• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Children out of Wedlock

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
OCBuckWife;1467760; said:
I'm interested in why it is that you feel that out of wedlock must also mean single parent? It seems to me that is an erroneous assumption.

The article makes a point of saying
Yes, the other posts in this thread did tend toward the same statement but the article does not state that out of wedlock ipso facto means one parent. It's point is how many parents are deciding that marriage itself is less and less important and/or a popular a state of affairs, so to speak. :lol:
Click to expand...

so using those two numbers
37%-born to non married mothers
40% (is that 40% of that number?) (14.8% of kids born to unmmaried mothers who are in a "longterm relationship).

maybe if we are discussing tow parents you should shovel in some divorce information.

women married from 1985-1989 57% reached their 15th anniversary
average length of marriage that ends in divorce-8 years
3.5 years median time between divorce and second marriage
52% of men age 25 or older who have ever been divorced, 44% for women
http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/cb08ff-02.pdf

Misreporting on Divorce - Freakonomics Blog - NYTimes.com
First is a clear mistake: ?On average, 43 percent of first marriages end in separation or divorce within 15 years, a federal study shows.? I can only assume that she is citing Census Bureau data, showing that 56.9 percent of women married from 1985 to 1989 had reached their 15th anniversary, and from that, inferring that 43.1 percent had divorced or separated within 15 years of marriage.
Click to expand...
n this paper, we re-calculate the equivalent probabilities analyzing only those who had actually been married at least 15 years ago, and find that 33.4 percent of these first marriages ended before their 15th anniversary. Or for those who don?t like our attempted ?fix,? I would suggest referring instead to an earlier census analysis (where this problem didn?t occur), which found that 34.8 percent of first marriages ended before their 15th anniversary.
Click to expand...

similar studies with different numbers get different outcomes whether you include women only or both men/women and whether you include end in divorce or include death/other reasons. these do not include separated but married...
 
Upvote 0
bigballin2987;1467877; said:
And his sentence was shorted because he snitched. A two time convicted felon doesn't get caught with all those guns and get a year.
Click to expand...

He also started writing pussy songs about how it's wrong to do that shit. I used to like his music. Now, it's just a bunch of sissy shit.
 
Upvote 0
BUCKYLE said:
He also started writing pussy songs about how it's wrong to do that shit. I used to like his music. Now, it's just a bunch of sissy shit.
Click to expand...
the only two songs buckyls listens to....
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISmgOrhELXs]YouTube - one borboun one scotch one beer[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftiJRiONy4o&feature=related]YouTube - "I Drink Alone" by George Thorogood[/ame]
 
Upvote 0
jimotis4heisman;1467882; said:
the only two songs buckyls listens to....
YouTube - one borboun one scotch one beer
YouTube - "I Drink Alone" by George Thorogood
Click to expand...

That's ridiculous. You forgot my theme song. :lol: I carry a boom box around and play this when I walk into the bar.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ig9nw-tEBIY&feature=PlayList&p=0C292571E2858E2C&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=35]YouTube - "Bad to the Bone" by George Thorogood & The Destroyers[/ame]

I also listen to Journey.
 
Upvote 0
OCBuckWife;1467833; said:
Honestly, marriage is grounded in religious beliefs that I don't hold. It is also very much a legal issue as well, however, with very many rights allowed to wedded spouses that are not always accorded to unwedded couples. If a couple has a child, and lives as a couple, even if they are not married, I don't see the issue.
Click to expand...

Agreed 100%. Being married doesn't necessarily mean you're more responsible or are better parents.
 
Upvote 0
FeistyRedHeadAZ;1467533; said:
its OBVIOUS most of you do not think that the so called men who were part of the situation should bear no responsibility. :roll2:
Click to expand...

While some folks here are making rather unpleasant comments, I hope they are merely for the inflammatory response and are not truly held as their beliefs. I think you'll find most people here hold both parties equally as accountable, even if one side does end up bearing a good deal more of the responsibility.

I applaud your efforts in raising your son on your own. :bow:

Best Buckeye;1467548; said:
I agree with most of what you said. Now tell me why I should have to pay my money to someone else?
Click to expand...

So innocent children are fed and clothed?
 
Upvote 0
Best Buckeye;1467708; said:
Bullshit.
Click to expand...

Then move somewhere else. The elected officials of the country you choose to live in deem it important to society to see that a certain minimum standard of living is given to even less than optimally productive citizens. Those same elected officials saw fit to impose taxes to pay for that - and to pay for a wide array of programs and projects that do not depend on your individual approval.

For 8 years I have watched my tax dollars being used by those elected officials for things that I deemed as ass hattery and douche baggery. I had no choice but to vote for the other side. That's your choice now. And if you do not like the democratic process that produced the unpleasant reality of you paying taxes for some deadbeat mom's living expenses, then you have options: move the fuck away; vote for people who do not want to take your taxes and pay for some deadbeat mom's living expenses. That's it. Those two. Why you say democracy is bullshit when it says you have those choices I cannot say.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Gatorubet;1468267; said:
Then move somewhere else. The elected officials of the country you choose to live in deem it important to society to see that a certain minimum standard of living is given to even less than optimally productive citizens. Those same elected officials saw fit to impose taxes to pay for that - and to pay for a wide array of programs and projects that do not depend on your individual approval.

For 8 years I have watched my tax dollars being used by those elected officials for things that I deemed as ass hattery and douche baggery. I had no choice but to vote for the other side. That's your choice now. And if you do not like the democratic process that produced the unpleasant reality of you paying taxes for some deadbeat mom's living expenses, then you have options: move the [censored] away; vote for people who do not want to take your taxes and pay for some deadbeat mom's living expenses. That's it. Those two. Why you say democracy is bull[censored] when it says you have those choices I cannot say.
Click to expand...

Choice #2 doesn't really do much for you though does it. You can vote all you want for a liberatarian, but they won't get elected. So, your choice number 2 is still a choice, but it doesn't change your situation.

Democracy is fantastic, but it doesn't prevent the possibility of mass ignorance or weakness taking over. Supposedly that's why we created a republic instead of a true democracy.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top