Fathers Matter

RickWhite

RickWhite

Well-Known Member
Years ago things were so simple. If kids went bad, it was automatically (and correctly) attributed to the absence of a Father. Then along came the Feminists and political correctness and we couldn't say that anymore. To imply that in some way a Father (a man) held a particularly important roll in the development of a child was considered sexist.

Now, Father no longer knows best. Now Fathers are portrayed as lazy idiots while Mothers are portrayed as the backbone of the family. Watch The Simpsons or Family Guy if you don't believe me. It's so sad.

Research however, shows that Fathers in fact play an indispensable roll in childhood development with things like delinquency, teen pregnancy, drug abuse and a host of other social ills being linked to Fatherless homes.

Below is a simple Google search that shows numerous results to this effect. The question that remains is why there are so many people still trying to promote the fraudulent notion that Fathers don't matter. Have we really become so ignorant that we fail to recognize even the most simple of life's truths or are we all just products of indoctrination?




http://www.google.com/search?q=the+role+of+fathers+in+child+development&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GGIE_en
 
ViRedd

ViRedd

New Member
Federal government welfare programs have eliminated fathers from families in the inner cities. Black fatherless families number upwards of 70% now, when in the 1930s and 1940s, the Black families were solidly intact. Just more of the unintended consequences of the Progressive Do-Gooders. And yet, the Progressives continue in their attempt to convince us that poverty causes crime. Go figure.
 
RickWhite

RickWhite

Well-Known Member
ViRedd said:
Nice link, Rick.

Dr. Thomas Sowell has written some excellent articles on family life among the Black population in the inner cities. Here's an interview with Dr. Sowell on the topic:

[URL="http://rightwingnews.com/mt331/2008/02/an_interview_with_thomas_sowel.php"]http://rightwingnews.com/mt331/2008/02/an_interview_with_thomas_sowel.php[/URL]
Click to expand...
Thanks, I'm a big fan of Sowell. "The Vision of the Anointed" was one of the best books I've read. "Race and Culture" was good too but a little dry.
 
doobnVA

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
RickWhite said:
Years ago things were so simple. If kids went bad, it was automatically (and correctly) attributed to the absence of a Father. Then along came the Feminists and political correctness and we couldn't say that anymore. To imply that in some way a Father (a man) held a particularly important roll in the development of a child was considered sexist.

Now, Father no longer knows best. Now Fathers are portrayed as lazy idiots while Mothers are portrayed as the backbone of the family. Watch The Simpsons or Family Guy if you don't believe me. It's so sad.

Research however, shows that Fathers in fact play an indispensable roll in childhood development with things like delinquency, teen pregnancy, drug abuse and a host of other social ills being linked to Fatherless homes.

Below is a simple Google search that shows numerous results to this effect. The question that remains is why there are so many people still trying to promote the fraudulent notion that Fathers don't matter. Have we really become so ignorant that we fail to recognize even the most simple of life's truths or are we all just products of indoctrination?




http://www.google.com/search?q=the+role+of+fathers+in+child+development&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GGIE_en
Click to expand...

MMMmmm rolls... do these rolls have butter? I like butter on my rolls.

Since when are The Simpsons and Family Guy an accurate portrayal of family life?

:wall:
 
Iron Lion Zion

Iron Lion Zion

Well-Known Member
doobnVA said:
MMMmmm rolls... do these rolls have butter? I like butter on my rolls.

Since when are The Simpsons and Family Guy an accurate portrayal of family life?

:wall:
Click to expand...
Because the cliche found in those shows, as well as others, had to come from somewhere...
 
doobnVA

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
Iron Lion Zion said:
Because the cliche found in those shows, as well as others, had to come from somewhere...
Click to expand...

It's called "fiction", and it isn't based on reality. It's a freaking cartoon. That's like saying Aqua Teen Hunger Force is based on reality. Come on, now.

A talking dog? A talking baby? Evil monkeys in the closet? It's slapstick comedy in cartoon form, nothing more.
 
Iron Lion Zion

Iron Lion Zion

Well-Known Member
doobnVA said:
It's called "fiction", and it isn't based on reality. It's a freaking cartoon. That's like saying Aqua Teen Hunger Force is based on reality. Come on, now.

A talking dog? A talking baby? Evil monkeys in the closet? It's slapstick comedy in cartoon form, nothing more.
Click to expand...
Maybe... but out of all of those lazy, overweight father's actually do exist.
 
doobnVA

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
ViRedd said:
Federal government welfare programs have eliminated fathers from families in the inner cities. Black fatherless families number upwards of 70% now, when in the 1930s and 1940s, the Black families were solidly intact. Just more of the unintended consequences of the Progressive Do-Gooders. And yet, the Progressives continue in their attempt to convince us that poverty causes crime. Go figure.
Click to expand...
Government welfare programs cause black fathers to abandon their families? I think maybe it's a lack of personal ethics and sense of responsibility that cause black fathers to abandon their families.


Fatherless families are more likely to be poor, and poor people are more likely to be engaged in criminal activities. Not because they are poor, but because of disadvantages that go along with being poor - lack of education, housing condition, and unemployment, for example. Some people are just criminals, plain and simple.

"For the 2000 Census, the percentage of black families headed by married couples was 38."

Notice this only says "married couples". Obviously this isn't taking into account couples with children who live together but are not married.

"There's nothing inherently racial about the trend, of course. The 2000 Census showed that only 69 percent of all American children were born into two-parent households"
 
doobnVA

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
Iron Lion Zion said:
Maybe... but out of all of those lazy, overweight father's actually do exist.
Click to expand...

You're right, they do. But just because they exist, and are portrayed in a comedic way on television, doesn't mean that those shows are in any way trying to depict an average American family.

Americans just seem to find overweight, alcoholic television fathers amusing. People find Judge Judy amusing, too, but that doesn't mean she represents the average judge.
 
P

PadawanBater

Guest
I think it's clear each member of the family has something to contribute, but I don't think the absense of a certain member of a family would contribute significantly to that childs development. Couldn't you argue that children born with siblings turn out more successful or better off or whatever because they develope better social skills during childhood, which helps them establish relationships during their lifetime? Wouldn't you then be justified in using this exact same logic and saying that since kids born without siblings turn out worse off than kids born with siblings, we should make it a law that parents have more than one child, to ensure both childrens success in life? What's the difference?

There are children who were brought up without a father who turn out to become millionaires, that's a fact.
There are children who are brought up in happy "complete" households who are sitting on death row, that's a fact.

There is not enough information either way to start establishing rules permitting or prohibiting households with or without a father.
 
doobnVA

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
PadawanBater said:
I think it's clear each member of the family has something to contribute, but I don't think the absense of a certain member of a family would contribute significantly to that childs development. Couldn't you argue that children born with siblings turn out more successful or better off or whatever because they develope better social skills during childhood, which helps them establish relationships during their lifetime? Wouldn't you then be justified in using this exact same logic and saying that since kids born without siblings turn out worse off than kids born with siblings, we should make it a law that parents have more than one child, to ensure both childrens success in life? What's the difference?

There are children who were brought up without a father who turn out to become millionaires, that's a fact.
There are children who are brought up in happy "complete" households who are sitting on death row, that's a fact.

There is not enough information either way to start establishing rules permitting or prohibiting households with or without a father.
Click to expand...

Very well said.

Just because a kid doesn't have a "father", doesn't mean they don't have a male role model in their life.

what's better, a reluctant and uninvolved biological father or a willing and involved male role model that didn't contribute sperm to the equation?
 
maxamus1

maxamus1

Well-Known Member
doobnVA said:
Very well said.

Just because a kid doesn't have a "father", doesn't mean they don't have a male role model in their life.

what's better, a reluctant and uninvolved biological father or a willing and involved male role model that didn't contribute sperm to the equation?
Click to expand...

same could be said about mothers too.
 
RickWhite

RickWhite

Well-Known Member
doobnVA said:
MMMmmm rolls... do these rolls have butter? I like butter on my rolls.

Since when are The Simpsons and Family Guy an accurate portrayal of family life?

:wall:
Click to expand...
WHOOSH!!!!

In case you are wondering that is the sound of a simple concept flying over doob's head.
 
F

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
doobnVA said:
Government welfare programs cause black fathers to abandon their families? I think maybe it's a lack of personal ethics and sense of responsibility that cause black fathers to abandon their families.


Fatherless families are more likely to be poor, and poor people are more likely to be engaged in criminal activities. Not because they are poor, but because of disadvantages that go along with being poor - lack of education, housing condition, and unemployment, for example. Some people are just criminals, plain and simple.

"For the 2000 Census, the percentage of black families headed by married couples was 38."

Notice this only says "married couples". Obviously this isn't taking into account couples with children who live together but are not married.

"There's nothing inherently racial about the trend, of course. The 2000 Census showed that only 69 percent of all American children were born into two-parent households"
Click to expand...



is this sarcasm?
 
RickWhite

RickWhite

Well-Known Member
PadawanBater said:
I think it's clear each member of the family has something to contribute, but I don't think the absense of a certain member of a family would contribute significantly to that childs development. Couldn't you argue that children born with siblings turn out more successful or better off or whatever because they develope better social skills during childhood, which helps them establish relationships during their lifetime? Wouldn't you then be justified in using this exact same logic and saying that since kids born without siblings turn out worse off than kids born with siblings, we should make it a law that parents have more than one child, to ensure both childrens success in life? What's the difference?

There are children who were brought up without a father who turn out to become millionaires, that's a fact.
There are children who are brought up in happy "complete" households who are sitting on death row, that's a fact.

There is not enough information either way to start establishing rules permitting or prohibiting households with or without a father.
Click to expand...
Did anyone bother to click the link?

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Features/Marriage/upload/48119_1.pdf

There are mountains of evidence that absence of Fathers or broken homes contribute to a great many social ills including poverty. And yes, the high rate of Fatherless homes in the Black community is proof of this. Read the link.

But see, this stuff was common sense before Feminism came along and waged a campaign to undermine the importance of Fathers. If not for you guys caving to your own indoctrination this would still be common sense.

Too bad common sense is so damn uncommon these days.
 
F

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
doobnVA said:
MMMmmm rolls... do these rolls have butter? I like butter on my rolls.

Since when are The Simpsons and Family Guy an accurate portrayal of family life?

:wall:
Click to expand...


i'm pretty sure the reason why the simpsons and family guy are so popular is because they DO imitate actual family life. most people get it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top