![wedding-cake-topper[1]](http://leatherhead.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/wedding-cake-topper1.jpg)
Marriage appears to be in terminal decline in both the UK & the USA but, with devastating social consequences & costs.
One US commentator thinks Government have too much invested in fixing the adverse social consequences of our individualistic society than to invest more in promoting marriage:
What could possibly be more important to the domestic welfare of our nation than healthy, happy intact homes? Studies over the past few years say being married and raising your own kids is good for you and good for them, offering various benefits in health, wealth and stability. But the shame of unwed parentage went out the window a long time ago, and marriage has been allowed to be viewed as an inconvenient bind rather than a bond.
Policies that support and encourage stable families — as opposed to supporting and encouraging instability — are not terribly likely with a Democratic majority, definitely not with a Democratic president. Not with all they have invested in the infrastructure of social engineering and social support.
Sound familiar? Yup! Our Gordon Brown is absolutely silent on marriage and up to his eyeballs in shovelling tax payers hard earned cash into supporting the outcomes of a catastrophic decline in marriage. Where are the prevention strategies Gordon? We have noted that you appointed Ed (Blinky) Balls as Secretary of State for Children, Schools & Families. Look at the Ministerial Departmental responsibilities (click on the “Ministerial Team” tab on the left column of the web page & then “Ministerial Responsibilities”)……and not a mention of “marriage” anywhere on the website.
2 responses so far ↓
MLH // April 20, 2008 at 10:07 pm |
Family values. I seem to remember that phrase being banded about by certain politicians in the 90’s which is why politicians today are largely reluctant to delve into it for fear of being accused of being a hypocrite, just as those politicians back in the 90’s were being hypocritical.
Simply encouraging marriage via tax incentives will not necessarily create stable family units. Will these people become good parents all of a sudden? There are a large number of couples divorcing every year which indicates its going to take more than cash for marriage deal with social issues.
Even if it could be shown that tax breaks acted to hold couples together, married couples allowances do not target support on couples with children, and represent vast expenditure on married couples without children at home, which does nothing for children at all.
This is politicians getting into a moral issue and I don’t think the public want to be lectured about morals by politicians.
leatherhead // April 21, 2008 at 8:34 am |
Not sure what “family values” has to do with the issue …..it’s certainly not a subject mentioned in the post. It is all about shifting Government policy to promoting & supporting marriage rather than the opposite. New Labour social policy provides financial incentives for low income mothers to stay single and remain a client of the state.
Mr Leatherhead