You (as the OP) sound like one of the Roman writers from the final century of the Western Empire, or most of the folk who thought the world was going to end in 1000AD which was surprisingly a lot of people. Society is far from getting worse and could still get better in how we treat people. Last days of empire and all that yada yada.
The world did go into decline after the Western Empire finally withered away though. The middle ages were a cesspool.
(Not agreeing with the premise of the thread, however)
The world didn't go into decline, Western Europe yes, but depends what you mean by decline, life went on quite similarly for a lot of folk. Eastern half of the Empire did alright for another couple hundred of years. The Arabs did quite well and kept up a lot of the supposedly forgotten knowledge of the Romans, they held up the academic side of things quite well and for the most part were also quite multicultural. China I do believe was doing grand at the time as well, but i'm less familiar with their history.
The Arabs ..kept up a lot of the supposedly forgotten knowledge of the Romans, they held up the academic side of things quite well
True, I admitted as much in my opening. But wouldn't it be prudent to learn from the errors of Europe's massive Welfare State, debt and experiments in multiculturalism rather than repeating their mistakes decades later?Some of what you've mentioned is happening in other countries too, not just in America, or they are nothing new.
Faith in God is mocked in Europe, Canada, Australia and other industrialized places.
I'm not quite sure what you mean by individual initiative, so please explain.
There is, but how do you think that is affected when you have to earn at least $X in salary to come out ahead of someone on Welfare payments, food stamps, Medicaid, Sec 8, free day-care, heating assistance, free cell phone service, etc, etc. It takes a lot of individual initiative to work and be self-reliant instead.There are plenty with a strong work ethic in this country. I suspect you are looking at a small group of people being lazy and thinking this is the future of the entire country.
I agree, personal responsibility is a major reason the Founders thought our Constitution required a people of faith. A secular government but a religious populace. A self-controlled citizen doesn't require a controlling government (tyranny). My question is, if many citizens learn from the Bible the value of personal responsibility why isn't that seen as a good thing? One doesn't have to believe the theology to recognize the wisdom in the Bible. That's the question I'd like to see asked of religion bashers. But I never see it.Personal responsibility has always been a human problem. In the past, people blamed the devil or someone else for their problems. Nowadays, it's our parents' fault or a co-worker or whoever. It isn't good to not be responsible for yourself, but it is not easy. I think it takes a lot of self-respect and strength to have full personal responsibility. Also, this is a problem everywhere in the world; there's not one society that is free from dishonesty.
The generation that went through the Depression was and they lived their entire lives that way because they knew it could happen again. And it will. Do you think the materialistic messages in pop culture contribute?True, not too many people are frugal with their money, but that's a long standing problem throughout the world.
There are plenty of progressives who are proud of America. Just because people have different political beliefs than you does not mean they all hate this country and want to destroy it.
We have 40 years of evidence of the Great Society's influence in the breakup of the family through perverse welfare incentives. Marriage rates are down, the rate of children born out of wedlock goes higher every decade and yet almost the entire West is now at a negative reproduction rate.I think families have always been dysfunctional. Husbands and wives got married too young and since divorce was taboo, stayed together for miserable decades. Doesn't sound like a stable home to me. I do agree that families need to be strengthened, but that comes down to personal responsibility and the need to look ahead into the future and accept the changes - gender equality, same-sex parenting, etc. - as human evolution, rather than looking back at the good old days which weren't really so great.
Culture may be rotting, but that has more to do with Hollywood and record companies trying to shock audiences for the sake of money. I think the average movie watcher of music listener just accepts what entertainment says and doesn't question the semantics.
Academics is in decline in many ways. On one hand, you have students who can barely read their grade level. On the other, you have students being taught creationism as a legitimate fact, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, and the fact that the U.S. is the only industrialized country debating evolution.
And it would be narcissistic to think so.Narcissism is a worldwide problem, not just an American issue.
INDY, I think you see our country as the super great, unique, utopia-like place, when it really never was. Yes, it is great that a simple country developed into a huge economic and political superpower, but we've always had our flaws. But you seem to think America and its people are unlike other countries and other people in the world. We're all human.
Thanks for your response. I agree with many things you say but I'll give you my perspective on some of your answers.
True, I admitted as much in my opening. But wouldn't it be prudent to learn from the errors of Europe's massive Welfare State, debt and experiments in multiculturalism rather than repeating their mistakes decades later?
It's the first step in self-reliance. It's doing what needs to be done without being told. It's how businesses are created. It's the opposite of waiting for someone to give you what you need.
There is, but how do you think that is affected when you have to earn at least $X in salary to come out ahead of someone on Welfare payments, food stamps, Medicaid, Sec 8, free day-care, heating assistance, free cell phone service, etc, etc. It takes a lot of individual initiative to work and be self-reliant instead.
What happens as the stigma to living on the dole lessens and it's seen as a personal choice not to be morally condemned?
I agree, personal responsibility is a major reason the Founders thought our Constitution required a people of faith. A secular government but a religious populace. A self-controlled citizen doesn't require a controlling government (tyranny). My question is, if many citizens learn from the Bible the value of personal responsibility why isn't that seen as a good thing? One doesn't have to believe the theology to recognize the wisdom in the Bible. That's the question I'd like to see asked of religion bashers. But I never see it.
The generation that went through the Depression was and they lived their entire lives that way because they knew it could happen again. And it will. Do you think the materialistic messages in pop culture contribute?
Destroy no... but "fundamental transformation" can't happen soon enough for the far-Left.
We have 40 years of evidence of the Great Society's influence in the breakup of the family through perverse welfare incentives. Marriage rates are down, the rate of children born out of wedlock goes higher every decade and yet almost the entire West is now at a negative reproduction rate.
I can think of no better term than entropy for a civilization that can't even be bothered to genetically replace itself.
Maybe Sandyhook will finally open some eyes.
I don't happen to believe in Creationism but you can still be an engineer, orthodontist, biologist or lawyer after being taught Creationism, if you don't read however you can't.
And it would be narcissistic to think so.
No, my utopia is in the next life. I just want a country where the individual matters more than the government. His sovereignty takes precedence, he is free to find his own potential, purse his own interests, follow his own faith and keep his own property while respecting the unalienable rights of others to do the same.
So what happened to the great empires and powers of the past? Were they conquered by invaders from beyond their borders or did they decay into moral decadence, bankruptcy, ethnic polarization and economic stagnation and fall at the hand of civil war and revolution from within?
To be happy, we must admit women and men aren't 'equal'
By Suzanne Venker
Published February 05, 2013
FoxNews.com
A war on men?
Norman Vincent Peale, author of "The Power of Positive Thinking," once wrote these words: “Change your thoughts, and you change your world.”
His statement is highlighted at the beginning of my new book, "How to Choose a Husband and Make Peace with Marriage." Its premise is that if women want to be successful in love, they should reject the cultural script they’ve been sold and adopt a whole new view of men and marriage.
As products of divorce, the modern generation has few role models for lasting love. That alone is a problem. But young women have an added burden: they’ve been raised in a society that eschews marriage. They’ve been taught instead to honor sex, singlehood and female empowerment.
Consider this statement by Rebecca Traister in Marie Claire: “The world as we’ve known it for a very long time—one in which a woman’s value was tied to her role as a wife—is ending, right in front of us. It is now standard for a woman to spend years on her own, learning, working, earning, socializing, having sex, and yes, having babies in the manner she—and she alone—sees fit. We are living through the invention of independent female adulthood.”
This message is not an anomaly; the idea that women don’t need men or marriage is palpable. It began in earnest more than forty years ago, with the modern feminist movement. Feminists assured women their efforts would result in more satisfying marriages, but the result is something else altogether. It looks something like this:
1. Women postpone marriage indefinitely and move in and out of intense romantic relationships, or even live with their boyfriends for years at a time. Eventually, their biological clocks start ticking and many decide they better hurry up and get married to provide a stable home for their yet-to-be-born children. Trouble is, their boyfriend’s not willing to commit.
2. Marriage becomes a competitive sport. The complementary nature of marriage—in which two people work together, as equals, toward the same goal but with an appreciation for the qualities each gender brings to the table—has been obliterated. Today, husbands and wives are locked in a battle about whom does more on the home front and how they’re going to get everything done. That’s not a marriage. That’s war.
It’s time to say what no one else will: Feminism didn’t result in equality between the sexes – it resulted in mass confusion. Today, men and women have no idea who’s supposed to do what.
Prior to the 1970s, people viewed gender roles as as equally valuable. Many would argue women had the better end of the deal! It’s hard to claim women were oppressed in a nation in which men were expected to stand up when a lady enters the room or to lay down their lives to spare women life. When the Titanic went down in 1912, its sinking took 1,450 lives. Only 103 were women. One-hundred three.
Compare that with last year’s wrecked cruise line, the Costa Concordia. It resulted in fewer deaths, but there was another significant difference. “There was no ‘women and children first’ policy. There were big men, crew members, pushing their way past us to get into the lifeboats. It was disgusting,” said passenger Sandra Rogers, 62.
The captain of the ship agrees. In USA Today, Francesco Schettino was asked about his New Year’s resolution. He responded, “Bone up on the parts about ‘women and children first’ and ‘the captain goes down with his ship.’”
You see, the problem with equality is that it implies two things are interchangeable – meaning one thing can be substituted for the other with no ramifications. That is what feminists would have us believe, and anyone who contradicts this dogma is branded sexist.
But the truth must be heard. Being equal in worth, or value, is not the same as being identical, interchangeable beings. Men and women may be capable of doing many of the same things, but that doesn’t mean they want to. That we don’t have more female CEOs or stay-at-home dads proves this in spades.
Unless, of course, you’re beholden to feminism. In that case, you’ll believe the above is evidence of discrimination. You’ll believe what feminists taught you to believe: that gender is a social construct.
Those of us with children know better. We know little girls love their dolls and boys just want to kick that ball. This doesn’t mean men can’t take care of babies or women can’t play sports. It just means each gender has its own energy that flows in a specific direction. For God’s sake, let it flow.
The battle of the sexes is over. And guess what? No one won. Why not try something else on for size? Like this: men and women are equal, but different. They’ve each been blessed with amazing and unique qualities that they bring to the table. Isn’t it time we stopped fussing about who brought what and simply enjoy the feast?
Read more: To be happy, we must admit women and men aren't 'equal' | Fox News
Suzanne Venker is Phyllis Schlafly's sidekick - and Schlafly is the most anti-woman woman there can be. She even once said a wife cannot be raped by her husband because sex within marriage is consensual the moment you take your vows.
ETA: the actual quote is: "By getting married, the woman has consented to sex, and I don't think you can call it rape."
So what happened to the great empires and powers of the past? Were they conquered by invaders from beyond their borders or did they decay into moral decadence, bankruptcy, ethnic polarization and economic stagnation and fall at the hand of civil war and revolution from within?
Also, some people are choosing not to get married these days because the lousy economy has killed off their future plans.
I mean what do you think when I imagine most of us here that the US is improving morally in at least in regards to how you treat homosexuals, other races and women?
Can you say that a little louder, Candy?
Never once in this thread did you point to the economy.
Avg. retail price/gallon gas in U.S. (regular all formulations)
Beg. of 1st Term
$1.85
Beg. of 2nd Term
$3.32
% change
79.5%
Consumer Price Index (all urban consumers)
Beg. of 1st Term
211.1
Beg. of 2nd Term
229.6
% change
8.8%
Unemployment rate, civilian labor force, seasonally adj. (current = Dec '12)
Beg. of 1st Term
7.8%
Beg. of 2nd Term
7.8%
% change
0.0%
Unemployment rate, alt. measure of underutilization (U-6), seas. adj. (current = Dec '12)
Beg. of 1st Term
14.2%
Beg. of 2nd Term
14.4%
% change
1.4%
Unemployment rate, blacks, seasonally adj. (current = Dec '12)
Beg. of 1st Term
12.7%
Beg. of 2nd Term
14.0%
% change
10.2%
Civilian labor force participation rate, seasonally adj. (current = Dec '12)
Beg. of 1st Term
65.7%
Beg. of 2nd Term
63.6%
% change
-3.2%
Number of federal employees, seasonally adj. (current = Dec '12 prelim.)
Beg. of 1st Term
2,790,000
Beg. of 2nd Term
2,794,000
% change
0.1%
Real median household income, in 2011 adj. dollars (2008 vs 2011)
Beg. of 1st Term
$52,546
Beg. of 2nd Term
$50,054
% change
-4.7%
Number of food stamp (SNAP) recipients (current = Oct '12)
Beg. of 1st Term
32,204,859
Beg. of 2nd Term
47,525,329
% change
47.6%
Number of unemployment benefit recipients (current = 1/5/13)
Beg. of 1st Term
7,770,779
Beg. of 2nd Term
5,659,482
% change
-27.2%
Poverty rate, individuals (2008 vs 2011)
Beg. of 1st Term
13.2%
Beg. of 2nd Term
15.0%
% change
13.6%
Disabled workers in current-payment status, SSDI (Jan '09 vs. Dec '12)
Beg. of 1st Term
7,442,377
Beg. of 2nd Term
8,827,795
% change
18.6%
U.S. rank in Economic Freedom World Rankings
Beg. of 1st Term
6
Beg. of 2nd Term
10
U.S. money supply, M2, in billions, not seasonally adj. (current = Dec '12)
Beg. of 1st Term
$8,249.3
Beg. of 2nd Term
$10,475.6
% change
27.0%
Price of gold, London (per troy oz.)
Beg. of 1st Term
$835.00
Beg. of 2nd Term
$1,688.00
$853.00
% change
102.2%
National debt, in billions
Beg. of 1st Term
$10,627
Beg. of 2nd Term
$16,433
% change
54.6%
Federal expenditures, in billions, current $ (4 yrs ended FY '08 vs 4 yrs ended FY '12)
Beg. of 1st Term
$11,945
Beg. of 2nd Term
$14,515
% change
21.5%
(S&P) federal gov credit rating
Beg. of 1st Term
AAA
Beg. of 2nd Term
AA+
Dow Jones
Beg. of 1st Term
8,281
Beg. of 2nd Term
13,650
% change
64.8%
GDP real growth rate
2012 2.2%
2011 1.7%
2010 2.8%
2009 -2.6%
2008 1.1%
2007 2%
2006 3.2%
2005 3.2%
2004 4.4%
2003 3.1%
2002 2.5%
2001 0.3%
Except for the last half of my first post you mean. Who here thinks the majority of these numbers will show improvement 4 years from now?
Who expects they'll be even worse? But I hope I'm wrong.
Honestly, the sense of malaise that is so clearly spread across the country can be traced pretty strongly back to the economy, in my mind. Moral loosening (by INDY's definition) has been occurring for decades, connecting them to economic effects that just started to happen in the past decade seems... silly. As does blaming this on "greed" or "the system". People have always been greedy, and always will. The system has always been corrupt, and always will. Our issue is not just that people in Washington can't get along, or that they are devoid of logic, or something. It's that the economy is probably in a major structural downturn, and people across the country (not just their politicians) have rather major differences. The politicians have been very faithful to their people, on the whole, in terms of accurately representing beliefs. We just like to simultaneously lambast Washington for both not compromising and for "giving in to the other side too much". Religion... yawn. Peoples morals don't come with it. Societies' morals have a fairly strong positive correlation between progressiveness and economic activity, regardless of religion. The same Christianity that lies beneath the strength of the American economy is the same religion which lay beneath the post-Roman European hellhole for nearly a millennium. The same Islam that lies beneath the modern Middle East is the same religion which lay beneath the Abbasid and Umayyad Caliphates which boomed with economic strength and (relative) progressiveness while Europe floundered with economic disaster and a political and social climate that make modern Iran look like Berkeley. Read Arabian Nights (I recommend the story of the Porter and the Three Ladies) and compare it to Beowulf. You'll notice a striking difference.
Religion... yawn. Peoples morals don't come with it. Societies' morals have a fairly strong positive correlation between progressiveness and economic activity, regardless of religion.
. But they have fallen on hard times, in part because of reasons they could not control. And instead of treating them like dirt and making insulting accusations about them, why not, I dunno, HELP THEM instead?
I firmly believe that a country that does not take care of those who are struggling, a country that treats various parts of its society as second-class citizens not worthy of the same rights as everyone else, is a country that will undoubtedly wind up falling apart.
As for the economic issue, I really would just absolutely love it if, even for a little bit, people could get off the backs of those who use welfare and quit attacking them for all our woes for a change. Again, have some people abused the system? Yep. But as digitize noted, that will happen with ANY system in the world. You don't throw the baby out with the bathwater because some people take advantage of and abuse the system, nor should you go around assuming the worst of everyone who uses the system as a result because a few people like to fuck things up. Most people on welfare are hard-working and as self-reliant as can be-believe me, many find it deeply embarrassing and humiliating to find themselves in such a state of needing that kind of help just to take care of themselves and their own families. But they have fallen on hard times, in part because of reasons they could not control. And instead of treating them like dirt and making insulting accusations about them, why not, I dunno, HELP THEM instead?