Hahahahahahahahaha. Rotflmao. I am sooo sick of this tired belief. It is patently false.
That’s for later. 
But seriously, who breaks up more? Single people who have been dating for a few weeks or married people? And I hope I don’t have to remind you that the 50% divorce rate does not mean that 50% of PEOPLE get divorced. The 50% rate doesn’t take into account repeat offenders. The fact is that the majority of people stay married once they do make that commitment.
I would recur to the ancient Spartan method of selection. Or brainwash everybody into ‘behaving’ according to Occam’s razor.
Whichever suits me.
Prove it.
Regardless, it’s a pretty tenuous pillar upon which to build a special exception for married couples - especially if you were actually worried about population control, which you certainly aren’t.
Regardless - okay, you’ve now banned abortion, and attempted to stigmatize casual sex like it was back when everybody respected their parents and when all the politicians were honest. So, when your effort at stigmatism fails, you’re going to end up with a lot of pregnant single mothers. What is your reaction to this phenomenon?
Here are your options:
Shotgun weddings - you presumably believe these never ever happened, because you believe that unmarried people never had sex. However, you have unmarried pregnant women now. Do you force marriage on the men? What if they’re already married?
Support the women - you wanna pay for this? Welfare hasn’t exactly been a republican platform…
Abandon the women - this is the current conservative approach. Back in the old days, they might have slapped a big red A on their chest too, just to be christian about it.
Take their babies away - Well, it’s an option…
Tell people that it’s not happening even though it is - Send them off to the convent! Hide them away for a few months! Tell people the servant had the kid! Heaven knows there were never bastards in the good old days; why, we don’t even have a word for it in the language!
SmartAlx, if you were given a magic wand that could change society’s attitudes on one issue, would it really be to create a new stigma for premarital sex? Because I would probably choose to eradicate racism, stigmatize violence, or maybe make people understand that Red Vines are way better than Twizzlers. You know, the big issues.
You started it. You first.
To a certain extent, yes. If we stigmatize unmarried sex fewer women will be getting pregnant. Sure it won’t stop it, but it will reduce it.
I’m not Republican anyway. I’m libertarian, just like Ron Paul.
Anyway we are getting too far off track. Let’s return to these two things:
I just DID. Shotgun weddings. Scarlet letters. Sending young females suddenly off to the convent. Bastards. If you were not deluding yourself about the past, these concepts would not exist. But they do. Because reality and you are starkly divorced on this matter.
Dodging the issue, eh? Okay, I’ll answer your diversion.
Now answer the REAL issue here. Your little plan will have consequences. Deal with them.
New stigma? Don’t you mean a renewed stigma?
No, it would be the sex thing. I truly believe that the sexual revolution was one of the worst things to happen to America, next to the Federal Reserve. The other issues are improving and will be solved on their own in time. This sex issue has no solution any time soon.
Yeah, right. It was so much better when sex was considered dirty and women who liked it sluts. :rolleyes:
So, out of curiosity, if someone invented 100% effective birth control and everyone used it, you’d be completely fine with premarital sex?
Oh, the good old days of 2008.
If it’s a stigma that’s so powerful that it actually stops extramarital sex from happening, then that will definitely be something new.
There are people who live together for years without getting married. I lived with my wife for eight years before we got married. There are people who get married after a month or a week or on a drunken Vegas weekend. Are you really saying thet all married couples are always more committed and more equipped to have kids than all unmarried couples?
This is stupid. No woman is going to get pregnant a million times. Even a fictional woman like that wrestler Cartman played on South Park is going to make it a dozen times max. And only because she was addicted to abortions. That was the only reason she got pregnant. So my solution to this non-problem is to use it as an impetus to raise money to both support and oppose abortions and single motherhood. Problem solved, economy kickstarted.
Research into and development of more effective birth control methods, subsidized birth control for those without the means to attain it, better education about birth control methods, and easier access to abortion.
No more of a problem than the unintended pregnancies that occur within marriages.
Birth control, better education, birth control, ending “abstinence only” nonsense prattle. Abstinence Only is the Shawn Kemp of sex education strategies. Birth control. Also passing out rubbers.
Abortion abortion abortion.
What he said.
Oh yeah, I forgot about the 37% of the single women in the 50s having shotgun weddings and being sent off to convents. Cite
What, you actually think that sort of thing wasn’t common? 20% would if anything be a low number for single womens’ lives being ruined due to the “need” to hide unwed pregnancies.
Pray and encourage the following. Stop the war on families and show value for life, encourage spirituality and the personal search for God.
I was being sarcastic. In 1960 5% of the births were to single women.
I corrected my statistic. I finally found a cite. 5% in 1960 to 36.8% in 2005.