frankly I am getting sick and tired of the liberal media and their associates feeding us with the propaganda that marriage is anything but the sacred union of a man and a woman. Humans can no more redefine marriage than they can create life. God created marriage; He defined it; He blessed it, and He sanctified it. So until humans can create life, marriage is between a man and a woman, period!
Jeff| 9.1.10 @ 1:55AM
Well, SAC, I'm getting sick and tired of people like you trying to tell the world what God's intentions were when he created marriage! And I'm getting sick and tired of the right wing know-it-alls who think they can define what marriage is by bringing their religion into. God has created a lot of things and one being the right he has given to all of us to marry a man or a woman regardless of our own gender. The only humans trying to redefine anything are people like yourself who are using their religious books to give the definition their own interpretation. We don't follw the laws in YOUR books. We follow the laws in the constitution, period! So please stop telling me what YOUR definition of marriage is.
Tomas| 8.23.10 @ 12:59PM
Last Friday I saw an exhibit of photographs by young inner-city kids. Blacks, unwed teenage mothers, victims of broken homes and the streets. A small amount of donated funds provided the cameras for these kids, and they were given instruction and specific projects to work on.
Their photos were truly amazing. I hate to admit it, but I wasn't expecting the quality of work I saw. And what was even more remarkable was the obvious effect this project had on the lives of these kids. Lessons on living that will carry them into adulthood.
One young gal, a beautiful black girl, told us about her home life. If you had seen the way she carried herself, you would never have known the hardships under which she had grown.
There was another young black kid who wasn't in the project, but was very interested in the photos. He was asking questions of everyone. How did you do this, how did you do that.
I pestered him all night. "You're going to take this class next year, right?"
He sheepishly said no, but I could see in his eyes something had been born that night.
We must always remember that school never stops. That that graduation cap and gown is only something you wear. Ugly, yes, but a placeholder in life's never-ending university. We can all be professors in this university.
Let's start now.
-
Believer| 8.23.10 @ 1:43PM
Thomas- Lets start now? How about when my wife and I started letting inner city kids, Black, white and hispanic, into our home to try and give them a decent place to live while they went to school. This we did at no cost to the County or the kids parent( usually a single mother), all but one or two over 10 years showed no gratitude to us and only wanted a place to sleep with no curfue. The kids parent always told us that the reason for them being homeless to begin with is they would defy any disipline and do as they pleased. We had two daughters that were taken in by these kids and came to us to try and help them, needless to say we no longer take in stray kids as the welfare dept. has seen to it that a stable home is next to impossible to welfare kids. I have seen Black kids who were a shoo in for a football carrear throw it all away on a life of dope, I know theres a way to overcome this but its not by anything man can come up with.
Hoop de hoop| 8.26.10 @ 4:02PM
Ms. Cruise's column is an argument for gay marriage since it would provide more two-parent households and help gay and lesbian people establish more long-term relationships. The evidence she cites derides "single parent" households, not "fatherless" households, which have not been shown to produce any negative effects if there are two female parents present. At present the two states that have shown the lead in extending civil unions and marriage to gays, Vermont and Massachusetts, have far lower divorce rates than in any states which disadvantage and target gays. Gay civil unions have been the law in Denmark for 21 years and gay marriage in Canada for 7 years, and in both these countries the social problems affecting children are miniscule compared the the United States with its heterosexism. Drudge ette Obama's attempt to portray Judge Walker as elitist flies in the face of the facts, which find that gays and lesbians are subject to economic discrimination in the US, usually making 20% less than comparably educated straights in the same areas, and much more likely to be laid off. All of which means the protections of marriage will be even more valuable in protecting children. A major cause of the instability of black families is their economic insecurity due to historic discrimination, and their statistics will only benefit by having more two parent gay households.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 8.23.10 @ 6:46AM
Citizens who buy into the welfare state and the public schools system both of whom are operated with central economic planning, get shortchanged.
Last week I saw a report where black male students in New York and Philadelphia only have graduation rates of 28%. One has to wonder why only black male students and not black female students.
If you look at crime statistics 80% of all violent crimes against whites and over 90% of all violent crimes against blacks are committed by black males.
A free education is a horrible thing to waste but many black males do waste the opportunity.
If I ran a restaurant where only 28% of my black male customers were satisfied you would see the a Denny's type lawsuit against my company claiming that numbers alone prove racial discrimination.
As to why black males fail, I really don't know the answer. It's easy to say it's a failure of the family but is it? Black females jump through the same hoops and make it.
It's ironic the Justice Department lets many major school systems get away with such poor performance but that's par for course. The federal government would have to admit all their central planning has failed and then would have to go after a major union group.
Perhaps the answer is trade schools as opposed to pretending everyone can go through the same funnel.
In the meantime prisons grow ever crowded with angry and violent black males.
GracieZG| 8.23.10 @ 9:51AM
When there is not sufficient pressure, as well as good examples set, from two loving (or at least strong) parents to make the most of education, the vacuum is too often filled in the black student community by peer pressure not to study, based on the idea that a student who studies hard and does well in school is "acting white."
This pressure is very real, and may be the most insidious, invisible reason behind the poor performance of male black students. It is a self-imposed command to do poorly in order to fit in. All teenagers want to fit it. It's just tragic that this version of "fitting in" ensures failure.
A loving mother and father who can reinforce in a student his desire and ability to achieve, and can also set that pattern, is what can supercede this negative peer pressure.
Yes, the single black female can achieve a lot, as has been proven. She also has a strong support system of other single black females who are achieving. But where that support system is lacking for black males, due to absent fathers, the door is often left wide open for peer pressure to fill the vacuum--and that pressure perpetuates failure.
jubilee| 9.11.10 @ 11:48AM
that 'catin' white nonsense is rather new: it came out in the early 70s when families started to beco me shattered. I think 'broken' is too weak of a word when it comes to families, even male birds help the females feed the chicks. It's also sad because many black girls are doing quite well in school but the boys are failing--no dad in the home, and drugs,startingwith pot become more important. Most primitive cultures KNEW that after a certain age, boys need to be with RESPONSIBLE men to mature
Believer| 8.23.10 @ 1:55PM
O'Stalin- Three possible answers to the problem of low performance of black Males. One abolish public schools, two abolish their trashy music, three, abolish the violent entertainment ind. As public schools are the apple of the Liberals eye that one is impossible to work with, possibly two and three but I doubt it.
scotchieguy| 8.23.10 @ 7:27PM
One you can get rid of if you convince enough people. But two and three? Exactly how do you ban their crappy music? Make it illegal? Same w/ the violent entertainment ind. Abolish that? The only way you get rid of two and three, is straighten out the family structure, which is only possible when you get the welfare state that currently molds these poor kids/families out of our society. Then, maybe we'll have a chance.
jubilee| 9.11.10 @ 11:56AM
Although it's my opinion, I think music started getting 'crappy' around 1988. After that, it either remained the same as far as style (rap predates1988) or it just started to get full of foul language. If you notice, most GIRLS curse WORSE that sailors in WW2; so you can't use the term 'curse like a sailor anymore'. Many stars dont even have to sing in tune--the technology fixes it for them, because music is more visual than thru the ear. Teenagers listen to woodstock singers, because they were real and innovative for its time--music is schlocky today. the sound is sooo late 80s
JOTHEPRO| 8.23.10 @ 6:49AM
The progressives (liberals) have so many people that beleive their bilge for ideals. How do we stop what has been going on for the last 50 years? It breaks my heart to see what they have done to this country and never have to pay the price for their programs and laws that have led us to this moral vacuum.
Redstateboy| 8.23.10 @ 9:31AM
Amen... and Amen
RCV| 8.23.10 @ 1:01PM
The right has been in power in this country for most of the past fifty years. Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush I and GWB. Funny your perspective on who's to blame!
Believer| 8.23.10 @ 2:02PM
RCV- Since taking office O'bama has spent more money in 18 months than Bush 1 and 2 both and Congress has been responsible for the laws that have edged us closer to socialism. No ones saying that the Republicans are without blame but backing the Democratic party is being foolish.
Granny3| 8.23.10 @ 4:50PM
Republican Presidents, but Democratic Congresses until 1995. None of the Presidents except GW had a Republican Congress.
Most of the welfare programs came from LBJ's Great Society. You should have seen what it did to the children where I was teaching. Disasterous and sad. All passed by Dems.
RCV| 8.24.10 @ 4:30PM
So I guess it's the Democratic congress that should get the credit for the Reagan "economic miracle"
Occam's Tool| 8.23.10 @ 10:09PM
Sorry, RCV, but Congress decides most of the direction in which our country goes, and it has been majority Republican for only a brief slice of time in the last 50---the latter Clinton and the first 6 years of Bush. Funny how that coincided with great economic growth, eh?
Margaret| 8.25.10 @ 7:06PM
Your looking in the wrong place - look at the Congress - they create the programs and spend the money on them. Those years you cited had Dem congresses and progressive policies. Once the programs are in place it's almost impossible to remove or consolidate them. And the Government lies.... Like Social Security is a choice, taxes are paid by choice... Read the US Constitution sometime - the Dept of Educ, the Dept of Energy, Environment are not supported by it. Think of the money that could remain in the states if you didn't have to pay the Feds their "redistribution" fees. Progressives took serious hold under Woodrow Wilson (D) and FDR and rewrote our history books. As a country we need to go back before we can go forward again.
jubilee| 9.11.10 @ 12:00PM
Although the 'right' has been in power, our form of government is NOT A MONARCHY. It is a 3 branch system. the president is not a king, we have state legislators as well as the judiciary. Also many on the 'right' are sort of , what i call, wimpy
Miles Glorious| 8.23.10 @ 2:08PM
There is a terrible day of reckoning coming and Vae Victis
Average Infidel| 8.23.10 @ 7:01AM
Indeed, a mind is a terrible thing to waste, just ask any democratic legislator, mayor, council member, the NEA and assorted communist/progressive/marxist/statist types. Of course you'd never get them to admit they are and or were wrong on any given subject let alone the reasons why their constitutents are by far the poorest, dumbest and more violent among any other level of learned individuals in this Country.
Good Lord we are truely in massive trouble here folks. So yeah you dipsticks out there , keep on pulling the D lever. I dare you.
Appleby| 8.23.10 @ 7:10AM
The real problem is that everyone is terrified of punishing Black males for wrongdoing, from the day they start kindergarten by cursing at their white female teachers, to the day they are carried off in handcuffs for knifing some student who *dissed* them in the washroom.
NOTHING a black male does can be construed as (1) a violation of the rules or (2) his fault.
When there are never any consequences directly attributable to his actions, what else would you expect but anarchy?
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 8.23.10 @ 8:27AM
Look at just about any government agency, in particular police departments. Black males with advanced degrees who can't even speak proper English. The Washington area got quite a treat listening to Chief Moose several years ago during the sniper incident in D.C. Chief Moose quickly earned the nickname the Ebonic chief for his half literate statements. On top of that he stated that a white male was being sought. It was later revealed that the night before that statement a lookout had gone out for hispanic or black males in a burgundy or dark blue caprice. One can only wonder how many lives were lost due to Chief Moose's racial pandering. Another interesting fact that the public never heard was that Moose and the sniper were both in the same National Guard in Oregon. While the sniper investigation was underway, Moose went to Hawaii, walked into a kitchen area of a Marriott hotel, then threatened to sue when someone asked him why he was in the employees only area. Moose received $250,000 from Marriott for that little incident. Here's more:
http://www.strike-the-root.com/3/rarey/rarey1.html
The union claimed that Moose had the information on Mohammad and Malvo earlier than acknowledged which he withheld thus endangering the safety of police officers on the case. It tried to include a clause in the new contract requiring such information be furnished as soon as available. A watered down provision was ultimately included. Moose further antagonized his police when, according to union president Walt Bader he opposed raises for the rank and file while himself getting a huge raise to over $160,000 per year making him the highest paid chief in the area. The rank and file got a 2% raise. An ATF agent member of the task force revealed that Moose had ordered that officers who checked cars following each shooting were to wave cars by if the drivers were minorities or females and to search only cars with white male drivers behind the wheel. This despite several eyewitness accounts (never made public) of suspects in a dark sedan who were either black or Hispanic in appearance. Moose 'tossed' those reports implying they were bad witnesses. One Montgomery officer (who understandably wishes to remain nameless) says he knows that Moose personally was aware of the descriptions of Muhammad and Malvo as early as Oct. 21st the day before the last victim was killed. It was also disclosed that Moose secretly dispatched a team of undercover agents to stake out Muhammad's ex-wife's house two days before he was captured, according to journalist Paul Sperry. That would have been on Oct. 22nd, the day of the last killing and one day before Moose claims the two became suspects.
RCV| 8.23.10 @ 1:04PM
Sorry, but most of the punishment meeted out in society is on black males. That system has sure worked well. I didn't hear complaints during the decades that white males were never punished for everything up to and including lynching blacks in the south.
RCV| 8.23.10 @ 2:58PM
Are you claiming that since whites males in the past were not puniched for their crimes that black males should not be punished now? Is there some sort of magic numbers of crimes that will balance the books?
RCV| 8.23.10 @ 4:36PM
Wasn't suggesting anything of the sort. I was pointing out that the idea that black males aren't being punished is false, and that the loading up of our prisons hasn' been a very effective strategy.
mark| 8.23.10 @ 3:51PM
The unfortunte reality is that most of the crimes committed by blacks is committed against other blacks. It is the black community which has the greatest interest in diminishing crime, but decades of victimology by the race discrimination industry prevents so many from coming to grips with the disfunction of the so-called black society.
jubilee| 9.11.10 @ 12:02PM
maybe they are cursing out their teachers, because they havent been raised with tonal music, just a bunch of sampling and cursing from those rap-crappers
Ken (Old Texican)| 8.23.10 @ 7:26AM
Janice,
Some years ago I read an interesting article. The thesis was that where European descendants live in a patriarchic world, Black folks often come from a matriarchic world.
Is there at least one clue hiding there?
jubilee| 9.11.10 @ 12:16PM
not true---the males had to go thru an initiation of some sort with other males after a certain age, and leave its mother--asians are also patriarchal as well, even though they had Mulan
Alert1201| 8.23.10 @ 7:34AM
One major obstacle to progress is political correctness that guards anybody who criticize single mothers as not being as good as two parent male and female households. We saw a taste of it in the 80s when Dan Quale criticized Murphy Brown and it has only gotten worse since them. You cannot say anything critical about single parenting w/o being lambasted as a backward insensitive hick. No leading political figure on either side has the cojones to come out and say what needs to be said.
Stephanie| 8.23.10 @ 8:31AM
At the local highschool in the county I live in, when a teenaged girl get pregnant, she is applauded and when she delivers, there are banners (paper) on the hall walls CONGRATULATING her on her new welfare recepiant. It is truely appalling.
No, we wouldn't want to say anythng against single moms. Who needs a man anyway! :-(
RCV| 8.23.10 @ 11:34AM
Sarah Palin will lead the right's new campaign against unwed teenage mothers.
Fendrfan| 8.23.10 @ 4:53PM
RCV - give it a rest - you're so full of mindless trashtalk, you're even replying to your own posts.
jubilee| 9.11.10 @ 12:19PM
George washington,his stepson, and Abe Lincoln, had crappy kids as well...Sarah Palin just joins them (notice the 'n' and the birthmonth) Lincoln and Palin also have spouses named "Todd"
jubilee| 9.11.10 @ 12:21PM
along with Abraham and Sarah--Abe was Feb 12 and I think Sarah was Feb 11--dates not years-
jubilee| 9.11.10 @ 12:26PM
Thomas Jefferson and John Adams also died on the Fourth of July in 1825---lots of eerie stuff here, also 2008 was 49 years after 1959 when we became 50 states. Obama i think was born in the 50th state he got elected 50 yrs later, after we BECAME 50 states----50 is the'Year of Jubilee'--I didn't vote for him though, I believe we have a 'choice' on who we elect but GOD puts leaders in for reasons. (i don't like what his policies are when it comes to country though, he doesnt have military or business experience
jubilee| 9.11.10 @ 12:28PM
OOPS i put in 'after we became 50 states'twice,my mistake--I think Obama has reasons for not showing his birth certificate
Redstateboy| 8.23.10 @ 9:36AM
Ann Coulter has the cajones
Alert1201| 8.23.10 @ 10:15AM
Yes, she certainly does. But she is not a major political figure. When a DeMent, McCane or McConnel says it I'll retract.
Timothy L. Pennell| 8.23.10 @ 7:37AM
When 83% of all of your children are born out of wedlock, to single Mothers, this is what you're gonna get. Anyone who says that "it doesn't matter if there's a Father in the house or not", doesn't have any boys.
BOYS don't listen to GIRLS. It's in our DNA. We're no afraid of our Mommies. We're afraid of our FATHERS. The Male is the Disciplinarian. The Male is STRENGTH. The best thing any kid can have, is the FEAR of hearing his Mother say: "You just wait til your FATHER gets home.
Boys need a role model. Boys need someone to be a GUIDE POST. The love between FATHER and SON is completely different than the love between a Boy and his MOM. I don't have girls, but I'm willing to bet that it works out the same way with Girls and their Dads. It's different.
LIBERALISM is a DISEASE. LIBERALISM is a CANCER. There is only ONE REASON that the Black Community languishes in despair. LIBERALISM.
Long ago the Black Male was BANISHED from the Black Home by the local Liberal Social Worker. Long ago Liberalism began REWARDING Out Of Wedlock Births, with MORE MONEY. More DEPENDENCE. More SLAVERY to their Liberal Masters.
Sometimes I wonder if all those years of being SLAVES, and having their basic needs provided FOR THEM by the WHITE MAN, have been ingrained in to their DNA. That, somewhere deep inside, they MISS the servitude. They NEED that security that the MASSA provided. Nothing else makes sense.
Why would any group of people give their undying devotion, at the ballot box, to a Group Of People who, not only haven't done a G*DD*MN THING FOR THEM in the last 60 years, but are RESPONSIBLE for their situation to begin with?
You people (That's right. I said YOU PEOPLE.) are you're own worst enemy. I guess STUPID really is, as STUPID does.
WRTolkas| 8.23.10 @ 8:34AM
Dear Mr. Pennell,
Wow! You have made comments about the DNA that would be a wonderful master's degree (no pun intended) research paper or PhD. dissertation if the applicant had enough courage.
I've known people who were (and still are) dumb as rocks. What they shared in common was generations of isolation and poverty. These are good people, but dumb as rocks.
And concerning "Judge" Walker, I think what he did was self serving. A greater man would have recused himself from the case. And for a judge to state as facts elements of sociology what sociologists don't understand is lunacy.
Regards,
WRTolkas
wodiej| 8.23.10 @ 9:01AM
I agree and have to wonder if their DNA is faulty and perhaps even a low intelligence quotient are factors.
Good fathers are indeed a very key part in a child's life, girls and boys.
PJ| 8.23.10 @ 10:40AM
This has nothing to do w/IQ or DNA. It's all environmental.
A few good examples of fine black men: Colin Powell, Thomas Sowell, Allen West, Julius Erving, many fine black pastors, JC Watts, George Washington Carver, Daniel Hale Williams.....The list goes on & on.
Ned| 8.23.10 @ 11:31AM
PJ is correct - this has nothing to do with IQ or DNA, it's totally the fault of the toxic environment created by liberal social policy, centered on victimology - "no failure is your fault, it's all racism, so don't even bother trying... so we generous liberals will take care of you damaged children..."
100 years ago some of the finest, most rigorous schools in the country were black-only (obviously not in the south) - today the liberal undermining of our national culture is so complete that few people are even aware of that. There's nothing wrong with the IQ or DNA of the individuals we're discussing, and their racial make-up is incidental to what's been done to them by liberal society. The Powells and Sowells and Condi Rices exemplify what is being wasted when we allow the "don't act white" aberration to replace self-reliance and hard work as the ethic being taught.
Believer| 8.23.10 @ 2:17PM
PJ- I agree it has nothing to do with I.Q. or DNA as I have had a few friends in the past from Africa here to go to school, they were to the Man or woman very bright. and when they finished school all went to work at great jobs.
sandyinohio| 8.23.10 @ 12:30PM
Mr. Pennell,
It was the white slave traders & white slave masters who tore apart the black families, banishing males apart from females. They were the ones who started breaking apart the black family unit.
Thom Burke| 8.23.10 @ 12:54PM
And what, after 145 years they still haven't recovered? LBJ's War on Poverty was the killing blow to the black nuclear family. Back on point, male black students don't fail as much as they don't try. Excelling in academics is considered "acting white" and that, unforunately, is a cardinal sin in their community.
joli| 8.23.10 @ 12:54PM
No, sorry, it was the black slave traders in Africa who sold their enemies into slavery, who tore apart the black families. It was perpetuated by certain white slave owners, though not by all. Nevertheless, is it still someone else's fault that blacks haven't figured out how to mend their families more than 140 years after slavery was abolished?
It is nonsense to think that the current legacy of broken black families started with slavery. Much more accurate to say it started with affirmative action, when democrats started trying to "help" them.
mark| 8.23.10 @ 4:03PM
To paraphrase C. Sykes, to declare victim status is to be innocent of misdeeds and entitled to special privileges. An entire industry now exists to preserve victimhood among those of the politically correct hue. Jessie Jackson and his ilk have done more to enslave blacks in poverty and degradation of the human spirit than all slaveowners combined.
scotchieguy| 8.23.10 @ 7:36PM
Well said, sir. To add to that, consider who sold the slaves. It was Africans selling fellow Africans into the slave trade. Why can't the left see this? Why can't they see the progress the Irish and Italians and Asians and Hispanics have had in this country? Even more importantly, other than Bill Cosby, where the hell are the leaders--the real leaders--in the black community?? This is the strangest part of the dilemma. Where are those leaders?
Granny3| 8.23.10 @ 4:55PM
And don't forget the Muslims and black tribesmen who sold them in the first place.
A horrible business and it continues all over the world, but particularly in the Middle East.
Laine| 8.23.10 @ 9:11PM
Slavery did less damage to the black family unit than libs welfare policies did. It's easy enough to prove. The majority of black children were born into intact families up to the 1960's. The income gap between black and white families was closing. So CLOSER in time to slavery, the black family was strong and competitive. Then LBJ decided he wanted a legacy and started the War on Poverty. Dems' continuing Welfare policies utterly destroyed the black family, exactly as Senator Patrick Moynihan predicted.
Libs who don't know this are ignoramuses or liars, take your pick.
Margie| 8.23.10 @ 9:37PM
Great posts here, Laine. Keep them coming!
jubilee| 9.11.10 @ 12:34PM
I was the ARABS that predates the whites in tearing down family structures, also the weaker tribes were the ones sold into slavery first---they had slaves from other tribes..the whites took advantage on what was already there. There were many black intact families before radical liberalism as well. Jim crow and 'reconstruction' werent enough to do this...this mess started in the early 70s or a little before.
jubilee| 9.11.10 @ 12:35PM
OOPS the 't' was stuck on keyboard (It was)
Believer| 8.23.10 @ 2:11PM
Timothy Pennell- Great comment.
Tom| 8.23.10 @ 7:38AM
I do not see the tie in between Walker's weak and incorrect decision and this report. Walker was not talking about single parent families he was talking about children raised by two same sex parents. While I think pointing out the immense damage single parent families do to society it is a good thing claiming it has any bearing on Walker's decision is a little bit of a reach.
2Anglico| 8.23.10 @ 9:48AM
You cannot see because you do not want to see a tie. 2 mommies means NO daddy. I guarantee this, a 16 year old male can whip any or both females.
Tom| 8.23.10 @ 12:26PM
Oh, I see it. But the report does not. Nor does the article which rests upon the report.
So is two daddies better than a daddy and a mommy cause it is more likely that one partner can whip the child? Of course not. The ideal family structure is a mother and a father but by using research whose subject was single family parenthood to make the point same sex parents are less than ideal is weak.
jubilee| 9.11.10 @ 12:39PM
In the flesh, two women CAN 'raise' a child easier than two men, up to a point.. I think if this continues, legalized polygamy will result; not from our generation, but from the next one if we dont stop shattering our families (broken is a weak word for this) two women are IN A HAREM type situation but 2 men arent
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 8.23.10 @ 8:11AM
Many black males are convicted felons and can't vote. That's another benefit of the welfare state for it's victims.
Rebecca| 8.23.10 @ 8:10AM
I do think Walker grounded his ruling on his finding of fact that the gender of parents don't matter. And they do for conception anyway, who's he to say there isn't a further need for male and female genders.
There has been a war against boys (and men) that has been going on from several fronts for a few decades, and it isn't just black boys that are doing poorly, whites are following. Today's public schools are female friendly (starting with the sedating of little busy boys), and colleges are producing more women with degrees than men.
I'm getting sick of male bashing.
part of the oppressor class| 8.23.10 @ 11:16AM
finally...someone gets to the real drama being played out!
joli| 8.23.10 @ 1:02PM
I pulled my son out of first grade when the teacher suggested I check into having him diagnosed for ADD, and told me he would probably be a good candidate for vocational school (she knew this when he was 6?!) I have nothing against vocational school, but please don't start telling him what he can't do! He is starting 2nd grade now, keeping up with a charter classroom full of busy boys!
drudge ette obama| 8.23.10 @ 8:15AM
Tom, it is not a direct connection, it is multi-stepped and not specifically stated because that would be too politically incorrect and damaging to the judge's argument.
The decline/disregard/dilution of traditional marriage (man & woman) must occur so to adopt the aberrant version of marriage that embraces same sex couples (the judge's goal). Begetting is the ultimate purpose of our existence, something that can't be done naturally between anything but man/woman.
Since the "best interest of the child" is supposed to be the highest consideration in coming to societal rules re children, single-moms must be lifted in the process to an acceptable option along with same sex marriage adoptions/families.
It can't be stated by the Judge that traditional marriage is best for the child; otherwise, same sex families will take a hit. In the same way, single-mother (mostly women) families can't be criticized; otherwise, the argument must be made that the male is missing and that accounts for the problem.
So, Walker's decision can't discuss the negatives of single-moms raising children without a father in the home; otherwise, he will step in it because that also makes the point that children are better served by traditional man/woman parents.
Of course, that point will bring out the points that "gays families are loving families" and movies will be made by progressive Hollywood that attempt to normalize same sex marriages.
And then others will say that single moms can do the job, too. And movies will be made to attempt to normalize those situations.
So, the best approach is to diminish and neutralize the importance of revering traditional marriage; otherwise, these alternative lifestyles (some of choice, some not) will hit the proverbial societal wall.
What gets in the way and makes a mess of single-mom families and same sex families is the stats that show the irreparable harm single moms and their progeny have suffered and caused society by their structure.
What same sex marriage will do is diminish and dilute traditional marriage to the point that society will increasingly abandon it as a life choice.
Civil unions and contract law take care of the majority of rights afforded same sex couples. Why not just leave it there - not because people are homophobic but because of the best interest of the child and society.
Tom| 8.23.10 @ 8:31AM
I do think the sex of parents matter; children are better off with a mother and a father. But the tie in with this report, which I read, is rather slim. Ms. Crouse's evidence is on the effects of single parent households on children the effects on same sex households is sure to be different in many way. While I have no statistics available I would wager that poverty in same sex households is much lower than in single parent households. What research I have read on the effects of same sex couples is nebulous to say the least. It hardly warrants re-ordering one of the bedrocks of our society on what seems to be little more than a whim and personal preference on Walker's part.
I am in agreement with what I see as Crouse's overall view, I just do not think this article was very well thoughout.
drudge ette obama| 8.23.10 @ 10:52AM
Fair enough, Tom.
part of the oppressor class| 8.23.10 @ 11:18AM
tom...what difference does it make? the whole issue....at bedrock...is about wealth/entitlements.
Tom| 8.23.10 @ 12:32PM
Of course weak arguments make a difference. When one presents his/her opinion in a way that is easily countered it weakens that opinion before anyone paying attention. The electoral history of the last 30 years is pretty good proof of this. When Republicans make good arguments for governing they win, when they do not they lose.
Just imagine someone who does not share the opinion that same sex parents are harmful to children listening to a debate on whether to allow same sex marriage. And the person not in favor of same sex marriage quotes a report that is about single parent families. How hard would it be for a well spoken and knowledgeable proponent of same sex marriage to demolish such an argument?
Conservate messaging needs to be powerful and empirical. Liberals have a near monopoly on emotion based arguments. Whenever the argument comes down to 'fairness' Conservatives lose. Even in such areas that are blatantly unfair, such as modern tax and entitlement policies.
Louis Jenkins| 8.23.10 @ 8:32AM
Another writer wastes her time outling the problems of our society. The communists (pardon the short had Ken) of our society have outlined the needless social norm of having a father, particularly when it comes to having a two parent system for delivery of reading, writing, and guidance. With one of the parents absent time becomes crucial, and perhaps that is why the male child does without. Black society is very much matriacal and yet the females make it through the grind of high school. The NEA jumps into the void and throws money at the problem, and the taxpayers are left holding the bag. (I'm from the government and here to help you.)Definitely what is being done is not working, but then what have the leftists done that ever works.
Petronius| 8.23.10 @ 9:00AM
Nothing will change until Liberals are kicked out of power and we go back to the old methods of schooling at primary level. The children who refuse to learn must be forced. And race has nothing to do with this beyond the predisposition of inner city blacks to believe that learning anything which does not gratify them is "white", and schools are places where whitey subjugates them. For Walker to add this to the mix is fatuous as well as perverse. Nobody is going to repeal Normality.
JimH| 8.23.10 @ 9:18AM
Black literacy and income was steadily rising up until the introduction of the Great Society and the War on Poverty. These programs weakened the role of the father in the family. The father’s role had up until this time been becoming stronger and was overcoming the weakening heritage of a matriarchal society inherited from Africa and reinforced by slavery. This and a street culture which equated getting an education with acting white are the major causes within black society for the lack of academic success. This was particularly sad in light of how slaves and recently freed slaves risked their lives in order to obtain an education. Bad public schools and lowered expectations of teachers are also contributing factors.
Ned| 8.23.10 @ 11:35AM
exactly Jim - succinct and spot on...
Don L| 8.23.10 @ 9:21AM
It's really quite simple to answer. It is because their political masters of the left will not tolerate them being allowed independence, certainly not through learning (vouchers anyone) other than the usual subjegation to the propaganda that has as its goal bringing about an imbedded hatred of America, and hatred of responsiblility - middle class values -known in the hood as "acting like whitey."
There is no greater window to the evil soul of liberalism than wwatching what it has done to the black community where they've had complete control of the management of most inner cities. Unfortunately, the black community doesn't seem to object or seek to alter the course that is so patently destructive to itself, voting always for those who would keep them down by blaming Whitey and tossing them a few dollars at election time. These are the same people who openly support the plague of abortion aimed in no small part at that same community. I for one, after years of fighting for their causes, no longer can find any sympathy for their conditions in life -just pity.
Pat| 8.23.10 @ 4:45PM
Don L. – You and JimH are correct but this “black community” concept is a chimera, there is no more a black community than there is a “white community”. When you look at a ghetto sub-culture as exists in our great cities such as Chicago, Washington D. C. or Detroit, you are seeing a toxic culture that both creates the problem and is the inevitable outcome of the problem. It doesn’t take a village to raise a child, it takes parents; mature adults teaching values, enforcing discipline. Villages may be needed to time the traffic lights, but it’s only concerned, educated parents who raise responsible citizens.
What a toxic culture creates is an exodus of intelligent black children to other locations with better opportunities leaving behind a self-perpetuating, helpless society as fertile ground for “entitlement’ politicians and race hustlers.
For example, Detroit has a high school graduation rate hovering around 25%, the most incompetent schools in the country based on test scores and an unemployment rate of 34%. For years, the Detroit Public Schools’ administration has hired and fired a series of School Superintendents who epitomize the meaning of systemic failure, a voting public that is indifferent to the problem and a string of corruption scandals related to tax money earmarked for the schools. The State of Michigan steps in from time to time but Lansing’s Democrats want no role in the hopeless task of cleaning up Detroit’s schools. The current mayor of Detroit, a replacement for the previously elected mayor now serving time in prison for corruption, wants to be placed in charge of the school system and, if successful, the merry-go-round of failure will continue under the farce of “local control”.
Having the Feds take complete control of Detroit’s school system is an option never mentioned in public debate, in the local media or in private conversations. Content to turn out generation after generation of high school dropouts with 5th grade educations, the local Democrats want no outside interference in their endless schemes to “reform” the schools, but will also accept no responsibility for the system’s failure to educate Detroit’s children.
Clinton nee Publius| 8.23.10 @ 9:23AM
My God, what a price Black America has paid for its indentured servitude. 47% graduating on time? Doesn't this sound like Uncle Tom's Cabin? I wonder what the literacy rate is today for Black Americans compared to what it was in the 19th century.
Here's the kicker: they don't even have to chain these people up this time - they become slaves of their own volition.
There are no victims in this world and there are no villains. There's only volunteers.
Redstateboy| 8.23.10 @ 11:35AM
I often recall that the Democrat Party is the Party of Slaves and Slavery - it was and Still is and they should be ashamed of themselves. The Dirty little secret to the decline of America can be argued to have taken place under the Presidencies of 2 Democrat Presidents: FDR & LBJ and like Jeremiah Wright said.... "America's Chickens....? Have come home to........ Roost.
Jesus| 8.23.10 @ 12:37PM
There is a world of difference between indentured servitudes which typically had a fixed time frame and was freely entered into by both parties and chattel slavery.
And regarding your literacy question here:
http://nces.ed.gov/naal/lit_history.asp
Steve A| 8.23.10 @ 9:40AM
I'm not sure as to why, but I am just positive that this is somehow George Bush's fault. I wish Purpleguy or vtwin were here to tell me how....
Dustoff| 8.23.10 @ 9:55AM
Well this doesn't help either. In today news. LA (calif) just spent $578 million dollars for "one" school.
Yet the grad rate in LA is low.
More wasted lives and money!
Fools I say!
Pete| 8.23.10 @ 10:28AM
The waste from a bloated federal government is staggering. I cringe every time I hear an inane "public service" ad on the radio (sports radio mostly) that amounts to "don't play in traffic." Seriously, how much money do they agencies have that they can put out ads like this? Has any criminal ever refrained from crime because he heard "responsibility, pass it on" on the radio?
Sandra| 8.23.10 @ 10:00AM
Can I see the figures of the number of Negro young men that HAVE their father married to their mother and did they graduate from high school, or did they entered into a criminal career track?
The Black men I know (granted a small sampling of my friends and acquaintances) from my time in the military, most came from 'intact" families, and a couple came from families where the father was present, but died young (not surprisingly, many of those were deaths from military service).
In our little subdivision near Ft. Meade (mostly retired military, with some civil service and contractors, some law enforcement, medical and teaching professionals) The black families are intact, and all the "boys" I have watched grow up, not only graduated high school, but are attending and graduating college as well.
Just my personal observation from my little house on the street where I live.
Poor and illegitimate white males have the SAME graduation rates as their black peers, but that's not news.
Tom| 8.23.10 @ 12:47PM
Sandra,
Absence of two parents is probably the biggest correlate to crime. While this is old it is still pretty accurate.
"The relationship [between single-parent families and crime] is so strong that controlling for family configuration erases the relationship between race and crime and between low income and crime. This conclusion shows up time and again in the literature. The nation's mayors, as well as police officers, social workers, probation officers, and court officials, consistently point to family break up as the most important source of rising rates of crime." - Barbara Dafoe Whitehead
scotchieguy| 8.23.10 @ 10:01AM
All one has to do to avoid living in poverty in America is 1), graduate from high school, and, 2) don't have kids out of wedlock. It is really that simple. The problem of course is compounded by the fact that the libs couldn't have done a more perfect job at utterly destroying the black family by way of their inter-city policies begun in the 60's.--create a permanent class of dependency on the gov't by giving them just enough to subsist on--food stamps, AFDC, etc., and then indoctrinate them by telling them they can't get ahead because Whitey has always had his foot on their throat.
Paul from SA| 8.23.10 @ 10:52AM
Lord of the Flies.
I believe that most boys without fathers turn into bad adults. I was lucky to have a father. If he didn't keep me in line, I would have turned into a major criminal.
Timothy L. Pennell| 8.23.10 @ 10:58AM
When 83% of all of your children are born out of wedlock, to single Mothers, this is what you're gonna get. Anyone who says that "it doesn't matter if there's a Father in the house or not", doesn't have any boys.
BOYS don't listen to GIRLS. It's in our DNA. We're no afraid of our Mommies. We're afraid of our FATHERS. The Male is the Disciplinarian. The Male is STRENGTH. The best thing any kid can have, is the FEAR of hearing his Mother say: "You just wait til your FATHER gets home.
Boys need a role model. Boys need someone to be a GUIDE POST. The love between FATHER and SON is completely different than the love between a Boy and his MOM. I don't have girls, but I'm willing to bet that it works out the same way with Girls and their Dads. It's different.
LIBERALISM is a DISEASE. LIBERALISM is a CANCER. There is only ONE REASON that the Black Community languishes in despair. LIBERALISM.
Long ago the Black Male was BANISHED from the Black Home by the local Liberal Social Worker. Long ago Liberalism began REWARDING Out Of Wedlock Births, with MORE MONEY. More DEPENDENCE. More SLAVERY to their Liberal Masters.
Sometimes I wonder if all those years of being SLAVES, and having their basic needs provided FOR THEM by the WHITE MAN, have been ingrained in to their DNA. That, somewhere deep inside, they MISS the servitude. They NEED that security that the MASSA provided. Nothing else makes sense.
Why would any group of people give their undying devotion, at the ballot box, to a Group Of People who, not only haven't done a G*DD*MN THING FOR THEM in the last 60 years, but are RESPONSIBLE for their situation to begin with?
You people (That's right. I said YOU PEOPLE.) are you're own worst enemy. I guess STUPID really is, as STUPID does.
Brian Mc| 8.24.10 @ 6:15AM
I was raised in the sixties/seventies. My father walked out on seven children leaving my mother to carry the family. We had welfare yes, and it seems funny to me that she never had, "Wait until your father gets home" to fall back on.
How did she do it? We had a fear of the Ten Commandments/God's wrath instilled in us...twelve years of Catholic education will do that for you. All Mom had to do was contact the school and voice a concern and the world would fall on our respective heads. This is how we were kept in line and not a single one of us committed crime that led to prison...funny, again. Want to straighten out a kid? Put him in a school system that relies on God...the final executor of justice.
Paul| 8.24.10 @ 10:25PM
The great society that lbj gave us was that of the overseers. In nineteen sixty-five, the baby-boomers were barely eighteen. On came the legislation booting fathers out of the home and big brother instead. are you married? sanctioned from the state? No? push it aside, here is your reward. We didn't do the marriage thing to begin with because we didn't trust you.
part of the oppresor class| 8.23.10 @ 11:20AM
not to pick a fight....but what are the stats on white families...especially mid to upper income...that suffer exhorbitantly high divorce rates?
Tom| 8.23.10 @ 12:56PM
I have a few comments. Kids from split homes are probably better off than kids who never knew their fathers. Especially when the father keeps in contact and part of the child's life. I think that this is probably more common in divorce situations than in out of wedlock births but honestly I have never read any hard numbers on that.
Divorce rates tend to go down the higher the income level. There are probably lots of reasons for this. People with high incomes tend to have less monetary problems which is a big source of marital strife. They also tend to be older and it is pretty well known that there is a negative correlation between age of a person's first marriage and divorce rate.
james wilson| 8.23.10 @ 11:47AM
Visiting LA yesterday, I took my daughter to Griffith Observatory--near the spot where the large block letters high on the mountain famously spell out HOLLYWOOD.
The observatory is a gift from a wealthy industrialist to the people of LA. It was jammed, with people of every type other than black Americans. I did not see a single one.
There are hosts there dying to speak to visitors about science and life. Please let us fire the public schools and let people who care about children take the care of them.
George S| 8.23.10 @ 12:02PM
The point is not about comparing marriage to poverty -- it is about the twisted logic of liberals. What judge Walker did when he stated "facts" in pursuit of his ruling follows a history of judicial activism along the same lines. That is, he applied fact to support his premise that marriage is a right and therefore put the brakes to the democratic process.
Liberal have two views on public policy: activities they approve and those that they disapprove. When they disapprove of an activity, they do what the judge in New York did when Mayor Bloomberg was sued to stop his anti-smoking ban in bars and restaurants -- the judge asked plaintiff where in the Constitution is there a right to smoke?
But when they approve of an activity or action by government, they do not look to the Constitution at all. Instead, they rely upon the checks and balances of the Constitution to thwart the democratic process. The only constitutional permissible way to to negate democratic action is if individual rights will be violated. Therefore, the liberal first seeks to determine which rights are violated so they can apply the affording equal protection or privileges and immunities. If they see none, they create one out of thin air. That's why we have a right to "privacy", to stop abortion legislation. That's why there is a "right" to marriage and a soon to be "right" to health care. All established to deflect any future majority public policy votes.
So what Walker did was establish a right to marry. And he did so by introducing facts and dismissed any arguments against those facts with a wave of his hand. The same dismissive attitude that global warmers take towards those who demand to analyze the evidence (debate over, shut up). Yet, when we present to their courts evidence in the same wrapping and packaging that the gay marriage facts were shipped in, it matters not a bit how irrefutable that evidence is -- because they'll cite contradictory anecdotes or evidence. But those contradiction are not needed to apply to their rulings -- they are facts. The judge says so.
Tom| 8.23.10 @ 1:01PM
George,
You make some good points. However, the author claims Walker's points are incorrect and the only hard evidence she presents is about single parent families. Do you not think it would have been helpful for her to list some research countering Walker's arguments? It is out there and not hard to find. The article as structured feels nebulous to me; it ties in something most people are aware of - the damage single parent families do to their children - with a situation that is similar but most people are much less aware of. The statistics on the effects of single parent families has been widely quoted by all sorts of people and is generally known, it is not so with the effects of same sex families.
George S| 8.23.10 @ 2:36PM
Tom,
Judge Walker's points is the whole point of what is wrong with our courts. Regardless of the merits, regardless of the accuracy, regardless of the studies or data supporting those points... does a Federal judge have the power to adjudicate based on those arguments? The short answer is no. What Walker was doing is engaging in public policy arguments and not points of law. This, in effect, gave him a super veto over the legislature and the people. If a judge uses the Constitution to interpret the law, the people's representatives cannot override without legislative action. But if the judge steps in and engages legislative debate, then the only thing he's allowed to do is cast his vote at the ballot box, like the rest of his fellow citizens do. Judge Walker, in effect, went to the ballot box and voted numerous times his own preferences, negating the votes of his fellow citizens.
Tom| 8.23.10 @ 3:03PM
George,
Yes, Walker is a great example of judicial overreach. And that would be a great argument. However, this seems to have little to do with the problem of black educational failure due to the lack of intact two parent families. Any blame that can be placed on the government - there is plenty - would fall mainly on the legislative and executive branches for continuing policies that encouraged single parent headed families. I just fail to see the tie-in and think the author did a bad job disputing Walker's 'facts'.
Steve A| 8.23.10 @ 1:04PM
You know what the difference is?? At least Bristol will not be standing there with her hand out looking for stamps, WIC, SCHIP, Govmt Subsidized Housing, Unemployment bennies & then voting to back the party who perpetuates her ignorance & poverty. I have no problem with single moms getting knocked up all day long, just quit asking me to pay for it.
RCV| 8.23.10 @ 4:38PM
As a matter of fact she was living on the government payroll and getting government housing for her and her child.
Uncle B| 8.23.10 @ 2:47PM
Hormone infested foodstuffs in the U.S.A. are causing little girls to mature sexually at 7 years of age, same for little boys! Now, Throw the black graduation dilemma into that mess and you have a real conundrum. the American Empire, based on the White farm boys of the 30's, 40's, 50's, 60's, is no more! There is no strong underpinning for America! The farms are all huge mechanized industrial complexes now! The Empire is dead! The blacks do as the blacks did all the way back to Africa and before that, even! They do it in the same proportions and for the same reasons as they always have, always will! They lack the cultural green screen of a certain breed of white Christian American - and are more visible now than ever before - no different, just more visible! Watch some of the oldest cartoons now banned and you will discover that nothing has changed in the black community, nor should it! The White Christians are in decline, almost non-existent in some parts! They are gone so no Green Screen back-drop, no muscle cars no Sunday church events, no watering down of the black component so it sticks out like a sore thumb!
Louis Jenkins| 8.23.10 @ 2:48PM
The American Communist Party published the following back in the 50's:
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
And why not? It furthers their purpose.
RCV| 8.23.10 @ 7:08PM
I see this repeated over and over in right-wing blogs. I must say, it doesn't exactly have the righ of authenticity to it, and reads like a clumsy made-up list of someone's idea of communist goals. Any original source citation? Can't find one on the web.
Margie| 8.23.10 @ 7:43PM
In starting to look for a link, I found this. Here's a history of Communism in the U.S.
My husband tells me he's seen the above list also, and that it does exist. Whether or not you find a link to it doesn't matter. It is still completely true that Communism operates this way, and always will. It has become the Democrat party.
RCV| 8.23.10 @ 11:13PM
These are all secondary souce links that just repeat what other rightwing commentators say. And you, my dear, with all due respect are not exactly an authoritative source on what democrats think. Just sayin.
Margie| 8.23.10 @ 7:44PM
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.....munist.htm
Margie| 8.23.10 @ 8:05PM
Some more interesting facts and info. Learn how the doctrine of Communism/Socialism lines up with the democrat party of today.
http://history.howstuffworks.c...../printable
David | 8.23.10 @ 3:36PM
SandyinOhio, it was not slavery that tore apart black families. In the 1950's blacks had very strong family units, equal to those of whites. They also had more Ph.D.'s than today. They were also out of poverty at a faster rate than today. Try educating yourself. Read some of Thomas Sowell's books.
The problem was the welfare policies that begin in the 60's and that continue to this day. Feminists have been telling all of us for almost 50 years that a man is not necessary in the life of a family, and government welfare and other policies and programs have made that appear to be a viable option for many - and destructive as it is, many have chosen that route. That is the problem with the black family today.
Paul Hubert| 8.23.10 @ 5:12PM
Not too long ago, a 'progressive', divorced, 'single-parent' woman set out to "prove" that children OF single parent households were no more disadvantaged than any other children.
She proved the opposite.
She proved it statistically across EVERY demographic.
The MOST important SINGLE factor in EVERY child's life turned out to be the FATHER.
Now, if anyone can tell me the TITLE of that book, I'll go out and buy a copy!!
I'd like to see it referenced here!
Michele San Pietro| 8.23.10 @ 5:34PM
Why? Certainly not because of a "racism". Personally, I'm only interested in knowing whether a person studies or not, I couldn't care less for whether they are white, black, green, or spotted.
Tim*| 8.23.10 @ 6:24PM
Time for blacks to leave The Liberal Democrat Plantation .
RCV| 8.23.10 @ 7:03PM
I'm sure they're waiting for your advice, Tim.
Truth to Power| 8.23.10 @ 11:29PM
Good advice. When you get to hang around with women like RCV though it is hard to leave. Maybe after RCV moves on.
big poppa| 8.23.10 @ 8:21PM
its genetics
Rebecca| 8.23.10 @ 9:01PM
Can't get past the headline. You don't "graduate high school." You graduate FROM high school.
Laine| 8.23.10 @ 9:28PM
Dems are the pushers of entitlement programs, as bad as any street drug in addictive properties and making the user completely dependent on the pusher. Even educated well to do blacks who don't need handouts buy a product from the Dem pushers- lack of accountability for the failure of the black community as a whole. They get to blame ancient slavery and whitey for all black pathology instead of admitting that they come from a community that shirks personal responsibility. When those Dems come around with their food stamps and blame whitey cards...few can resist. Only 5% of blacks are strong and independent enough to reject the Dem poison and vote Republican.
Melissa| 8.23.10 @ 10:57PM
Thanks, Ms. Crouse. Excellent article!
a. mcewen | 8.24.10 @ 7:23AM
Ms. Crouse tries to connect the state of black males to gay marriage, but WHERE IS THE CORREALATION?
Richard Baker| 8.24.10 @ 7:34AM
Regardless, black kids don't, for the most part, come to school for the education. Their parents, I use that term loosely, use the schools as giant daycare centers. When I had a black student who worked hard and concentrated, the others would razz that student as "acting white" and not being "black." It was as if Dr. King and Medgar Evers died for nothing. These kids come from a world that sees education and personal improvement as anathema.
Brian| 8.24.10 @ 12:44PM
How is it that gay people marrying is in anyway connected to black males and single family homes? Gay marriage strengthens marriage, not diminishes it.
Tracy| 8.24.10 @ 2:00PM
My question is are any of you actually black? I feel that if you were you'd be able to understand exactly how horrific this article is. I am a black male. I graduated high school. Graduated college and will graduate college for the second time in May of 2011. I also happen to be gay. There are many things in the black community that contribute to the "deteriorating" family and there are numerous causes of educational failure. Of those issues, sexuality is not one. What Ms. Crouse does not mention is the negativity that exists in parts of the black community regarding education. For example, I have family members that call me a 90210 kid or say that I speak like a "white boy" because I use correct grammar. Rather than support me in my collegiate endeavors, I was ridiculed and made to feel ashamed. Things such as the above are reasons why men of color are resistant to education. Black men are, similar to Mr. Baker's point, forced to attempt choosing whom they would like to be. If you work hard to receive an education and speak properly then you are not black enough. You aren't cool. You aren't accepted by "your own". However, you will never be white and assimilating into "white" culture will always be a shock. I have personally been called an "oreo" black on the outside and white one the inside by so called friends.
All this to say, your religious views are your own. Definitely worthy of respect. Your religious views are not yours to force onto the masses and turn this great nation into a theocracy. Nor do your views give you the license to contrive arguments against an individuals way of life based on falsehoods and idiocies impertinent to the true issue at hand.
Gabriel | 8.31.10 @ 5:12PM
Your point is well taken however you forget to mention when all this "your being white attitude" took place oh yea thats right when single mothers became the norm in the black community. Black gay men like you traditionally have no place in ANY black community world wide. It has never been "our thing" now that we have listened to white liberals that has changed. You are a product of the of the problem. Being gay almost did not exist & you can not make the claim that homosexual lifestyle are not being promoted. For it to take place the break down of the family had to occur. Despite your attempts to make this judge look like he is not a huge threat to society as a whole you throw your own under the bus. Black gay men are afraid to be so they take the womans position & actually argue the points made by our enemies & enemies to civilization & the order of the universe. Gays can not reproduce there is a reason for that. They are not intended to nature wants then out that is why it has not tried to duplicate them. Cluck & chick all you want when over half of gay men will get HIV in thier lifetimes your lifestyle is crazy period.
Dave| 8.24.10 @ 3:00PM
Other than a laughable per pupil spending statistic on DC's education budget (Coulson's number includes such irrelevant things as retirement funds and higher education budgets, but still only uses current K-12 student enrollment in the denominator), the author makes a cogent point about the many educational benefits of two parent households.
Two parents have more time to read to their children. Two parents are more likely to have two incomes, or if only one works outside of the home they will likely have less childcare expenses, so they are less likely to live in poverty. This anti-poverty effect is at its greatest when the two parents don't suffer discrimination that prevents them from getting married, getting health insurance as a family, revieving pension or disability benefits, or paying extra income taxes because they don't have the housing or tax filing options that other couples married couples have.
Not a single one of the Crouse's arguments or statistics about the benefits of having a second parents in the household make the case for preventing committing couples of any sexual orientation from getting married. But they make a powerful argument that any comnmitted couple should be allowed to get married.
Syd Chaden| 8.25.10 @ 12:29AM
One of the greatest contributors to the fatherless black home was the welfare program in the 40's and 50's. Homes in which there was a male adult didn't qualify for welfare. So, the males left, for the most part, although they stopped by for dinner and dessert every now and then. This was just another case of the do-gooders screwing up society.
Margaret| 8.25.10 @ 7:13PM
It was intentional - the big change came in the 60's when blacks were achieving with men at home. The rules changed in a Dem Congress - no more help for those who had men at home. A Progressive attack on poor families, especially black families.
NancyP| 8.25.10 @ 7:37PM
It makes no sense to compare the life chances of a child of a high school dropout mother who makes minimum wages as a nurse's aide or night janitor and lives in a school district where over half of children do not graduate from high school, to the life chances of a child of two college graduate same-gender parents whose collective income is at or above the national median and who live in a school district where 95% of children graduate from high school.
The biggest predictors of school success are parental education level and family income. Other predictors of school success include access to environments where academic success clearly leads to good jobs and to a degree of respect.
If you really care about the low-income black students of either gender, try promoting mixed-income housing requirements, good public transit systems, and other strategies to ensure residential racial and economic desegregation. Invest in public libraries, science museums, and other extra-curricular learning sites, and keep museum admissions free for K-12 students.
Brian| 8.25.10 @ 11:54PM
The two most important things to black males above all else are ejaculation and drugs.
Lisa| 8.26.10 @ 10:24AM
"What is the evidence for the bald statement that same sex couples who adopt or use in vitro or surrogates "are less likely to result in permanent family structures than heterosexual marriages"?"
There isn't any.
Oh, and Brian, thankfully they also enjoy murdering. I hope they can find you.
GreenmanTN| 8.26.10 @ 10:51AM
The reason young black males don't graduate is because of... gay people?! This little bit of non-logic is what we in academic circles like to call "making $#it up." I don't care what you think of gay people or gay rights, at some point you have to recognize (after making such a ridiculous assertion as this would be a good time) that your obsession with the topic is causing you to become unhinged. In fact, such specious arguments only prove Judge Walker's ruling that personal animus is the entire reasoning behind ballot initiatives like Prop 8, not actual reason or logic.
Average Joe| 8.26.10 @ 11:28PM
Homophobic and racist. You all bring shame to God. Love one another, it is so simple.
Ron| 8.27.10 @ 6:32AM
Jeff, the truth is totally blocked off from people who scoff at God. It is totally impossible for two males, or two females to have a child. It is therefore not "natural", that is, in accordance with nature. Homosexuality/lesbianism is denounced in the Holy Bible, and described as an ABOMINATION because it itsn't that you were "created that way" it is because you CHOOSE to follow that behavior.
The Bible staates that man is created in the "image" of God. Would you suggest that God is "gay"?
To say that God made man with homosexual "gene programming" is to do what you accuse others of. No proof whatsoever.
Man has the responsibility to follow the rules put forth by God. We are bound by the principals and laws of the scriptures, however we can refuse to obey, and in that case, we are bound to its' consequences.
Jeff| 8.28.10 @ 5:01AM
No Ron, the truth is totally blocked off from those that try to act like they are God. How can you make such a statement about it being impossible for two men or two women to have children? Is it impossible for a man and woman who either one are sterile or in some way can’t physically produce children? They can have children the same way two men or two women can. Please don’t be so ignorant as to make such a shallow statement.
Do we need to look at all the subjects that are “denounced” by God in the bible? I’m sure we can find many that have been overlooked. Or rather, they have been INTERPRETED in the way to best fit whatever religion or believer deems it to say. The bible says not to wear clothes of more than one fabric. Or trim your sideburns, ever. And all adulterers must die along with anyone who curses their parents. It also says that parents can stone their children for misbehaving. Should we follow all of these rules that the bible says as well? The bible cannot be interpreted verbatim nor should any one person be allowed to translate it into what THEY think it means.
Man is created in the “image” of God. Does that mean God is a man? A woman? Black? White? Handicapped? Has a physical or mental impairment? Living in poverty? Has cancer? Is he all of these things? Or maybe none of these things? The point is Ron, there are many things that we don’t choose in life but still make up what a human being is. And one of those things is being gay. God doesn’t have to be any of them in order for us to be one of his own.
If you need proof that gay men and women didn’t choose to be homosexual, ask any one of the millions of gay people out there if they would choose a life that would succumb them to the hatefulness and bigotry from people like yourself. Ask them if they would choose a life where they could be beaten or murdered or raped or shunned from their own family members because they “chose” a gay lifestyle. Before you make such asinine, white trash comment like that, do your research.
Open your eyes and recognize that we, as a nation, ARE NOT bound by God’s scriptures. We are required to follow the laws of the constitution and those put forth by our legislatures. There is a separation of church and state for a reason. No where does anyone have to follow scripture if they deem it doesn’t fall within their beliefs. And we are all entitled to belief whoever and whatever we choose. It doesn’t have to be the same as you. To think otherwise only makes you a hypocrite in God’s eyes and goes against everything that he stands for.
Dr. Stephen Jones | 8.27.10 @ 7:16AM
I think Judge Walker does not live in the community where p0verty exists. He needs to spend several days with single mothers who are struggling to survive. I appuad the sigle mothers efforts. All the data points to the fact that a two parent housholds increases the child's education attainment and the household income is better. To me gender still matters. A mother and a father is needed. Their team effort to raise me and trust in God made a huge difference in my education goals and accomplishments.
ari| 8.31.10 @ 10:29AM
oy. 2/3 of black people are conservative. They are usually more conservative than white conservatives.
Integration, neighborhood by neighborhood, with intermarriage, was happening with measurable rapidity from the end of the Civil War until President Wilson, a progressive academic. The progressive agenda is, and always has been, profoundly racist. Even after the spectacular resurgence of the KKK, under Wilson, black people were progressing economically. Wilson blocked black people from government employment. Prior to 1965, black women's wages were growing at a faster rate, and they were enterring the professions at a higher rate, than white women. They had the "social capital" of their mothers' work experience. White women enterred the work force with hesitancy, and cluelessness from about world war 2, onward. 1865 to 1945- that's 80 years more skill-building. White women, to advance into the professions- had helps from books like "things your mother didn't teach you." Black mothers could, and did teach their daughters.
There were extraordinary arguments about integrating schools that had material resources (integrated) pitted against moral resources (black, male schoolteachers) and also- dewey- ite education versus a classical southern education. Maya Angelou had a perfectly good classical education with shakespeare, in the backwoods of tinytown Arkansas, for example. It's hard to read the main integrationists from the early twentieth century, because their arguments were all classically based, filled with references to Roman jurisprudence. They were intimate with Solomon, and Cicero, and Othello.
Integration wasn't a progressive idea. It was a religious ideal, worked by pastors, and members of churches. I'm still trying to figure out how communists, atheists, and socialists jumped on that train, and claimed to be its engineer.
Renee Dakari| 5.18.11 @ 1:39PM
Reply to your article. I for one am tired of reading what White writers believe is the problem and solutions for Black people. It does not matter if a child is raised in one parent household or two. A single parent can raise a child boy or girl and can teach them to be successful. The school system is a broad spectrum of covert racism of teacher's. Whites want to continue to believe they have and are the answer to Black people's problem's because you all are in the dominate system. A Black parent can teach their child the proper way's to live on this earth. Tell them to get their education, respect other's you must work to get what you want. All of this teaching is for naught. White teacher's teach in these school's and class and come with their own inherent belief's of young Black boy's and Girl's. Don't blame the single parent issue. If your going to do research also include bias inherent thinking of school teacher's men and women.