Is this going to lead to an increase to an already increasing number of underaged mothers and single mothers?
This is more because we've stopped being a society where pregnancy means automatic marriage which can never be dissolved without becoming a pariah, but yes, banning birth control would also make it skyrocket.
Combine this with the public perception of not viewing abortions in a positive light, then yes.. people who make mistakes are being punished and punished hard.
Is it going to increase the already 40% of children not having a father/mother?
I'd like a source for that figure, but probably, yes. [/quote]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_parentThe results of the 2010 United States Census showed that 27% of children live with one parent, consistent with the emerging trend noted in 2000.[6]
I seem to have confused the number with Children borne out of wedlock.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/13/health/13mothers.html"Unmarried mothers gave birth to 4 out of every 10 babies born in the United States in 2007"
So yeah, the problem is not about having birth control, it is the effect of having birth control that is creating this illusion of "sexual freedom" for younger women. Combine this with a lack of morals/parenting on both sides and you get a generation of children being raised without knowing what it takes to make a relationship work.
For Santorum, it's not about stopping the government from imposing on your life. It's about the government imposing on your life in the right way; namely a way that fell out of favor in the Western world around 1880.
So, what? He's essentially saying what leftists are saying.
The left, in general, wishes to expand the scope of government through social programs. Rick Santorum wants to expand the scope of government by making us a closed, reactionary society where rich white men have all the power and everyone else plays out a predetermined role. I.e. 1880's society.
[/quote]
Really?
Such religious intolerance! Heh, but seriously.. at least give a guy a fair shake. If we disqualified candidates on what they have said before that sounds highly strange, then we'd have literally nobody to elect. Go throughout the history of any candidate and you are likely to find statements that are troubling to some degree, depending on your perspective.
But then again, what a politician says during his or her campaign really has no bearing on how they will run the country when they are elected. El Presidente Barack H Obama should be the perfect example of this.
And, really, lets be honest here. If Santorum did win the presidency, do we honestly believe he'll turn American thinking back to 1880? Thats pure malarky and hogwash
. He won't ever have enough power to do what you "believe" he will do because really, not all Republicans (especially his own party) are nowhere near what fanatical when it comes to religion.
But yeah, there seems to be this misconception that Republicans are Republican because they are religious. And that is verily untrue because alot of Republicans are Republicans because there is no other fiscally conservative party in America, and well.. the Tea Party has not fully become its own party yet.