In the 1950s, there was an effort to change the cultural consensus around the treatment of children who were born out of wedlock. It never stopped there. Today, the "single mother" is lauded as one of the grandest heroes of our society. There's something terribly wrong with that, because we will get more of the behavior that we applaud. That is what is happening, and children are collateral damage.
Sarah, great ideas and wonderful writing. Well done.
In the west we have lost the idea that a family, focused on the proper raising of children is the core of our culture. When we focus on that we advance, when we ignore it we decline.
In his book, The Ultimate Resource, Julian Simon points out that slower population growth reduces the number of geniuses and innovative new ideas. I think this post is making the same point, parents living their children has the capacity to increase innovative and useful new ideas. I think the reason the world seems to celebrate the privation of children is the reluctance to ask people to take responsibility for themselves.
Sarah, what a comprehensive article. We only have to look at our current culture/values to support your conclusion. We are steadily eroding what has proven to be true in the past. Alexander is our current "master" for his accomplishments. To perform that piece of music without any music is fabulous. Our current example of proven talent nurtured by his parents. I wish we had more people proclaiming the gift of "family". You did a great job with this "masterpiece"!!
If refraining from bedtime reading is bad for an individual child but good for society (so that they all may suffer equally), where does one stop?
Perhaps parents should think twice about preparing nutritious meals.
Clean clothes? Out of the question.
School attendance? Optional.
In their teens, restrictions on alcohol and drug use? Nope.
Personal responsibility, such as learning to show up on time for work or school? Get serious.
Yes, society will be better if all parents withhold anything that might help their children do better in school, work or life in general. Equity at its finest.
This is absolutely correct. The destruction of strong families is one of the most important goals of the left and has been for decades, although they rarely come right out and say it. Good families are the primary ground-level threats to the endless expansion of governmental powers which they believe will lead us to Utopia.
"Illegitimate" was always a legal term to denote that the child, being extra marital, would not inherit by the default operation of law. It was primarily a concern of aristocracies who would have to ensure their political marriages would carry succession rights. In itself it is not meant to be an offensive term. I can't say the same is true for "bastard."
Theory and practice sometime part ways, as I think world history shows that those aristocracies did produces a few bastard monarchs. Yet, I can't point to a good example right now. Good comment, though.
Sarah, great ideas and wonderful writing. Well done.
In the west we have lost the idea that a family, focused on the proper raising of children is the core of our culture. When we focus on that we advance, when we ignore it we decline.
In his book, The Ultimate Resource, Julian Simon points out that slower population growth reduces the number of geniuses and innovative new ideas. I think this post is making the same point, parents living their children has the capacity to increase innovative and useful new ideas. I think the reason the world seems to celebrate the privation of children is the reluctance to ask people to take responsibility for themselves.
Sarah, what a comprehensive article. We only have to look at our current culture/values to support your conclusion. We are steadily eroding what has proven to be true in the past. Alexander is our current "master" for his accomplishments. To perform that piece of music without any music is fabulous. Our current example of proven talent nurtured by his parents. I wish we had more people proclaiming the gift of "family". You did a great job with this "masterpiece"!!
If refraining from bedtime reading is bad for an individual child but good for society (so that they all may suffer equally), where does one stop?
Perhaps parents should think twice about preparing nutritious meals.
Clean clothes? Out of the question.
School attendance? Optional.
In their teens, restrictions on alcohol and drug use? Nope.
Personal responsibility, such as learning to show up on time for work or school? Get serious.
Yes, society will be better if all parents withhold anything that might help their children do better in school, work or life in general. Equity at its finest.
Churchill defined socialism as the equal sharing of misery.
This is absolutely correct. The destruction of strong families is one of the most important goals of the left and has been for decades, although they rarely come right out and say it. Good families are the primary ground-level threats to the endless expansion of governmental powers which they believe will lead us to Utopia.
Well done. I have shared with many of my younger families. They mostly homeschool thankfully.
"Illegitimate" was always a legal term to denote that the child, being extra marital, would not inherit by the default operation of law. It was primarily a concern of aristocracies who would have to ensure their political marriages would carry succession rights. In itself it is not meant to be an offensive term. I can't say the same is true for "bastard."
Theory and practice sometime part ways, as I think world history shows that those aristocracies did produces a few bastard monarchs. Yet, I can't point to a good example right now. Good comment, though.
Yes. And the term applied primarily to intestate inheritance. Exceptions and developments did indeed take place.
The deconstruction of the family is a major societal wound for (((their))) goal of total destruction for White western civilisation.
Gotta' love Rachmaninoff! Thanks for the essay and the fine performance video.