|
 |
11/5/2010
Smaller government hawks must embrace traditional marriage
Chuck Donovan, Senior Research Fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society makes an acute observation about just one more consequence of Tuesday’s Republican sweep.
Exit polls and candidate victory speeches confirm the truth that yesterday’s electoral outcomes were rooted in concerns about a sagging economy and soaring government spending. But the public records and political philosophies of yesterday’s victors at the ballot box also convey the quiet strength of social issues in the 2010 election.
The quiet strength of social issues. The quiet strength.
….As economist Jennifer Roback Morse has phrased it, “It is simply not possible to have a low-impact government in a society with no social or legal norms about family structure, sexual behavior, and childrearing. The state will have to provide support for people with loose or non-existent ties to their families. So, in the long run, a free society needs marriage.” [Emphasis is mine.]
State Senator Glenn Grothman gets it.
How the United States and the State of Wisconsin are working to encourage single motherhood and discouraging children in 2-parent families
We are all grateful when children are not aborted. Nevertheless, out-of-wedlock births have grown from 10.7-percent in 1970 to 41-percent last year….
The Left and the social welfare establishment want children born out of wedlock because they are far more likely to be dependent on the government. They are 20 times more likely to wind up in prison and 9 times more likely to drop out of school. Well-known author Charles Murray said, Children born out of wedlock, are “the single most important social problem of our time – more important than crime, drugs, poverty, illiteracy, welfare, or homelessness because it drives everything else.” While we can talk about jobs, education, or crime, our economy and freedoms will inevitably decline as long as the number of children born out of wedlock keeps going up.
Grothman goes on to document government’s cost of single-motherhood, as well as the cash value of benefits if a mother marries. It’s eye-opening, eye-popping even.
Total benefits lost if our single mother marries a husband making $35,000 per year: $38,036 in tax-free benefits. [Emphasis is mine.]
Wow. So why marry when the government is so generous? And the Senator goes on to offer solutions. Last page. Good stuff. The guy puts his values on his sleeve.
This short treatise from Robert P. George firms up the connection between economic and social conservativism. An excellent read.
The family, based on the marital commitment of husband and wife, is the original and best department of health, education, and welfare. No government agency can hope to do what the well functioning family does.
….The moral foundations of economic conservatism are precisely those of social conservatism: respect for the human person, which grounds our commitment to individual liberty; and the right to economic freedom and other essential civil liberties; belief in personal responsibility, which is a precondition of the possibility of moral desirability; ….
The two greatest institutions ever devised for lifting people out of poverty and enabling them to live in dignity are the market economy, and the institution of marriage. These institutions will stand together, or they will fall together. And if that’s not a reason for economic and social conservatives to unite on principle, and not merely out of pragmatism, I don’t know what is.
Hear, hear.
Jo Egelhoff, FoxPolitics.net
COMMENTS
Couldn't agree more!
Joe (Fri Nov 05 08:49:40 2010)
Hear hear!
Andrew Ellis (Fri Nov 05 10:08:46 2010)
Right on !
Rich Carlstedt (Fri Nov 05 13:01:19 2010)
I think I get it.
You want less government except when it comes to the personal lives of people.
>>>The quiet strength of social issues. The quiet strength.<<<
So... your government will now dictate the private lives of people.
Dean Weichmann (Fri Nov 05 19:36:50 2010)
***You want less government except when it comes to the personal lives of people.***
I fail to see anything in the article that says government should interfere in our personal lives. Where the heck did you find it?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
~ John Adams
C. R. Stevenson (Sat Nov 06 00:27:45 2010)
CR, just the title screams it, >>> Traditional Marriage<<<
There is also this;
>>>>>legal norms about family structure, sexual behavior, and childrearing.<<<<<
Legal norms means government rules. My point is that it is hypocritical to favor smaller government an still favor controls over private lives.
I favor less control over the individual when it does not harm others. I also favor more control over business especially when that lack of control means harm to people. Think of BP and Enron.
Dean Weichmann (Sat Nov 06 06:12:04 2010)
Dean, you just don't get it. "Compassionate" conservatives will tolerate "some" government intrusion when it confirms their personal beliefs. Duh!
Jack Lohman (Sat Nov 06 11:03:57 2010)
"Controls over private lives" is allowed, not carried out by government. Like God and prayer in our classrooms and civic centers. "Controls over private lives" comes via social norms, cultural mores, religious teachings. "Control" over the individual (if that's what one wants to call it) comes from one's family and community. So Dean, you don't want government in your or my bedroom - neither do I. Bu you (or others - I don't know about you) have taken God out of my interaction in the community. So if not God, government rushes in to fill the breach. AND when it does, it costs a whole lot more.
Why would you argue against an expectation in our society that children be raised by two parents, as opposed to by the government? Why would a government, via its fiscal policies, encourage single parent families?
As C.R. so aptly quotes John Adams, when we are no longer a moral and religious people, our Constitution becomes inadequate.
Jo (Sat Nov 06 15:08:54 2010)
All just laws must be based on unchanging truth. If you want to be an atheist, then it follows there is nothing to be gained by "compassion"; whatever is, just IS. the liberals' cries of "fairness" just don't make sense if there is no God. WHO CARES if I torture you, rob you, cheat, etc. if there is NO God?
But the law of God IS written on the heart, and therefore when man tries to do "better", he always fails. Dean and Jack, do you want the govt to protect you from a thief? Why should it, if there is no God, and no unchanging truth--the thief was just smarter than you, and all he did was mind HIS own business. The govt shouldn't get involved in his private decision.
What about a gang that firebombs your house? Who's to say "they shouldn't do it"!? Why ask the govt to send a fire truck, when all the gang wanted was to enjoy themselves!
There ARE ten commandments, all law has been consciously or unconsciously based on them, and there's no escape from this fact.
Read "Homosexuality: a Freedom Too Far" avilable in the library, and NOT written by a Christian, for the answers as to why homosexuality was removed from the diagnostic manual used by psychiatrists. (Hint, it was NOT "better medical understanding".)
What about
emily matthews (Sat Nov 06 16:37:19 2010)
>>> If you want to be an atheist, then it follows there is nothing to be gained by "compassion"; whatever is, just IS. the liberals' cries of "fairness" just don't make sense if there is no God. WHO CARES if I torture you, rob you, cheat, etc. if there is NO God?<<<
Jo, you are making the assumption that if one does not believe as you do then he has no morals....You are wrong. Further, I have observed that there are plenty of religious people who do not appear to take moral values seriously.
It is not neccesary to believe in god to beleive in people.
>>>Why would you argue against an expectation in our society that children be raised by two parents, as opposed to by the government?<<<
Why would you think that I argue against two parents?
>>>Why would a government, via its fiscal policies, encourage single parent families?<<<
Why would a government seek to punish single parents and their children?
Dean Weichmann (Sat Nov 06 21:22:24 2010)
"Jo, you are making the assumption that if one does not believe as you do then he has no morals....You are wrong. Further, I have observed that there are plenty of religious people who do not appear to take moral values seriously."
Hear, Hear...sitting on a pew on Sunday in no way means you have morals and values.
I have seen enough "Bible thumpers" who on Sunday say one thing and the rest of the week go around doing what they preached against.
It has been my observation that those who live thier lives as God commands us, do it without bringing notice on themselves.
Dale (Sat Nov 06 22:26:59 2010)
Yea Guys, I know some really good people who are atheists but have very strong morals. They don't thump the bible on Sundays but they do unto others what they expect out of humanity. Honesty does not only exist in religion (though I am a Christian).
I suggest that we keep God out of politics, because I also know some so-called Christian politicians who have done exactly that (well, they claim to be Christians as they twist the knife). But they give Christians a very bad name.
Jack Lohman (Sun Nov 07 01:27:45 2010)
Opps, I attributed a quote to Jo that was Emily's, sorry.
Emily, the ten commmandments are sort of redundant and too specific.
>>>The Golden Rule or ethic of reciprocity is a maxim,[2] an ethical code, or a morality,[3] that essentially states either of the following:
1.One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself (positive form)[2]
2.One should not treat others in ways that one would not like to be treated (negative/prohibitive form, Also called the Silver Rule)
The Golden Rule is arguably the most essential basis for the modern concept of human rights, in which each individual has a right to just treatment, and a responsibility to ensure justice for others.[4] A key element of the Golden Rule is that a person attempting to live by this rule treats all people with consideration, not just members of his or her in-group. The Golden Rule has its roots in a wide range of world cultures, and is a standard which different cultures use to resolve conflicts.<<<
Dean Weichmann (Sun Nov 07 05:04:05 2010)
Jesus said: "So whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to them; for this is the Law and the prophets." (Matthew 7:12 RSV)
I would be willing to make a small wager, were I a wagering person that this statement is based on the Ten Commandments.
No matter how Man tries to twist it, the Golden Rule, even though it occurs in many religions,is based on Biblical teaching. Even though more specific than some would like, the Ten Commandments are a good sound foundation on which people may rely.
C.R. Stevenson (Mon Nov 08 09:16:33 2010)
CR, The Golden Rule, or variations of it predate Christanity...by a lot.
>>>The Golden Rule has a long history, and a great number of prominent religious figures and philosophers have restated its reciprocal, bilateral nature in various ways (not limited to the above forms).[2] As a concept, the Golden Rule has a history that long predates the term "Golden Rule" (or "Golden law", as it was called from the 1670s).[2][6] The ethic of reciprocity was present in certain forms in the philosophies of ancient Babylon, Egypt, Persia, India, Greece, Judea, and China.
Examples of statements that mirror the Golden Rule appear in Ancient Egypt, for example in the story of The Eloquent Peasant which is dated to the Middle Kingdom (c. 2040–1650 BCE): "Now this is the command: Do to the doer to cause that he do."[7] Rushworth Kidder states that "the label 'golden' was applied by Confucius (551–479 B.C.), who wrote, 'Here certainly is the golden maxim: Do not do to others that which we do not want them to do to us.'" Kidder notes that this framework appears prominently in many religions, including "Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, Zoroastrianism, and the rest of the world's major religions."<<<
Dean Weichmann (Mon Nov 08 10:50:58 2010)
|
|
Blog Archives
| 2010 |
  December
|
November
|
October
|
September
|
August
|
July
|
June
|
May
|
April
|
March
|
February
|
January
• Solberg: Healing After an Abortion
• Basketball fans eyeing extension of Miller Park sales tax
• Nanny sex-ed bill goes to Doyle
• A first. Village limits pension contribution for employees
• Nanny State update: Toothbrushing mandated
• Obama pushes education inflation
• WI Investment Board votes to borrow to juice up returns
• So Republicans have brought nothing to the table?
• You have got to be kidding me
• Nygren: Governor Continues Terms of Failure in State of the State
• Sen. Fitzgerald: Governor down the wrong track at high speed
• Phosphorus is the new CO2. $Billions in Wisconsin
• More Obama giveaways
• A reprimand? Would you keep him on the job?
• Burri: Sarah Palin for Prez troubles me
• Quote of the Day – Obama after the pie-eating contest
• Populism, abused and trampled
• Fitzgerald: Senate Republicans Propose Real Job Creation Agenda
• Stripped down health insurance – it’s about time
• Ok GOP, scrap the Party of NO; time to lead
• No way Feingold is a Coakley. Is Wall a Brown?
• Burri: Conservatives off the chart for a RINO?
• Paltry quid pro quo?
• Doyle says ARRA has ‘created or retained’ 44,000 WI jobs
• Does most of the public fall for this stuff?
• When you get signatures, always get a couple extra
• Blame it on the outmoded computers
• Scott Brown victory does not scuttle health bill
• 8th Congressional Candidate Forum, Jan. 25
• Scott Walker Meet-and-greet, Monday, Jan. 18
• Aren’t consumers taxpayers too?
• MORE taxes on investment income - dreadful and wrong
• Join the blaze orange army and say ‘Enough is Enough’
• The future of government-run health care
• Tax on banks is a really bad idea
• Roth, Savard on the stump, grassroots style
• Savard speaking in Appleton, 8 PM, Wed., Jan. 13.
• Rahmlow: Savard, Bies frontrunners for State Senate
• Burri: Failing Political Correctness 101
• School contracts and Race to the Top
• Senator Feingold worrisome and big red flags
• Psephological?
• This is really important. Contact Rep. Kagen. Now. Please.
• This is exactly what we need from Governor Doyle
• This guy is my hero
• Why am I not surprised?
• Talk health reform with Feingold (Th), Petri (today)
• Give the Mayor power over MPS - if he can break contracts
• Burri: Yup, Dems really are going to bypass a conference
• The $2.7 billion Wisconsin deficit no one told you about
• Walker launches county accountability website
• Rahmlow: Why is Van Hollen dodging the Nebraska deal?
|
| 2009 |
December
|
November
|
October
• The Lawton-Bader files
• Yup, it’s the TAX LEVY, not the tax RATE
• Ellis: costly automobile insurance laws must be rolled back
• If not Barrett, who?
• The subsidy game
• Burri: Bailouts, Banks, Health Care, and the Mob
• Attend Appleton Schools budget meeting tonight
• A public option WON’T increase costs? That’s delusional!
• Appleton Schools budget meeting Monday
• Wisconsin should be screaming for accountability
• Burri: If anything, we need more obstructionism around here
• WI on the leading edge - in the wrong direction
• Rep. Montgomery: Utility Customers Join State’s Crime-Fighting Efforts
• Public Conservation and Recreation Lands Total 16.5% of State
• In the crow's nest of the Titanic, shouting 'Iceberg!'
• Is Rep. Nelson a political hack?
• Health care: The road ahead will be brutal
• Kagen's pandering again
• Birthers - good stuff for you
• How much do we bend over backward for seniors?
• The trouble with health care is paying for it
• Two-parent families: The Gold Standard
• Burri: Kids... the joys and blessings
• Very, very worried about health care
• Rep. Huebsch: Wisconsin is proof government health care isn’t the answer
• School district contracts push up tax levy
• What? Obama, the Peace Prize?
• TODAY - hearing on Campaign Finance Reform
• Appleton School District tax levy up way too much
• CBO report is out - and the bill isn't even written yet?
• So, how much do YOU budget for health care?
• Burri: Copenhagen trip was amateurish
• “Sotomayor, you have blood on your hands...”
• Cap and Trade. Always follow the money
• Rep. Kagen gets (almost) free health services
• I actually agree with Rep. Kagen
• Future Wisconsin Conference for Conservatives, October 10, Wauwatosa
|
September
|
August
|
July
|
June
|
May
|
April
|
March
|
February
|
January
|
| 2008 |
December
|
November
|
October
|
September
|
August
|
July
|
June
|
May
|
April
|
March
• Important votes Tuesday, including Appleton Common Council
• Democrats are becoming supply siders??
• Further debunking Hillary myths
• WEAC has created an unsustainable monopoly
• From Mark Gundrum: One of the greatest honors an American can experience
• 'Operation Chaos' working?
• Joe Martin the best candidate in Appleton's 8th
• State programs to cut? - Volume II
• Oh the naivete of youth
• Not just disingenuous - flat wrong
• Steve - you will be missed
• Make cuts only AFTER you're elected....
• Getting serious: What programs can we cut?
• Rep. Steve Kagen joining me on Jerry Bader Show today
• Rep. Van Roy: Dental Care Pilot Program
• Has Dave Obey turned the corner on earmarks?
• Speaker Huebsch: Governor turns down Federal Aid?
• Mark Rahmlow: "We're Broke."
• As taxpayers, how do we know if it's a Chevy or a Lexus?
• This is trash talk - about a veteran
• Frank Lasee: Take time to get the Compact right
• 'The Gableman Ad' - is it racist?
• Roth thankful, Kagen shaking money tree
• Gov. Doyle's office not enamored with Freedom of Information
• Governor Doyle will never do it
• Leadership on smoking ban? Not Hanna
• Rep. Van Roy speaks out about smear ads
• You're threatening me about potholes?
• Losing the Hastert seat is NOT a trend and NOT curtians for the GOP
• First suggestion for 'slashing' programs
• Big money-saver for municipalities
• More one time fixes. Nuts.
• Any chances???
• I'm doing the Jerry Bader Show, today, the 11th
• Representative Frank Lasee: Final Waltz of the Season
• Guest Blog: It's not the county's business to be in the nursing home business
• Yup, Hillary won Texas and Ohio
• Gableman/Butler race featured - and it isn't pretty
• Lies from Planned Parenthood and NARAL
• He who sacrifices liberty.....
• Duh.
• The Troha sentencing, Doyle and that $200K
• Guns, passion and "originality"
• How hard is it anyway, to shut down a government program?
• Voting is a PRIVILEGE. And so are property taxes....
• Guest Blog: Governor Doyle, cancel your Ireland trip
|
February
|
January
|
| 2007 |
December
|
November
|
October
|
September
|
August
|
July
|
June
|
May
|
April
|
March
|
February
|
January
• Lots of ideas. No money.
• The Cigarette Tax - "Poor Policy Instrument?"
• School budget Lite?
• Frankenstein - not in the library, but in the legislature
• A librarian, a legislator, a president
• $1.25/pack - NO, NO, NO, and NO
• Kagen and Reagan in the same breath?
• Menasha: behind the 8-ball, but not biting the dust
• Any way you slice it, Wisconsin government wants (further) in on health care
• The World is Flat...what about health care?
• The PAC - too precious to fail. Day 3
• News follow-ups: Appleton West, Kagen at the White House
• Fox Cities PAC - too precious to fail - Day 2
• Fox Cities PAC - too precious to fail
• New Transit Tax coming your way
• Rep. Petri has his finger in the dike - I guess
• AASD Retirement Costs Burdensome
• Health care, health care, health care, health care
• Water rate increase was no slam dunk
• Education for all is just a bad dream
• New Year's resolutions from a parade snob
|
| 2006 |
December
|
November
|
October
|
September
|
| 2000 |
May
|
|
