Actually, the father COULD be reached for comment, but he was in Chicago.
Regardless, this is what happens when the leftist dream is installed where women trade boring, reliable, employed husbands in for sexcapades with multiple losers and government checks.
3 comments:
Not sure if you saw this recent Atlantic piece "Why Being a Poor Kid in America Is Particularly Awful”
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/09/childcare-spending/407035/?utm_source=SFTwitter
The image at the top says everything about why it's awful: There is no father or husband in the picture - literally.
The irony is lost on the female writer, who argues that child poverty is due to a lack of government funding for families rather than, say, the rising illegitimacy rate and number of single-mother households. This is hamster rationalization 101.
George Will gives a 3 step plan to avoid poverty:
1) Get a high school education and graduate.
2) Wait until you are married (at least 20-years-old) before having babies.
3) Each family needs a mother AND a father to succeed.
Poverty is vanishingly small among those who follow the 3 steps.
How much longer does the boy in question have left to live in the conditions noted by the article? With parents and "child welfare" agents like that, I'm guessing not very.
Concerning the Atlantic article, noted in the comments, of how bad it is being a "poor" kid in the soon to be former USA, obviously the writers have no clue what it's like to be a poor kid in Africa, Asia, India.............
Yes, the overwhelmingly majority (as in almost all) of the "poor" kids actually have food, clothing and shelter in Amerika. Guess what the poor kids in other countries don't have?
Post a Comment