Ongoing Slaughter in Chicago: Dialogue on its Causes

Broken homes as the primary factor; with my friend, atheist Marxist Jon Curry (words in blue)

[I linked an article about 64 shootings and 13 deaths in Chicago over another weekend] Same old failed liberal / Democrat social & political policies; same old tragic results . . . How about trying conservative politics and Christian social and moral positions for a change? Not much to lose on the south side of Chicago . . .

What exactly are you proposing to address the shootings? Tax cuts? Gutting environmental protections?

Christian morals on sexuality and marriage and family. That will do the job quite nicely.

So make sex before marriage illegal?

Of course that will never happen, but Christian teaching is the answer. You asked me, and I replied. What’s your solution? Vote Communist?

Black is the most Christian racial demographic in America. If only they were more Christian that would do it you think? I’m on mobile so I can’t articulate much of what I would propose but I’m just trying to point out that if you don’t have any policy based solution then it would seem this constant drum beat you have about how they’ve elected Democrats would seem irrelevant.

It can’t be solved politically. It has to be changed by behavior. The black community has to reform itself by getting back in touch with its own strong pro-family views of the past (before 50 or 60 years ago).

69% illegitimacy (whites are 28%) and a horrendous number of fatherless homes and skyrocketing abortions is NOT traditional back family (read also Christian) values. It has come from white secularism and the sexual revolution.

Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, was very clear about how she wanted less black people around. Her wishes were spectacularly granted. Blacks would probably be 20% of the population now if they hadn’t massively killed their own children. Instead they stay at 14%, and so have less societal influence as a result.

People can differ on theories and solutions to the tragedy in good faith, but what we know for sure from sociology is that broken homes, like poverty itself, are very strong predictors of a life of misery and crime: especially of young boys, who desperately need a strong male role model.

Thus the solution is to promote traditional families once again. It’s just common sense; hardly even arguable, in my opinion. The way we do this is to promote Christianity, which was the biggest institutional support of the traditional family.

I think we would see that blacks who are Muslim likely have a better rate of intact families and marriages. So that would be a positive support as well, in that respect.

65% of black families have one parent, compared to 24% for whites and 15% among Asian-Americans.

The pro-childkilling Guttmacher Institute notes that “In the United States, the abortion rate for black women is almost five times that for white women. . . .” 37% of abortions are obtained by black women, even though blacks are 14% of the US population.

See also the research study, “Father-Absent Homes: Implications for Criminal Justice and Mental Health Professionals” (Minnesota Psychological Association):

Abstract: The number of single-parent households in the United States has reached high levels in recent decades. As the extant literature suggests that children raised in single-parent households experience more physical and psychological problems compared to those raised in two-parent households, the implications of homes in which fathers are absent may be important to explore for criminal justice and mental health professionals. The present article aims to examine the extant literature base on father-absent homes, seeking to provide a fair and balanced account of this phenomenon. Specifically, we highlight ten adverse outcomes associated with homes missing a father. Findings suggest that a negative developmental trajectory may result for children lacking a father in the home, albeit further research in this area is warranted. . . .

Conclusion: Given the large research base suggesting that children who grow up in homes without a father present adverse outcomes at rates significantly above those with fathers present, attention to this phenomenon is perhaps warranted by clinicians, researchers, and policymakers. It is important to point out that not all children who are raised in a father-absent home will experience adverse outcomes. This said, available evidence cannot be ignored. Rather, further investigation into single-parent homes and potential differences for children’s developmental trajectories if they are raised solely by their fathers compared to their mothers could make a major contribution to the field.

The ten adverse disproportionate effects of fatherless homes listed in the article are:

1) Perceived Abandonment

2) Attachment Issues

3) Child Abuse

4) Childhood Obesity

5) Criminal Justice Involvement

6) Gang Involvement

7) Mental Health Issues

8) Poor School Performance

9) Poverty and Homelessness

10) Substance Use

I emphasize (for the sake of single-parent families out there who are not experiencing these problems) what the article stated: “not all children who are raised in a father-absent home will experience adverse outcomes. This said, available evidence cannot be ignored.”

See also the striking, shocking, tragic statistics listed regarding fatherless homes and the catastrophic results from The Fatherless Generation web page. Anyone who can ignore all of this compelling sociological evidence has their head in the sand.

So it has nothing to do with which political party has been elected in a city. There’s no point for you to raise this issue again and again.

It has a relation insofar as the Democrats continue to deny poor people school choice so they can better themselves: something the Republicans have favored for at least 40 years now.

And the Democrats are less concerned with law and order: as we see with the current antipathy to police and defunding them: which will be an absolute catastrophe.

And the Democrats pushed wrongheaded, counterproductive welfare schemes that were the cause of the dissolution of the black family.

And they have dead-wrong views about growing business and the economy that can help poor people have a better life, whereas Trump and Republicans push free enterprise zones and lowered black and Hispanic unemployment to the lowest rates ever.

So they don’t help things at all. But they are not the primary cause; just a strong secondary cause.

Democrats have taken the black vote for granted since 1964 (and habitually receive 90% of it or more). As long as that happens, they will never help the black community because they have no incentive or political motivation to do so.

That’s the reality, and it is one of 3,963 reasons why many more African-Americans should vote Republican. Far too many (along with poor whites and Hispanics) live in hellholes in Democrat-run inner cities now and have absolutely nothing to lose (even if they were skeptical that Republicans could do any better).

Republicans could hardly do any worse even if they tried to do so . . .

It is in your hands to stop all of the killing and the shooting wherever it might be. You cannot say, “Black lives matter,” and then kill yourselves. Because you know we’ve mattered long before it was said, but the way we show that we matter, the way that we show all the various people of color matter is by loving each other and doing something about it. Not just talking about it, not just waiting to see the media and press come when there’s a horrible thing.

In the aforementioned piece on Chicago’s high black-on-black crime rates, my colleague Devin Foley cited CNN black commentator Don Lemon. In Lemon’s eyes, the 72 percent out-of-wedlock birth rate in the black community and the subsequent absence of fathers is responsible for the cycle of destruction which young black men are subjected to.

Photo credit: Tumisu (8-28-15) [Pixabay / Pixabay License]

***