Dogmatic Wolves
Oct. 18th, 2006 07:25 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kokopelleThis morning I listened to NPR Talk of the Nation. The topic was "Married Couples Are Now a Minority", with the info blurb being "Census figures show that for first time in history, married couples are in the minority. In the second in a series on America at 300 million, guests discuss the culture shift and how it is affecting Americans."
One of the guests was Steve Watters, director of young adults in Marriage for Focus on the Family. Though he kept a low profile overall, his comments alluding that a married nuclear family is the most stable environment. He said (paraphrasing), "children will get the wrong ideas from the non-married couple's household". ACK! Excuse me for getting on a soapbox, but I feel that the dogmatic goal of a married man and woman, with the man in the lead, is more destructive than constructive. Case in point, does this mean that a bad nuclear marriage is better than any single parent or same-sex marriage? I would hope not.
The elephant in the middle of the room is that of Focus on the Family deriving it's policies from dogmatic evangelical interpretations of the Bible. It both fascinates and scares me when the sanitized version of their philosophy is presented to the general public. Same-sex marriage is roundly condemned by Steve's group. Their private core belief is that homosexuality is an abomination. The public argument, "it is bad for the children to be in the same-sex environment". Single-parent rearing of children, especially by women, is privately condemned because the authority of the male is removed from the rearing. With the absence of the male, the female is further removed from the authority of God. This is not the public face put on single-parent child rearing. If put on the spot about it, the most Steve would probably just admit that he believes that single-parent rearing of children is "bad for the children" relative to the male-leading man-woman married couple. The male’s family authority, as the duly appointed representive of God, is not discussed for public consumption.
This dogmatic wolf in sheep's clothing bugs me. IMO, Focus on the Family would lose wide support from non-party line members if the larger part of society had a true(r) picture of the group's thoughts. Everyone has a right to their own beliefs, including Steve Watters. The part that really bugs me is that groups like Focus on the Family have influence on government policies. Their dogmatic views are quietly supported and implemented while a sanitized version of their beliefs is presented to the general public. Scary stuff!
One of the guests was Steve Watters, director of young adults in Marriage for Focus on the Family. Though he kept a low profile overall, his comments alluding that a married nuclear family is the most stable environment. He said (paraphrasing), "children will get the wrong ideas from the non-married couple's household". ACK! Excuse me for getting on a soapbox, but I feel that the dogmatic goal of a married man and woman, with the man in the lead, is more destructive than constructive. Case in point, does this mean that a bad nuclear marriage is better than any single parent or same-sex marriage? I would hope not.
The elephant in the middle of the room is that of Focus on the Family deriving it's policies from dogmatic evangelical interpretations of the Bible. It both fascinates and scares me when the sanitized version of their philosophy is presented to the general public. Same-sex marriage is roundly condemned by Steve's group. Their private core belief is that homosexuality is an abomination. The public argument, "it is bad for the children to be in the same-sex environment". Single-parent rearing of children, especially by women, is privately condemned because the authority of the male is removed from the rearing. With the absence of the male, the female is further removed from the authority of God. This is not the public face put on single-parent child rearing. If put on the spot about it, the most Steve would probably just admit that he believes that single-parent rearing of children is "bad for the children" relative to the male-leading man-woman married couple. The male’s family authority, as the duly appointed representive of God, is not discussed for public consumption.
This dogmatic wolf in sheep's clothing bugs me. IMO, Focus on the Family would lose wide support from non-party line members if the larger part of society had a true(r) picture of the group's thoughts. Everyone has a right to their own beliefs, including Steve Watters. The part that really bugs me is that groups like Focus on the Family have influence on government policies. Their dogmatic views are quietly supported and implemented while a sanitized version of their beliefs is presented to the general public. Scary stuff!
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
"Won't anybody think of the children?!"
Date: 2006-10-18 02:39 pm (UTC)One of my best friends was raised in a 'proper' nuclear family. She's 24 and is running her own buisness. Her sister ran away from home several times, now has a child and has yet to obtain any kind of degree.
In my humble opinion, the whole "anything but a traditional nuclear family will screw up your kids" is the utter height of bullshit- kids get screwed up no matter what enviroment they're raised in. I'll admit to some jealously toward my friends who had both parents around- but I'd still rather take both my parents being apart and happy instead of them staying together and being continually miserable and violent.
Re: "Won't anybody think of the children?!"
Date: 2006-10-18 02:51 pm (UTC)Re: "Won't anybody think of the children?!"
Date: 2006-10-18 04:25 pm (UTC)Makes me wonder what kind of 'traditional' values these people want so badly to go back to...
no subject
Date: 2006-10-18 02:57 pm (UTC)My mom grew up in a broken household, but she is one of the best women I know. As she says, you can either choose to be a victim or you can pick yourself up and make your life better. Her one sister is married, owns her home with her 3 kids and husband; her other sister has 4 kids, each from a different father, and is currently married to an...yeah, and won't take care of her kids like she needs to; her brother is currently living on his own and owns a trailer house.
My dad grew up in a broken household. He does his best for my family. Half of his siblings turned out messed up and the other half didn't. *shrug*
You make of it what you will really.
no subject
Date: 2006-10-18 03:20 pm (UTC)Again, my beef is that the root of their talk is really about moral absolutes. Their words are otherwise. Now... if the goal of the nuclear family, lead by a strong Christian husband and father, is to indoctrinate (oh... sorry, didn't mean to use that word, I mean "guide") offspring into being moral Christian citizens, I suppose Steve's way is correct. That’s not the objective presented. Let's all be honest about what our true goals are here
Can you tell that this gets under my skin??? LOL.
no subject
Date: 2006-10-18 03:35 pm (UTC)Re: "Won't anybody think of the children?!"
Date: 2006-10-18 04:56 pm (UTC)Family values is a political and social concept or term that has been used in various nations across the world to describe a set of moral beliefs in society specifically in response to the perception by social or religious conservatives of declining morality within that nation itself. The term is vague in its precise definition as many different groups have claimed that it means different things. As such, "family values" has been described as a political buzzword or power word."
Definition
The concept of "family values" is rooted in each individual culture thus making the values different for different societies. In addition, cultures change over time in response to economic, political, and cultural developments. Therefore, "family values" vary from household to household, from country to country, and from generation to generation.
Conservative and liberal perspectives
Social and religious conservatives often use the term "family values" to promote conservative ideology that supports traditional morality or values. American Christians often see their religion as the source of morality and consider the nuclear family to be an essential element in society. Some conservative family values advocates believe the government should endorse Christian morality, for example by displaying the Ten Commandments or allowing teachers to conduct prayers in public schools. Religious conservatives often view the United States as a "Christian nation". For example, the American Family Association, says "The American Family Association exists to motivate and equip citizens to change the culture to reflect Biblical truth and traditional family values." These groups variously oppose abortion, pornography, pre-marital sex, homosexuality, some aspects of feminism , cohabitation, and depictions of sexuality, in the media.
In contrast to the view of family values held by the Christian right, liberals have used the phrase to support such values as family planning, affordable child care, and maternity leave. For example, groups such as People For the American Way, Planned Parenthood, and Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays have attempted to define the concept in a way that promotes the normalization of single-parent families, the acceptance of same-sex monogamous relationships and marriage. This understanding of family values does not promote conservative morality, instead focusing on encouraging and supporting alternative family structures, access to contraception, abortion, sex education, childcare, and parent-friendly employment laws, which provide for maternity leave and leave for medical emergencies involving children.
Media application
Typically, the term is used by the media to refer to Christian values, but in a New York Times survey, "Five percent of the women and one percent of the men defined family values as being connected to religion or the Bible. Nine out of ten women defined family values as loving, taking care of and supporting each other, knowing right from wrong and having good values."
cheap viagra online 17668
Date: 2013-02-19 12:28 pm (UTC)cialis online 9209
Date: 2013-02-21 03:34 am (UTC)payday loans online 13873
Date: 2013-02-26 09:05 am (UTC)