“The 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s included the twentieth century’s highest teen birth rates (respectively 79.5, 91.0, and 69.7 per thousand)”
Good enough?
How about this?
Childbearing. The rate of teen childbearing in the United States has fallen steeply since the late 1950s, from an all time high of 96 births per 1,000 women aged 15-19 in 1957 to an all time low of 49 in 2000 (see chart below). http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/tgr/05/1/gr050107.html
Except for “pseudo” and “brain dead”, I humbly agree. She said what many of us were thinking far more eloquently than I could.
I guess this is where the disconnect is. When I hear someone talk about how messed up it is that we’re expected to be “politically correct” and not use words like “wetback” and “nigger” because of those dirty hippy liberals, I absolutely feel like that person is a raging racist. Granted, I don’t think any of those words have been outlawed, but I really don’t understand bitching about not being able to use them in polite company or to pollute the airwaves.
I’m gonna have to disagree with you here, kiddo. I’m about as socially Liberal as they come (though not particularly politically passionate) in that I’m pro-choice, pro-gun control, pro-gay marriage, etc. My parents, on the other hand, are staunchly Republican and very religious. I respect their view on abortion because I understand their side, even if I don’t agree with it.
Now, I do realize that there are outliers of both parties who think “the other side” can do no right and is clearly just batshit crazy, but I’d be willing to bet that the vast majority of us can respect some of the other side’s beliefs, even if we don’t share them.
Oddly enough, I cringed at the last line and seriously debated including it in my response. I did so because I wanted to show that I was quoting the whole post without actually taking up all of the space needed to quote the whole post. Some of the gems from her post, for me, included:
Because holy cow, that’s what it feels like the Right is demanding sometimes.
A longstanding cry of the Right has been that Liberals are trying to steal God from everything. I’m not saying that you fall into this bucket, but I promise you that I know MANY religious conservatives who feel this way. The separation of church and state is important to many of us on the Left because it’s a way to keep from ostracizing our citizens who worship differently than others… or who do not worship at all. Muslims, Buddhists and Athiests pay taxes too, why should they feel out of place or noticably unrepresented in a government building? Exactly, they shouldn’t. But since altering everything in government to cover EVERY belief system would be pretty overwhelming if not outright weird, let’s just keep our religions to ourselves for the sake of working together as a society.
On a completely unrelated note, you’re kind of mean. It’s the Pit, I know. But just sayin’.
Must have been that medical marijuana, which is destroying society BTW.
The biggest thing to me that SA fails to address is that something had to happen with healthcare in this country. Healthcare costs are rising at 3x the pace of inflation, and the US already had the highest healthcare costs in the industrialized world. Talk to any HR director, person thinking about starting a business, or even thinking about switching jobs, and they’re going to tell you that healthcare is their number one concern. Even if this bill wasn’t the best solution out there, you’ve got to say it was a try at solving it.
The opponents of the bill didn’t have any ideas about what could be done about rising healthcare costs. At all. “Let’s keep everything exactly the same” doesn’t appear to be much of a solution when this express train of costs has been barrelling down towards us for over 20 years with no respite in sight.
All of SA’s nostalgia about the good old days doesn’t change the fact that a solution to healthcare problems was needed right now. I don’t give a damn whether things were better in the 1960’s, because we don’t have a time machine that will take us back there. I want to ask SA what he’d do about it right now, because saying “Well, back in the 60’s we should have…” is about as useful as any solution the Republicans in Congress came up with, which was no solution at all.
I see. So your response to what you percieve as self-righteous bullshit is to post…self-righteous bullshit. Yeah, that’s really convincing.
Seriously, you are without question one of the two or three most inept proponents of conservative principles I’ve ever seen. I seriously doubt there is a single person who, seeing how often and how aggressively you present yourself as a self-righteous, grudge-bearing prick, endlessly preaching hatred of anyone who happens to self-identify as liberal, would ever say, “Yeah, there’s someone to emulate”.
About the only person less skilled than you at argument on conservative principles is probably Clothahump but I will give you the edge on word count.
Hey dumbass, we HAVE answered your charges. Again and again and again. But you simply prefer to stick your fingers in your ears and go “la-la-la, I can’t HEAR you!!!”, so what’s the use? Most people gave up a long time ago. So what’s the point?
You know, definition of insanity and all that. :rolleyes:
Besides, when asked for cites, you state you prefer to rely on your own personal experiences, because “I was there.” So why should anyone take you seriously?
And they no longer have the decency to die from back alley abortions. Why, they go right to the clinic in broad daylight and everything! That is, if their state has a clinic. Oh, for the good old days when birth control was condoms and men* couldn’t be relied upon to use them… oh, wait–that’s still true today!
And those damned women libbers! Wanting jobs and education and stuff. Who wears the pants in the family, anyway? Why aren’t they content to just stay home and sew buttons on shirts, worry about ring around the collar and cook the Sunday roast? That’s all they’re good for. And who cares about her pleasure in bed–it’s a woman’s duty to service her husband. Everyone knows that. Her job is to be a wife and mother–why does she need a credit rating or a credit card in her own name? Jeesh–next thing we know, they’ll want equal pay for equal work! Thank god that’s never happened…
Seriously, SA’s whole schtick can basically be summed up as “the world has gone to hell they started letting people who aren’t decent, god-fearing, property-owning white men actually have a say.”
Bad enough that it’s stupid, but after the 837th time or so, it’s also boring as hell.
It was pretty high. Of course, one must consider that many if not most of them got married because they were pregnant. And frankly, I don’t consider “high rate of teen marriage” an indicator of a BETTER time.
Oh, goody. I haven’t had my dose of surreality yet. :rolleyes:
Spare us both, SA. I don’t have the time, and I doubt you’ve got the strength. Let it go… my post wasn’t directed at you, specifically, but at the social mores of a previous time.
It seems that in order for Starving Artist to be right, we have to all just accept his boundaries. He claims that unwed couples and children being raised by single parents are sure signs of civilization decline - I don’t see what the evidence is of that, but we are to accept it because he is old, and therefore he ‘knows’. Similarly, we are to accept that racism, homophobia, illegal abortions, etc were not ‘real’ problems back in the day, and therefore they just don’t matter. Because he said it, it is so.
Boy, I can’t wait until I’m old enough to just declare nonsensical things to be facts. Tell me, SA, how old do you need to be before you can do that?
Ok. . .aaand? What do we learn from this? Is the implied thesis that married teen pregnancy is a-ok, but unmarried teen pregnancy is bad? Unpack this for us.