Stay-at-home moms are un-American
By Tom Quiner
The president and his party are very clear about what they think about stay-at-home moms:
“Sometimes, someone, usually mom, leaves the workplace to stay home with the kids, which then leaves her earning a lower wage for the rest of her life as a result. And that’s not a choice we want Americans to make.”
The message: women, it is imperative to put your kids last. Put your job first. That is where you find your worth.
At least according to Barack Obama and the value system of the Democratic Party.
Great point. Kids love socialising with kids their own age and learning new skills in nursery. When the US catches up with the rest of the developed world and gives both parents the right to take 1 to 2 years maternity or paternity leave, you’ll start to see a difference in what women can accessibly achieve in the workplace, without the hardship of leaving young babies in the care of others.
They do have the right to take 1 to 2 years of parental leave, as long as they pay for it themselves. It would be immoral to coerce one’s neighbor to pick up the tab.
Oh I see. It’s moral to force poverty-striken families back to work at a key stage in development of the parent-baby bond. Only rich families should have the option of time with a young baby. Your reasoning for better family life is striking.
Your reasoning isn’t.
Interesting that it is a man who dislikes the idea of others having to pay for a parent to spend special years with a new child and a women who thinks it’s a good idea. Reinforces my original thought that men probably shouldn’t be allowed to vote or hold legislative offices. They just do not understand reality.
Ms. Windrider –
With regard to voting and holding office, I haven’t heard that view about men expressed before. Do you have any plan in mind to enact such a policy? If so, would you care to share it here? It seems to me that it would be difficult to implement such a policy within such a rights-sensitive climate.
We will always have the poor; the question is how to best help. Historically, the Church -specifically the Catholic Church- has been on the front lines of this matter, where it can be closest to the people in need.
Yet we must not mandate this care upon the populous so as to cause undue burden. Raising the social safety net too high quickly exposes human tendencies to become overly reliant (think hammock), or apathetic about production.
I agree.
Is that your personal opinion or something based on research? If you look at countries with a strong welfare model, like in Scandanvia, they pay up to 60% in tax, have high rates of benefits yet low levels of unemployment. Raising the social safety net has made them the best and most productive places to live in the world, with the lowest levels of income inequality:
http://www.uwgb.edu/walterl/welfare/denmark.htm
http://sciencenordic.com/happier-people-nordic-countries
One of the most gratifying, satisfying, non-paying, rewarding jobs in the entire world doesn’t have value? Thank you, Mr. President. I believe that is a slap in the face to all mothers – stay at home or not.
He’s disgusting, offensive. He must be floundering to say something so stupid so as to take attention off the wheel of scandals and bungles that will be his legacy. Good luck with that. The best thing for America would be for him to resign now. Having no one at the helm would be better than his constant obnoxious attacks on our nation and its people.
What? Was this taken out of context (what Obama said)? I can’t even figure out what he meant by that.
No, it’s not taken out of context. I think he intended to make a case for equal pay (even though there are already laws on the books), but it came out sounding like a slam against stay-at-home moms.
What do you expect from a guy who thinks babies are punishment?
I expected no less.
He and his values were repudiated during the midterm elections. A shame it took so long, but encouraging none the less.
Yes, it is encouraging.