Children need their moms and dads, especially in times of crisis.
Sadly, marriage rates fell by 6% in 2018, dropping to the lowest rates since the US started measuring that rate in 1867, according to the Center for Disease Control.
Why should we care? Well, marriage as an exclusive, life-long relationship between one man and one woman has been recognized by every civilization throughout history to make fathers responsible for the babies they make. Currently 40% of children are born out of wedlock, and a third of children are living in households without their biological fathers.
Children without a biological father at home comprise:
- 63% of youth suicides, five times that national rate.
- 70% of the children living in state-operated institutions.
- 85% of children with behavioral disorders, five times the national average.
- 90% of youth runaways.
We also know that children born without fathers in the household have a dramatically higher mortality rate, are much more susceptible to substance abulse, and are 120% as likely to suffer child abuse. Fatherless children are much more likely to live in poverty and to depend on entitlements. The total cost of fatherlessness to the US was estimated as $100 billion in 2008.
Even President Barack Obama understood the importance of having fathers being involved in children’s lives. So why are Republicans afraid to advocate for natural marriage? Let’s go over a few of the objections I’ve heard from my friends:
“Love is love.” Marriage is not a state recognition of love, otherwise sisters could marry each other. Only one man and one woman can produce a child, and marriage provides the best way to ensure a children have a mother and father in a household, and to hold men accountable for the lives they create.
“Traditional marriage is discriminatory.” If we recognize marriage as between one man and one woman to provide children with the best chance of being raised by their mothers and fathers, anyone is free to marry, regardless of sexual preferences. Others are free to live and love as they chose; no one is depriving them of their liberty.
“I know same-sex couples that are wonderful parents.” Even if you believe children don’t need a mother or a father, same-sex parenting doesn’t resolve the problem of 40% of children being born out of wedlock and a third of them growing up without a biological father in the household. Only natural marriage binds the child with her mother and father in a lifelong commitment, and holds the father responsible.
“Not all marriages are made in heaven. Some parents are abusive.” This is true, which is why divorce laws have always recognized the three As: Adultery, Abuse, and Abandonment. The problem with easy divorce laws and government recognition of same-sex marriage is that it teachers that marriage is about the romantic feelings between sexual partners as opposed to putting the children first. Children who are growing up without their fathers are much more likely to be abused.
“It doesn’t matter if children have a mom or dad, as long as they have two loving parents.” First of all, with the rise of throuples, why two? That number applies natural marriage because it takes one man and one woman to create a child, and in most cases, they’re uniquely qualified to raise her; otherwise the number two is arbitrary. Adoptive and foster parents are carefully screened and do heroic work, but on the whole, children deprived of their mothers and fathers fare worse: Children living in households with unrelated adults are 40 times as likely to die of inflicted injuries as children living with two biological parents, according to a study of Missouri data published in the journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics in 2005. Children need their mothers and fathers.
“Not every married couple wants to have children.” This is true, but according to the CDC, almost half of the pregnancies in the US are unexpected; unexpected children born in wedlock will have a mother and father. Men and women who don’t have children serve as role models of fidelity to all of us.
“It’s 2020. You can’t turn the clock back to reestablish a patriarchal theocracy.” urn Off course I can turn the clock back, and do so every November. We can reestablish good social policies without having to buy lime-green appliances or forcing women wear red dresses and bonnets. Marriage isn’t an imposition of religion; it has been recognized by various religions and secular governments around the world throughout history.
“Let’s get the government out of marriage.” This is a copout. When I posted about getting the government out of gun ownership by removing references to the Second Amendment, they were furious at me because they recognized that our silence would leave the left free to rewrite gun laws. The same is true for marriage. The GOP silence on natural marriage has allowed proponents of the sexual revolution to destroy marriage by leaving it without a definition. But why would we want to get the government out of marriage? Marriage laws have long been necessary for property rights and custody. Without them, each couple would have to negotiate an individual contract. Since we’ve loosened marriage laws four out of ten fathers aren’t taking responsibility for their children; in 1960 only one in twenty children were born out of wedlock.
“We’re losing votes.” Maybe, but we’re losing children through mental illness, drug addictions and suicide. We’re expanding government promoting fatherlessness and dependency on the state.
It’s sad that and institution considered so wholesome and necessary to every civilization throughout history, and the evidence is stacking up that as a nation we won’t thrive without natural marriage. Now is a crucial time to take a stand for children. Children needs moms and dads.
