WHETHER
THE CASTE SYSTEM IS NECESSARY
IN
THIS MODERN DIGITAL WORLD?
1.
Caste system is the one
that has been made all over this world. This has come up so that human beings
could live as an integrated society, as family with discipline and morality.
But, because of the hindrances to this caste system, it has been destroyed
gradually. Because of this, the present world is confronted with several
threats leading to the deterioration of traditional family set up, that is,
Father, Mother and Children.
2.
One day, six catholic
Christian Nadars of Kanyakumari District were speaking together in Chennai
(South India). Among them, two friends had married women belong to other castes
after loving them, while speaking like; there was talk about the Nadar
Community. Two of them asked what was there is community. God created Adam and
Eve. From then onwards, the human beings originate. We are Christians we should
not take into account the divisions among us, in the name of the caste. They
argued that the communal set up was not necessary by citing the words of
St.Paul who wrote to the Galatians and some more facts.
3.
Therefore, this essay
was written emphasizing the fact that the caste system is necessary, by citing
the facts, mentioned in the Bible, so that the Christian Nadars should
understand that the caste system is compulsorily indispensable and act accordingly.
4.
St. Paul, the Apostle
has written the Epistle to the Galatians, “There
is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male
nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus”. [Gal.3:27-28 and Col.3:11].
As per the aforesaid verse, there are no difference among the Communities and
men. Before God, it is true that there is no difference among men. But, St.Paul
had stated in the aforesaid verse “There is neither male nor female”. If it is
so, shall we infer that there is no difference between man and woman?
5.
In this digital world,
in Western countries, especially in United States, indiscipline and indecencies
escalate and families have been scattered, moreso it is dismanteling the
Traditional Family system, that is, Father, Mother and Children. This scenario
has been gradually spreading to other countries also. For example, in the
United States of America,
1.
Only 16% of
Baltimore Teens raised with Married Parents. (Enclosure-1)
2.
45.4 percent of American Moms in their twenties have
never been married. (Enclosure-2)
3. If
39 Percent of the Elderly want to die because they’re lonely. (Enclosure-3) http://constitution.com/39-percent-elderly-want-die-theyre-lonely-state-pay-suicide/
4.
Single Americans now
more than half of U.S. population. (Enclosure-4)
5.
Americans Think
Homosexuals Make Up a Quarter of the Population. (Enclosure-5)
6.
Parent One, Parent Two to replace
references to mother, father on passport forms. (Enclosure-6)
7.
CA Governor Bans the
Words 'Husband' and 'Wife' In Marriage. (Enclosure-7)
8.
Nebraska
Teachers Told To Call Kids 'Purple Penguins' As 'Boys And Girls' Is Not
'Gender Inclusive'. (Enclosure-8)
9.
40 percent of
Americans believe that marriage is becoming obsolete. (Enclosure-9)
10. 6.80
Crores of Americans Have Criminal Records – More Than Population of France.
(Enclosure-10)
11. Census:
More Americans 18-to-34 Now Live With Parents Than With Spouse. (Enclosure-11)
12. 'First
Time in Human History': People 65 and Older Will Outnumber Children Under 5
(Enclosure-12)
13. Polyamory
can be between many people of differing genders and is always consensual.
(Enclosure-13)
14. About
the American Association for Nude Recreation
15. California
Allows Children to Have More Than Two Legal Parents (Enclosure-15)
6.The
root cause for all of these irregularities is that in foreign countries an
American marries a German woman, a German man marries an Italian woman, an Italian
man marries a French woman, and the Frenchman marries an English woman, without
any principle or without any binding whatsoever. Since, the marriages have been
held like this, nobody has affection and love for anybody. There is no code of
conduct. There is no fidelity. There is no obedience. There is no love and
affection. There is no culture or decency. There is no older or younger one.
Consequently, the families have been ruined, the families have been dismantled.
It has become very usual that one man lives with a woman today, some days,
later, he will live with another woman and even after some period, he will live
with another woman. Further it has become very usual that without getting
married man and woman live together and cohabits together as long as they
require and later on, estrange from each other. Whether the world will survive?
Whether the world will prosper?
7.Today, the
Tamil Culture and tradition follow only the same condition. Where has gone the
period in which it was preached “For one man, one woman, “Husband is only the
visible God”, “Husband is husband though he may be like a stone or grass? The
leaders and the spiritual leaders do not speak about these and discipline. The
Dravidian Culture has peruncated and the tradition and culture of Tamil People
have been spoiled. On 17.07.2007, news was published in the English Newspaper,
“Indian Express” in Chennai edition, with the following statistics,
a)
In the year 1960, 1
or 2 divorce cases were filed.
b)
In the year 1980, 100
to 200 divorce cases were filed.
c)
In the year 1990,
about 1000 divorce cases were filed.
d)
In the year 2005,
9000 divorce cases were filed.
-The New Indian Express
dated 17.07.2007.
e)
Later, 4 family
courts have started functioning in Chennai City, since 2009.
f)
In the year 2011, all
the Family courts in Chennai City functioned even on all Saturdays and Sundays.
g)
The Governor has
granted his approval in 2015 for constituting 5 more Family Courts, excluding
the aforesaid 4 Family Courts in Chennai.
8.Who is responsible
for the escalation in the number of Family Courts, like this? It is because
people have failed to follow the moral order. The Dravidian leaders acted in an
indisciplined manner. That has spoiled the culture and tradition of Tamilians.
9.Only owing
to this, in the olden times, a man marrying his sister’s daughter (niece) and the
marriage between a man and the daughter of his elder sister, and the marriage
between a man and the daughter of his paternal or maternal aunt (cousin sister)
and the marriage between the family relations were in vogue. Besides this,
marriage with the same community was prevalent. If problem crops up between the
wife and husband, the elders belonging to the family of husband or wife will
compromise the couple. There was respect for the words of the elders in the
family and the Society. Hence, the families have not been scattered and
spoiled.
10.The
communal system is very much indispensable for the world to function orderly
and smoothly and it enables the people to adhere to the moral and disciplinary
code. Therefore, we have to compulsorily follow the communal system. We come cross
with many details in the Old Testament of the Bible. Further, Nehemiah, the son
of Hachaliah stated that
“And Esdras
the priest stood up, and said to them: You have transgressed, and taken strange
wives, to add to the sins of Israel.
And now make confession to the Lord the God of
your fathers, and do his pleasure, and separate yourselves from the people of
the land, and from your strange wives”(Ezra.10:10-11).Further, Nehemia said that “In those days also I saw Jews that married wives, women of Azotus, and
of Ammon, and of Moab. And their children spoke half in the speech
of Azotus, and could not speak the Jews' language, but they spoke according to
the language of this and that people. And I chid them, and laid my curse
upon them. And I beat some of them, and shaved off their hair, and made them
swear by God that they would not give their daughters to their sons, nor take
their daughters for their sons, nor for themselves, saying:”(Nehemia.13:23-25).
11.On
23.03.2014, the fourth Annual Day was celebrated in the Loyola Engineering
College, Chennai. When, Hon’ble Bharath Joshie, the British Deputy Commissioner
Spoke in that function, he instructed the students “Never forget your roots” (The
New Indian Express, dated 24.03.2014)
12.Further,
God created Adam and Eve. The human kind has originated from them. But, how it
is possible that Americans are tall, the Japanese People are short, the
Africans are black in their complexion, the Europeans are fair in their
complexion, and the Indians are neither fair nor dark in their complexion, but
almost wheatish in their complexion? Similarly, the communal system also
originated from the ancient period. It was created so that man could lead a
morality base disciplined life, with solidarity.
13. Therefore,
if intercaste marriage is held or solemnized the discipline will crumble. The
code of discipline will be destroyed. Therefore, let us give the girls in
marriage, within our respective castes and let us choose the girls, for
marriage within our respective castes. Let us follow the world with the code of
discipline. Let us follow the world with the code of moral order. Let us follow
the world with the the code of Natural Order.
14. Finally, let us take into
consideration of the identical advice, imparted by Moses to the Israelites, as
an order. “The Israelites were told “not
to marry the Canaanites”. Moses answered
the children of Israel, and said by the command of the Lord: The tribe of the
children of Joseph hath spoken rightly.And
this is the law promulgated by the Lord touching the daughters of Salphaad: Let
them marry to whom they will, only so that it be to men of their own
tribe. Lest the possession of the children of Israel be mingled from
tribe to tribe. For all men shall marry wives of their own tribe and
kindred: And all women shall take husbands of the same tribe: that
the inheritance may remain in the families, And that the tribes be not
mingled one with another, but remain so As they were separated by the
Lord. And the daughters of Salphaad did as was commanded :”( Numbers. 36:6-10).
16.Therefore,
let us take steps to follow the Natural Order and Moral Order, by adhering to the traditional
and cultural heritage and by strengthening the caste-system in order to make
the world as orderly and peaceful.
By G. ALEX BENZIGER, ADVOCATE
ENCLOSURES-1
TO 15
ENCLOSURE -1
Report: Only 16% of Baltimore Teens Raised With
Married Parents
(CNSNews.com) – A new report released by the Family Research Council’s Marriage and Religion Research Institute (MARRI) says
that only 16 percent of 15- to 17-year-old teens in Baltimore have been raised
in an intact, married family.
The report, released
Wednesday and compiled in light of the recent Baltimore riots, cites Census
Bureau statistics showing that, in terms of family units, Baltimore is “one of
the five least intact counties of America,” along with Cuyahoga, Ohio; the
Bronx, N.Y.; the District of Columbia; and Shelby County, Tenn.
The report cites
studies indicating that children who grow up in intact, married families are
least likely to experience poverty during their youth, because married families
generally earn higher incomes than stepfamilies, cohabiting families, divorced
families, separated families, and single-parent families.
The report says
children raised in intact, married families tend to have better educational
attainment and achievement than those from non-intact families. They are more
likely to achieve higher education after graduating from high school than those
from other family structures.
“There is a profound
crisis in the black community, not just in Baltimore, but nationwide --the
crisis is in marriage and family,” Bishop E. W. Jackson, Family Research
Council Senior Fellow for Church Ministries and President of S.T.A.N.D, said in
a statement on the study.
“Seventy two percent
of children are born out of wedlock. Too many fathers are missing from the
home, and an alarming number of mothers are still children themselves. Boys in
these circumstances are inculcated with the values of the streets, and become
susceptible to every negative influence.” Jackson continued.
“Instead of pursuing
education, many embrace the attitude of victimization. Instead of seeking
employment, too many prefer to hustle. Race and poverty become excuses for
criminality. These social pathologies are perpetuated from one generation to
the next.
“Only God -- not
government -- can redeem the situation. Only prayer can move the heart of God.
Only Pastors led by God can shepherd people out the darkness into the light of
faith, family and responsibility. The church is the only institution with the
credibility and spiritual power to transform the lives of the people and
communities they serve,” Jackson concluded.
Dr. Pat Fagan,
director and senior fellow of MARRI, also released a statement on the report.
“The breakdown of
marriage in inner city Baltimore is a tragedy for the city and the state of
Maryland. That this level of public violence happened is not surprising,
given all that the data tell us about the family life of the inner city,” he
said.
“Three and four
generations of single parent family life puts in place conditions of poverty,
addiction, crime and abuse. Children who grow up in these conditions
become hardened and distorted, as the riots made visible. The solution
lies in the opposite direction: love and fidelity between fathers and
mothers, chastity for the young so that they can be loving and faithful in
their turn; prayer and worship to gain the strength to live this love and
fidelity and neighborliness to help those around.”
“When this happens, educational success follows, and business
and jobs flow into communities. Government can do much good, but it
cannot deliver love, fidelity or prayer. Leadership on these must come from
other institutions,” Fagan concluded.
ENCLOSURE - 2
cnsnews.com
45.4% of American Moms in Their
Twenties Have Never Been Married
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/ali-meyer/454-american-moms-their-twenties-have-never-been-married
By Ali
Meyer |
May 11, 2015 | 2:21 PM EDT
(CNSNews.com) - Forty-five percent of
American mothers in their twenties have never been married, according to data
that the
Census Bureau releasedleading into the Mother’s Day weekend.
As
of June 2014, according to the Census
Bureau,
there were 8,118,000 American women who were mothers and were from 20 to 29
years of age. Of these 8,118,000 American mothers in their twenties, 3,689,000
had never been married. That is 45.4 percent.
"In
comparison with all mothers, young mothers are more likely to have had their
first birth when they were neither married nor cohabiting,” states the Census.
“Among young mothers who had their first birth between 2005 and June of 2012,
38 percent were neither married nor cohabiting at the time of the first birth.”
While
the percentage of babies who are born to unmarried mothers is increasing, the
average number of babies born per woman is declining.
“The
average number of children ever born has dropped from more than three children
per woman in 1976 to about two children per woman in 2012,” says the Census
Bureau’s report on “Fertility of Women in
the United States: 2012,” which was published in 2014.
Of
the 4,125,353 who had a child in the 12 months prior to the 2012 Census Bureau
survey, 31.3 percent had never been married and 7.0 percent were not married at
the time of the survey. Only 61.8 percent of the new mothers was “currently
married.”
Women
living below the poverty line, according to the Census Bureau, had a higher
birth rate in 2012 than women living above it.
“Twenty
eight percent of women with a birth in the prior year were living in poverty in
2012, up from 25 percent in 2008,” said the Census Bureau report. “The
fertility rate for women in poverty was 82 births per 1,000—higher than the
fertility rate of those with incomes at 100 to 199 percent of poverty (63
births per 1,000) and almost twice as high as those with incomes at or above
200 percent of poverty (45 births per 1,000).”
May
06, 2015
Release Number: CB15-FF.08
The driving
force behind Mother’s Day was Anna Jarvis, who organized observances in
Grafton, W.Va., and Philadelphia, Pa., on May 10, 1908. As the annual
celebration became popular around the country, Jarvis asked members of Congress
to set aside a day to honor mothers. She succeeded in 1914, when Congress
designated the second Sunday in May as Mother’s Day.
How Many Mothers
43.5 million
Number of women between
the ages of 15 and 50 who have children. These mothers gave birth to 95.8
million children.
Source: Fertility of Women in the United States: 2014, Detailed Tables, Table 2
<http://www.census.gov/hhes/fertility/data/cps/2014.html>
Source: Fertility of Women in the United States: 2014, Detailed Tables, Table 2
<http://www.census.gov/hhes/fertility/data/cps/2014.html>
3.9 million
Number of women between
the ages of 15 and 50 who gave birth in the past 12 months.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013 American Community Survey, Table B13002
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/13_1YR/B13002>
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013 American Community Survey, Table B13002
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/13_1YR/B13002>
36.0%
Percentage of women age
15 to 50 who had a birth in the past 12 months who were unmarried.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013 American Community Survey, Table S1301
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/13_1YR/S1301>
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013 American Community Survey, Table S1301
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/13_1YR/S1301>
62.5
Number of births per
1,000 women age 15-44 in 2013, down 1 percent from 2012.
Source: National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics Reports, Page 4
<http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_01.pdf>
Source: National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics Reports, Page 4
<http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_01.pdf>
22.3%
Percentage of women age
15 to 50 who have had two children. About 42.4 percent had no children, 17
percent had one, 11.7 percent had three, and about 6.8 percent had four or
more.
Source: Fertility of Women in the United States: 2014, Detailed Tables, Table 1
<http://www.census.gov/hhes/fertility/data/cps/2014.html>
Source: Fertility of Women in the United States: 2014, Detailed Tables, Table 1
<http://www.census.gov/hhes/fertility/data/cps/2014.html>
3.932 million
The number of registered
births in 2013, less than 1 percent fewer births in 2012. Of this number,
273,105 were to teens 15 to 19.
Source: National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics Reports
<http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_01.pdf>
Source: National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics Reports
<http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_01.pdf>
61.7%
Percentage of women age
16 to 50 who had a birth in the past 12 months who were in the labor force.
Source: 2013 American Community Survey, American FactFinder, Table S1301
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/13_1YR/S1301>
Source: 2013 American Community Survey, American FactFinder, Table S1301
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/13_1YR/S1301>
30.3%
The percentage of women
who had given birth in the past 12 months who had a bachelor’s degree or
higher.
Source: 2013 American Community Survey, American FactFinder, Table S1301
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/13_1YR/S1301>
Source: 2013 American Community Survey, American FactFinder, Table S1301
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/13_1YR/S1301>
85.2%
Percentage of women age
15 to 50 who gave birth in the past year and who have at least a high school
diploma.
Source: 2013 American Community Survey, American FactFinder, Table S1301
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/13_1YR/S1301>
Source: 2013 American Community Survey, American FactFinder, Table S1301
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/13_1YR/S1301>
64
Number of births in the
past year per 1,000 women age 15 to 50 with a graduate or professional degree.
The number was 53 per 1,000 for women whose highest level of education was a
bachelor’s degree.
Source: 2013 American Community Survey, American FactFinder, Table S1301
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/13_1YR/S1301>
Source: 2013 American Community Survey, American FactFinder, Table S1301
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/13_1YR/S1301>
Noah and Sophia
The most popular baby
names for boys and girls, respectively, in 2013.
Source: Social Security Administration
<http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/babynames/>
Source: Social Security Administration
<http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/babynames/>
Mothers Celebrated
14,161
Number of florists
nationwide in 2013. The 62,222employees in floral shops across our nation will
be especially busy preparing, selling and delivering floral arrangements for Mother’s
Day.
Source: County Business Patterns: 2013 (NAICS 45311)
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/BP/2013/00A1//naics~45311>
Source: County Business Patterns: 2013 (NAICS 45311)
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/BP/2013/00A1//naics~45311>
15,113
Number of employees of
greeting-card publishers in 2013.
Source: County Business Patterns: 2013 (NAICS 511191)
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/BP/2013/00A1//naics~511191>
Source: County Business Patterns: 2013 (NAICS 511191)
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/BP/2013/00A1//naics~511191>
16,288
The number of cosmetics,
beauty supplies and perfume stores nationwide in 2013. Perfume is a popular
gift given on Mother’s Day.
Source: County Business Patterns: 2013 (NAICS 44612)
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/BP/2013/00A1//naics~44612>
Source: County Business Patterns: 2013 (NAICS 44612)
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/BP/2013/00A1//naics~44612>
23,096
Number of jewelry stores
in the United States in 2013 — the place to purchase necklaces, earrings and
other timeless pieces for mom.
Source: County Business Patterns: 2013(NAICS 44831)
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/BP/2013/00A1//naics~44831>
Source: County Business Patterns: 2013(NAICS 44831)
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/BP/2013/00A1//naics~44831>
5.2 million
Number of stay-at-home
moms in married couple family groups in 2014.
Source: America’s Families and Living Arrangements: 2014
<http://www.census.gov/hhes/families/files/shp1.xls>
Source: America’s Families and Living Arrangements: 2014
<http://www.census.gov/hhes/families/files/shp1.xls>
862,043
Number of child day care
services employees across the country in 2013. They were employed by one of the
74,939 child day care services. In addition, there were 693,325 child day care
services without paid employees in 2012. Many mothers turn to these centers to
help juggle motherhood and careers.
Source: County Business Patterns: 2013 NAICS 6244
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/BP/2013/00A1//naics~6244>
Nonemployer Statistics: 2012
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/NES/2012/00A1//naics~6244>
Source: County Business Patterns: 2013 NAICS 6244
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/BP/2013/00A1//naics~6244>
Nonemployer Statistics: 2012
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/NES/2012/00A1//naics~6244>
9.9 million
The number of single
mothers living with children younger than 18 in 2014, up from 3.4 million in
1970.
Source: America’s Families and Living Arrangements, 2014.
<http://www.census.gov/hhes/families/files/fm2.xls>
Source: America’s Families and Living Arrangements, 2014.
<http://www.census.gov/hhes/families/files/fm2.xls>
411,011
Number of
women age 15 to 50 who had a birth in the past 12 months and were living with a
cohabiting partner.
Source: 2013 American Community Survey, American FactFinder, Table B13004
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/13_1YR/B13004>
Source: 2013 American Community Survey, American FactFinder, Table B13004
<http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/13_1YR/B13004>
The following is a list of observances typically covered by the
Census Bureau’s Facts for Features series:
|
African-American
History Month (February)
Super Bowl Valentine's Day (Feb. 14) Women's History Month (March) Irish-American Heritage Month (March)/ St. Patrick's Day (March 17) Earth Day (April 22) Asian/Pacific American Heritage Month (May) Older Americans Month (May) Mother's Day Hurricane Season Begins (June 1) Father's Day |
The Fourth of
July (July 4)
Anniversary of Americans With Disabilities Act (July 26) Back to School (August) Labor Day Grandparents Day Hispanic Heritage Month (Sept. 15-Oct. 15) Unmarried and Single Americans Week Halloween (Oct. 31) American Indian/Alaska Native Heritage Month (November) Veterans Day (Nov. 11) Thanksgiving Day The Holiday Season (December) |
Editor’s note: The preceding data were collected from a variety of
sources and may be subject to sampling variability and other sources of error.
Facts for Features are customarily released about two months before an
observance in order to accommodate magazine production timelines. Questions or
comments should be directed to the Census Bureau’s Public Information Office:
telephone: 301-763-3030; fax: 301-763-3762; or e-mail: <PIO@census.gov>.
Last Revised: May 8, 2015
Some
content on this site is available in several different electronic formats. Some
of the files may require a plug-in or additional software to view. Please visit
theDownload Plug-In page for a full list.
FFF: Mother’s Day: May 10, 2015
ENCLOSURE - 3
http://constitution.com/39-percent-elderly-want-die-theyre-lonely-state-pay-suicide/
CLOSETHURSDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2016
If 39 Percent of the Elderly want to die because they’re lonely.
If 39
Percent of the Elderly Want to Die Because They’re Lonely, Should the State Pay
for their Suicide?
Feb 24, 2016
The Oregon Public Health Division
recently released its annual report, “Death
with Dignity Act 2015 Data,” which details the number of people
who requested physician-assisted suicide last year, and why. The report states
its data is derived from the required reporting forms and death certificates
that the Oregon Public Health Division receives (as of January 27, 2016).
Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act (DWDA)
was enacted in 1997, which legally permits terminally‐ill adult Oregonians to obtain and use prescriptions from their
physicians to self‐administer lethal doses of medications.
But the statistics the Department
reports reveal that the greatest number of people dying are elderly, low
income, isolated, unmarried/divorced/widowed women– who are not terminally ill.
Michael Burgess, a spokesman for the New York Alliance Against
Assisted Suicideand former director of the New York State
Office for the Aging (who is lobbying New York not to pass an assisted
suicide bill) attests that Oregon’s findings are “disturbing.” He points out
that those most likely to seek physician-assisted suicide “are vulnerable
seniors who rely on government health insurance and are alone and dependent.”
Is being alone and dependent on the
government “a good enough reason” for the government to help someone commit
suicide?
The majority of
people asking to die in Oregon did not have cancer.
They didn’t ask
to die because they were in chronic, physical pain.
Nor did they have
some incurable illness.
According to the statistics, “similar to
previous years, the three most frequently mentioned end‐of‐life concerns were:
·
decreasing ability to participate in
activities that made life enjoyable (96.2%),
·
loss of autonomy (92.4%), and
·
loss of dignity (75.4%).”
Why
were physicians assisting suicides for people who were not terminally ill, as
the law specifies?
Shouldn’t
these doctors be prosecuted for murder?
Some liken physician-assisted suicide to
elder abuse. And Oregon’s assisted suicide statistics do support that
concern.
According to the most recent study of
elder abuse published by the New
England Journal of Medicine, the most vulnerable person in society is a
poor, elderly woman. Seniors who are women, isolated, have functional
impairment, and little to no resources are most vulnerable to be subject to
state/physician-assisted suicide.
If
elderly women are lonely, isolated, and depressed they can get a pill to die in
Oregon.
Is
being lonely and isolated a reason to die? And to have the state pay for
suicide?
Diane Coleman, President and CEO of Not Dead Yet, a national disability rights
organization, argues that Oregon’s data also evidences that the disabled are
very much threatened by legalized assisted suicide. She says, “The Oregon data
shows that unaddressed disability-related concerns underlie assisted suicide
requests. A state policy of assisted suicide targeting this population sends
the message that a life with a disability is not worth living, and society
would rather help end your life early than address your concerns.”
Burgess argues, instead of funding
physician-assisted suicide, taxpayers should support its most vulnerable
through funding that would “provide them with better access to palliative care,
mental health counseling and social support, rather than life-taking options.”
If Oregon is a benchmark for the rest of
America, more death, in greater numbers, lie ahead.
Since the law was passed in 1997,
prescriptions were written for 1,545 people under the DWDA; of these 991
patients died from taking the medicine. From 1998 through 2013, the number of
prescriptions written annually increased by 12 percent. During 2014 and 2015,
the number of prescriptions written increased by an average of 24 percent.
During 2015, the rate of DWDA deaths was 38.6 per 10,000 total deaths.
Death with Dignity, a 501(c)3 non-profit
organization, is lobbying to implement “Death with Dignity laws around the
United States based on the groundbreaking Oregon model.” It suggests that
assisted suicide laws will “expand the freedom of all qualified terminally ill
Americans to make their own end-of-life decisions, including how they die.”
But if Oregon is any model, people
aren’t receiving assisted suicide because they are terminally ill.
They are asking to die because they
don’t enjoy life. Not enjoying life isn’t a reason for the state to pay for
suicide. Rather, the state, non-profits, churches, and community organizations
can become more involved with the elderly. Numerous programs exist:
The National Suicide Prevention
Lifeline lists the following:
There are many
options other than death. Or murder. If anything, Oregon is the example not to
follow. Unless Americans want their government to kill off the elderly.
The views
expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not
necessarily either shared or endorsed by Constitution.com.
http://constitution.com/39-percent-elderly-want-die-theyre-lonely-state-pay-suicide/
ENCLOSURE - 4
Single Americans
now more than half of U.S. population
Rich
MillerBloomberg
Think you're all alone? Over 1/2 Americans now single
September 10, 2014 Washington
Single
Americans make up more than half of the adult population for the first time
since the government began compiling such statistics in 1976.
Some 124.6 million Americans were single in
August, 50.2 percent of those who were 16 years or older, according to data
used by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in its monthly job-market report. That
percentage had been hovering just below 50 percent since about the beginning of
2013 before edging above it in July and August. In 1976, it was 37.4 percent
and has been trending upward since.
In a report to clients entitled
"Selfies," economist Edward Yardeni flagged the increase in the
proportion of singles to more than 50 percent, calling it
"remarkable." The president of Yardeni Research in New York said the
rise has "implications for our economy, society and politics."
Singles, particularly younger ones, are more
likely to rent than to own their dwellings. Never-married young singles are
less likely to have children and previously married older ones, many of whom
have adult children, are unlikely to have young kids, Yardeni wrote. That will
influence how much money they spend and what they buy.
He argued the increase in single-person
households also is exaggerating income inequality in the U.S.
"While they have less household earnings
than married people, they also have fewer expenses, especially if there are no
children in their households," Yardeni wrote.
The percentage of adult Americans
who have never married has risen to 30.4 percent from 22.1 percent in 1976,
while the proportion that are divorced, separated or widowed increased to 19.8
percent from 15.3 percent, according to the economist.
ENCLOSURE - 5
http://lastresistance.com/11792/poll-americans-think-homosexuals-make-up-a-quarter-of-the-population/#84KXoGGSpMKkGgpD.03
Poll: Americans
Think Homosexuals Make Up a Quarter of the Population
If a quarter of the
population were homosexual, we’d have quite a dwindling population. Liberals
wouldn’t be complaining about how we’re overpopulated. And maybe they wouldn’t
be pushing girls and women to get abortions.
You can
thank a couple of things for this complete misperception by Americans that
homosexuals take up nearly 25% of the population. For one, homosexuals have one
of the most powerful lobbies. In addition, homosexuality has completely
saturated the media and academic systems, from elementary education all the way
up to universities. It’s everywhere, and people are taught from their earliest
days that homosexuality is completely normal, beautiful and natural, that it
makes perfect biological sense, and that everyone should voice his utmost
support for it. Not publicly endorsing it is a hate crime. From the Daily Caller:
Americans
think 23 percent of their fellow citizens are gay, according to a new poll by Gallup. That’s an exaggeration
so strong, it’s close to ten times as high as the actual figure.
The 23
percent estimate is down slightly from a 25 percent estimate in 2011,
but still much, much higher than current research indicates the actual
rate to be, which, according toresearch by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, is about 3 percent of
Americans. Gallup’s own daily polling finds that 3.8 percent of Americans
identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender.
However,
only 9 percent of those polled by Gallup even believed the gay population to be
less than five percent. Thirty-three percent of respondents believed the
figure to be above25 percent.
The
exaggeration of America’s gay population is apparent across many different
demographics. Those with more education were less off with their estimates, but
even those with postgraduate degrees placed the gay population at 15 percent,
four to five times its actual figure.
Overall,
those from groups more sympathetic to gays exaggerated their population to a
greater degree. Social liberals thought 24 percent of the population was gay,
compared to just 19 percent of social conservatives, and supporters of gay
marriage believe that 25 percent of their fellow Americans are gay, compared to
a 21 percent estimate from gay marriage opponents.
Wildly
off-the-mark beliefs about the makeup of America’s population are nothing new.Earlier polls by Gallup have found that
Americans believe the country is one-third black (blacks are about 14
percent of the country) and 30 percent Hispanic (they are a little
over half that).
Because of how much
homosexuality’s saturated our everyday lives, it seems as if it homosexuals make
up a substantial amount of the populace. That’s what we’re led to believe
anyway. They might have the loudest voices, but in reality, they’re a tiny
minority, screaming at everyone not just to tolerate them, but to openly and
publicly endorse them and their behavior and to excoriate those who don’t.
###############################################################
ENCLOSURE - 6
Washington Post
Friday, January 7, 2011; 11:47 PM
Friday, January 7, 2011; 11:47 PM
Parent One, Parent Two to replace
references to mother, father on passport forms
Goodbye, Mom and Dad.
Hello, Parent One and Parent Two.
THIS STORY
The State Department has decided to make U.S. passport
application forms "gender neutral" by removing references to mother
and father, officials said, in favor of language that describes one's parentage
somewhat less tenderly.
The change is "in recognition of different types of
families," according to a statement issued just before Christmas that drew
widespread attention Friday after a Fox News report.
The
announcement of the change was buried at the end of a Dec. 22 news release,
titled "Consular Report of Birth Abroad Certificate Improvements,"
that highlighted unrelated security changes.
The new policy is a win for gay rights groups, a vocal
and financially generous Democratic voting bloc that has pushed for the change
since Barack Obama began
his presidential transition in late 2008. The decision follows last month's
vote to end the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy, which gay
leaders consider one of their biggest victories in years.
Fred Sainz, vice president of the Human Rights Campaign,
a gay rights advocacy group, called the news "a positive step forward for
all American families. It was time that the federal government acknowledged the
reality that hundreds of thousands of kids in this country are being raised by
same-sex parents."
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council,
blasted it as reflecting the "topsy-turvy world of left-wing political
correctness."
"This is clearly designed," he said in a
statement, "to advance the causes of same-sex 'marriage' and homosexual
parenting without statutory authority, and violates the spirit if not the
letter of the Defense of Marriage Act," the federal law that defines
marriage as between one man and one woman.
He called on Congress to take action.
It was not immediately clear whether a similar change
would be made to all federal documents. But after Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton announced in 2009 that partners of gay American diplomats
would be eligible for benefits accorded to spouses, the rest of the U.S.
government followed suit.
In 2000, Clinton was the first wife of a president to
march in a gay-pride parade, and as secretary of state she has advocated on
behalf of gay rights. In a speech in June she said the United States "was
elevating our rights dialogues with other governments and conducting public
diplomacy to protect the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender
persons."
Rosemary Macray of the State Department Bureau of
Consular Affairs shrugged off complaints of political correctness and described
the switch as an unremarkable bureaucratic tweak.
"Really, there have been so many changes in the last
10 or 15 years with reproductive technology and the like, and so this is why it
is important for us to accurately reflect families in these applications,"
she said.
The DS-11 form is required of first-time passport
applicants and children younger than 16. The change will go into effect Feb. 1
and will be part of an already-scheduled revision of passport forms, Macray
said.
"It's not going to really involve any expense to
taxpayers," she said.
6 A
France is
set to ban the words 'mother' and 'father' from all official documents under
controversial plans to legalise gay marriage
PUBLISHED: 14:31 GMT, 24 September
2012 | UPDATED: 14:31 GMT, 24 September 2012
France
is set to ban the words 'mother' and 'father' from all official documents under
controversial plans to legalise gay marriage.The move which has outraged
Catholics means only the word 'parents' would be used in identical marriage
ceremonies for all heterosexual and same-sex couples. The draft law states
that 'marriage is a union of two people, of different or the same gender'.And
it says all references to 'mothers and fathers' in the civil code - which enshrines
French law - will be swapped for simply 'parents'.The law would also give equal
adoption rights to homosexual and heterosexual couples.
Justice Minister Christiane Taubira told France's Catholic
newspaper La Croix: 'Who is to say that a heterosexual couple will bring a
child up better than a homosexual couple, that they will guarantee the best
conditions for the child's development?'What is certain is that the interest of
the child is a major preoccupation for the government.'The head of the French Catholic
Church Cardinal Philippe Barbarin warned followers last week that gay marriage
could lead to legalised incest and polygamy in society.He told the Christian's
RFC radio station: 'Gay marriage would herald a complete breakdown in
society.'This could have innumerable consequences. Afterward they will want to
create couples with three or four members. And after that, perhaps one day the
taboo of incest will fall.'
Leading French Catholics have also published a 'Prayer for
France', which says: 'Children should not be subjected to adults' desires and
conflicts, so they can fully benefit from the love of their mother and
father.'And Pope Benidict invited 30 French bishops to Italy to urge them to
fight against the new law.He told them: 'We have there a true challenge to take
on.'The family that is the foundation of social life is threatened in many
places, following a concept of human nature that has proven defective.'
And leading French bishop Dominique Rey has called on the
government to hold a referendum on gay marriage.He said: 'A referendum must be
held to allow a real debate and to make sure the government is not in the grip
of the lobbies.'A majority of the population agrees with the traditional view
of marriage.'
President Francois Hollande pledged in his manifesto to legalise
gay marriage.The draft law will be presented to his cabinet for approval on
October 31.
California Governor
Bans the Words ‘Husband’ and ‘Wife’ In Marriage
In the state of
California, heterosexual married couples can no longer be referred to as husbands
and wives. Democrat Governor Jerry Brown has signed a bill into law that not
only redefines marriage, but eliminates any reference to husband and wife,
replacing each with the generic term of spouse.
SB 1306 was sponsored
by Democrat Mark Leno from San Francisco. Christian News Network reports on the
content of said bill.
“Under
existing law, a reference to ‘husband’ and ‘wife,’ ‘spouses,’ or ‘married
persons,’ or a comparable term, includes persons who are lawfully married to
each other and persons who were previously lawfully married to each other, as
is appropriate under the circumstances of the particular case,” it reads. “The
bill would delete references to ‘husband’ or ‘wife’ in the Family Code and
would instead refer to a ‘spouse,’ and would make other related changes.”
ENCLOSURE - 8
School
Told to Call Kids ‘Purple Penguins’ Because ‘Boys and Girls’ Is Not Inclusive
to Transgender
by
KATHERINE TIMPF October 8, 2014
1:50 PM @KATTIMPF
Nebraska
teachers are instructed to ask students what their preferred pronouns are.
A Nebraska school district has instructed its
teachers to stop referring to students by “gendered expressions” such as “boys
and girls,” and use “gender inclusive” ones such as “purple penguins” instead.
“Don’t use phrases such as ‘boys and girls,’ ‘you guys,’ ‘ladies and
gentlemen,’ and similarly gendered expressions to get kids’ attention,”
instructs a training document given to middle-school teachers at the
Lincoln Public Schools. “Create classroom names and then ask all of the ‘purple
penguins’ to meet on the rug,” it advises. The document also warns against
asking students to “line up as boys or girls,” and suggests asking them to line
up by whether they prefer “skateboards or bikes/milk or juice/dogs or
cats/summer or winter/talking or listening.” “Always ask yourself . . . ‘Will
this configuration create a gendered space?’” the document says. The
instructions were part of a list called “12 steps on the way to gender
inclusiveness” developed by Gender Spectrum, an organization that “provides education,
training and support to help create a gender sensitive and inclusive
environment for children of all ages.” Other items on the list include
asking all students about their preferred pronouns and decorating the classroom
with “all genders welcome” door hangers. If teachers still find it “necessary”
to mention that genders exist at all, the document states, they must list them
as “boy, girl, both or neither.” Furthermore, it instructs teachers to
interfere and interrupt if they ever hear a student talking about gender in
terms of “boys and girls” so the student can learn that this is wrong. “Point
out and inquire when you hear others referencing gender in a binary manner,” it
states. “Ask things like . . . ‘What makes you say that? I think of it a little
differently.’ Provide counter-narratives that challenge students to think more
expansively about their notions of gender.” The teachers were also given a
handout created by the Center for Gender Sanity, which explains to them
that “Gender identity . . . can’t be observed or measured, only reported by the
individual,” and an infographic called “The Genderbred Person,” which was
produced by www.ItsPronouncedMetroSexual.com. Despite controversy, Lincoln
Superintendent Steve Joel has declared that he is “happy” and “pleased” with
the training documents. “We don’t get involved with politics,” he told KLIN
Radio’s Drive Time Lincoln radio show. “We don’t get involved with gender
preferences. We’re educating all kids . . . and we can’t be judgmental,” he
said.
ENCLOSURE - 9
Nearly 40% say
marriage is becoming obsolete
Nearly 40% say marriage is
becoming obsolete – USATODAY.com: Marriage is increasingly optional and could be on its way to
obsolescence,according to a survey of more than 2,600 Americans that examines
changing attitudes about relationships today. Among the 2,691 adults surveyed
by the Pew Research Center last month, 39% say marriage is becoming obsolete,
up from 28% who responded to the same question posed by Time magazine in 1978.
‘If four in 10 are saying it’s becoming obsolete, they’re
registering an awareness of a very important social change,’ says Paul Taylor
of Pew.
Family Research Council President Tony Perkins responded :
“According to the study, only five percent of Americans under
age 30 do not plan on marrying. This doesn’t sound like ‘the end of marriage,’
as some are claiming the survey indicates.
“There’s certainly reason for concern about some trends – such
as the increase in the percentage of births that occur out of wedlock from five
percent in 1960 to 41 percent in 2008. At the same time, some interpretations
of the data expressed in the media are distorted. A decline in the percentage
of adults who are married is largely because people delay marriage, not because
young men and women are foregoing marriage completely.
“Two-thirds of Americans are ‘optimistic’ about the institutions
of marriage and the family. Far fewer say that about schools, the economy, or
‘morals and ethics.’ It’s not surprising that most people consider single
parents or cohabiting couples who are raising their own children to be
‘families.’ The question is whether they are the kind of families we should
seek or, as a society, should foster and encourage. If a couple is not raising
children, Americans are still five times more likely to declare them not to be
a family if they are a same-sex or cohabiting couple than if they are married.
“The research is still clear – married husbands and wives, and their children, are happier,
healthier, and more prosperous than people in any other household setting. TimeMagazine’s Belinda Luscombe gets it right
in the end when she says that ‘marriage is still the best avenue most people
have for making their dreams come true.“
ENCLOSURE - 10
Lawyer: 68 Million Americans
Have Criminal Records – More Than Population of France
(CNSNews.com) –
A trial lawyer who testified last month before the House Committee on the
Judiciary Over-Criminalization Task Force said the U.S. is “in danger of
becoming a nation of criminals,” estimating that over 68 million Americans have
criminal records – more than the population of France.
Rick Jones, executive director of Neighborhood
Defender Service of Harlem, testified on June 26 on behalf of the National
Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, that “68 million people living with
convictions – more than the entire population of France. We are in danger of
becoming a nation of criminals, because we are policing from a place of fear.”
In written testimony, Jones estimated that “some 65
million people have a criminal record, citing a report from the National Employment Law Project, titled, “65
Million Need Not Apply: The Case for Reforming Criminal Background Checks for
Employment” – a product of NELP’s Second Chance Labor Project, “which promotes
the employment rights of people with criminal records and fairer and more
accurate criminal background checks for employment.”
The report’s findings were based on information from
the 2008 “Survey of State Criminal History Information Systems” by the U.S.
Bureau of Justice Statistics.
According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics Strategic Plan 2005-2008, under the heading “Criminal History Records,” 68
million people had criminal records at the close of 2003. “At the close of
2003, States and the FBI maintained criminal history records on approximately
68 million individuals. Of these, over 50 million records were available for
interstate background checks.”
“Since the initiation of the BJS National Criminal
History Record Improvement Program (NCHIP) in 1995, the number of criminal
records has increased 35%, and the number of records which are now shareable
among the States increased 97%,” BJS said.
“68 million people in this country are living with a
criminal record. That’s one in every four adults – 20 million people with
felony convictions, 14 million new arrests every year, 2.2 million people
residing in jail or prison. That’s more than anywhere else in the world,” Jones
told the task force.
He proposed that the U.S. “move from penalty,
prosecution and endless punishment to forgiveness, redemption and restoration,”
specifically calling for a “national restoration of rights day.”
A
once-a-year national restoration of rights day would consist of: “educational
programs for employers, skills training workshops for the affected community,
jobs fairs, certificate of relief programs at no-cost and … no-cost
opportunities to clean up your rap sheet.”
ENCLOSURE -11
Census: More Americans 18-to-34
Now Live With Parents Than With Spouse
(Wikimedia Commons/Framartin)
(CNSNews.com) - Four decades ago, in the mid-1970s,
young American adults--in the 18-to-34 age bracket--were far more likely to be
married and living with a spouse than living in their parents’ home.
“There are now more young people living with their
parents than in any other arrangement,” says the Census Bureau study.
“What is more,” says the study, “almost 9 in 10 young
people who were living in their parents’ home a year ago are still living there
today, making it the most stable living arrangement.”
The Number 1 living arrangement today for Americans in
the 18-to-34 age bracket, according to the Census Bureau, is to reside without a spouse in their parents’
home.
That is where you can now find 22.9 million 18-to-34
year olds—compared to the 19.9 million who are married and live with their
spouse.
In 1975, according to Census Bureau data, 31.9 million
Americans in the 18-to-34 age bracket were married and lived with their spouse.
Back then, this was the most common living arrangement
for that age bracket.
Also in 1975, 14.7 million in the 18-to-34 age bracket
lived in their parents’ home; 6.1 million lived in an “other” arrangement
(including with siblings, grandparents, other relatives, or unrelated
roommates); 3.1 million lived alone, and 0.7 million cohabitated with an
unmarried partner.
In 2016, according to the Census Bureau, only 19.9
million were married and lived with a spouse—while 22.9 million lived in their
parents’ home.
Also in 2016, 15.6 million lived in an “other”
arrangement. 9.2 million cohabitated with an unmarried partner, and 5.9 million
lived alone.
The Census Bureau counted college students living in a
dormitory as living in their parents' home. By contrast, it counted someone as
living with a spouse even if they and their spouse still lived with a
parent. The category of living with a spouse, the study said, included
any “young adult who lives with a spouse, regardless of whether anyone else is
present in the household (e.g., parents, roommates, other family members).”
In 1975, when calculated as percentages according to
the Census numbers, 57 percent of 18-to-34 year olds lived with a spouse, 26
percent lived in their parents’ home, 11 percent lived in an “other”
arrangement, 5 percent lived alone, and 1 percent lived with an unmarried
partner.
In 2016, 31 percent lived in their parents’ home, 27
percent lived with their spouse, 21 percent lived in an “other” arrangement, 12
percent lived with an unmarried partner, and 8 percent lived alone.
The rise in young adults living at home coincided with
a decline in the economic status of young men.
“More young men are falling to the bottom of the
income ladder,”says the Census Bureau study. “In 1975, only 25 percent of men, aged 25 to 34, had
incomes of less than $30,000 per year. By 2016, that share rose to 41 percent
of young men (incomes for both years are in 2015 dollars).”
“There are now more young women than young men with a
college degree, whereas in 1975 educational attainment among young men outpaced
that of women,” says the study.
In the last decade, says the study, the pace of change
in the living arrangements of young Americans has been rapid--but has not been
uniform across the states and regions of the country.
“Within the last 10 years, the breadth and speed of
change in living arrangements have been tremendous,” it says. “In 2005, the
majority of young people lived independently in their own household (either
alone, with a spouse, or an unmarried partner), which was the predominant
living arrangement in 35 states. By 2015—just a decade later—only six states
had a majority of young people living independently.”
With the exceptions of California and Mississippi, the
Top Ten states with the highest percentages of 18-to-34 year olds living with
their parents were concentrated along the Atlantic coast. (See chart below).
They included: New Jersey (46.9%), Connecticut (41.6%), New York (40.6%)
Maryland (38.5%), Florida (38.3%), California (38.1%), Rhode Island (37.1%),
Pennsylvania (37.1%), Massachusetts (37.0%) and Mississippi (36.8%).
With the exceptions of Washington and Oregon, the ten
states with the lowest percentages of 18-to-34 year olds living with their
parents were concentrated in the Midwest and Mountain states.
These included North Dakota (14.1%), South Dakota
(19.9%), Wyoming (20.9%), Nebraska (22.7%), Iowa (22.8%), Montana (24.1%),
Colorado (24.6%), Kansas (26.0%), Washington (26.6%) and Oklahoma (26.7%),
which tied with Oregon (26.7%).
“Why are there geographical differences in young adult
living arrangements?” the Census study asks. “For one, local labor and housing
markets shape the ability of young people to find good jobs and affordable
housing, which in turn affects whether and when they form their own
households.”
ENCLOSURE - 12
'First Time in Human
History': People 65 and Older Will Outnumber Children Under 5
People in line at an ATM machine in Athens, Greece, on July 10,
2015. (AP Photo/Spyros Tsakiris)
(CNSNews.com)
- Sometime in the next four years the global population of human beings who are
65 and older will surpass those under 5 for the first time, according to a
new report from the U.S. Census Bureau.
“For
the first time in human history, people aged 65 and older will outnumber
children under age 5,” says the report, entitled “An Aging World: 2015.”
“This
crossing is just around the corner, before 2020,” says the report.
“These
two age groups will then continue to grow in opposite directions,” it says. “By
2050, the proportion of the population 65 and older (15.6 percent) will be more
than double that of children under age 5 (7.2 percent).
“This
unique demographic phenomenon of the ‘crossing’ is unprecedented,” says the
Census Bureau.
(Screen capture of chart in Census Bureau report.)
The
Census Bureau report included a ranking of “The World’s 25 Oldest Countries and
Areas” in 2015 based on the percentage of the country’s population that was 65
or older.
While
Japan ranked as the oldest country, the other 24 in the top 25 included 22
European countries, plus Canada and the U.S. territory of Puerto Rico.
The
world’s youngest countries were in the Persian Gulf.
“The
percentage of the population aged 65 and over in 2015 ranked from a high of
26.6 percent for Japan to a low of around 1 percent for Qatar and the United
Arab Emirates,” said the report.
“Of
the world’s 25 oldest countries and areas in 2015, 22 are in Europe, with
Germany or Italy leading the ranks of European countries for many years,
including currently.”
After
Japan, with 26.6 percent of its population 65 or older, Germany ranked No. 2
with 21.5 percent of its population 65 or older. Italy ranked No. 3 with 21.2
percent of its population 65 or older; and Greece ranked No. 4 with 20.5
percent of its population 25 or older.
The Census Bureau report estimates that between now and 2050, the population that is 65
and older will more than double while the population under 20 years of age see
almost no growth.
At
the same time, those in what the report calls “the working age
population”—people who are 20 to 64 years of age—will increase by only 25.6
percent.
“Among
the 7.3 billion people worldwide in 2015, an estimated 8.5 percent, or 617.1
million, are aged 65 and older,” says the report. “The number of older people
is projected to increase more than 60 percent in just 15 years—in 2030, there
will be about 1 billion older people globally, equivalent to 12.0 percent of
the total population.
“The
share of older population will continue to grow in the following 20 years—by
2050, there will be 1.6 billion older people worldwide, representing 16.7
percent of the total world population of 9.4 billion,” says the report. “This
is equivalent to an average annual increase of 27.1 million older people from
2015 to 2050.
“In
contrast to the 150 percent expansion of the population aged 65 and over in the
next 35 years, the youth population (under age 20) is projected to remain
almost flat, 2.5 billion in 2015 and 2.6 billion in 2050,” the report says.
“Over
the same period, the working-age population (aged 20 to 64) will increase only
moderately, 25.6 percent,” the Census Bureau says. “The working-age population
share of total population will shrink slightly in the decades to come, largely
due to the impact of low fertility and increasing life expectancy.”
While
there has been a global increase in human longevity, it is not the primary
force driving the global population toward a demographic where the elderly will
outnumber young children.
“The
main demographic force behind population aging is declining fertility rates,”
says the Census Bureau report.
“Populations with high fertility tend to have a young age distribution with a
high proportion of children and a low proportion of older people, while those
with low fertility have the opposite, resulting in an older society.”
“In
many countries today, the total fertility rate (TFR) has fallen below the 2.1
children that a couple needs to replace themselves,” says the report. “In 2015,
the TFR is near or below replacement levels in all world regions except
Africa.”
Europe
has a particularly low fertility rate.
“The
more developed countries in Europe, where fertility reduction started more than
100 years ago, have had TFR levels below replacement rate since the 1970s,”
says the Census Bureau report. “Currently, the average TFR for Europe is a very
low 1.6.”
In
the United States in 2015, according to the report, 14.9 percent of the
population is 65 or older. In 2050, the report estimates, 22.1 percent of the
U.S. population will be 65 or older.
The
Census Bureau report includes a sidebar on “Support of Childless Older People
in an Aging Europe.”
“Traditionally,
children are the mainstay of old age support, especially when only one parent
is still living,” says this sidebar authored by researcher Martina Brandt at
Dortmund University and Christian Deindl at University of Cologne. “However,
people are not only living longer but also having fewer children, with rising
childlessness among the older people.”
“Thus new challenges arise: Who will
provide help and care to the childless older people?” they write. “On what
support networks can they rely? And, what role does the state play in care
provision?”
ENCLOSURE - 13
Polyamorists
set up lobby group
With increasing attention brought to polyamorous
relationships by members of of the Liberal Party, a formalised Polyamory Action
Lobby (PAL) has been founded to combat the image of poly people as relationship
bogeymen.
A spokesperson for the Sydney-based
PAL said fear of differently structured relationships should not be used as a
weapon to deny monogamous same-sex couples legal recognition.
The PAL are united in opposition to
the Australian Christian Lobby’s (ACL) plan to deny same-sex marriage.
“We’re sick of being treated like the
bottom of a slippery slope, the fat end of the wedge and the scary inevitable
consequence of legalizing same-sex marriage,” the spokesperson said.
“Our lives and our experiences are not
toys for power brokers, politicians and lobby groups to play games with.”
The lobby was set up not only to fight
for legal rights, but also to challenge cultural misconceptions about
polyamorous relationships.
According to the lobby, polyamory is
not the same as polygamy, although the two terms are often taken to mean the
same thing.
“When people hear ‘polygamy’ they
think of a man with multiple wives, [which is] often taken in a creepy
religious way. But polyamory can be between many people of differing genders
and is always consensual,” the spokesperson said.
“We’re against those traditional
polygamous relationships that are oppressive in nature. We also think that it’s
disingenuous of politicians, especially those on the left who know better, to
conflate that sort of polygamy with consensual polyamory.”
The lobby contends there is no reason
adults should not be able to form committed relationships with more than one
person, and there is no evidence that smaller families are any better off.
“Polyamory often isn’t a choice; if
people love more than one person, they can’t help it,” the spokesperson said.
“Even if they could [choose], why would it matter?”
As far as the law is concerned, the
lobby said the government should not have the right to restrict consenting
adult relationships based on love and respect.
“The legal, health and financial
protections enjoyed by a spouse in a monogamous relationship must be extended
to all partners in a family,” the spokesperson said. “A family should be about
security, stability and love; not about its structure.”
A spokesperson for the Australian Christian
Lobby said it is a legitimate concern legalising same-sex marriage would lead
to a claim for polyamorist marriage. They believe this is already happening.
“Although referred to in the Bible and
practiced by some people in the ancient world, polygamy is not condoned by God
and has never been accepted in Christian orthodoxy,” the spokesperson said.
“The
ACL would not support any move to add to the plurality of relationships already
in Australia with the nonsense put forward about polyamorous relationships.”
ENCLOSURE - 14
About the American Association for Nude
Recreation
Our Mission: Simply put, we exist "To advocate nudity and nude
recreation in appropriate settings while educating and informing society of
their value and enjoyment."
The American Association for Nude Recreation is the largest,
most long-established organization of its kind in North America. With roots
dating to 1931, we have grown from our humble beginnings to an organization
that has served 213,000 individuals throughout the United States, Canada,
Mexico and beyond. These members enjoy their own backyards and pools with
family and friends, as well as over 200 nudist resorts and affiliates.
For over 80 years AANR has espoused the benefits of wholesome
nude family recreation. Since our inception it has remained a primary mission
to protect the rights of nudists in appropriate settings regardless of age,
gender, race or economic status. We continue to proudly endorse the benefits
and rights of families to enjoy a skinny dip and other nude recreation
pastimes.
Although society has become more tolerant and accepting of nude
recreation, we still have a long way to go in educating the public regarding
the wholesomeness of our choice of nudity, AANR strives to distinguish between
attire and behavior. Nudity, as we espouse it, is the enjoyment of the freedom
of being without clothes. As such, it should not be confused with behavior,
which may or may not involve nudity. It is imperative that this be understood
so that the perpetuated stereotypes disappear and that tolerance for family
social nudism is commonly accepted by the generations to come.
It is also the mission of AANR to be an advocate of our rights.
As stated in the Nudists’ Bill of Rights, we have the right to hold our values
and beliefs; to responsibly enjoy nudity in the company of our family and
friends. Nudists are law-abiding citizens and have the right to be treated as
such.
Many who did not grow up in a nudist environment find it
difficult to fully grasp the concept that regardless of age, nudists are
comfortable in their own skin. The human body is merely the vessel that carries
us through life, and the transition from child to teen to adult for a nudist is
comfortably free of much angst that textiles experience. And yet nudist and
textile alike experience the same changes that come to our body’s agility in
the autumn years.
Though we members of AANR are all accepting of those who enjoy
wholesome nude recreation, we are a collection of individuals who have varying
interests and levels of tolerance on a variety of subjects. However, the one
constant that must remain among AANR members for us to survive as a viable
organization that protects and promotes the right of nude recreation, is that
we communicate and work through the challenges that each decade brings to our
family in this ever evolving world.
During the past eight decades we have collectively weathered
many storms. Recessions. Societal unrest. Global conflict. Reactionary
assaults. Media coverage good and bad. Yet our members are resilient and
committed, and we have become a stronger organization throughout these changes.
Members and club owners are active contributors within their local communities;
conscientious stewards of their environment; and most importantly accepting of
their neighbors based upon who they are on the inside, not the exterior package
or the financial or political clout they may wield.
The growing interest in, and acceptance of, the positive aspects
of social nudity has caused many sociology professors to contact AANR looking
for more information on the history of nudism, while business professors are
often interested in the nude recreation industry. We are a relevant and significant
segment of society. So be proud to be a naturist.
AANR’s promise to you is that we will continue to work towards
protecting those places where persons have the right to enjoy nudity and
privacy. These include sanctioned nude beaches and public lands set aside for
that use; certainly it also includes our homes, private backyards, and AANR
clubs, campgrounds and resorts as well.
AANR is committed to educating the public regarding the benefits
of social family nude recreation, with the emphasis on family. Stories
regarding families running nudist clubs, three-generation nudist families, and
AANR youth have appeared in scores of mainstream media and helped make great
strides toward public education and understanding that nude recreation is a
wholesome, family activity.
AANR and its many loyal volunteers advocate, educate and work
hard to enhance opportunities for enjoyment of wholesome clothes-free
experiences. In the years ahead we seek to grow our ranks by increasing
membership and chartering clubs that commit to upholding our principles and
standards. We recognize that nude recreation is not for everyone. However, it
is a basic ethic of our laws and our culture that we respect the rights of each
other to choose, or not choose, nudity as a way of enhancing life. So we urge
all members to respect boundaries and communicate openly with one another. Then
enjoy a well-deserved Nakation®.
AANR Principles and Standards. While the quality of our facilities
may have changed over the years, our commitment to fostering wholesome,
nurturing environments that promote body acceptance and respect for all persons
has not changed. Members subscribe to the following principles, which you’ll
find repeated on every membership card:
We
recognize the essential wholesomeness of the human body and that life is
enhanced by the naturalness of social nudity. From exercise to relaxation,
physical health and mental well being are enriched through social nude
recreation. We have the right to practice social nudity in appropriate settings,
provided we do not infringe on the rights of others.
AANR's
standards state:
AANR
welcomes all people willing to conform to its principles and standards,
regardless of age, gender, marital status, religious beliefs, ethnic origin or
sexual orientation.
*Any
agreement to be photographed or to permit any public use of name, address or
occupation shall not be a requirement of membership
We
reject categorically any attempt to associate the good name and reputation of
family social nudism, of any AANR-chartered club, or of the American
Association for Nude Recreation, with the sexual exploitation of the human
body. We further reject any use of the terms nudist, nudism, family social
nudism, or American Association for Nude Recreation, as a cover for sexually-exploitive
purposes, commercial or otherwise.
The
misuse, abuse or misrepresentation of any member's relationship with an AANR-
chartered club, or with AANR, in violation of these Principles and Standards,
shall be grounds for termination of membership.
Serving
Members and Clubs Through Advocacy and Education. AANR and its
regions are not-for-profit organizations. We believe there is a strong
symbiotic relationship between people who want an ever increasing array of
choices to enjoy clothes free and the clubs and businesses that grow by serving
them. Since 1931 we have worked earnestly to promote the interests of both.
Both members and clubs help elect a volunteer President, Vice President,
Secretary, and the fourteen members of our Board of Trustees. Together, they
provide guidance, oversight, their time, and expertise to advancing our
mission.
Headquarters
and Staff. Day
to day operations, providing membership services and assistance to clubs, work
in public relations and government affairs are handled by a dedicated staff
working from AANR’s headquarters in Kissimmee, Florida. Members and visitors
who drop into our office---located just minutes from Walt Disney World---can
obtain brochures about various clubs. A lobby store offers the chance to buy
much of the merchandise we offer in our on-line shop.
In
addition to AANR’s staff, the Association utilizes a number of professionals in
the field ranging from legal counsel, government relations and public relations
personnel, and more. Wherever, and in whatever capacity, the goal is the same:
Promote, Enhance, and Protect nude recreation and nude living.
Our
Regions. To
aid in carrying out AANR’s mission at local levels, the association is
organized into seven geographical regions. Operating as individual
corporations, they include:
- American Association for Nude
Recreation Eastern Region
- American Association for Nude
Recreation Midwest Region
- American Association for Nude
Recreation Northwest Region
- American Association for Nude
Recreation Southwestern Region
- American Association for Nude
Recreation Western Region
- American Association for Nude
Recreation Florida Region
- American Association for Nude
Recreation Western Canadian Region
For
a map explaining the states, provinces, and territories served by each region,
and links to region homepages, please visit AANR Regions.
Our Friends. There are many
others who help spread the word about the benefits of going clothes free and
help to advance nude recreation. Tour our link library of these Friends of Nude Recreation.
ENCLOSURE - 15
California Allows Children to Have More Than Two Legal
Parents
15 OCT 2013
California
Governor Jerry Brown recently signed into law a measure that allows a child, in
an appropriate case, to have more than two legal parents. This is a truly
novel development, as states have otherwise uniformly taken the view that three
parents is a crowd that cannot be tolerated. Ever.
The
California bill was passed in reaction to a 2011 case, In re M.C., in which two women and a man each
seemed to meet the criteria to be a legal parent of the same child. But
the state appellate court held that, given many prior pronouncements from the
state’s highest court on the subject, it could not award that status to all
three. However, it invited the legislature to reconsider the so-called “rule of
two,” an invitation that was accepted.
In this
column, I’ll discuss the ruling that brought this question into focus—a
disturbing case of a child who had not a single stable parent, despite having
three adults potentially holding parental rights with regard to the child—and
the potential implications of the legislature’s change to the parentage code.
In re M.C.: A Mess
From Beginning to End
M.C. was
born into a complicated situation. Her mother, Melissa, was involved,
prior to her pregnancy, with another woman, Irene. The two women had lived
together, although not happily, in a relationship marked by mutual physical
abuse, mental illness, and drug use. Nonetheless, they became registered
domestic partners in 2008 (which, at the time was the only status available for
same-sex couples in California). They separated within a few months, and
Melissa shortly thereafter became involved with a man, Jesus, with whom she
conceived a child.
From the
outset, Jesus knew he was the child’s biological father, and he was supportive
of Melissa during the pregnancy. For a few months of the pregnancy,
Melissa lived with him and his family and accepted his support. While
still pregnant, she filed the paperwork to dissolve her domestic partnership
with Irene—as a domestic partnership status could then be unilaterally
dissolved. Melissa also sought and obtained a temporary restraining order
(TRO) based on Irene’s alleged physical abuse of her.
But within
two months, and still during Melissa’s pregnancy, Melissa and Irene
reconciled. Melissa left Jesus and said that she was going back to Irene,
who had promised to care for her and the baby. The two women at least
briefly lived together in a car and without a cellphone. Melissa did not
provide Jesus with any contact information. Melissa and Irene then were
married in California in October 2008, during the six-month window between
court rulings when same-sex marriage was legal in California. (It became
legal again in 2013 after the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Hollingsworth v. Perry, briefly discussed here.)
When M.C.
was born in March 2009, only Melissa was listed on the birth certificate.
Melissa, Irene, and M.C. lived together after the birth for three to four
weeks, until Melissa and M.C. moved out. Jesus did not know their
whereabouts and had no contact with Melissa or the child. A series of
conflicts followed, including Irene’s filing for custody and visitation,
Melissa’s obtaining a restraining order against her, and Melissa’s re-establishing
contact with Jesus and sending some modest support payments.
But what was
merely a complicated situation became a devastatingly complicated one in
September 2009. Melissa’s new boyfriend attacked Irene with a knife,
causing severe stabbing injuries. He fled, but Melissa was apprehended
and charged as an accessory to attempted murder. Melissa admitted later
that she and her new boyfriend had followed Irene, and that her boyfriend had
befriended Irene with the intent to use violence to “scare her” into dropping
her pursuit of custody of, or visitation with, M.C. With Melissa in jail,
M.C. was removed from Melissa’s custody and placed in foster care.
Presumed
Parents Under California Law
The question
of parentage—that is, the question whether a person is the legal parent of a
child—can arise in any number of circumstances. For M.C., it became most
pressing when she was placed in foster care, because only legal parents have
the right to be notified of, and to participate in, child welfare proceedings
and to petition for custody or visitation. In M.C.’s case, who had these
rights?
As the
genetic mother who gave birth to M.C., Melissa was clearly entitled to
legal-parent status. But she was incarcerated and, in addition, was
dealing with a range of issues including bipolar disorder and a lengthy history
of substance abuse.
What about
Jesus or Irene? This is where the law gets as complicated as the facts.
Beyond the biological mother, whose parentage is obvious in the absence of an
enforceable surrogacy arrangement, California law sorts out competing parentage
claims by relying on a series of presumptions.
Under the
Uniform Parentage Act, which California has adopted by statute, biological
mothers and “presumed parents” have parental rights. (These rights are
fiercely protected by the U.S. Constitution and include the right of “care,
custody, and control” and a virtually unfettered right to exclude non-parents
from the child’s life.)
Among the
ways a man can gain presumed parent status is by marriage to the mother on a
date that is near in time to the child’s birth, or by receiving the child into
his home and openly holding out the child as his own; if his paternity has been
adjudicated or acknowledged. The adjudication or acknowledgment of paternity
are additional ways to gain presumed parent status. Even without meeting
one of the specified statutory criteria, an unwed, biological father may also
have the constitutional right to be treated as a legal father if he has grasped
the opportunity to assert parental rights but has been thwarted by the
unilateral conduct of the mother or that of a third party.
Can a woman
other than the biological mother of a child be a presumed parent? The statute
provides that the parentage laws should be applied in a gender-neutral fashion
to the extent practicable. This provision has been interpreted to mean
that, for example, the female spouse of a biological mother is entitled to a
presumption of parentage, despite the clear lack of a biological connection.
And, in several cases, California courts have recognized that lesbian
co-parents, who were not able to marry until recently, could nonetheless
acquire presumed parent status by openly holding out a child as their own and
receiving the child into their homes.
To Whom Does
M.C. Belong?
For Jesus,
his claim to legal fatherhood was based on the constitutional claim.
Although he always admitted that he was the father of M.C., and provided at
least modest financial support for her, he never physically received the child into
his home (primarily because he lived in Oklahoma and the child lived in
California). He was thus unable to meet the statutory criteria for
presumed father status. However, he sought to establish a relationship
with the child, but was thwarted at several turns by Melissa, who moved without
providing contact information and did not maintain a phone line.
For Irene,
her claim of presumed parenthood was rooted in the statutory
presumptions. As the spouse of Melissa at the time of M.C.’s birth, Irene
was entitled to a presumption of parentage.
The juvenile
court, which had jurisdiction because M.C. had been removed and placed in
foster care, saw no reason to pick two from among M.C.’s three possible
parents. Thus, it held that (1)Melissa was a legal mother because of
biology; that (2) Irene was a presumed mother because she was married to
Melissa at the time of M.C.’s birth; and that (3) Jesus was a presumed father
because he was the biological father and he had attempted to establish a
relationship with the child. In that court’s view, all three persons were
thus entitled to the rights and obligations of parenthood.
Can a Child
Have More Than Two Legal Parents?
A
fundamental problem with the juvenile court’s ruling was the existence of
longstanding precedent in California (and everywhere else) that a child can
have no more than two legal parents. The state’s highest court reached
that conclusion in cases involving surrogacy, lesbian co-parentage, and
competing paternity claims over a child conceived in adultery. (Some of
these cases are discussed here andhere.)
Yet, the
statutory scheme for determining parentage makes it possible for more than two
people to have so-called “presumed parent” status. If a woman is married
to one person and impregnated by another who then establishes a relationship
with the child, there may be two other people—as there were in this case—who are
entitled to presumed parent status. When this happens, the statute
provides that the “presumption which on the facts is founded on the weightier
considerations of policy and logic controls.”
In this
case, M.C. argued for recognition of all three parents (despite the fact that
none of them seem obviously equipped to raise a child). And while the
appellate court was sympathetic to the need for parentage law to adapt to
“novel parenting relationships,” it concluded that the legislature would have to
make the first move. The court wrote:
We
agree these issues are critical, and California’s existing statutory framework
is ill equipped to resolve them. But even if the extremely unusual
factual circumstances of this unfortunate case made it an appropriate action in
which to take on such complex practical, political and social matters, we would
not be free to do so. Such important policy determinations, which will
profoundly impact families, children and society, are best left to the
Legislature.
Stuck with the
two-parent cap, the court in M.C. remanded the case for a determination as to whether Jesus or Irene
had the stronger claim to parentage. For Jesus, a favorable ruling would
mean that the child could be placed with him immediately. For Irene, who
was deemed not immediately capable of custodial parenting, a favorable decision
would entitle her to reunification services with a goal of eventually placing
M.C. with her. For Melissa, her legal parent status was secure and,
whether Jesus or Irene gained the legal right to be her parental counterpart,
she still retained rights to supervised visitation.
The
Legislature’s Response
In a bill
that was signed into law recently, the California legislature lifted the
judicially-imposed two-parent cap. The legislative findings state
specifically that the purpose of the bill is to abrogate the ruling in In re M.C. to the
extent that it held that no more than two people could be deemed legal parents
of the same child. And while most children will have no more than two
legal parents, the bill opens up the possibility of more than two when a court
deems that limiting the number of adults with legal ties to the child would be
detrimental to the child.
In its
technical respects, the bill amends provisions regarding custody and child
support to explain how existing rules would apply in cases of more than two
parents. With respect to child support, for example, a child would be
presumptively entitled to the same dollar amount of support, with allocation
among all legal parents, but the sheer number of parents may justify deviating
from the guideline amount. For custody, the bill makes clear that the
presumption of joint custody does not apply to cases of three or more parents.
The bill
then gets to its main purpose and amends the parentage provisions to state
explicitly that a court may find a child to have more than two legal
parents. But the court does not have to reach that conclusion just
because more than two are entitled to a presumption of parentage. In most
cases, courts will still weigh the relative strength of presumptions, and
choose one parent over others. But when this process is harmful to the
child, the court can elect to treat them equally and grant legal parent status
more broadly.
In the
legislature’s words, “Most children have two parents, but in rare cases,
children have more than two people who are that child’s parent in every
way. Separating a child from a parent has a devastating psychological and
emotional impact on the child, and courts must have the power to protect
children from this harm.”
Can Bad
Facts Make Good Law?
There’s an
old adage that says “Bad facts make bad law,” a reference to the sometimes
tortured precedents that result when courts apply law to very unusual
situations. But could this be a case in which bad facts have actually led
to goodlaw?
It’s hard to imagine that the situation that is described above animated a
legislature that is concerned about children who “have more than two people who
are that child’s parent in every way” and who would be devastated by separation
from any one of them. From a distance, it’s impossible to know what
attachments M.C. does or does not have. Surely, the attachments cannot be
that strong to the three adults who claim her, given that she’s spent most of
her life in foster care with only limited visitation with her three putative
parents. But there may well be other children whose lives fit the legislature’s
image—who are conceived and raised in situations in which a two-parent cap is
the source of harm and deprivation. While the very existence of such
families may seem novel, or even scary to the traditionalists, they are a
reality of modern life. And children should not suffer due to the law’s
desire to cling to the past.
One caution for courts as they
navigate these uncharted waters: Do not recognize additional parents
lightly. There are costs to the rights of existing parents that are
incurred by recognizing additional ones. Indeed the very notion that parentage
brings the right to exclude is challenged by the notion of three (and even
more) parents. There are also potentially costs to children, whose
attachments to adults may be stretched too thin by the legal recognition of
additional ones. But with careful application of the new standard, which
is correctly focused on the child’s well being, courts should be able to
prevent harm to some children without creating harm for others.
MAY
GOD BLESS YOU
Comments
Post a Comment