Divorce Rates Drop, as well as Marriage Rates

Yesterday, the New York Times decided to print statistics showing that the rate of divorce, often erroneously quoted as being 50%, has been steadily declining for decades, but the driving forces are not encouraging as more people chose to marry later in life, or never at all.

“Two-thirds of divorces are initiated by women, so when you’re talking about changes in divorce rates, in many ways you’re talking about changes in women’s expectations.”
-- William Doherty, marriage therapist, University of Minnesota

For background, click headlines below to read previous articles:

Marriage Rates Low Among Millennial Generation

Young Adults Rarely Marry, Seniors Divorce Often

Fewer Get Married, but Stay Married: Census

Marriage Trend: Confined within Church

One-third of Households are People Living Alone

Most Non-committal Cohabitants' First Marriage Ends

More Women Shack Up & Give Birth; Marriage Rare

Also read ObamaNation: Perpetual Poor Barred from Marriage


-- From "The Truth About The Divorce Rate Is Surprisingly Optimistic" by Brittany Wong, The Huffington Post 12/2/14

We've all heard that 50 percent of marriages in the U.S. end in divorce.

And while that disheartening stat continues to get tossed around, the divorce rate isn't really at 50 percent -- and it isn't rising either. In fact, a new piece in the New York Times' data blog Upshot suggests that the divorce rate has actually been dropping for some time now. Looking at the numbers, the Times suggests the high divorce rate of the late 1970s and early 1980s may have just been a "historical anomaly," rather than a trend.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Everything you heard about divorce is wrong, sort of" by Herb Scribner, Deseret News 12/2/14

. . . Later marriages are a trend I wrote about back in October. Since the Great Recession of 2008, women have found more job opportunities than men, giving them a leg up in becoming the breadwinner at home and causing many of them to seek out men who have their finances and future secured.

Young millennial women are also sidestepping marriage to focus on personal goals ahead of forming a family, according to Deseret News National’s Emily Hales. Young women are putting other priorities — a career, having children and cohabitating — ahead of marriage, even though it’s something they really want, Hales wrote. It doesn’t help, either, that young marriages are also more likely to end in divorce, the Pew Research Center found, which has motivated youngsters to wait for marriage.

But only time will tell whether or not the divorce rate is truly declining. Family Studies reported older men and women, especially baby boomers, are divorcing at unprecedented rates. And if you adjust the current divorce rates by age, the divorce rate actually peaked in 2011 with a 40 percent increase, Family Studies reported.

And many divorce rate numbers don’t take into account the rise in cohabitating couples, who don’t always marry but still end up in separation, as Bradford Wilcox wrote about in 2013.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "The Divorce Surge Is Over, but the Myth Lives On" by Claire Cain Miller, New York Times 12/2/14

About 70 percent of marriages that began in the 1990s reached their 15th anniversary (excluding those in which a spouse died), up from about 65 percent of those that began in the 1970s and 1980s. Those who married in the 2000s are so far divorcing at even lower rates. If current trends continue, nearly two-thirds of marriages will never involve a divorce, according to data from Justin Wolfers, a University of Michigan economist (who also contributes to The Upshot).

Of college-educated people who married in the early 2000s, only about 11 percent divorced by their seventh anniversary, the last year for which data is available. Among people without college degrees, 17 percent were divorced, according to Mr. Wolfers.

Working-class families often have more traditional notions about male breadwinners than do the college-educated — yet economic changes have left many of the men in these families struggling to find work. As a result, many wait to achieve a level of stability that never comes and thus never marry, while others split up during tough economic times.

Some of the decline in divorce clearly stems from the fact that fewer people are getting married — and some of the biggest declines in marriage have come among groups at risk of divorce. But it also seems to be the case that marriages have gotten more stable, as people are marrying later.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read Where Liberalism Flourishes, Population Diminishes

And read Utopian Dream Shattered by Reality of Birth Rate

In addition, read Married Birthing Nearly Extinct Among Non-college Grads and preview the violent and dismal economic future of an America without intact families as President Obama Replaces Fathers with Government Mentors

Census: 'Gay Marriage' Official, but Fewer Marry

Despite the fact that most states do not recognize same-sex "marriage," President Obama's Census Bureau now classifies such "marriages" the same as natural marriages.  The latest Census report shows that the percentage of Americans married is less than ever recorded — in fact, many studies find that the majority of Americans are single.  According to the Census, less than five marriages out of one-thousand are so-called "gay marriages."

For background, read about the low marriage rates among the millennial generation and high divorce rates among seniors.

Also click headlines below to read previous articles:

Same-sex Household Count Tiny: U.S. Census

President Obama Favors the One Percenters (Homosexuals)

One-third of Households are People Living Alone

Marriage Trend: Confined within Church

Marriage Obsolete: American Poll

Cohabitation Soars, Children Suffer: Study

ObamaNation: Perpetual Poor Barred from Marriage

-- From "Census Bureau now categorizes same-sex married couples as ‘families’" by Adam Bell, Charlotte Observer 9/18/14

In prior years, the U.S. Census Bureau counted such couples as “unmarried partners,” even if they were legally married. But now, starting with the new annual American Community Survey, they are in among the family totals.

The change, however, won’t have a big effect on overall family statistics given how small the same-sex totals are . . .

Same-sex couples who live together but are not married are still counted as “unmarried partners,” the same designation for unmarried opposite-sex couples. The Census Bureau has counted same-sex couples since 1990.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "For first time, census data on married couples includes same-sex spouses" by D’Vera Cohn, Pew Research Center 9/18/14

The Census Bureau estimates there were nearly 252,000 households headed by same-sex married couples in 2013, a notable increase from the 182,000 estimated in 2012, but still a small fraction of the 56 million total U.S. married couples. . . .

The overall decline in marriage among adults in part reflects the rising age when people first get married. Although the median age at which Americans first marry was once in the low 20s, it’s now is in the late 20s for both men and women. But other factors may also be in play: Marriage is declining most sharply for less-educated adults.

In part because marriage is so uncommon at younger ages, the Pew Research Center analyzes marriage trends for adults ages 18 and older. A recent widely cited analysis by the Martin Prosperity Institute concluding that single people make up more than half the U.S. adult population based its numbers on ages 16 and older.

In the newly released data, same-sex cohabiting partners appear to make up a smaller share of 2013 households than in 2012. . . .

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Millennials Won't Marry, but Favor 'Gay Marriage'

A new report from the Urban Institute shows that the same generation that embraces legalized same-sex "marriage" includes a growing number of young adults who have a diminished view of the institution of marriage in their own lives. Such recognition of the alarming drop in marriage rates, as well as birth rates, ought to set off warning sirens among middle-aged Americans whose retirement income is dependent upon the generation to come.

UPDATE 9/20/14 - Census: 'Gay Marriage' Official, but Fewer Marry

For background, click headlines below to read previous articles:

Young Adults Rarely Marry, Seniors Divorce Often

One-third of Households are People Living Alone

Government Funding Strangled by Government Constraints on Birth Rate

Utopian Dream Shattered by Reality of Birth Rate

Where Liberalism Flourishes, Population Diminishes

Also read Married Birthing Nearly Extinct Among Non-college Grads and preview the violent and dismal economic future of an America without intact families as President Obama Replaces Fathers with Government Mentors



-- From "Millennials Set to Be the Most Un-Married Generation Yet" by Michelle Smith, Money News 7/21/14

If millennials keep to current trends, over 30 percent of females will turn 40 as single women. That's nearly double the share of Gen X counterparts who were single at that age.

In 1960, 59 percent of adults between ages 18 and 29 were married. Today, the marriage rate among that age group has dropped to 20 percent.

Overall, only about 26 percent of all millennials, described as those born after 1982, are married, says Forbes.

Many people believe millennials have largely scratched marriage off their list of aspirations as 44 percent of young adults, a much larger share than of any other generation, feel marriage is “obsolete,” says Forbes. . . .

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Marriage Is Not Priority for Millennials, Study Says" by Anugrah Kumar, Christian Post Contributor 7/21/14

Using data from the American Community Survey to estimate age-specific marriage rates, Washington, D.C.-based Urban Institute finds that the percentage of Millennials marrying by age 40 will fall lower than for any previous generation of Americans, even in a scenario where marriage rates recover considerably.

In the early millennium period, from 2000 to 2004, the peak first marriage rate for single U.S.-born women at each year of age from 20 to 40 was .099. This indicated that among never-married single women age 25 in that period, just under 10 percent would have married a year later at age 26, says the study titled, "Fewer Marriages, More Divergence: Marriage Projections for Millennials to Age 40."

A pattern of divergence is evident across the racial and ethnic comparisons, the study finds, noting that, overall, racial and ethnic differences in marriage are projected to be more pronounced for Millennials than for any previous generation.

For example, Hispanic women, Non-Hispanic black women and non-Hispanic women of other racial origin are projected to have steeper decrease in marriage than non-Hispanic white women. For men, the patterns are similar, except that the trends for non-Hispanic white men are slightly steeper than those for non-Hispanic other men.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Millennials say no to marriage" by Tami Luhby, CNN Money 7/20/14

"The evidence shows that getting married increases wealth and income," said Pamela Smock, a sociology professor at the University of Michigan.

Single Americans may be less likely to buy homes or trade up to accommodate growing families, while single parents may be more likely to qualify for government safety net programs.

And the growing schism in marriage rates could exacerbate income inequality in this country, dividing society into still mostly married "haves" and increasingly single "have nots."

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

In addition, read 'Intact Family' Nearly Extinct Among Blacks and also read Marriage Trend: Confined within Church as well as The Religious Procreate, Others Don't

And read American Trend: Fewer Children, More Animals/Pets

Married Birthing Nearly Extinct: Non-college Grads

A latest John Hopkins University study found that less-educated adults, who are almost 30 years old, do not wait until marriage to have kids. Researchers said that it is now an "unusual" trend for non-college graduates to have all their children within marriage.

For background, click headlines below to read previous articles:

44% of 'Middle America' Births are Out of Wedlock

More Women Shack Up & Give Birth; Marriage Rare

Young Adults Rarely Marry, Seniors Divorce Often

Fewer Get Married, but Stay Married: Census

Demise of Family Counters Upward Mobility: Harvard Study

Violence & Poverty due to Absence of Intact Family

ObamaNation: Perpetual Poor Barred from Marriage

UPDATE 7/29/14: Marriage Rates Low Among Millennial Generation

UPDATE 12/3/14: Divorce Rates Drop, as well as Marriage Rates

-- From "Non-College Graduates Do Not Wait Until Marriage to Have Children, Study" by Stephen Adkins, UniversityHerald Reporter 6/17/14

"Clearly the role of marriage in fertility and family formation is now modest in early adulthood and the lofty place that marriage once held among the markers of adulthood is in serious question," sociologist Andrew J. Cherlin said in a press release.

The researchers found that 81 percent of births reported by women and 87 percent of births reported by men had occurred to non-college graduates. Overall, 57 percent of births had occurred outside wedlock for both men and women. Plus, 64 percent of women and 63 percent of men had at least one child outside of marriage. It was 74 percent among women and 70 percent among men without 4-year college degrees.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "More Millennial Mothers Are Single Than Married" by Belinda Luscombe, Time Magazine 6/17/14

Motherhood is beginning to show the fissures along income and education lines that have already appeared in other aspects of U.S. society, with a small cluster of wealthy well educated people at one end (married with kids), a large cluster of struggling people at the other (kids, not married) and a thinning middle. While many children raised by single parents are fine, the advantages of a two parent family have been quite exhaustively documented. Some of these advantages can be tied to financial resources, but not all.

Among people with kids between the ages of 26 to 31 who didn’t graduate from college, 74% of the moms and 70% of the dads had at least one of those kids while single, Cherlin found.

The study points out that unmarried couples have a high break up rate in the first few stressful years after the birth of a child and that this often leads to what’s called “multi-partner fertility” in the academy and “a lot of different baby mamas” in the rest of the world. This kind of family instability, with step-siblings and half siblings and a lot of fleeting parental figures can be tough on both finances and on kids and leads to the calcification of social inequality “The sharp differentiation by education in the transition to adulthood,” says the study, “is another indicator that American society is moving toward two different patterns of family formation and two diverging destinies for children.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "The Luxury of Waiting for Marriage to Have Kids" by Olga Khazan, The Atlantic 6/17/14

. . . the cornerstone theory of marriage no longer applies. Culturally, young adults of all social classes and income levels are less likely to think of marriage as the “cornerstone” of their lives—that is, the first thing they do as adults.

. . . marriage is increasingly something only educated people do. . . . College-educated people are increasingly only marrying other college-educated people, and they’re more likely to get married overall. One reason less-educated women are having children out of wedlock is that college-educated men are not interested in marrying them.

Unlike in Western Europe, where couples cohabit for years and sometimes decades, often with kids, less-educated Americans tend to rotate in and out of cohabiting relationships as the years wear on. They have children with multiple different partners, creating complex webs of child obligations, step-parents, and half-siblings.

For the study, researchers examined the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, which interviewed 9,000 young people born between 1981 and 1998 annually from 1997 to 2011.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Most Millennial moms who skip college also skip marriage, data shows" by Jill Rosen, John Hopkins University 6/16/14

The study is detailed in "Changing Fertility Regimes and the Transition to Adulthood: Evidence from a Recent Cohort," a paper by Cherlin, Elizabeth Talbert, and Suzumi Yasutake recently presented to the Population Association of America.

Of mothers with four or more years of college, 32 percent had at least one baby while unmarried. Of mothers with one to three years of college, 67 percent had at least one baby while unmarried. Of mothers with a high school diploma, 71 percent had at least one baby while unmarried. Lastly, among mothers with no high school diploma, 87 percent had at least one baby while unmarried.

Only 36 percent of the mothers had all of their babies while married —that's 46 percent of whites, 10 percent of blacks and 28 percent of Hispanics. Those numbers are roughly the same for men.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Millennials in Adulthood" posted at Pew Research 3/7/14

The median age at first marriage is now the highest in modern history—29 for men and 27 for women. In contrast to the patterns of the past, when adults in all socio-economic groups married at roughly the same rate, marriage today is more prevalent among those with higher incomes and more education.

Perhaps because of their slow journey to marriage, Millennials lead all generations in the share of out-of-wedlock births. In 2012, 47% of births to women in the Millennial generation were non-marital, compared with 21% among older women. Some of this gap reflects a lifecycle effect—older women have always been less likely to give birth outside of marriage. But the gap is also driven by a shift in behaviors in recent decades. In 1996, when Gen Xers were about the same age that Millennials were in 2012, just 35% of births to that generation’s mothers were outside of marriage (compared with 15% among older women in 1996).12

Millennials join their elders in disapproving of this trend. About six-in-ten adults in all four generations say that more children being raised by a single parent is bad for society; this is the most negative evaluation by the public of any of the changes in family structure tested in the Pew Research survey.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read Utopian Dream Shattered by Reality of Birth Rate as well as American Trend: Fewer Children, More Animals/Pets

Gays, Unions March Against Catholic School Morals

As President Obama leads America into the national sexual deviancy month of June, the Archdiocese of Cincinnati is under fire from the PC police, the mainstream media, homosexualists of all stripes, and its own Catholic school teachers who plan to unionize rather than sign contractual morality clauses that challenge their self-proclaimed rights to behave immorally and defy God Almighty.

Umm . . . unions may have political power, but . . .

For background, read Drop Morals for Catholic School Teachers, California Parents Say and also read Nun Blasted by North Carolina Parents for Teaching Catholicism

And click headlines below to read previous articles:

ObamaNation: Building Alters of Worship to Sexual Deviancy

President Obama & Democrats Celebrate Deviant Sex Month of June

Homosexual Indoctrination Month in Schools Nationwide

-- From "White House declares June LGBT Pride Month" by Anna Brand, MSNBC 6/2/14

LGBT rights just got another big push from the president himself.

The White House on Friday issued a proclamation by President Barack Obama calling on Americans to eliminate prejudice “everywhere it exists,” declaring June as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month.

“As progress spreads from State to State, as justice is delivered in the courtroom [in defiance of voters], and as more of our fellow Americans are treated with dignity and respect – our Nation becomes not only more accepting, but more equal as well,” the proclamation begins.

Obama writes that although the gay rights movement saw a massive victory this month last year with Supreme Court’s decision to strike down a key provision of the Defense of Marriage Act, giving gay couples married in states where it’s legal the same federal benefits that straight couples receive, full equality is not yet here.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Cincinnati Catholic school teachers resign over anti-gay morality clause" by Matt Bradwell, UPI 6/2/14

Catholic school teachers in the Archdiocese of Cincinnati are resigning rather than sign a new contract that includes a morality clause banning public support of the LGBT community. Additionally, teachers cannot publicly support sex outside of marriage nor the use of in-vitro fertilization.

"This is a deep human issue and to dismiss it ... by calling (homosexuality) a lifestyle seems to be a huge misunderstanding on the cognitive level ... It's a dismissal of other human beings," [Catholic high school teacher Robert] Hague wrote in an open letter to Cincinnati Catholic Schools Superintendent Jim Rigg.

Roger Rosen teaches French and Latin at the same Catholic school where he was valedictorian almost five decades prior. He said he signed the new contract because he felt he had no choice, going as far as to call himself a "coward" for doing so.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Cincinnati Catholic teachers unionize in response to new 'morality clause'" by Lyndsey Schley, WKSU-FM89.7 (Kent State Univ.) 5/16/14

Some Catholic school teachers in southwest Ohio have formed a union. For Ohio Public Radio, WNKU’s Cheri Lawson reports that they’ve organized in response to a new restrictive employment contract adopted by the Archdiocese of Cincinnati and similar to one imposed in Cleveland.

The controversial agreement has drawn national attention because of a morality clause that spells out actions that could cause teachers to lose their jobs. Among them are showing public support for abortion, sex outside of marriage and same-sex unions.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Gay pride event has focus on Catholic teacher contract" by Michael D. Clark, The Cincinnati Enquirer 5/31/14

Officials from the national Human Rights Campaign amped up the national controversy this week. The Washington, D.C.-based gay rights organization put another spotlight on Cincinnati – and other dioceses around the country – by sending a letter to the Vatican on behalf of nine teachers who quit their jobs by refusing to sign the new contract.

HRC officials said "the Archdiocese of Cincinnati took anti-LGBT to a new level, calling not only for the firing of gay and lesbian school employees, but also citing support of the 'homosexual lifestyle' as grounds for dismissal."

[Dan Andriacco, spokesman for the Cincinnati archdiocese,] said "99 percent" of the 2,800 teachers in archdiocesan schools have signed the new contract for the next school year.

Saturday's gay pride event will further heighten the conflict between the LGBT community and church officials, [critics say].

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.



Also read Pope Francis opposes same-sex marriage and warns of Satanic homosexual behavior

From "A litany of 'thou shalt nots': Catholic teachers challenge morality clause" by Susan Candiotti and Chris Welch, CNN 5/31/14

The revised morality clause goes beyond more general standard language requiring teachers -- Catholic or not -- to adhere to Catholic doctrine.

First, the 2014-15 contract adds the title "ministers" to all teachers -- from geography to gym class -- a move seen as a legal maneuver to try to protect the archdiocese from discrimination lawsuits. It stems from a 2012 U.S. Supreme Court decision in the case of Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC, in which the justices cite a "ministerial exemption" that gives religious institutions greater latitude when hiring and firing employees.

Teachers must sign a promise not to engage in or publicly support several areas of conduct including unmarried cohabitation or sex, using a surrogate mother or in-vitro fertilization, a homosexual lifestyle, and improper use of social media.

Catholic schools in Cleveland, as well as in Oakland, California, and Honolulu, Hawaii, are working on integrating the clause in their teacher contracts.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Ohio Catholic School Contracts Controversy Dismissed as Overblown" by Carl Bunderson, CNA/EWTN NEWS, posted at National Catholic Register 5/29/14

The new guidelines specify that the educator must agree “to exemplify Catholic principles and to refrain from any conduct or lifestyle which would reflect discredit on or cause scandal to the School or be in contradiction to Catholic doctrine or morals.”

[Dan Andriacco, communications director for the Cincinnati archdiocese, said] “We do consider all of our teachers, including those who are not Catholic, to be ministers of the Church, because our schools are a ministry — that’s the reason we open up the doors in the morning. It’s not just to provide a great education, great discipline, although we do that: it’s to spread the Gospel.”

The wording is important, Andriacco said, for its concern with public — not private — acts, and its extension beyond the bounds of the classroom: “a teachers’ function as a role model doesn’t end at the classroom door. . . . I understand the complaint when people say it’s a bunch of ‘thou shalt nots’ — but it has to be. You can’t list the fullness of everything we’re supposed to do; as Catholics, we should all be very charitable – how are you going to write a contract requirement that people be charitable?”

“But, there is some generalized wording,” he added, that the examples are “not the sum of what we expect of our Catholic teachers; we expect a lot more than that. This is not supposed to be a catalogue of everything we expect from them.”

“If we had a problem with teachers posting racial slurs on their Facebook page or blog, that that would probably be part of the contract; I really suspect that if we did not fire, or publicly discipline a teacher who posted racial slurs on their website, that we would get an even bigger pushback than we’re getting now.”

The specified wording and examples in the contract are necessary, Andriacco explained, because the archdiocese has found itself in “situations where people seem to not know what the contract obligates them to.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

UPDATE 12/27/14: From "Diocese to Lose $2 Million in Teacher’s IVF Lawsuit" by Peter Jesserer Smith, National Catholic Register

A federal grand jury decided the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend, Ind., will have to pay out nearly $2 million to a teacher it fired for violating the morals clause of her contract by using artificial means to get pregnant [—a violation the Civil Rights Act].

A diocesan statement emailed to the Register stated the Fort Wayne-South Bend Diocese is “disappointed with the outcome of the trial and is considering an appeal to the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Herx, a married Catholic woman, had been a junior-high language-arts teacher at St. Vincent de Paul School in Fort Wayne since 2003. She told diocesan officials that she was conceiving a child through in vitro fertilization (IVF) and was let go after rejecting the diocese’s attempts to reconcile her with Church teaching.

The case is complicated by the fact that Herx was fired after her second round of IVF treatments. According to court documents, Herx informed the school’s principal, Sandra Guffey, in March 2010, during the first round of treatment — part of which was paid for by the diocese’s health plan — and her contract was renewed. Guffey registered no objections at the time, explaining during the trial that she had been unaware of the Church’s teaching on IVF and only learned about it when reading a magazine a year later.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

UPDATE 1/14/15: From "Judge cuts jury award for ex-teacher’s in vitro firing" by The Associated Press

Monday’s decision by U.S. District Judge Robert L. Miller Jr. dropped Emily Herx’s $1.9 million judgment in her civil rights lawsuit to just under $544,000.

After a four-day trial in December, a jury awarded her $1.75 million for compensatory damages for pain and suffering, $125,000 for medical care, $75,000 for lost wages and benefits, and $1 for punitive damages, The Journal Gazette reported.

In Monday’s ruling, Miller Jr. . . . reduced the compensatory damage award to $299,999 and left the punitive damage award at $1, to bring that total to $300,000.

Miller also increased the award for lost wages and benefits to $118,803, and included $22,853 in post-termination out-of-pocket health care costs, court documents indicate.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read Gay Agenda will be Complete when Christians are Muzzled, Say Homosexualists as well as Senator Ted Cruz Says the Gay Agenda Ends Christian Liberty

And read American Decline: Obama's Gay Agenda vs. Christians as well as America Going to Hell; Christians Lose Convictions

Obama Replaces Fathers with Government Mentors

Although President Obama serves as a personal model of the responsible father in a stable marriage and family, his government policies have exacerbated the liberal ideals of the past half-century.  While the president announces yet another government effort today to make up for the liberals' destruction of the family, especially of minority populations, he champions every anti-family policy imaginable.

For background, click headlines below to read previous articles:

Government Destines Black Children to Poverty

Black Abortion Key to Reducing Poverty, Says Mayor

Liberals Admit to Destruction of African Americans

ObamaNation: Perpetual Poor Barred from Marriage

Defeating Marriage & Destroying Family: Survey

Demise of Family Counters Upward Mobility: Harvard Study

Violence & Poverty due to Absence of Intact Family

'Intact Family' Nearly Extinct Among Blacks

Now that the liberals' Nanny State has destroyed the family within the American underclass, their solution to the problem is to virtually replace parents with government.  For example, these experts say that Obama-Schooling Should Begin at Age 18 Months.

UPDATE 5/16/15: Public Boarding Schools Proposed by Obama Administration

-- From "Obama urges national commitment to help boys of color" by Tom Cohen, CNN 5/30/14

It is a stark and sobering fact of American life in the 21st century -- black, Hispanic and Native American boys and young men are less likely to graduate, stay out of jail and get a job than those who are white.

Chances are greater they'll grow up with a single parent or none at all, won't read well, and will get suspended or expelled from school or just drop out.

Saddest of all, such statistics aren't new or particularly shocking in a society that has come to expect such class, racial and ethnic disparities.

President Barack Obama launched his "My Brother's Keeper" initiative three months ago to focus on solutions to such chronic and deep-rooted social ills. The initiative included a task force to examine the issue, and an invitation for businesses and foundations to help out.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Obama’s My Brother’s Keeper initiative takes crucial next step" by Trymaine Lee, MSNBC 5/30/14

During an emotional speech at the White House, delivered before a backdrop of young black and Latino men from Obama’s hometown of Chicago, the president implored Americans of all colors to shake their complacency over the dire outcomes of minority men and help provide them pathways to success.

This morning, the task force released its first report to the president, in which they outline a broad set of guiding principles and recommendations. The recommendations include launching a national mentor-recruiting campaign, eliminating suspensions and expulsions of preschoolers, encouraging a culture of reading at home and growing youth summer programs and pre-apprenticeships.

The initiative calls on filling the gaps for young men of color at critical times in their lives, including early education, when these boys often fall behind in literacy and math. The task force recommends universal access to high-quality early childhood care and education, saying, “pre-school for all is a vital component to the administration’s so-called ‘opportunity agenda.’” And later, as students prepare to graduate from high school, that students are college-ready. But even further, the task force suggests helping these young people through college with stronger college counselors and, after graduation, expanded access to mentorship programs and internships. It’s what the task force describes as a “cradle-to-college-and-career approach.” (emphasis added)

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Opportunity for All: My Brother’s Keeper Blueprint for Action" by Office of the Press Secretary, The White House 5/30/14

. . . Boys of color are too often born into poverty and live with a single parent. . . . Too many of these boys and young men will have negative interactions with the juvenile and criminal justice system, and the dream of a college education is within grasp for too few.

. . . Today, the President met with his Cabinet to discuss the Task Force’s initial assessments and recommendations and the President called on the American people to get engaged through mentorship opportunities nationwide.

It is important that all children have caring adults who are engaged in their lives.  But too many young people lack this support.  For example, roughly two-thirds of Black and one-third of Hispanic children live with only one parent.   Moreover, research suggests that a father's absence increases the risk of his child dropping out of school among Blacks and Hispanics by 75 percent and 96 percent respectively.  We see significant high school dropout rates—as high as 50 percent in some school districts—including among boys and young men from certain Southeast Asian and Pacific Islander populations. And some 27 percent of American Indians and Alaska Natives live in poverty, compared to 11.6% of White Americans.

The President is calling on Americans interested in getting involved in My Brother’s Keeper to sign up as long-term mentors to young people . . .

To read the entire White House press release above, CLICK HERE.

UPDATE 4/16/15: Decades of Income Inequality is due to Demise of Married-parent Families with Children, Study Shows

Pope Open to Homosexual Civil Unions, Media Report

Once again, the mainstream media leaped to put words in Pope Francis' mouth.  Numerous reports explicitly claim that the Pope supports same-sex civil unions as well as legally-sanctioned heterosexual cohabitation, when he never said any such thing, and again media are reporting that the Pope is evolving toward women clergy.

"I see a glimmer of hope that I'm hoping will open up into a floodlight into this conversation . . ."
-- Jon O'Brien, president of Catholics for Choice

For background, read Liberal Media Say Pope Francis OKs Gay & Women Priests but actually the Pope Said the Gay Agenda is the Work of the Devil, and also the Pope Disappoints Liberals by Opposing 'Gay Adoption.'

Also read Pope's New Spanish Cardinal Says 'Gay Gene' is a Defect

In addition, read Pope Francis Decries Abortion; Vatican Says Media Distort Him

-- From "Pope Francis: Church could support same-sex civil unions" by CNN, posted at WPIX-TV11 (NY) 3/5/14

Pope Francis reaffirmed the Catholic Church’s opposition to gay marriage on Wednesday, but suggested in a newspaper interview that it could support same-sex civil unions.

For instance, civil unions provide financial security to cohabitating couples, “as for instance in medical care,” the Pope said in a wide-ranging interview published Wednesday in Corriere della Sera, an Italian daily.

A number of Catholic bishops have supported civil unions for gay couples, including Pope Francis when he was Archbishop of Buenos Aires in 2010, according to reports in National Catholic Reporter and The New York Times.

On the role of women in the church, an issue of particular concern to Catholics in the United States, the Pope hinted that changes could be in the works.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From  "Did Pope Francis open the door to same-sex civil unions?" by Joshua Normanm, CBS News 3/5/14

Pope Francis has famously declared a cessation of hostilities in the culture wars on same-sex marriage, contraception, and abortion that had defined the Catholic Church for much of the modern era.

On Wednesday, he signaled a new direction in that regard when discussing civil unions in a short but wide-ranging interview . . . he explained why he thought civil unions were created in the first place. . . . in a translation of the interview provided by John Thavis, the former Rome bureau chief for Catholic News Services (CNS.)

The Vatican has as recently as January said the pope and the Catholic Church are not open to same-sex civil unions, and Thavis told CBS News the pope's wording was deliberately vague in the most recent interview.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Pope, in interview, suggests church could tolerate some civil unions" by Francis X. Rocca, Catholic News Service 3/5/14

"Matrimony is between a man and a woman," the pope said, but moves to "regulate diverse situations of cohabitation (are) driven by the need to regulate economic aspects among persons, as for instance to assure medical care." Asked to what extent the church could understand this trend, he replied: "It is necessary to look at the diverse cases and evaluate them in their variety."

Asked if the church's teachings on sexual and medical ethics represented "non-negotiable values," a formulation used by Pope Benedict XVI, Pope Francis said he had "never understood the expression 'non-negotiable values.'"

"Values are values, period," he said. "I cannot say that, among the fingers of a hand, there is one less useful than another. That is why I cannot understand in what sense there could be negotiable values."

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Catholic Church on Homosexual Acts: ‘Under No Circumstances Can They Be Approved’" by Michael W. Chapman, CNSNews.com 3/5/14

When asked how the Church could address the issue, Pope Francis said, “It is necessary to look at the diverse cases and evaluate them in their variety.”  The Pope did not say that civil unions – “diverse situations of cohabitation” – were impermissible, but that the “diverse cases” could be evaluated “in their variety.”

The Catechism of the Catholic Church says that “homosexual persons are called to chastity.” (2359) The Catechism further says, “Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that ‘homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.’ They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.” (2357)

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Women Could Have Greater Role in Church, Says Pope" by Deborah Ball, Wall Street Journal 3/5/14

The Vatican could soon make significant changes to the role of women in the Catholic Church and to its approach to divorcées, Pope Francis said in a newspaper interview.

Some Vatican experts have raised the possibility of the pope appointing women to senior positions in the Vatican bureaucracy, perhaps as the head of one of its powerful departments.

But the pope suggested even bigger changes could be in store, with a senior cardinal now consulting female experts in considering possible options.

Some church leaders advocate making women deacons, ordained ministers who can assist at Mass or perform baptisms, although the pope made no reference to such a possibility.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read Pope Francis Cracks Down on American Liberal Nuns, Priests

Demise of Family Counters Upward Mobility: Harvard

A new Harvard University study directly contradicts President Obama's "economic inequality" narrative, by showing that the liberals' redefinition of family is the greatest cause of poverty in America.

“The strongest and most robust predictor [of social mobility] is the fraction of children with single parents. . . . [Children] of married parents also have higher rates of upward mobility if they live in communities with fewer single parents.”
-- Harvard University study Where is the Land of Opportunity? The Geography of Intergenerational Mobility in the United States

UPDATE 4/16/15: Decades of Income Inequality is due to Demise of Married-parent Families with Children, Study Shows

For background, click headlines below for previous articles:

ObamaNation: Perpetual Poor Barred from Marriage

More Women Shack Up & Give Birth; Marriage Rare

Violence & Poverty due to Absence of Intact Family

Liberalism Causes Poverty in America: Study

Liberals Admit to Destruction of African Americans

Marriage Essential for Children: Studies

Study Shows Gay Parenting Harms Children

Supreme Court's New Morality Means Justice for Polygamy

-- From "Economists: Your Parents Are More Important Than Ever" by Derek Thompson, The Atlantic 1/23/14

. . . your parents' marriage (or living arrangement) matters. The single strongest predictor of a child's economic fortunes is the fraction of single parents in the area where she grew up. Children of married parents have a much better shot of getting ahead even if they're in areas where single parents are the norm. "The fraction of children living in single-parent households is the strongest correlate of upward income mobility among all the variables we explored," the researchers said.

It's important not to overstate the causality here. Rich single parents tend to produce richer children than married couples living in poverty. Instead it's best to see marriages as a powerful centripetal force in the vicious cycle of poverty. Low-income parents tend to have children who grow up to be lower-income, who are in turn more likely to form single-parent households and raise children who follow this well-worn life path.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Economic mobility hasn’t changed in a half-century in America, economists declare" by Jim Tankersley, Washington Post 1/22/14

Incorporating results from a previous study dating back to the 1950s, the [Harvard] authors concluded that “measures of social mobility have remained remarkably stable over the second half of the twentieth century in the United States.”

Several economists who study mobility and inequality expressed surprise at that stasis — starting with Chetty, the lead author. “I am really struck by how stable it seems to be,” he said in an interview. “I would not have expected that, because many things have changed over time.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Family Matters" by W. Bradford Wilcox, posted at Slate 1/22/14

[The Harvard study] explores the community characteristics most likely to predict mobility for lower-income children. The study specifically focuses on two outcomes: absolute mobility for lower-income children—that is, how far up the income ladder they move as adults; and relative mobility—that is, how far apart children who grew up rich and poor in the same community end up on the economic ladder as adults. . . .

. . . this is the first major study showing that rates of single parenthood at the community level are linked to children’s economic opportunities over the course of their lives. A lot of research—including new research from the Brookings Institution—has shown us that kids are more likely to climb the income ladder when they are raised by two, married parents. But this is the first study to show that lower-income kids from both single- and married-parent families are more likely to succeed if they hail from a community with lots of two-parent families.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Poverty and Opportunity: Begin with Facts" by Ron Haskins, The Brookings Institution 1/28/14

Changes in marriage rates over the past decade are astounding. Between 1970 and 2010, the percentage of 35 year old women living in married-couple families with children fell from about 78 percent to 50 percent while the percentage of women who were single and living with children more than doubled from 9 percent to over 20 percent. This demographic trend has two major effects that work against our goals of reducing poverty and increasing mobility. First, children in single-parent families are four times as likely to be poor as children in married-couple families. Thus, the rising share of children in female-headed families is a major force pushing up the child poverty rate. No one thinks being reared in poverty is good for children and their development. Second, there is now all but universal agreement that the best rearing environment for children is a married-couple family. Not only do married-couple families have more money to invest in their children, but they also spend more time with their children and use child rearing techniques that are more conductive to child development. Research shows that disadvantaged parents, usually single mothers, spend less time with their children, talk with them less, and are more likely to use child-rearing techniques that are associated with poor developmental outcomes, especially corporal punishment.

. . . The most straightforward way to reduce poverty and increase opportunity would be to reverse these trends. However, the changes in family composition have been proceeding for more than four decades and show no signs of abating, despite a host of efforts by policy makers. . . .

. . . Nonmarital births increase the nation’s poverty rate, increase income inequality, and have deleterious effects on children’s development. Parents, children, and the nation as a whole would benefit from a reduction in the nation’s nonmarital birth rate. . . .

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "2-Parent Families Are Best Predictor of Upward Mobility for Poor, Harvard Study Finds" by Napp Nazworth, Christian Post Reporter 1/23/14

Copious studies have long shown that marriage helps families leave and stay out of poverty. What is most interesting, though, about the new study by Harvard economists Raj Chetty, Nathaniel Hendren and Patrick Kline, and Berkeley economist Emmanuel Saez is that it is a community-level analysis.

This means that poor children who live in communities with a large proportion of single parents are more likely to remain poor even when they are raised by their married mother and father. Or, another way of saying the same thing, poor children who are raised by a single parent but live in a community where most children are raised by both parents are more likely to escape poverty.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read Obama-Schooling Should Begin at Age 18 Months as well as Black Abortion Key to Reducing Poverty, Says Mayor

Where Liberalism Flourishes, Population Diminishes

As the United States follows the trends of other nations, notably those in Europe, in abandoning conservative values of family and rejecting God's command to "be fruitful and multiply," the secular hope for a sustained growing economy depends largely on immigration.

“The census projections to 2060 have us going down to half a percent because we’re an older population, and aging populations don’t grow so much.  If we have very sharp declines in growth, that takes a bite out of the economy.”
-- William Frey, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution (nonpartisan research organization)

UPDATE 5/14/14: Utopian Dream Shattered by Reality of Birth Rate

For background, click headlines below to read previous articles:

American Trend: Fewer Children, More Animals/Pets

Sex on the Rise, Procreation in Decline

44% of 'Middle America' Births are Out of Wedlock

Childless Women: White and More Educated

Christians Will Flourish Demographically, Academic Says

Liberalism Causes Poverty in America: Study

ObamaCare Covers Abortion, Pays Abortionists

Lower Birth Rate Saves Taxpayers, Says Obama White House

UPDATE 8/10/14: Abortion Advocates Fear Extinction (because they don't procreate)



-- From "U.S. Population Grows At Slowest Rate Since The Great Depression" by Jillian Berman, The Huffington Post 12/30/13

The U.S. population grew by just 0.72 percent in the year ended July 1, 2013, the Census Bureau reported Monday. That’s the slowest growth rate since 1937. . . . [There are] fewer marriages and limited mobility, especially for America’s young people. . . .

And though the recession technically ended in June 2009, and economists are hoping for a stronger economy in 2014, population growth shows little sign of gaining strength. About half of the states showed somewhat slower growth rates this year than last year, Frey said.

U.S. population growth is expected to slow even more in the next few decades, though that’s largely not attributable to a weak economy, Frey said. Instead, the slow growth will mostly be the result of an aging population.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "U.S. Population Up Just 0.7%, Census Finds" by Tamar Lewin, New York Times 12/30/13

In January 2014, the bureau said, one birth is expected every eight seconds in the United States, and a death every 12 seconds.

The projected world population on Jan. 1, 2014, is 7,137,577,750, an increase of 77,630,563, or 1.1 percent, from Jan. 1, 2013.

In January 2014, 4.3 births and 1.8 deaths are expected worldwide every second. India added 15.6 million people over the one-year period. It led all countries, followed by China, Nigeria, Pakistan and Ethiopia.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "CDC: U.S. Fertility Rate Hits Record Low for 2nd Straight Year; 40.7% of Babies Born to Unmarried Women" by Terence P. Jeffrey, CNSNews.com 1/8/14

The U.S. fertility rate has dropped from year-to-year for each of the last five years. In 2007, it was 69.3. In 2008, it was 68.1. In 2009, it was 66.2. In 2010, it was 64.1. In 2011, it was 63.2. And, in 2012, it was 63.0.

Since 1960, the fertility rate in the United States has declined 46.6 percent. In that year, 118 babies were born per 1,000 women aged 15 to 44.

. . . 2012 thus marked the fifth straight year that 40 percent or more of the babies born in the United States were born to unmarried women.

The percentage of American babies born to unmarried mothers has more than doubled since 1980. That year, only 18.4 percent of the babies born in the United States were born to unmarried mothers.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Births: Final Data for 2012" by Joyce A. Martin, M.P.H. et. al., U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 12/30/13

The 2012 general fertility rate declined to 63.0 births per 1,000 women aged 15–44, another historic low for the United States. The total fertility rate declined 1%, to 1,880.5 births per 1,000 women in 2012.

Birth rates declined among women in their early 20s between 2011 and 2012 to a new record low. The rate was also down for women 25-29 years, but increased for women aged 30 to 44 years. Birth rates for the youngest (under 15 years) and the oldest mothers (45 years and higher) were unchanged.

To read the entire government report, CLICK HERE.

From "Four Years Into Economic Recovery, America’s Fertility Rate Remains Depressed" by Neil Shah, The Wall Street Journal 12/31/13

Low fertility means less growth in a country’s population, barring a pickup in immigration. Fewer people can mean fewer workers to propel the economy and a smaller tax base to draw from to pay the benefits due retired Americans.

“The fact that fertility has continued to drop, post-recession, suggests that this decline is linked to longer-term, non-economic factors,” said Mark Mather of the Population Reference Bureau, a nonprofit demographic research group.  “A growing number of young adults are going to college and postponing marriage and family formation.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Unplanned pregnancies don't necessarily mean marriage anymore" by Hope Yen, Associated Press 1/7/14

Demographers say the cohabiting trend among new parents is likely to continue. Social stigma regarding out-of-wedlock births is loosening, and economic factors play a role.

About 18.1 percent of all single women who became pregnant opted to move in with their boyfriends before the child was born, according to 2006-2010 data from the government's National Survey of Family Growth, the latest available. That is compared to 5.3 percent who chose a post-conception marriage, according to calculations by Daniel Lichter, a Cornell sociologist.

As recently as the early 1990s, 25 percent of such couples got married.

Since the early 1990s, the share of out-of-wedlock, cohabiting births has grown from 11 percent to 24 percent, while those to noncohabiting, single mothers has remained steady at 16 percent.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read More Women Shack Up & Give Birth; Marriage Rare as well as Most Non-committal Cohabitants' First Marriage Ends

In addition, read how low birth rates cause European nationalities to fear that they will cease to exist, especially Russia and even Germany.

ObamaNation: Perpetual Poor Barred from Marriage

The Nanny State's so-called safety net has become a trap for generations of low-achieving Americans who learn to "make a living" by gaming myriad government programs. Earning too much "on the books" or getting married means you're kicked off government assistance -- as such, the system precludes climbing the ladder of success.

“Staying unmarried is the tax shelter for the poor.”
-- Gene Steuerle, fellow at the Urban Institute

For background, read Young Adults Rarely Marry, Seniors Divorce Often and also read About Half of Americans Now Born Out of Wedlock as well as Family Demise, as 1/3 of Households are People Alone

UPDATE 4/16/15: Decades of Income Inequality is due to Demise of Married-parent Families with Children, Study Shows

UPDATE 5/30/14: President Obama Replaces Fathers with Government Mentors

-- From "4.1 Million Single-Mother Families Are Living In Poverty: Census" by Hope Yen, Huffington Post, 9/19/13

The [U.S. Census] figures, released Thursday, [show] Single-mother families in poverty increased for the fourth straight year to 4.1 million, or 41.5 percent, coinciding with longer-term trends of declining marriage and [thus increased] out-of-wedlock births. Many of these mothers are low income with low education. The share of married-couple families in poverty remained unchanged at 2.1 million, or 8.7 percent.

By race or ethnicity, a growing proportion of poor children are Hispanic, a record 37 percent of the total. Whites make up 30 percent, blacks 26 percent.

With poverty remaining high, food stamp use continued to climb. Roughly 15.8 million, or 13.6 percent of U.S. households, received food stamps, the highest level on record.

The numbers also reflect widening economic inequality, an issue President Barack Obama has pledged would be a top priority of his administration to address. Upward mobility in the U.S. has been hurt . . .

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Tax Expert: ‘Staying Unmarried Is the Tax Shelter for the Poor’" by Penny Starr, CNSNews.com 9/18/13

. . . Tianna Gaines-Turner, a low-wage worker from Philadelphia . . . explained that if she married the father of her children, who was living with them, she would lose benefits. If she told them she was living with the children’s father, the government would take action to make him pay child support and penalize her for having access to his income.

“So basically I did not report that he lived in the home with us,” Gaines-Turner said. “I reported that I was a single parent.

“Unfortunately, the system is not set up – I’m not going to say reward – but it’s not set up to encourage people to have families; to build on what the American Dream is really about is family values,” Gaines-Turner said. “That’s what I was brought up on.

“Family values, family dreams, is for two people who love each other to be able to get married,” Gaines-Turner said. “I wanted to show my children, especially my daughters, and my sons, that if you love this person and you want to be together, you do the right thing and you get married,” said Gaines-Turner, who also has three stepchildren. “You don’t stay shacked up.”

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Single Moms: Pew Research Center Finds That Moms Are Breadwinners In 40 Percent Of Households" by Huffington Post 5/30/13

Based on an analysis of data from the U.S. Census Bureau, Pew found that 40 percent of households with children under the age of 18 include mothers who provide the sole or primary source of income for the family, up from just 11 percent in 1960. They attribute this growth to the increasing number of women in the workforce.

And the majority of these breadwinning moms are single parents: 63 percent -- or 8.6 million -- are single mothers, and 37 percent (5.1 million) are married mothers who out-earn their husbands.

However, the two groups differ greatly in income; the median total family income for homes with married mother breadwinners was nearly $80,000 in 2011, compared to $23,000 for families led by a single mother [thus, below the poverty level in most cases].

. . . 64 percent of those surveyed said that the increasing number of single mothers in the U.S. is a "big problem," though that percentage is down from 71 percent in 2007. And young adults are less concerned about single moms than older adults; 42 percent of adults under 30 view the growing number of single moms as a big problem, compared to 65 percent of adults in their 30s and 40s and 74 percent of adults aged 50 and older. Republicans (78 percent) are also more likely than Democrats (51 percent) to view this trend as a big problem.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

Also read Liberals Admit to Destruction of African Americans as well as 'Intact Family' Nearly Extinct among Blacks

Bill O'Reilly 7/22/13 (click for video)

More Women Shack Up & Give Birth; Marriage Rare

A federal government report with dire statistics of a culture producing children out of wedlock, purports that cohabitation is advantageous over marriage.  The report surveyed girls/women aged 15 to 44, and showed that the vast majority of those less-educated tend to cohabit with men, not necessarily the father of their children.

Only 19 percent of women who got pregnant said it led to their nuptials. In 1995, that number was 32 percent.

For background, read Most Non-committal Cohabitants' First Marriage Ends and also read About Half of Americans Now Born Out of Wedlock as well as Violence & Poverty due to Absence of Intact Family

-- From "CDC: More women choosing cohabitation before marriage" by Michelle Castillo, CBS News 4/4/13

A new report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention showed that 48 percent of women were living with their significant other but not married to them. The number is a sharp increase from the 43 percent reported in 2002 and the 35 percent that reported the same situation in 1995.

Only 23 percent of the women said they got married first before moving in. That number dropped from 30 percent in 2002 and 39 percent in 1995. Women who opted to live without a boyfriend or husband stayed between 27 to 29 percent, which was consistent with the 1995 figures.

Seventy-four percent of 30-year-olds said they had cohabited with a partner. Fifty-five percent said they did it by the age of 25.

High school dropouts were most likely to move in with their boyfriend, with rates at 70 percent.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "More Americans are living together before marriage, study finds" by Karen Kaplan, Los Angeles Times 4/4/13

The older women got, the more likely they were to have tried it. A majority (55%) of women said they had lived with a boyfriend by age 25; by the time those women turned 30, a full 74% had cohabited.

Among women who moved in with a significant other before they turned 20, 25% became pregnant before they got married. But among women over 30, 8% got pregnant before marriage, the study found. The pregnancy rate for women who didn’t finish high school was 33%, compared with 5% of women who finished college.

Overall, getting pregnant was less likely to lead to marriage than in years past. Between 2006 and 2010, 19% of pregnancies prompted couples to get married. In 1995, 32% of pregnancies led to marriages, the researchers reported.

. . . The women in the most recent survey averaged 22 months for their first stint at living together . . .

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "Cohabitation Before Marriage on the Rise: Does it Lead to Better Relationships?" by Brittney R. Villalva, Christian Post Reporter 4/4/13

. . . the study also suggests relationships that result from co-habitation could be more likely to last. It has previously been noted that couples who cohabitate are less likely to get married or stay married.

Other reports have suggested that young couples in particular do not always consider the consequences when deciding to cohabitate.

To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.

From "The Cohabitation Revolution" by Chuck Colson, Christian Post Guest Columnist 9/16/11

. . . nearly half of all American children have lived in a home where the adults are merely living together rather than married.

Today’s advocates of “modern family structure” will tell you that this is no big deal, that having a wedding ring is overrated. The kids, they say, will do fine either way. Well, the fact is, an intact marriage puts children way ahead of children in other types of households. National Review editor Rich Lowry, who labels the current trend a “cohabitation revolution,” notes, “Children in cohabiting households tend to lag children in intact married families on key social indicators and are not much better off than children in single-parent families.”

Jennifer Roback Morse of the National Organization for Marriage reports that children living with their mother and a live-in boyfriend are 33 times more likely to be abused than those living with their biological married parents. Also, children in households with unrelated adults are 50 times more likely to die from inflicted injuries, compared with children living with both biological parents.

Lowry says, “Children turn out to benefit from the structure, rituals, and identity that come with a lasting marriage between their parents. And the very act of committing to the norms of marriage makes adults better marital partners and parents.”

To read the entire opinion column above, CLICK HERE.

Also read Cohabitation Soars, Children Suffer, According to Study as well as Marriage Essential for Children, Studies Show

AGENDA: Grinding America Down (full movie on YouTube):


AGENDA: Grinding America Down (Full Movie) FREE to watch for a limited time (click here)! from Copybook Heading Productions LLC on Vimeo.