Jackson Jambalaya

This will all be received by the black population as "white lies". You know the white man has a "hidden agenda" to put blacks back into slavery.

The only thing that can save the black population in this country is black men willing to get married to their baby momma, stay married and raise their kids to do the same. I would say it would be easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle.

I'm not convinced it's policy related .
First of all, many unwed births were not recorded as the babies were delivered by midwives if the family was poor or in homes for unwed mothers if the family had resources. Many children were privately adopted. An unwed mother and her family did not have to report to anyone.
The availability of medicaid to pregnant women, made the use of midwives less common and parents didn't have to pay for unwed home care.
One also has to understand that the each state had differing legal definitions of " marriage". Many children that today would be considered " out of wedlock" were considered " common law in wedlock". No one delivering babies asked to see proof of marriage in those years. They accepted the word of the mother as those who get into researching their families can uncomfortably discover. Indeed, " in wedlock " babies can turn up a year after the husband and named father dies!
Then there were the cultural changes in how unwed mothers were regarded which also happened in the 60's and early 70's. And, many of the virginity myths exploded.
Rather than government statistics, academic research in the 50s and early 60's are more accurate. I would suggest reading AND THE POOR GET CHILDREN as it references earlier research as well.
This reporter is probably young and didn't know he had to dig deeper.

8:39 am, white men should do the same and also not trade in their wives and children for a trophy wife and new family at the expense of their first one!

I have always had a problem with these single issue statistics, like "women make 30% less than men". It's as if people are hiring on sex and race alone, which is not only false, it's illegal.

Why are black women (as a demographic) paid so little? I would imagine if one were to mine the data, it would be evident that black women are less educated, are having children earlier, and are choosing lower paying fields. That's always been the case with the women vs men statistic.

Women have traditionally chosen lower paying fields that allow them flexibility to rear children. Also, women drop in and out of the workforce more often than men, an action which penalizes nearly everyone, regardless of race, gender, etc.

But people throw up a bar chart that shows black women making $35,000/year on average and knee-jerkers immediately scream "RACISM!!!"

8:53, 'Each State' does NOT have a different definition of marriage. There is the ultra-liberal definition and there is the traditional American definition. Can you name others?

9:10 am Try to think instead of react.
I am referring to the differing LEGAL definitions of what constituted a common law marriage. The number of years required varied from state to state.
Do I need to define " common law marriage " for you?
Is this a term with which you are not familiar?

Anonymous said...
"This will all be received by the black population as "white lies". You know the white man has a "hidden agenda" to put blacks back into slavery."

Not all blacks. The black middle class did well under Reagan because job creation. We voted for Reagan for a reason. Especially loved him as a Governor. We need a real conservative because Democrats seem focused on lower class/dependent blacks.

yes indeed .... 50 years later and we have a welfare nation, rampant drug addiction, an explosion of bastard babies, a blown up moral compass and MILLIONS of just down right stupid people.
oh yes, least we forget...God has been run out of town.... what a glorious 50 years it has been.

9:40 "8:53, 'Each State' does NOT have a different definition of marriage."

Really? Try telling that to two gay guys who want to get married in Misssissippi or Alabama.

and 1:17 - thank you for reminding us of Reagan's mantra: "A rising tide lifts all boats". It's a pity society has been fragmented into so many small groups, each oblivious to the needs of others.

Uh...I'm 8:53 and I'm pretty sure I'm the one who pointed out States do have a differences to 9:40 am and clarified at 10:16 am

2:44 pm,I share some of your concerns. What bothers me is that you don't mention that what was once loan sharking is now legal, that you can no longer rely on a prospectus' accuracy to invest, Lee Ioccocca became a hero even though he decided a $1 " O " ring would cost less than law suit rewards over the Pinto catching fire when rear ended since those who'd be buying were either too young or too poor to have their lives be worth much, Watergate, no WMDs in Iraq,
I don't agree with you about God because I don't sell Him so short as to believe he can be " run off" and because you get to go to church and pray anytime and anywhere and He can hear you without you showing off and trying to impose your beliefs on others. Churches aren't shutting down, indeed, the mega/commercial churches are something some of fear might be offensive to God, but unlike you, I'll let Him judge your soul and be responsible for my own and my family's!
Sorry you don't see His blessings.

Goobs, homos and others: If your claim of 'every state....different definitions' were accurate, we would have 50 definitions of marriage. We do not. We have only four: Regular, creative, inventive and imaginative. Take your pick and choose a bandwagon.

7:17 pm
Well, you could come up with nearly 50 as each state has their own statutes and not all the language matches up word for word.

And, the discussion WAS about a specific time period that called the data in the article into question. But, since you changed the subject...

It is because of the differences that until homosexual marriage was approved in some states, every state recognized a marriage that took place in another state or country even when the law varied especially on common law conditions that had to be met.

Mississippi ended recognition of common law marriages in this state in 1956 but still recognizes common law marriages if the couple met the conditions in a state with statutes like Montana and Texas.

There is even something called putative marriage where a child born of a marriage where one of the parents believed it legal, that child can still inherit. Bigamy is an example.

Marriage is a legal contract that governs things like inheritance and property and tax filing.

You can get married in a church but if you don't have a marriage license the marriage may be valid in the eyes of God but not in the eyes of the law.

If you are going to get emotionally worked up about what marriage is or isn't, you need to understand the existing law including the latest court rulings.

If you are going to quote statistics on out of wedlock births, you have to know how they were reported or if they were reported and what constituted " out of wedlock". A child born in the early years of a common law marriage would be out of wedlock in year 1 but not in year 15 in some states.

But, you totally miss that hospitals don't require proof of marriage when the babies are born. If the parents SAY they are married , the baby is not reported as " out of wedlock". That happened more often prior to 1963. Indeed, there were more than a few babies born during and shortly after WWII where the women claimed a marriage to a soldier who died and no one looked too closely.

And, if you are going to be worked up about gay marriage, it behooves you to know enough about the law to understand why a homosexual couple who have lived together for decades might want the legal protection of the state.

Being against homosexual marriage doesn't prevent homosexuality.

Declared Christianity has not prevented pedophiles from becoming ministers and priests nor has any organized religion cured homosexuality among their members including married ministers. So, you either start learning about sexuality, or hang on to myths that put your children at risk.

A WWII veteran told me, " My buddies died for freedom of speech, but we owe it to them to be informed before we run off at the mouth in public. They got that freedom comes with responsibility attached. Being an emotional asshole with an opinion isn't responsible."

So white unwed birth rates go from 3% to 29%, while the black rate goes from 25% to 73%. Yet KF chooses to describe the Black change as "exploded." Considering the white rate increased by over 800%, is that not an explosion also? Or is the white community happy that "at least our rate is not as bad as THOSE peoples..."

But I'm sure that as your girls continue learning to "twerk" like Miley, and your boys continue to model themselves after thug culture (like Bieber), the white rates will continue to climb

People, illegitemacy is a USA problem, not a Black/White problem.

The change in black nonmarital birth rates is also reported i a very misleading fashion. The rate (not the proportion, the absolute number of women) who have no of nonmarital child birth is actuallly LOWER now than it was 50 years ago.

See table 19 here: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr56/nvsr56_06.pdf
and Table 3 on p. 25 here:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr48/nvs48_16.pdf

In 1956, about 91 of every 1000 unmarried black women had a baby. In 2005, about 61 of every 1000 did.

The key quote to understand the difference is on the bottom of p5 of the second link: "Birth rates for married black women have declined even more than
rates for unmarried black women and are now quite similar (tables 3 and 8). As a result, the proportion of births to unmarried black women remains high" (emphasis in source)

in plain English, unmarried black women are getting pregnant at lower rates than they used to, but MARRIED black women have cut back childbearing so dramatically that the ratio of nonmarital births has increased.

9:22 uh, "getting pregnant" is not synonymous with "giving birth".

The majority of patients in Dr. Gosnell's abortion clinic were black. The few white patients got to use the "clean" room, per the testimony recently.

"The rate (not the proportion, the absolute number of women) who have no of nonmarital child birth is actuallly LOWER now than it was 50 years ago. "

This sentence makes no sense at all, so I can't even try to figure out what was intended.

Note: "the absolute number" is an integer. A rate is essentially a proportion (either one can be expressed as "number of X per Y").

Pitpanther, Miley and Justin stand out because they are idiosyncrasies. If one of the black musicians did the same, it wouldn't make news. Please, try to make an argument that "twerking" is a white thing.

We can all talk integers, statistics, and manipulate data all we want. However, according to the University of my Eyeballs, illegitimacy is much more common in the black culture. It's not a stigma, and people that want to live that lifestyle need to just own up. Fatherhood is non-existent , motherhood is somewhat shaky, and many black kids are raised by their grandmother. Everyone wants to get up in arms when someone points out that the emperor has no clothes on. But the truth is the truth, as this post shows.

12:04 AM; Did you intentionally craft your opening sentence so that Pitpanther is described as an idiosyncracy? If so, good job. If not, good job.

I have a problem with the highly unscientific correlations that are often made when discussing issues like this. Poverty most definitely is a lagging indicator or what is going on in society. Case in point, as much as you all like to hate to admit it, President Obama inherited an economy in free fall that had been rocked by energy industry fraud, real estate/ housing bust, etc. It is often done because people love to put blame on people they dislike. I would liken trying to blame Obama for the current economic stats to blaming a doctor for inheriting a practice at the beginning of a plague. When the economy began to fail and nearly collapsed under Bush, did you all think the result of the data under Obama would be improvement? Its hard to have intelligent conversations/debates with people that don't make rationale arguments.