Isn't it ironic that our Parliament is so interesting in getting couples of the same sex to marry, yet ignores the blatant need of couples who generate children through sexual union to marry. Talk about the elephant in the room!
In a society where marriage was expected those women who found themselves without a spouse through circumstances beyond their control, performed heroically in raising those children because of the good example of most of the people around them and the environment that they were typically raised in.
Now in a society where marriage is not necessary before the first casual sexual encounter which may result in a child, if that child is not aborted then the, young lady typically becomes a single mother on the Domestic Purposes Benefit, which is the greatest determinant of poverty for herself and for her children.
However, the Government, in it's blinkered approach to this growing problem of fatherlessness and poverty in NZ, instead turns it's attention to social obligations that would normally flow from young people setting up proper relationships before they have children. Except from mandatory child care from age 3 - that's only really necessary if mothers are working.
If the NZ Government really wanted to reduce child poverty, they would stop teaching that sex is recreational teenagers, and that it's purpose is for the generation of children. The Government would stop trying to change marriage so that two of the same sex, who can never create children together can pretend their relationship is a marriage when it can never be, and instead actively encourage marriage of men and women through government incentives, and discourage divorce by putting in penalties for those at fault in a marriage break up.
If NZ really wants to reduce our growing child poverty problem, which is costing the taxpayer billions and will continue to increase in cost, then that is what is needed. Nothing else will work.
Related links:
Welfare reforms target kids' education, health
Marriage: America’s Best Antidote to Child Poverty
In a society where marriage was expected those women who found themselves without a spouse through circumstances beyond their control, performed heroically in raising those children because of the good example of most of the people around them and the environment that they were typically raised in.
Now in a society where marriage is not necessary before the first casual sexual encounter which may result in a child, if that child is not aborted then the, young lady typically becomes a single mother on the Domestic Purposes Benefit, which is the greatest determinant of poverty for herself and for her children.
However, the Government, in it's blinkered approach to this growing problem of fatherlessness and poverty in NZ, instead turns it's attention to social obligations that would normally flow from young people setting up proper relationships before they have children. Except from mandatory child care from age 3 - that's only really necessary if mothers are working.
Parents face having their benefits slashed in half if they don’t send their children to school or early childhood education centres and enrol them with a doctor.This is now heading into a massive increase of government power over the lives of families and children, starting with those on benefits. It's not for no reason that socialist governments love welfare - it creates a massive dependent class which then necessitates government intervention.
They must also complete basic health checks.
Social development minister Paula Bennet has just announced new ‘social obligations’ which she says will give kids a better start in life. …
From July next year all beneficiary parents must ensure their children:
* attend 15 hours a week Early Childhood Education (ECE) from age 3
* attend school from age five or six
* enrol with a General Practitioner
* complete core WellChild/Tamariki Ora checks
If they don’t, a ”graduated sanction process” will allow three warnings before they face a cut of up to 50 per cent.
If the NZ Government really wanted to reduce child poverty, they would stop teaching that sex is recreational teenagers, and that it's purpose is for the generation of children. The Government would stop trying to change marriage so that two of the same sex, who can never create children together can pretend their relationship is a marriage when it can never be, and instead actively encourage marriage of men and women through government incentives, and discourage divorce by putting in penalties for those at fault in a marriage break up.
If NZ really wants to reduce our growing child poverty problem, which is costing the taxpayer billions and will continue to increase in cost, then that is what is needed. Nothing else will work.
Related links:
Welfare reforms target kids' education, health
Marriage: America’s Best Antidote to Child Poverty
Auckland City Missioner Diane Robertson’s told a Catholic Social Justice week meeting in Auckland last week that 44,000 people this year have had benefits sanctioned (lost up to 50 percent of benefit) plus 14,000 have had unemployment benefit suspended.
ReplyDeleteThe National government's itch to slash and cut beneficiaries income is heartless.
As for nanny state demanding every 3 year old attend Early Childhood Education, whatever happened to parents as first educators ? This is completely contrary to subsidiarity.
FWIW, the purpose of sex is not ONLY for the generation of children but ALSO for the unity of the married spouses.
MPs ought to quit trying to redefine marriage and instead focus on the real issues of poverty, low incomes, and decent jobs so important for families.
God Bless